• 0 Posts
  • 10 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle



  • You need an incredibly robust quality management system to even achieve certification (allowing you to place on the market) when creating systems which include life support function, or functions which potentially could kill a user. All potential changes both within and outside of the manufacturers’ control MUST be assessed and constantly monitored so such issues CANNOT arise.

    No one should be able to legally place an unsafe app on the market, or legally perform changes to the app without the necessary checks and balances.

    Medical device approvals in most countries are definitely not the wild west. Although they are not perfect.


  • Just read up on the Dutch cases and it appears only some details of some cases were released (900 partial released of 30,000 cases between 2012-2021). Of those 8 said their mental illness was the only factor leading to the request for euthanasia.

    This leaves somewhere between worst case (8/900) 0.8% and best case (8/30,000) 0.03% of cases you mention here, where autism or other intellectual disability specifically led to a person being euthanased.

    My intention is NOT to take the importance away from 8 lives potentially unnecessarily lost, but only to put the problem into relative terms. If I was in a dire position and suffering, I would want this option available to me.



  • Even the smaller competitors like Bombardier would have an interest in this, even if they are not the manufacturers of similar sized aircraft, a loss of faith in the aviation industry hurts everyone too. Plus suppliers etc.

    As for the investigators (I know you meant FAA, not FCC), we have a similar issue in medical devices - you need seriously well educated experts to perform the investigations, and it is hard to find any without industry experience which wouldn’t look good on paper. The solution is to try as hard as you can to not have ex-employees audit their ex-bosses, but it isn’t always possible so we accept some overlap. It doesn’t mean these people don’t take their job seriously.




  • Everyone is a bit shit here (including whoever came up with that title…). No one “won” anything here.

    DoE wanted to use “emergency” measures to survey miner’s energy use, which is likely outside of the scope of the original intent of such powers (which appears to be why the judge granted a temporary restraining order?).

    The Bitcoin miner’s claim the data release would cause “irreparable harm to their business…” If that’s not an admission of guilt, then I don’t know what is.