For every case like this, you can find cases where engineers and/or their employers made really bad choices when left to their own devices. The outcome of the Pinto case, and others like it, should not only be judged by the specific issue, but also by their cumulative effect in encouraging manufacturers to be proactively cautious (though that is hard to measure.)

That's an interesting comment about the phase delay. My impression as I watched the video was that the rocket behavior resembled the pilot-induced oscillations that can occur when a pilot's responses lag too far behind the events.

The article doesn't contain any evidence that the cost of operating in Australia was a significant part of the problem, but it does contain evidence that the management pissed off a significant part of the company's talent.
 

I confine my activities to the antisocial media, such as Slashdot.

I broadly agree, but I would like to offer a couple of additional points. Firstly, there are fact-based disciplines within the humanities. Secondly, STEM (especially the technology and engineering parts) can be (mis)taught in a 'how-to' style that is light on critical thinking and in-depth understanding.

That one word pretty much sums up the trajectory of business and politics today. And neoserf for its plans for us.
 

You had me for a second, but this is not a valid analogy. The valid analogy would require someone to say that their analysis has found the pen that will make you a good writer.

"Is it time for more scientists to speak out openly about raising the level of transparency and honesty in their field?"

It has already happened - that's how you got to hear about it.

Just for a moment, I wished the the squeegee guys were back. I would like to see an interaction between a squeegee guy and this car at the exit of the Lincoln tunnel.

Who or what runs the legal system? And why would the manufacturers respond with anything other than 'fuck off - we will do what we like' to a judgment against them?

This is not the libertarian alternative. That would be that you can choose not to buy a car until some manufacturer deigns to build one that is secure - or you can build one yourself.
 

Loss of most of its former atmosphere.

So if a tree falls in a forest, and someone, somewhere is deaf, then it doesn't make a sound?

While SCOTUS has made some sensible rulings recently, the lower courts are still making decisions as if nothing has changed.

Alas, it is much less common than ordinary self-interested self-interest.

You are entitled to your opinion, but your attempt to establish it as the sole objective point of view is doomed to failure, on account of its subjective basis.