Poll
Personally I want nothing to do with them. They say that ignorance is bliss and unfortunately I know a little bit too much about how these things work. It only takes one bad connection (in a device with billions of them) to ruin your day, and I don't think they are anywhere near as safe as their designers purport them to be.
As prone as we humans are to making mistakes, no machine will ever be able to match the amount of built in redundancy we have and our ability to deal with the unexpected, at least not in the foreseeable future.
We are a ways off yet but as a person who could be physically disabled in the future, I'm looking forward to the technology.
The idea scares me. I would lean towards no in your poll at this point in time.
The problem is that safety always ends up taking a back seat to profiteering. If they could solve that problem..I'm not convinced it's even going to happy. When it comes to driving, safety is paramount.
It scares me too. I have this image of trying to avoid a collision with some automated thing coming straight at me 'thinking' that it's doing the right thing.ac_unsure
Nothing could be further from the truth. The lack of safety is a huge expense for any company. Just ask Maine Montreal and Atlantic Railway. It is much cheaper to do it right the first time than pay big for a mistake.This technology is already in vehicles to a degree with parallel parking assist and distance maintaining cruise control.
Safety is always paramount until people get used to everything working the way it's supposed to. Then they become complacent and the corner cutting begins. I'm watching it happen with the space program. Privately owned rockets? Wtf?ac_wot
Gawd, you display a shocking ignorance of common sense Safety IS good for profits you moron.:crazy: In other words, should we rely on robots to transport us around?
Hell, NO. The auto industry is generally pretty good at implementing safety and efficiency innovations in their products, but taking the driver's control away is stupid. Some may point to the skies, and argue that the aircraft are essentially pilotless, but flying an aircraft in a huge open sky where there are no intersections, junctions, aircraft approaching directly from head on, trees, rain, ice and pedestrians is a far less complex task than manoeuvring a car in a busy road system.
We do need to move away from a transport system that facilitates independently operated units to one that uses a common vehicle that is part of a programmed grid, but the car itself is not suitable for that.
He is not the only one that thinks like that. It is just a misunderstanding. He seems like an ok guy.
Anything that can override my control and cause the vehicle to go in a direction I don't want it to is dangerous imo. I don't even like anti-lock brakes. =(
Anyone who thinks that safety comes before profit is naive.Absolutely no driverless car for me.
If I run someone over I want to be in control of the vehicle when I do it.
No, my friend it is you that is incredibly naïve. You've never worked in industry have you? In Canada, it is safety, safety and safety. You cut corners on safety, you are fired. Not following safety is bad for profits.GM ignition switch, BP oil spill, MMA railway disaster, Volkswagon emission cheat...
How did those mistakes profit their companies you fucking idiot? MMA is toast. BP spent billions cleaning up, Volksawgen is teertering on collapse over something that had nothing to do with safety and GM had an expensive recall. How did not following safety rules boost share prices or improve their bottom line fucking dunce.
The3 only companies that do not have to pay for safety mistakes are public owned companies.Lead paint, cadmium costume jewelry, melamine baby milk, tainted pet food...
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?
Ah China eh? Good comparison retarded brainwashed asshole.
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.It's not always the company with their name on the product who is cutting the corners...
I said that cutting corners was profitable. That's how capitalism works btw.
You are talking to another Rohammad here. The number of train derailments per car load has dropped in Canada. However, when they do happen they are expensive, very expensive. Besides the cost of emergency crews rerailing equipement and the cost of trucking panels out to affected track damage, you have follow up trains in CTC territory that cannot move. What does this mean you retarded left coast faggot. Profits are down because some conductor left a mainline switch in reverse or didn't do an inspection while in the back track. Taking the time to do things safely the first time is always cheaper, but don't tell occutard idiots that get their info from the TYEE.
No it isn't, not in Canada. I have worked in places where like that, but not being safe in this country is very expensive. If you cut corners in Canada on industrial projects, you are run off and worse, blacklisted.
You have never worked in heavy industry have you? It is pretty obvious.
That's what happens when you outsource components. No one knows who made it or what the quality is.
Can you name an electronic component that is made in Canada? I'll give you a month to do some research.
Are you unwell today?
If this fucking left coast occutard thinks he can walk on the job, ignore safety rules and the company he works for will pat him on the back for his contribution to capitalism, he's delusional. He'd be run off on the first day. The reason, safety violations are bad for business.
Regardless of which direction the number of disasters in any given industry are going, the number of fuckups caused by greed only goes in one direction - up.
I'm always fucking wonderful, so fuck you.HP had to recall millions of power cords recently because - wait for it - there wasn't enough copper in them to keep them from catching fire!!!
You're usually smarter is all. Pregnancy brain maybe?As far as I can tell, China must already have driverless cars.
Because when they get to a modern country like ours, they cannot drive for shit.
Herman/Shen - Are you denying manufacturers cut corners?
For the umpteenth time, safety violations are bad for business. It's not about greed, it's about laziness.
Incidents are going down on a per unit basis too.
:laugh3:
:rimshot:
We know that yet they happen because the reality is, corners get cut.EB, put your money where your mouth is and give us a single example of when you were told to put profit ahead of safety in Canada? You can't because no company besides little fly by nigh scammer outfits knows that would kill them.
And there are consequences for non compliance. I know because I have ran contractors off for safety violations. If I don't do it, I am ran off.
It's clear that both parts
I'm not saying compliance isn't important but again, tell me in all honesty that manufacturers don't cut corners. Tell me that sometimes those corners don't affect safety.
Every part our contractors order from Ontario, France or Germany goes through rigorous testing before they can be used. We have a training program now that did not exist thirty years ago when I started as a young leasehand. That is just one industry too.
But, as someone asked, please provide an example of a company where you worked that told you to get around safety rules. I can't fathom big industries, like mining, rail, manufacturing doing that. Anyone in those industries that said that up to the company officers would be run off on the spot.GM. Faulty ignition switches. They kept it under wraps.
They recalled 800, 000 cars and they forfeited $900 mill US. How was violating safety good for GM? That too me is an example of why safety violations are so fucking expensive.
I think you've figured out by by now where I work. At our FC facility when the price of oil was high and contractors hard to find, we banned small welding crews and brought in unionized ones for not following guidelines about depressurizing. If there was an incident, we would be held responsible and it would be EXPENSIVE. What our company likes about unionized workers is they will have a guy who's job is to ensure safety rules are followed. Small indies don't have that. He or she will discipline workers who feel our rules to much of a chore for them.I answered Herman's call for a company that kept a safety violation under wraps. They should have been sacked for it - HARD!
