• FrogmanL@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    If anyone is s curious, I work in that industry, and that is why it is so regulated. A lot of things have to go wrong for any single person’s mistake to matter. We test the heck out of aircraft. Some of these tests are absurd, but they’re meant to prove that the code still works even if the plane flies through the twilight zone.

    • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I also work in the industry and yet you’ve got a company that didn’t follow the rules of redundancy, locked a normally required safety critical architecture and software of using redundant sensor behind paid DLC and caused two fatal crashes.

  • wieson@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    These things should never come down to the individual skill of the programmer. There should be systems and checks in place to assure the quality. And if the quality isn’t reached, the programmer needs enough time and support to reach them.

    But we all know, being thorough doesn’t pay.

  • TheChickenOfDoom@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Have never and will never fly. Don’t care. Too much shit goes wrong. “BUT YOU ARE MORE LIKELY TO GET IN AN AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT” Yeah, but cars tend to not FALL OUT OF THE FUCKING SKY FROM WAY THE HELL FAR UP WHEN SOMETHING GOES WRONG. Hate that fucking statistic because you DO have a good amount of control over the safety of your own car vs. a plane that if any little thing goes wrong, you’re likely fucked.

    Sure, there are dangers driving a damn car. There’s danger walking out of your front door. Getting into the shower. Doing ANYTHING in this life with our frail-ass human bodies. I’m not going to escalate that by going up into the goddamn sky on board an old-ass fucking airplane depending on half-assed maintenance and poorly done code. If my car fails, it’s on the side of the road waiting for a tow truck. If I get hit by someone, or I hit someone, at least I can survive and that is significantly improved with the quality of my driving. If the plane fails, I’m fucking dead, end of fucking story.

    Don’t give me this CARS ARE MORE DANGEROUS shit. And “odds” mean nothing because at any time the odds can fall against you. Odds aren’t a guarantee of “this has to happen X number of times in Y without fail”. Typical uneducated thinking.

    • tauonite@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Planes fail all the time. That’s five separate incidents from this week. It’s very rare that an accident happens, and this can be seen in the statistics. If you’re curious how accidents do happen, check out Mentour Pilot’s videos on YouTube. I understand that being in control of a car feels safer but the statistics don’t lie.

  • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Software for airplanes” is a broad term. If I ever get into a position to make software for airplanes, it’s probably not going to be things that can crash the plane. The entertainment system is still software for airplanes.

    • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      People in the past have used the entertainment bus to get into the flight telemetry data, hopefully only in a read-only state, but that will only be true if you trust the competence of the IT group that set up the programming for the switches.

      Just be careful of where you try to write data and you should be fine! (and stay away from /dev/wing0 and /dev/wing1 on the network mount!)