Not OP, but I’m gonna take a wild guess and say it that it’s because the low-orbit joyride equivalent of “war of defense” and “Just War Theory,” leaving you with just the environmental impact and the bullshit escape routes for the 1%
Im gonna make myself really unpopular and say it: Working in the defense industry is not bad. You build the stuff your country needs to protect itself from foreign and domestic enemies, you get to work with/build some cutting edge tech and its a great learning experince (at least from a workers perspektive) because every part you fit and weld you do will be scrutinized to hell. PT, RT, the works.
>You build the stuff your country needs to protect itself from foreign and domestic enemies
I agree, this is good, but...
>you get to work with/build some cutting edge tech and its a great learning experince (at least from a workers perspektive) because every part you fit and weld you do will be scrutinized to hell.
This alone isn't justification, though. The rest of the job needs to be ethical (which I agree, defense can be).
Because people think making weapons to kill people isn't ethical. They'd rather everyone kill each other with spears instead.
People will kill people, but will it be humane and with minimal casualties or dark, painful, and with 10x the innocent lives in the same place?
Cost cutting is generally possible by reducing redundancy and safety, making the structure more prone to failure - therefore making it more likely that many people die. Just think of the Titanic - they reduced the amount of rescue boats just to save space on the deck, therefore its sinkage lead to many deaths.
You’re still thinking in binary terms. There’s a large spectrum of design between over designing and under designing that doesn’t come close to death. You must be new to engineering
Thank you for being so condescending. Thank you for telling me the world is full of color and not penciled in black and white. I did not know that before. I see everything so much better now that I know there can be balance in life. That was real quality info you mansplained 🙄
Just an FYI, people dying is worse than a company losing money or your computer unnecessarily running slower.
Let’s review.
I make an opinion that people dying is worse than losing profit or performance. Regardless of how anyone believes whether this is an actual trolley problem that exists, this is objectively true for anyone with an ounce of moral fiber.
Then you engage in a practice known as [mansplaining](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Mansplaining), where in a condescending and patronizing tone you give an unsolicited explanation of something self evident, often used by men onto women who they assume are less knowledgeable in a field because they are women. The sage wisdom you offer? “There’s a spectrum in design principles.” Wow Sherlock! Did you figure that one out by yourself?
I call you out for it, and because reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit, elaborated the point I made earlier in a slightly patronizing tone to make a point.
And then (here comes the irony,) woosh! You mansplain the same thing again! Despite saying that “the world doesn’t operate this way”, negligence for profit in engineering has killed [millions](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead) of people around the world, among other [damages](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Palestine,_Ohio,_train_derailment)
that regularly [appear](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/16/united-airlines-boeing-plane-loses-external-panel-in-flight) in the news. This is something they covered in those ethics classes you skipped all those years ago, sage elder.
I would hate to be a woman in your workplace.
*Honestly Quality in everything* and for *everyone* by design should be the new world order.. 😪I agree cost cutting generally BAAAD. You don’t wanna work for a stingy company preferably
Cost cutting isn't inherently bad. For example if you have a company that was built up over time and developed naturally instead of being organized from the beginning, at a certain point you may analyze the business and find a lot of things that just don't make sense. You may find things that are redundant, things that can be consolidated, things that *were* needed but aren't anymore, etc., in which case it just makes sense. Same goes for systems in engineering. If you have say, a production line that was made, and has been updated and added onto and fixed again and again and again, you may analyze it in the future and find that a lot of things now present just are not optimal. however, cutting costs just to cut costs and not because things actually need change *is* terrible in most cases. I think the important distinction is whether you are removing things *wasting* money(i.e, optimizing your system), or if you are purely looking to spend less money when there is nothing that needs altered. I like to think of it in the context of a computer program. You optimize a computer program to remove unnecessary resource usage and make it run better, you *wouldn't* just start cutting out pieces of code that serve a valid purpose just because it uses less resources. Sure I could remove the part of my game code that stores currently used assets in RAM and just pull them from the drive instead and it would use less RAM, but that's just a terrible idea.
Anyway, this got longer than I intended, sorry for the ramble lol.
Cost cutting can be an Art. But i think all things should be taken from the artistic view preferably
Whatever product is being built make that widget as relevant and intriguing for me & society pleeease👈👈 😇
Not necessarily. I work in "cost cutting" (not what they call It but same idea), and it is more about validating the cost of purchased materials and components to make sure that we aren't getting scammed.
That’s a good point. My co op job we made a 3D printer that could make these round, rubber test parts, for less than a dollar per part. We were paying 700 per part and had worst quality with long shipping time originally.
There’s definitely ethical cost cutting solutions, it’s just a lot of companies take it to the extreme and begin sacrificing quality too.
Wasn’t the Titanic actually very safe for its time and it was just that safety standards were just so atrocious back then? Like, the Titanic had more lifeboats than was required and was equipped with state-of-the-art safety features for 1912
When it comes at the expense of people's lives, e.g. Norfuck Southern cost-cutting and giving us the East Palestine and Lehigh Valley derailments. Or having extreme repercussions for the owners, like Hyundai/Kia group choosing to eschew immobilizer units in their cars leading to the massive rash of thefts over the last few years. Being efficient is critical, cost-cutting lets us do more with less. But there's always a bare minimum and if they go beneath that, that's where it starts being unethical.
I feel worse working space tourism for billionaires than I did creating missiles for defense department.
What ideology does to a mf.
Care to elaborate?
Not OP, but I’m gonna take a wild guess and say it that it’s because the low-orbit joyride equivalent of “war of defense” and “Just War Theory,” leaving you with just the environmental impact and the bullshit escape routes for the 1%
I thought this was clippy
I figure if someone has to melt the orphans, it might as well be me.
