• saigot@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    6 months ago

    Well apparently it’s programmed to bypass the safety system after 3 attempts under the assumption that the user knows best.

    This seems like a really dumb choice, but I can see why an engineer would want to point out that it’s not incompetent engineering but an incompetent business department.

    • Miaou@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      6 months ago

      If you’re implementing it, it’s your responsibility, end of story.

      • OrekiWoof@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        if you don’t implement it, it will get implemented by someone else anyway and you’re putting your job at risk

        • Miaou@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          That’s called accountability and that’s why engineers get paid extra. Ethic classes are not the part of engineering degrees in the USA very obviously, I shouldn’t be surprised

          • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            How can you talk about personal responsibility while blaming engineers for the fact that this guy intentionally closed his finger in a car door?

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                I did read it and I’m also reading it in the context of the article and the rabid group-think here claiming that a potential injury after closing your hand in a door four times in a row is somehow the companies fault or the fault of the engineering department.

                • Miaou@jlai.lu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  If you think disabling or weakening safety features after multiple attempts is OK, there is nothing left to discuss with you on this topic.

                  • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    If you have to rely on the appeal to emotion fallacy to do the heavy lifting for your argument, I suppose you’re correct that there’s nothing left to discuss.

                    Personally, I learned long ago not to close my hand in a door after the first attempt. I suppose there’s a reason why some people need safety warnings not to use their toaster in the bathtub, and we should all live by those standards.