> They often demonstrate ideals that go counter to their own interests
This for real. The cognitive dissonance is giving me more cognitive dissonance. I highly doubt that even though this may be a VC owned and operated site, somehow everyone on the site is a vc or something similar?
We've banned this account for egregiously and repeatedly breaking the site guidelines.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Note: using HN as intended has nothing to do with your opinions about capitalism or any other hot topic.
We've banned this account for egregiously and repeatedly breaking the site guidelines.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Note: using HN as intended has nothing to do with your opinions about capitalism or any other hot topic.
From what I gather of HN, although its possible I may be wrong, HN's demographics make union member's rare on the site. Tech companies have clearly been winning for a while against unions and the rhetoric reflects that.
+1 while I don't have any idea this deep in hardware engineering, in normal appdev Chinese open source contributions are well known and there's a whole class of up and coming apps which are great, just not internationalized well enough for others to use yet
It is funny, you could take articles from the 1980's about Japan taking over Americas grip on technology, swap Japan to China and they would read almost the same to what we are seeing today.
Yes, there are some different key details but the parallels on the messaging is neat to see.
Yes, watched the Last Week Tonight yesternight on Boeing and even the construction of the 787 seemed suspect when taking that into account. I think some of the engineers refused to say they would fly on the 787 too considering its engineering?
I haven't seen the segment, but I have just finished reading "Flying Blind" which focuses on the 737MAX disasters, and goes through the history of other issues.
The 787 did have its issues, and was certainly a bit of an early warning for the issues to come with the MAX, however it seems like it was more cheaping-out on things, than actively hiding ways in which they were going against regulations. The main issue was the battery housings, which after a few early issues, got re-
designed and retro-fitted to the fleet. There hasn't been a 787 hull loss yet.
Additionally because it was a new program, lots of legacy stuff never got in the way. The 787's cockpit is fairly modern, seemingly up to the standards Airbus have been setting for years, and without all the legacy gotchas that are present in the 737's cockpit. Being a higher priced plane also means that there seems to be less nickel-and-diming on the options, and therefore fewer opportunities for airlines to turn down optional safety extras.
As a frequent long-haul traveller, I'm fine on a 787 (although I'd prefer an A350). The 777 is uncomfortable but fine.