You cannot deny these things happen. You cannot deny corners get cut, especially when manufacturing isn't done in our country.
No one is disagreeing that safety is good for business and profits.
I'm glad you are finally seeing the benefits to unions. :)
I made good money all my years abroad. But, decided to come home. One of the reasons is that I cannot stand the way safety is disregarded outside our borders. It's disgusting. the easter bunny would be right if he was talking about the holes I have worked in. But not Canada. People get hurt and heads roll. It happens still, but the consequences are so punitive as they should be.
I would still like easter bunny to give an example of a company he worked at that violated safety regulations because it's more profitable.
The skilled trades unions are great. They are not like other unions that oppose pipeline development. When prices were high and new projects coming on line, their journeymen only took only the best long term positions. We only accept third year apprentices or better. Therefore at times and on shorter term jobs we had to settle for small welding steamfitting contractors. They are not really cheaper either because we have to have a unit operator baby sitting them whereas unions provided a supervisor to do that.
And damn near everything is made in Asia these days.
Are you starting to see why EB says what he says?
True blue labour doesn't oppose the pipeline.
Even heavy industry products made in Asia are still subject to ISO standards and stress testing. However, most heavy industry products in our industry are made here in Canada. Ontario to be specific.
What EB doesn't get because he's never worked in industry is that when injuries, derailments, blasts, fires etc happen it si because someone violated standards to save time and thinking they would get away with it. That's people like Herm or myself. There are consequences for us(dismissal) and consequences for the company(monetary) and consequences for new employees new CROR rules for example. It's not something I could get through his thick skull, but it is something we could show him.
Uninized JOURNEYMEN pipefitters/steamfitters and welders are still working. They are less choosy about the length of jobs, but they are still working. Small contractors, well back to Cape Breton for a lot of them.That's ONE industry. The subject is CARS.
Shen Li, what is your problem?
:mad:
I like easter bunny very much..
He's a very nice man and a great poster, but you talk to him like you do Odinson..
And he's not the first person you have chased away with vulgar personal attacks..
Thanks for nothing.
:sneaky2:
I thought our industrial expert said he doesn't trust any industry because safety hurts their bottom line(the opposite is true, but don't waste ur breath on occutards). Are cars today safer or more dangerous? They are inherently safer. Does violating or ignoring safety problems good for companies? Fuck no, in extreme cases it can damn near put them under, Do new technologies sometimes have kinks to be ironed out? Yes, they do which is why I wouldn't touch driverless technology for some time yet.
Here's a box of Kleenex just for you.
(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22http://www.redstaplerchronicles.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/kleenex.jpg%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22http://www.redstaplerchronicles.com/wp-%20...%20leenex.jpg%22%3Ehttp://www.redstaplerchronicles.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/kleenex.jpg%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)
Don't worry Fash. It doesn't faze me. I know what to expect when I push Shen's hot buttons.:laugh3:
I am getting tired of Shen Li flying off the handle at good posters like you easter bunny..
I have your back and I think RW does too.Shen is a mainland apparatchik. A Mao loving cadre member.
She has a bit of a temper. =)))
A bit easter bunny?
You are a gentleman.:howdy:
Me a commie/socialist? I would sell every fucking SOE in China if it wasn't for the fact that most aren't worth spit.
So I guess no one ever cuts corners when it comes to safety then huh?
We actually see it a lot in the food processing industry if you want a home grown example. An American company branded Blue Bell had listeria in one of its plants (yes, KNEW) and they didn't stop pumping out icecream until three people died.
Factory farms are an issue as they are there to make a profit and it's only after the fact that they get smacked through the courts. They cut corners because it's cheaper.
Again, I'm not saying safety isn't important to companies but so are profits.Without safety there is no profit. Food safety in Canada and the USA are very good. But we had a listeriosis outbreak at the Maple Leaf plant in Toronto with 57 confirmed cases and 22 deaths. They were able to pinpoint that it came in the packaging process. We have a fail safe system in place in Canada and it nearly always catches problems long before they get into the food supply. on the rare occasions that it does not, new rules and procedures are added. Beefed up training on listeria and cleanliness were included too. The recall cost Maple Leaf $20 million and that is not including $27 million spent on lawsuit settlements.
We also had mad a cow outbreak in this country too. To my knowledge no tainted beef got into our food supply. But the result for Canadian beef producers was anything but profitable. Japan and Korea banned Canadian beef imports even though no affected beef got into the food supply. The US and Europe banned live beef imports.
My point being that the argument profitability precludes safety is not reflected by the evidence. If it were, we would never eat any food from Sobeys, never drive a car, never fly, never ride a bike, go skiing, take public transit, enjoy an alcoholic beverage or live in any shelter.
Any place I have lived and worked that government controlled the means of production had terrible safety records. There were few if any investigations, recalls, forget lawsuits and naturally no changes to prevent further problems. I know I feel a lot safer with the means of production in private hands than in government hands. I would only buy imported if that were to ever happen.The city of Flint Michigan has a crisis with lead into their city's water. This is a government owned utility. There goes the theory about safety and profitability being in opposition to each other.
How water crisis in Flint, Mich., became federal state of emergency
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/01/19/michigan-flint-water-contamination/78996052/
If safety standards were left up to market forces then it would be the loss of revenue due to dead customers that would be the determining factor. Sorry, but that is a fact.
That wasn't the case in Flint was it? Market forces means providing a service, making the customer happy and they continue to purchase. Public ownership and monopolized capitalism means you don't care what the customer thinks, people that do not know what they are doing are appointed to positions they are unqualified for based on connections and safety is entrusted to people with no skin in the game. Look, I have lived in places where the means of production and all utilities are controlled by government. Every time you turn on a gas stove, you are playing Russian roulette. Sorry, but that is the real fact. What you posted is fantasy.So there you have it. Herman does not trust the public sector with his safety and easter bunny does not trust the private sector with his safety.
The only trustworthy system is one that rewards safety improvements. There is no such system.
Every industry, public and private rewards safety. Um hello.:crazy:
There's no need for that, but I have to wonder what easter bunny does for a living. How about it easter bunny? Can you tell us? I am a hairdresser.
:laugh: I'll try you Herm. My current one is good, but the prayer breaks throw me a bit
I'll assume that would not be a problem with you
ac_smile
I do electronics repair mostly. I've seen the quality of every component go down and down until the product simply fails to operate anymore. And I see the very same thing happening in every other industry. We have a system that punishes failure, but encourages cost cutting. The two are incompatible imo.