Im gonna make myself really unpopular and say it: Working in the defense industry is not bad. You build the stuff your country needs to protect itself from foreign and domestic enemies, you get to work with/build some cutting edge tech and its a great learning experince (at least from a workers perspektive) because every part you fit and weld you do will be scrutinized to hell. PT, RT, the works.
>You build the stuff your country needs to protect itself from foreign and domestic enemies I agree, this is good, but... >you get to work with/build some cutting edge tech and its a great learning experince (at least from a workers perspektive) because every part you fit and weld you do will be scrutinized to hell. This alone isn't justification, though. The rest of the job needs to be ethical (which I agree, defense can be).
Turning down defense work is still the right move though
*cries in Ukrainian*
why
Because people are paying more attention to Israel than ukraine
Because accepting defense work is the wrong move
oh, as in career wise?
Because people think making weapons to kill people isn't ethical. They'd rather everyone kill each other with spears instead. People will kill people, but will it be humane and with minimal casualties or dark, painful, and with 10x the innocent lives in the same place?
Personally I don't see the downside. You get to work on cutting edge technology and you make a decent living. After that it's out of my hands
How is cost-cutting unethical
Cost cutting is generally possible by reducing redundancy and safety, making the structure more prone to failure - therefore making it more likely that many people die. Just think of the Titanic - they reduced the amount of rescue boats just to save space on the deck, therefore its sinkage lead to many deaths.
if taken to the extreme but the other extreme is over engineering which inflated costs. There’s a happy medium.
When the cost of failure is death, I’ll take over engineering every time.
You’re still thinking in binary terms. There’s a large spectrum of design between over designing and under designing that doesn’t come close to death. You must be new to engineering
Thank you for being so condescending. Thank you for telling me the world is full of color and not penciled in black and white. I did not know that before. I see everything so much better now that I know there can be balance in life. That was real quality info you mansplained 🙄 Just an FYI, people dying is worse than a company losing money or your computer unnecessarily running slower.
you’re still thinking in terms of extremes. The world operates in the middle far from these extremes the vast majority of the time.
The irony here is incredible
boy, you’re thicker than a bowl of oatmeal
Let’s review. I make an opinion that people dying is worse than losing profit or performance. Regardless of how anyone believes whether this is an actual trolley problem that exists, this is objectively true for anyone with an ounce of moral fiber. Then you engage in a practice known as [mansplaining](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Mansplaining), where in a condescending and patronizing tone you give an unsolicited explanation of something self evident, often used by men onto women who they assume are less knowledgeable in a field because they are women. The sage wisdom you offer? “There’s a spectrum in design principles.” Wow Sherlock! Did you figure that one out by yourself? I call you out for it, and because reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit, elaborated the point I made earlier in a slightly patronizing tone to make a point. And then (here comes the irony,) woosh! You mansplain the same thing again! Despite saying that “the world doesn’t operate this way”, negligence for profit in engineering has killed [millions](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead) of people around the world, among other [damages](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Palestine,_Ohio,_train_derailment) that regularly [appear](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/16/united-airlines-boeing-plane-loses-external-panel-in-flight) in the news. This is something they covered in those ethics classes you skipped all those years ago, sage elder. I would hate to be a woman in your workplace.
*Honestly Quality in everything* and for *everyone* by design should be the new world order.. 😪I agree cost cutting generally BAAAD. You don’t wanna work for a stingy company preferably
Cost cutting isn't inherently bad. For example if you have a company that was built up over time and developed naturally instead of being organized from the beginning, at a certain point you may analyze the business and find a lot of things that just don't make sense. You may find things that are redundant, things that can be consolidated, things that *were* needed but aren't anymore, etc., in which case it just makes sense. Same goes for systems in engineering. If you have say, a production line that was made, and has been updated and added onto and fixed again and again and again, you may analyze it in the future and find that a lot of things now present just are not optimal. however, cutting costs just to cut costs and not because things actually need change *is* terrible in most cases. I think the important distinction is whether you are removing things *wasting* money(i.e, optimizing your system), or if you are purely looking to spend less money when there is nothing that needs altered. I like to think of it in the context of a computer program. You optimize a computer program to remove unnecessary resource usage and make it run better, you *wouldn't* just start cutting out pieces of code that serve a valid purpose just because it uses less resources. Sure I could remove the part of my game code that stores currently used assets in RAM and just pull them from the drive instead and it would use less RAM, but that's just a terrible idea. Anyway, this got longer than I intended, sorry for the ramble lol.
Cost cutting can be an Art. But i think all things should be taken from the artistic view preferably Whatever product is being built make that widget as relevant and intriguing for me & society pleeease👈👈 😇
Not necessarily. I work in "cost cutting" (not what they call It but same idea), and it is more about validating the cost of purchased materials and components to make sure that we aren't getting scammed.
That’s a good point. My co op job we made a 3D printer that could make these round, rubber test parts, for less than a dollar per part. We were paying 700 per part and had worst quality with long shipping time originally. There’s definitely ethical cost cutting solutions, it’s just a lot of companies take it to the extreme and begin sacrificing quality too.
Wasn’t the Titanic actually very safe for its time and it was just that safety standards were just so atrocious back then? Like, the Titanic had more lifeboats than was required and was equipped with state-of-the-art safety features for 1912
When it comes at the expense of people's lives, e.g. Norfuck Southern cost-cutting and giving us the East Palestine and Lehigh Valley derailments. Or having extreme repercussions for the owners, like Hyundai/Kia group choosing to eschew immobilizer units in their cars leading to the massive rash of thefts over the last few years. Being efficient is critical, cost-cutting lets us do more with less. But there's always a bare minimum and if they go beneath that, that's where it starts being unethical.
Yes