The fact that Boeing is working on a software fix doesn't contradict the thread. It's explicitly mentioned in the thread. mobile.twitter.com/trevorsumner/status…... > Nowhere in here is there a software problem. The computers & software performed their jobs according to spec without error. The specification was just shitty. Now the quickest way for Boeing to solve this mess is to call up the software guys to come up with another band-aid. (some related follow up tweets) > I'm a software engineer, and we're sometimes called on to fix the deficiencies of mechanical or aero or electrical engineering, because the metal has already been cut or the molds have already been made or the chip has already been fabed, and so that problem can't be solved. > But the software can always be pushed to the update server or reflashed. When the software band-aid comes off in a 500mph wind, it's tempting to just blame the band-aid. > Follow @davekammeyer if you want to dig in.

All fly by wire jets have movements based on sensors. In the F-16 a faulty AOA probe is okay. 2x Faulty AOA probes are okay as long as they disagree. 2x faulty AOA probes that agree (frozen) are a very bad thing. But the loss is just a jet with an ejected seat if it can't be fixed, not nearly 200 people which is terribly sad. The worst part is from a previous Hacker News post listed below. In particular, the "Economic Problem" which states "Boeing sells an option package that includes an extra AoA vane, and an AoA disagree light, which lets pilots know that this problem was happening. Both 737MAXes that crashed were delivered without this option. No 737MAX with this option has ever crashed." twitter.com/trevorsumner/status/1106934…?...

URL has a load of junk on the end of it. Suggest change to: twitter.com/trevorsumner/status/1106934…

This reminds me of the Twitter [0]/HN [1] thread by someone trying to argue that the Boeing 787 MAX couldn't be blamed on software engineers, because it was the aerodynamic/mechanical/systems engineers and business executives who demanded too much (and also, the pilots for just not being better trained). Yes, that's all technically true. We could even put more blame on the human desire for convenient speedy travel as more of a direct factor. But software engineering is part of systems engineering for any modern project. We should want and expect software engineers to have the agency and bigger-picture thinking to do more than just design for inadequate inputs. [0] twitter.com/trevorsumner/status/1106934… [1] news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19414775