There are still electronics repair techs? I thought that job disappeared along with cobblers. It's a throwaway industry. I am fine with that. It has given people in third world countries I have lived in access to technology they would not have had in the past. But electronics and the rag trade are kind of unique.
Everything you said was dead wrong. My own industry has dramatically reduced industrial accidents causing injusry in the last fifty years. From spudding to wheels, we have dramatically reduced our rate of injury and land disturbance per barrel. Similar success has been found in transportation, mining, forestry, and heavy manufacturing. The one industry in Canada that has done very little to fix their poor safety and environmental record is agriculture. They have grown used to flying under the radar though. We have a system in Canada that rewards innovation that reduces costs. Nothing incompatible with that. They work hand in hand with one another.
I too thought that job no longer existed easter bunny.
ac_blush
I don't do consumer electronics anymore. Just certain types of industrial stuff.
Are industrial electronics disposable too easter bunny?Not the stuff I'm working on. =))
Can I ask what the electronics are for easter bunny?
Musical instruments and stuff.
That seems enjoyable easter bunny.
ac_smile
I knew it. That's not a real industry.
How very judgmental of you Shen Li.
:001_rolleyes:
It is! =)))
Oh you:laugh:
You little brat you!:0c0KHxD:
Are you self employed easter bunny?Yup. =)
I wanted to be a self employed beautician..
But, I got hired by the provincial government and liked the security it provides my family..
I thought about pursuing it someday, but I would rather get a degree once my children are adults.Something tells me you would do really well as a beautician. =)
Oh you're so sweet easter bunny..
I must go to sleep now..
Have a lovely evening.
:2cdfr50_th:
You got something brown on your nose. Might want to wash your face.ac_biggrin :beurk: :001_rolleyes:
Yes, thank you Shen Li.
Question: Are you comfortable with the idea of self-driving cars?
Option 1: Yes
votes: 3
Option 2: No
votes: 5
Option 3: Not sure
votes: 0
Title: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:13:51 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:13:51 PM
As prone as we humans are to making mistakes, no machine will ever be able to match the amount of built in redundancy we have and our ability to deal with the unexpected, at least not in the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 08:16:28 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 08:16:28 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:16:57 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:16:57 PM
Personally I want nothing to do with them. They say that ignorance is bliss and unfortunately I know a little bit too much about how these things work. It only takes one bad connection (in a device with billions of them) to ruin your day, and I don't think they are anywhere near as safe as their designers purport them to be.Quote from: "easter bunny"
As prone as we humans are to making mistakes, no machine will ever be able to match the amount of built in redundancy we have and our ability to deal with the unexpected, at least not in the foreseeable future.
The idea scares me. I would lean towards no in your poll at this point in time.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:26:51 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:26:51 PM
We are a ways off yet but as a person who could be physically disabled in the future, I'm looking forward to the technology.Quote from: "RW"
The problem is that safety always ends up taking a back seat to profiteering. If they could solve that problem..
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 08:28:36 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 08:28:36 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:28:53 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:28:53 PM
Personally I want nothing to do with them. They say that ignorance is bliss and unfortunately I know a little bit too much about how these things work. It only takes one bad connection (in a device with billions of them) to ruin your day, and I don't think they are anywhere near as safe as their designers purport them to be.Quote from: "easter bunny"
As prone as we humans are to making mistakes, no machine will ever be able to match the amount of built in redundancy we have and our ability to deal with the unexpected, at least not in the foreseeable future.
The idea scares me. I would lean towards no in your poll at this point in time.
It scares me too. I have this image of trying to avoid a collision with some automated thing coming straight at me 'thinking' that it's doing the right thing.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:30:43 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:30:43 PM
We are a ways off yet but as a person who could be physically disabled in the future, I'm looking forward to the technology.Quote from: "RW"
The problem is that safety always ends up taking a back seat to profiteering. If they could solve that problem..
Nothing could be further from the truth. The lack of safety is a huge expense for any company. Just ask Maine Montreal and Atlantic Railway. It is much cheaper to do it right the first time than pay big for a mistake.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 08:31:03 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 08:31:03 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:33:05 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:33:05 PM
I'm not convinced it's even going to happy. When it comes to driving, safety is paramount.Quote from: "RW"
Safety is always paramount until people get used to everything working the way it's supposed to. Then they become complacent and the corner cutting begins. I'm watching it happen with the space program. Privately owned rockets? Wtf?
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:33:50 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:33:50 PM
We are a ways off yet but as a person who could be physically disabled in the future, I'm looking forward to the technology.Quote from: "RW"
The problem is that safety always ends up taking a back seat to profiteering. If they could solve that problem..
Gawd, you display a shocking ignorance of common sense Safety IS good for profits you moron.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Bricktop on January 18, 2016, 08:36:13 PM
Post by: Bricktop on January 18, 2016, 08:36:13 PM
Hell, NO. The auto industry is generally pretty good at implementing safety and efficiency innovations in their products, but taking the driver's control away is stupid. Some may point to the skies, and argue that the aircraft are essentially pilotless, but flying an aircraft in a huge open sky where there are no intersections, junctions, aircraft approaching directly from head on, trees, rain, ice and pedestrians is a far less complex task than manoeuvring a car in a busy road system.
We do need to move away from a transport system that facilitates independently operated units to one that uses a common vehicle that is part of a programmed grid, but the car itself is not suitable for that.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:37:54 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:37:54 PM
We are a ways off yet but as a person who could be physically disabled in the future, I'm looking forward to the technology.Quote from: "RW"
The problem is that safety always ends up taking a back seat to profiteering. If they could solve that problem..
Gawd, you display a shocking ignorance of common sense Safety IS good for profits you moron.:crazy:
He is not the only one that thinks like that. It is just a misunderstanding. He seems like an ok guy.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:39:12 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:39:12 PM
This technology is already in vehicles to a degree with parallel parking assist and distance maintaining cruise control.Quote from: "RW"
Anything that can override my control and cause the vehicle to go in a direction I don't want it to is dangerous imo. I don't even like anti-lock brakes. =(
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:40:22 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:40:22 PM
We are a ways off yet but as a person who could be physically disabled in the future, I'm looking forward to the technology.Quote from: "RW"
The problem is that safety always ends up taking a back seat to profiteering. If they could solve that problem..
Gawd, you display a shocking ignorance of common sense Safety IS good for profits you moron.:crazy:
He is not the only one that thinks like that. It is just a misunderstanding. He seems like an ok guy.
