Airplane safety is fairly black-and-white compared to, say, the decision to partner with law enforcement or to censor certain kinds of content on YouTube.
Given that Silicon Valley engineers have attitudes that are not broadly representative of the general public, I think it's rather presumptuous for them to operate as moral crusaders within a company.
Aircraft safety is the opposite of black and white. Engineering is all about making compromises, in aircraft, you compromise with weight, otherwise, we would be giving every passenger an ejection seat/parachute.
> Engineering is all about making compromises, in aircraft, you compromise with weight, otherwise, we would be giving every passenger an ejection seat/parachute.
You forgot cost. The 737-MAX is fairly well documented to have been pushed by management for the purpose of increasing profits while compromising safety.
I think the difficulty was that it wasn't black and white. You can say "I think MCAS is a danger because it only relies on one sensor and has authority to make the plane uncontrollable" and someone can counter with "MCAS failing looks like and is fixed the same way as any runaway stabilizer trim, every pilot knows how to handle that".
Obviously the second hypothetical statement was wrong, but it's hardly "evil" to make that argument.
Given that Silicon Valley engineers have attitudes that are not broadly representative of the general public, I think it's rather presumptuous for them to operate as moral crusaders within a company.