Anyone who thinks that safety comes before profit is naive.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Renee on January 18, 2016, 08:40:35 PM
Post by: Renee on January 18, 2016, 08:40:35 PM
If I run someone over I want to be in control of the vehicle when I do it.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:43:15 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:43:15 PM
We are a ways off yet but as a person who could be physically disabled in the future, I'm looking forward to the technology.Quote from: "RW"
The problem is that safety always ends up taking a back seat to profiteering. If they could solve that problem..
Gawd, you display a shocking ignorance of common sense Safety IS good for profits you moron.:crazy:
He is not the only one that thinks like that. It is just a misunderstanding. He seems like an ok guy.
Anyone who thinks that safety comes before profit is naive.
No, my friend it is you that is incredibly naïve. You've never worked in industry have you? In Canada, it is safety, safety and safety. You cut corners on safety, you are fired. Not following safety is bad for profits.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:43:50 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:43:50 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:46:55 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:46:55 PM
GM ignition switch, BP oil spill, MMA railway disaster, Volkswagon emission cheat...Quote from: "easter bunny"
How did those mistakes profit their companies you fucking idiot? MMA is toast. BP spent billions cleaning up, Volksawgen is teertering on collapse over something that had nothing to do with safety and GM had an expensive recall. How did not following safety rules boost share prices or improve their bottom line fucking dunce.
The3 only companies that do not have to pay for safety mistakes are public owned companies.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:47:32 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:47:32 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:48:44 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:48:44 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:49:04 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:49:04 PM
Lead paint, cadmium costume jewelry, melamine baby milk, tainted pet food...Quote from: "easter bunny"
Ah China eh? Good comparison retarded brainwashed asshole.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:50:27 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:50:27 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 08:54:24 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 08:54:24 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:57:16 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 08:57:16 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
I said that cutting corners was profitable. That's how capitalism works btw.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:58:23 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 08:58:23 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
You are talking to another Rohammad here. The number of train derailments per car load has dropped in Canada. However, when they do happen they are expensive, very expensive. Besides the cost of emergency crews rerailing equipement and the cost of trucking panels out to affected track damage, you have follow up trains in CTC territory that cannot move. What does this mean you retarded left coast faggot. Profits are down because some conductor left a mainline switch in reverse or didn't do an inspection while in the back track. Taking the time to do things safely the first time is always cheaper, but don't tell occutard idiots that get their info from the TYEE.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:01:34 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:01:34 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
I said that cutting corners was profitable. That's how capitalism works btw.
No it isn't, not in Canada. I have worked in places where like that, but not being safe in this country is very expensive. If you cut corners in Canada on industrial projects, you are run off and worse, blacklisted.
You have never worked in heavy industry have you? It is pretty obvious.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:02:19 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:02:19 PM
It's not always the company with their name on the product who is cutting the corners...Quote from: "RW"
That's what happens when you outsource components. No one knows who made it or what the quality is.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:03:13 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:03:13 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
I said that cutting corners was profitable. That's how capitalism works btw.No it isn't, not in Canada.I have worked in places where like that, but not being safe in this country is very expensive. If you cut corners in Canada on industrial projects, you are run off and worse, blacklisted.
You have never worked in heavy industry have you? It is pretty obvious.
Can you name an electronic component that is made in Canada? I'll give you a month to do some research.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:05:23 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:05:23 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
You are talking to another Rohammad here. The number of train derailments per car load has dropped in Canada. However, when they do happen they are expensive, very expensive. Besides the cost of emergency crews rerailing equipement and the cost of trucking panels out to affected track damage, you have follow up trains in CTC territory that cannot move. What does this mean you retarded left coast faggot. Profits are down because some conductor left a mainline switch in reverse or didn't do an inspection while in the back track. Taking the time to do things safely the first time is always cheaper, but don't tell occutard idiots that get their info from the TYEE.
Are you unwell today?
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:06:03 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:06:03 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
I said that cutting corners was profitable. That's how capitalism works btw.
No it isn't, not in Canada. I have worked in places where like that, but not being safe in this country is very expensive. If you cut corners in Canada on industrial projects, you are run off and worse, blacklisted.
You have never worked in heavy industry have you? It is pretty obvious.
If this fucking left coast occutard thinks he can walk on the job, ignore safety rules and the company he works for will pat him on the back for his contribution to capitalism, he's delusional. He'd be run off on the first day. The reason, safety violations are bad for business.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:06:44 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:06:44 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
You are talking to another Rohammad here. The number of train derailments per car load has dropped in Canada. However, when they do happen they are expensive, very expensive. Besides the cost of emergency crews rerailing equipement and the cost of trucking panels out to affected track damage, you have follow up trains in CTC territory that cannot move. What does this mean you retarded left coast faggot. Profits are down because some conductor left a mainline switch in reverse or didn't do an inspection while in the back track. Taking the time to do things safely the first time is always cheaper, but don't tell occutard idiots that get their info from the TYEE.
Regardless of which direction the number of disasters in any given industry are going, the number of fuckups caused by greed only goes in one direction - up.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:07:01 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:07:01 PM
Are you unwell today?
I'm always fucking wonderful, so fuck you.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:08:12 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:08:12 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:08:47 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:08:47 PM
Are you unwell today?
I'm always fucking wonderful, so fuck you.
You're usually smarter is all. Pregnancy brain maybe?
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Bricktop on January 18, 2016, 09:09:17 PM
Post by: Bricktop on January 18, 2016, 09:09:17 PM
Because when they get to a modern country like ours, they cannot drive for shit.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:09:43 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:09:43 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:11:26 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:11:26 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
You are talking to another Rohammad here. The number of train derailments per car load has dropped in Canada. However, when they do happen they are expensive, very expensive. Besides the cost of emergency crews rerailing equipement and the cost of trucking panels out to affected track damage, you have follow up trains in CTC territory that cannot move. What does this mean you retarded left coast faggot. Profits are down because some conductor left a mainline switch in reverse or didn't do an inspection while in the back track. Taking the time to do things safely the first time is always cheaper, but don't tell occutard idiots that get their info from the TYEE.
Regardless of which direction the number of disasters in any given industry are going, the number of fuckups caused by greed only goes in one direction - up.
For the umpteenth time, safety violations are bad for business. It's not about greed, it's about laziness.
Incidents are going down on a per unit basis too.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:11:35 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:11:35 PM
As far as I can tell, China must already have driverless cars.Quote from: "Mr Crowley"
Because when they get to a modern country like ours, they cannot drive for shit.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:13:14 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:13:14 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
You are talking to another Rohammad here. The number of train derailments per car load has dropped in Canada. However, when they do happen they are expensive, very expensive. Besides the cost of emergency crews rerailing equipement and the cost of trucking panels out to affected track damage, you have follow up trains in CTC territory that cannot move. What does this mean you retarded left coast faggot. Profits are down because some conductor left a mainline switch in reverse or didn't do an inspection while in the back track. Taking the time to do things safely the first time is always cheaper, but don't tell occutard idiots that get their info from the TYEE.
Regardless of which direction the number of disasters in any given industry are going, the number of fuckups caused by greed only goes in one direction - up.
For the umpteenth time, safety violations are bad for business. It's not about greed, it's about laziness.
We know that yet they happen because the reality is, corners get cut.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:15:37 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:15:37 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:17:37 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:17:37 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
You are talking to another Rohammad here. The number of train derailments per car load has dropped in Canada. However, when they do happen they are expensive, very expensive. Besides the cost of emergency crews rerailing equipement and the cost of trucking panels out to affected track damage, you have follow up trains in CTC territory that cannot move. What does this mean you retarded left coast faggot. Profits are down because some conductor left a mainline switch in reverse or didn't do an inspection while in the back track. Taking the time to do things safely the first time is always cheaper, but don't tell occutard idiots that get their info from the TYEE.
Regardless of which direction the number of disasters in any given industry are going, the number of fuckups caused by greed only goes in one direction - up.
For the umpteenth time, safety violations are bad for business. It's not about greed, it's about laziness.
We know that yet they happen because the reality is, corners get cut.
And there are consequences for non compliance. I know because I have ran contractors off for safety violations. If I don't do it, I am ran off.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:20:46 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 09:20:46 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
You are talking to another Rohammad here. The number of train derailments per car load has dropped in Canada. However, when they do happen they are expensive, very expensive. Besides the cost of emergency crews rerailing equipement and the cost of trucking panels out to affected track damage, you have follow up trains in CTC territory that cannot move. What does this mean you retarded left coast faggot. Profits are down because some conductor left a mainline switch in reverse or didn't do an inspection while in the back track. Taking the time to do things safely the first time is always cheaper, but don't tell occutard idiots that get their info from the TYEE.
Regardless of which direction the number of disasters in any given industry are going, the number of fuckups caused by greed only goes in one direction - up.
For the umpteenth time, safety violations are bad for business. It's not about greed, it's about laziness.
Incidents are going down on a per unit basis too.
It's clear that both parts
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:26:28 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:26:28 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
You are talking to another Rohammad here. The number of train derailments per car load has dropped in Canada. However, when they do happen they are expensive, very expensive. Besides the cost of emergency crews rerailing equipement and the cost of trucking panels out to affected track damage, you have follow up trains in CTC territory that cannot move. What does this mean you retarded left coast faggot. Profits are down because some conductor left a mainline switch in reverse or didn't do an inspection while in the back track. Taking the time to do things safely the first time is always cheaper, but don't tell occutard idiots that get their info from the TYEE.
Regardless of which direction the number of disasters in any given industry are going, the number of fuckups caused by greed only goes in one direction - up.
For the umpteenth time, safety violations are bad for business. It's not about greed, it's about laziness.
We know that yet they happen because the reality is, corners get cut.
And there are consequences for non compliance. I know because I have ran contractors off for safety violations. If I don't do it, I am ran off.
I'm not saying compliance isn't important but again, tell me in all honesty that manufacturers don't cut corners. Tell me that sometimes those corners don't affect safety.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:30:48 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:30:48 PM
Would you like me to do a search of ALL the corporate fuck ups I can find?Quote from: "easter bunny"
Sure and show us how safety mistakes were profitable too.
You are talking to another Rohammad here. The number of train derailments per car load has dropped in Canada. However, when they do happen they are expensive, very expensive. Besides the cost of emergency crews rerailing equipement and the cost of trucking panels out to affected track damage, you have follow up trains in CTC territory that cannot move. What does this mean you retarded left coast faggot. Profits are down because some conductor left a mainline switch in reverse or didn't do an inspection while in the back track. Taking the time to do things safely the first time is always cheaper, but don't tell occutard idiots that get their info from the TYEE.
Regardless of which direction the number of disasters in any given industry are going, the number of fuckups caused by greed only goes in one direction - up.
For the umpteenth time, safety violations are bad for business. It's not about greed, it's about laziness.
Incidents are going down on a per unit basis too.
It's clear that both partsand labourneed to meet certain standards or you get problems.
Every part our contractors order from Ontario, France or Germany goes through rigorous testing before they can be used. We have a training program now that did not exist thirty years ago when I started as a young leasehand. That is just one industry too.
But, as someone asked, please provide an example of a company where you worked that told you to get around safety rules. I can't fathom big industries, like mining, rail, manufacturing doing that. Anyone in those industries that said that up to the company officers would be run off on the spot.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:31:56 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:31:56 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:38:32 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:38:32 PM
GM. Faulty ignition switches. They kept it under wraps.Quote from: "RW"
They recalled 800, 000 cars and they forfeited $900 mill US. How was violating safety good for GM? That too me is an example of why safety violations are so fucking expensive.
I think you've figured out by by now where I work. At our FC facility when the price of oil was high and contractors hard to find, we banned small welding crews and brought in unionized ones for not following guidelines about depressurizing. If there was an incident, we would be held responsible and it would be EXPENSIVE. What our company likes about unionized workers is they will have a guy who's job is to ensure safety rules are followed. Small indies don't have that. He or she will discipline workers who feel our rules to much of a chore for them.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:42:42 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:42:42 PM
You cannot deny these things happen. You cannot deny corners get cut, especially when manufacturing isn't done in our country.
No one is disagreeing that safety is good for business and profits.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:43:13 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 09:43:13 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:50:25 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:50:25 PM
I answered Herman's call for a company that kept a safety violation under wraps. They should have been sacked for it - HARD!Quote from: "RW"
You cannot deny these things happen. You cannot deny corners get cut, especially when manufacturing isn't done in our country.
No one is disagreeing that safety is good for business and profits.
I made good money all my years abroad. But, decided to come home. One of the reasons is that I cannot stand the way safety is disregarded outside our borders. It's disgusting. the easter bunny would be right if he was talking about the holes I have worked in. But not Canada. People get hurt and heads roll. It happens still, but the consequences are so punitive as they should be.
I would still like easter bunny to give an example of a company he worked at that violated safety regulations because it's more profitable.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:55:58 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 09:55:58 PM
I'm glad you are finally seeing the benefits to unions. :)Quote from: "RW"
The skilled trades unions are great. They are not like other unions that oppose pipeline development. When prices were high and new projects coming on line, their journeymen only took only the best long term positions. We only accept third year apprentices or better. Therefore at times and on shorter term jobs we had to settle for small welding steamfitting contractors. They are not really cheaper either because we have to have a unit operator baby sitting them whereas unions provided a supervisor to do that.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 10:17:58 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 10:17:58 PM
I answered Herman's call for a company that kept a safety violation under wraps. They should have been sacked for it - HARD!Quote from: "RW"
You cannot deny these things happen. You cannot deny corners get cut, especially when manufacturing isn't done in our country.
No one is disagreeing that safety is good for business and profits.
I made good money all my years abroad. But, decided to come home. One of the reasons is that I cannot stand the way safety is disregarded outside our borders. It's disgusting. the easter bunny would be right if he was talking about the holes I have worked in. But not Canada. People get hurt and heads roll. It happens still, but the consequences are so punitive as they should be.
I would still like easter bunny to give an example of a company he worked at that violated safety regulations because it's more profitable.
And damn near everything is made in Asia these days.
Are you starting to see why EB says what he says?
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 10:19:00 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 10:19:00 PM
I'm glad you are finally seeing the benefits to unions. :)Quote from: "RW"
The skilled trades unions are great. They are not like other unions that oppose pipeline development. When prices were high and new projects coming on line, their journeymen only took only the best long term positions. We only accept third year apprentices or better. Therefore at times and on shorter term jobs we had to settle for small welding steamfitting contractors. They are not really cheaper either because we have to have a unit operator baby sitting them whereas unions provided a supervisor to do that.
True blue labour doesn't oppose the pipeline.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 10:34:38 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 10:34:38 PM
I answered Herman's call for a company that kept a safety violation under wraps. They should have been sacked for it - HARD!Quote from: "RW"
You cannot deny these things happen. You cannot deny corners get cut, especially when manufacturing isn't done in our country.
No one is disagreeing that safety is good for business and profits.
I made good money all my years abroad. But, decided to come home. One of the reasons is that I cannot stand the way safety is disregarded outside our borders. It's disgusting. the easter bunny would be right if he was talking about the holes I have worked in. But not Canada. People get hurt and heads roll. It happens still, but the consequences are so punitive as they should be.
I would still like easter bunny to give an example of a company he worked at that violated safety regulations because it's more profitable.
And damn near everything is made in Asia these days.
Are you starting to see why EB says what he says?
Even heavy industry products made in Asia are still subject to ISO standards and stress testing. However, most heavy industry products in our industry are made here in Canada. Ontario to be specific.
What EB doesn't get because he's never worked in industry is that when injuries, derailments, blasts, fires etc happen it si because someone violated standards to save time and thinking they would get away with it. That's people like Herm or myself. There are consequences for us(dismissal) and consequences for the company(monetary) and consequences for new employees new CROR rules for example. It's not something I could get through his thick skull, but it is something we could show him.
True blue labour doesn't oppose the pipeline.Quote
Uninized JOURNEYMEN pipefitters/steamfitters and welders are still working. They are less choosy about the length of jobs, but they are still working. Small contractors, well back to Cape Breton for a lot of them.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 10:37:28 PM
Post by: RW on January 18, 2016, 10:37:28 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 10:41:02 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 10:41:02 PM
GM ignition switch, BP oil spill, MMA railway disaster, Volkswagon emission cheat...Quote from: "easter bunny"
How did those mistakes profit their companies you fucking idiot? MMA is toast. BP spent billions cleaning up, Volksawgen is teertering on collapse over something that had nothing to do with safety and GM had an expensive recall. How did not following safety rules boost share prices or improve their bottom line fucking dunce.
The3 only companies that do not have to pay for safety mistakes are public owned companies.
Shen Li, what is your problem?
I like easter bunny very much..
He's a very nice man and a great poster, but you talk to him like you do Odinson..
And he's not the first person you have chased away with vulgar personal attacks..
Thanks for nothing.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 10:49:37 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 10:49:37 PM
That's ONE industry. The subject is CARS.Quote from: "RW"
I thought our industrial expert said he doesn't trust any industry because safety hurts their bottom line(the opposite is true, but don't waste ur breath on occutards). Are cars today safer or more dangerous? They are inherently safer. Does violating or ignoring safety problems good for companies? Fuck no, in extreme cases it can damn near put them under, Do new technologies sometimes have kinks to be ironed out? Yes, they do which is why I wouldn't touch driverless technology for some time yet.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 10:51:10 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 10:51:10 PM
Shen Li, what is your problem?
:mad:
I like easter bunny very much..
He's a very nice man and a great poster, but you talk to him like you do Odinson..
And he's not the first person you have chased away with vulgar personal attacks..
Thanks for nothing.
:sneaky2:
Here's a box of Kleenex just for you.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 11:07:15 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 11:07:15 PM
GM ignition switch, BP oil spill, MMA railway disaster, Volkswagon emission cheat...Quote from: "easter bunny"
How did those mistakes profit their companies you fucking idiot? MMA is toast. BP spent billions cleaning up, Volksawgen is teertering on collapse over something that had nothing to do with safety and GM had an expensive recall. How did not following safety rules boost share prices or improve their bottom line fucking dunce.
The3 only companies that do not have to pay for safety mistakes are public owned companies.
Shen Li, what is your problem?
:mad:
I like easter bunny very much..
He's a very nice man and a great poster, but you talk to him like you do Odinson..
And he's not the first person you have chased away with vulgar personal attacks..
Thanks for nothing.
:sneaky2:
Don't worry Fash. It doesn't faze me. I know what to expect when I push Shen's hot buttons.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 11:13:37 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 11:13:37 PM
GM ignition switch, BP oil spill, MMA railway disaster, Volkswagon emission cheat...Quote from: "easter bunny"
How did those mistakes profit their companies you fucking idiot? MMA is toast. BP spent billions cleaning up, Volksawgen is teertering on collapse over something that had nothing to do with safety and GM had an expensive recall. How did not following safety rules boost share prices or improve their bottom line fucking dunce.
The3 only companies that do not have to pay for safety mistakes are public owned companies.
Shen Li, what is your problem?
:mad:
I like easter bunny very much..
He's a very nice man and a great poster, but you talk to him like you do Odinson..
And he's not the first person you have chased away with vulgar personal attacks..
Thanks for nothing.
:sneaky2:
Don't worry Fash. It doesn't faze me. I know what to expect when I push Shen's hot buttons.:laugh3:
I am getting tired of Shen Li flying off the handle at good posters like you easter bunny..
I have your back and I think RW does too.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Bricktop on January 18, 2016, 11:17:38 PM
Post by: Bricktop on January 18, 2016, 11:17:38 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 11:21:25 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 11:21:25 PM
GM ignition switch, BP oil spill, MMA railway disaster, Volkswagon emission cheat...Quote from: "easter bunny"
How did those mistakes profit their companies you fucking idiot? MMA is toast. BP spent billions cleaning up, Volksawgen is teertering on collapse over something that had nothing to do with safety and GM had an expensive recall. How did not following safety rules boost share prices or improve their bottom line fucking dunce.
The3 only companies that do not have to pay for safety mistakes are public owned companies.
Shen Li, what is your problem?
:mad:
I like easter bunny very much..
He's a very nice man and a great poster, but you talk to him like you do Odinson..
And he's not the first person you have chased away with vulgar personal attacks..
Thanks for nothing.
:sneaky2:
Don't worry Fash. It doesn't faze me. I know what to expect when I push Shen's hot buttons.:laugh3:
I am getting tired of Shen Li flying off the handle at good posters like you easter bunny..
I have your back and I think RW does too.
Shen is a mainland apparatchik. A Mao loving cadre member.Quote from: "Mr Crowley"
She has a bit of a temper. =)))
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 11:23:00 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 18, 2016, 11:23:00 PM
She has a bit of a temper. =)))Quote from: "easter bunny"
A bit easter bunny?
You are a gentleman.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 11:27:41 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 18, 2016, 11:27:41 PM
Thank you!She has a bit of a temper. =)))Quote from: "easter bunny"
A bit easter bunny?
You are a gentleman.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 19, 2016, 12:17:18 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 19, 2016, 12:17:18 AM
Shen is a mainland apparatchik. A Mao loving cadre member.Quote from: "Mr Crowley"
Me a commie/socialist? I would sell every fucking SOE in China if it wasn't for the fact that most aren't worth spit.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: RW on January 19, 2016, 04:07:45 AM
Post by: RW on January 19, 2016, 04:07:45 AM
That's ONE industry. The subject is CARS.Quote from: "RW"
I thought our industrial expert said he doesn't trust any industry because safety hurts their bottom line(the opposite is true, but don't waste ur breath on occutards). Are cars today safer or more dangerous? They are inherently safer. Does violating or ignoring safety problems good for companies? Fuck no, in extreme cases it can damn near put them under, Do new technologies sometimes have kinks to be ironed out? Yes, they do which is why I wouldn't touch driverless technology for some time yet.
So I guess no one ever cuts corners when it comes to safety then huh?
We actually see it a lot in the food processing industry if you want a home grown example. An American company branded Blue Bell had listeria in one of its plants (yes, KNEW) and they didn't stop pumping out icecream until three people died.
Factory farms are an issue as they are there to make a profit and it's only after the fact that they get smacked through the courts. They cut corners because it's cheaper.
Again, I'm not saying safety isn't important to companies but so are profits.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 19, 2016, 12:35:36 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 19, 2016, 12:35:36 PM
We also had mad a cow outbreak in this country too. To my knowledge no tainted beef got into our food supply. But the result for Canadian beef producers was anything but profitable. Japan and Korea banned Canadian beef imports even though no affected beef got into the food supply. The US and Europe banned live beef imports.
My point being that the argument profitability precludes safety is not reflected by the evidence. If it were, we would never eat any food from Sobeys, never drive a car, never fly, never ride a bike, go skiing, take public transit, enjoy an alcoholic beverage or live in any shelter.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 19, 2016, 02:54:59 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 19, 2016, 02:54:59 PM
Without safety there is no profit. Food safety in Canada and the USA are very good. But we had a listeriosis outbreak at the Maple Leaf plant in Toronto with 57 confirmed cases and 22 deaths. They were able to pinpoint that it came in the packaging process. We have a fail safe system in place in Canada and it nearly always catches problems long before they get into the food supply. on the rare occasions that it does not, new rules and procedures are added. Beefed up training on listeria and cleanliness were included too. The recall cost Maple Leaf $20 million and that is not including $27 million spent on lawsuit settlements.Quote from: "seoulbro"
We also had mad a cow outbreak in this country too. To my knowledge no tainted beef got into our food supply. But the result for Canadian beef producers was anything but profitable. Japan and Korea banned Canadian beef imports even though no affected beef got into the food supply. The US and Europe banned live beef imports.
My point being that the argument profitability precludes safety is not reflected by the evidence. If it were, we would never eat any food from Sobeys, never drive a car, never fly, never ride a bike, go skiing, take public transit, enjoy an alcoholic beverage or live in any shelter.
Any place I have lived and worked that government controlled the means of production had terrible safety records. There were few if any investigations, recalls, forget lawsuits and naturally no changes to prevent further problems. I know I feel a lot safer with the means of production in private hands than in government hands. I would only buy imported if that were to ever happen.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 20, 2016, 05:11:46 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 20, 2016, 05:11:46 PM
How water crisis in Flint, Mich., became federal state of emergency
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 21, 2016, 11:47:01 PM
Post by: easter bunny on January 21, 2016, 11:47:01 PM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 22, 2016, 12:24:56 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 22, 2016, 12:24:56 AM
If safety standards were left up to market forces then it would be the loss of revenue due to dead customers that would be the determining factor. Sorry, but that is a fact.Quote from: "easter bunny"
That wasn't the case in Flint was it? Market forces means providing a service, making the customer happy and they continue to purchase. Public ownership and monopolized capitalism means you don't care what the customer thinks, people that do not know what they are doing are appointed to positions they are unqualified for based on connections and safety is entrusted to people with no skin in the game. Look, I have lived in places where the means of production and all utilities are controlled by government. Every time you turn on a gas stove, you are playing Russian roulette. Sorry, but that is the real fact. What you posted is fantasy.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 22, 2016, 12:28:09 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 22, 2016, 12:28:09 AM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 22, 2016, 12:55:38 AM
Post by: easter bunny on January 22, 2016, 12:55:38 AM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 22, 2016, 01:01:01 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 22, 2016, 01:01:01 AM
The only trustworthy system is one that rewards safety improvements. There is no such system.Quote from: "easter bunny"
Every industry, public and private rewards safety. Um hello.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 22, 2016, 01:03:38 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 22, 2016, 01:03:38 AM
The only trustworthy system is one that rewards safety improvements. There is no such system.Quote from: "easter bunny"
Every industry, public and private rewards safety. Um hello.:crazy:
There's no need for that, but I have to wonder what easter bunny does for a living. How about it easter bunny? Can you tell us? I am a hairdresser.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 22, 2016, 01:14:52 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 22, 2016, 01:14:52 AM
The only trustworthy system is one that rewards safety improvements. There is no such system.Quote from: "easter bunny"
Every industry, public and private rewards safety. Um hello.:crazy:
There's no need for that, but I have to wonder what easter bunny does for a living. How about it easter bunny? Can you tell us?I am a hairdresser.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: cc on January 22, 2016, 03:47:27 PM
Post by: cc on January 22, 2016, 03:47:27 PM
I'll assume that would not be a problem with you
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 12:06:20 AM
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 12:06:20 AM
The only trustworthy system is one that rewards safety improvements. There is no such system.Quote from: "easter bunny"
Every industry, public and private rewards safety. Um hello.:crazy:
There's no need for that, but I have to wonder what easter bunny does for a living. How about it easter bunny? Can you tell us? I am a hairdresser.
I do electronics repair mostly. I've seen the quality of every component go down and down until the product simply fails to operate anymore. And I see the very same thing happening in every other industry. We have a system that punishes failure, but encourages cost cutting. The two are incompatible imo.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 12:21:00 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 12:21:00 AM
The only trustworthy system is one that rewards safety improvements. There is no such system.Quote from: "easter bunny"
Every industry, public and private rewards safety. Um hello.:crazy:
There's no need for that, but I have to wonder what easter bunny does for a living. How about it easter bunny? Can you tell us? I am a hairdresser.
I do electronics repair mostly. I've seen the quality of every component go down and down until the product simply fails to operate anymore. And I see the very same thing happening in every other industry. We have a system that punishes failure, but encourages cost cutting. The two are incompatible imo.
There are still electronics repair techs? I thought that job disappeared along with cobblers. It's a throwaway industry. I am fine with that. It has given people in third world countries I have lived in access to technology they would not have had in the past. But electronics and the rag trade are kind of unique.
Everything you said was dead wrong. My own industry has dramatically reduced industrial accidents causing injusry in the last fifty years. From spudding to wheels, we have dramatically reduced our rate of injury and land disturbance per barrel. Similar success has been found in transportation, mining, forestry, and heavy manufacturing. The one industry in Canada that has done very little to fix their poor safety and environmental record is agriculture. They have grown used to flying under the radar though. We have a system in Canada that rewards innovation that reduces costs. Nothing incompatible with that. They work hand in hand with one another.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 12:27:31 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 12:27:31 AM
I do electronics repair mostly.Quote from: "easter bunny"
I too thought that job no longer existed easter bunny.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 01:08:09 AM
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 01:08:09 AM
I do electronics repair mostly.Quote from: "easter bunny"
I too thought that job no longer existed easter bunny.
ac_blush
I don't do consumer electronics anymore. Just certain types of industrial stuff.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 01:09:40 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 01:09:40 AM
I do electronics repair mostly.Quote from: "easter bunny"
I too thought that job no longer existed easter bunny.
ac_blush
I don't do consumer electronics anymore. Just certain types of industrial stuff.
Are industrial electronics disposable too easter bunny?
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 01:17:16 AM
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 01:17:16 AM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 01:25:32 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 01:25:32 AM
Not the stuff I'm working on. =))Quote from: "easter bunny"
Can I ask what the electronics are for easter bunny?
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 01:37:14 AM
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 01:37:14 AM
Not the stuff I'm working on. =))Quote from: "easter bunny"
Can I ask what the electronics are for easter bunny?
Musical instruments and stuff.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 01:42:03 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 01:42:03 AM
Not the stuff I'm working on. =))Quote from: "easter bunny"
Can I ask what the electronics are for easter bunny?
Musical instruments and stuff.
That seems enjoyable easter bunny.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 01:43:34 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 01:43:34 AM
Not the stuff I'm working on. =))Quote from: "easter bunny"
Can I ask what the electronics are for easter bunny?
Musical instruments and stuff.
I knew it. That's not a real industry.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 01:46:47 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 01:46:47 AM
Not the stuff I'm working on. =))Quote from: "easter bunny"
Can I ask what the electronics are for easter bunny?
Musical instruments and stuff.
I knew it. That's not a real industry.
How very judgmental of you Shen Li.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 02:10:25 AM
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 02:10:25 AM
Not the stuff I'm working on. =))Quote from: "easter bunny"
Can I ask what the electronics are for easter bunny?
Musical instruments and stuff.
That seems enjoyable easter bunny.
ac_smile
It is! =)))
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 02:12:29 AM
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 02:12:29 AM
Not the stuff I'm working on. =))Quote from: "easter bunny"
Can I ask what the electronics are for easter bunny?
Musical instruments and stuff.
I knew it. That's not a real industry.
Oh you
You little brat you!
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 02:13:26 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 02:13:26 AM
Not the stuff I'm working on. =))Quote from: "easter bunny"
Can I ask what the electronics are for easter bunny?
Musical instruments and stuff.
That seems enjoyable easter bunny.
ac_smile
It is! =)))
Are you self employed easter bunny?
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 02:14:39 AM
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 02:14:39 AM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 02:18:54 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 02:18:54 AM
Yup. =)Quote from: "easter bunny"
I wanted to be a self employed beautician..
But, I got hired by the provincial government and liked the security it provides my family..
I thought about pursuing it someday, but I would rather get a degree once my children are adults.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 02:46:13 AM
Post by: easter bunny on January 23, 2016, 02:46:13 AM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 02:51:32 AM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 02:51:32 AM
Something tells me you would do really well as a beautician. =)Quote from: "easter bunny"
Oh you're so sweet easter bunny..
I must go to sleep now..
Have a lovely evening.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Renee on January 23, 2016, 08:06:41 AM
Post by: Renee on January 23, 2016, 08:06:41 AM
Something tells me you would do really well as a beautician. =)Quote from: "easter bunny"
You got something brown on your nose. Might want to wash your face.
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 05:13:38 PM
Post by: Anonymous on January 23, 2016, 05:13:38 PM
Something tells me you would do really well as a beautician. =)Quote from: "easter bunny"
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: easter bunny on February 09, 2016, 03:26:29 AM
Post by: easter bunny on February 09, 2016, 03:26:29 AM
Title: Re: Driverless cars - yea or nay
Post by: Anonymous on February 09, 2016, 09:03:52 PM
Post by: Anonymous on February 09, 2016, 09:03:52 PM
Something tells me you would do really well as a beautician. =)Quote from: "easter bunny":beurk:
Yes, thank you Shen Li.