Next Threat; Data Manipulation

[tw]

Originally Posted by mbpark

The problem isn't management. It's management being ignorant of these issues and thinking they can cut corners to increase margins.

Those were the exact same reason why American cars earned bad quality recommendations. Again, they were only concerned with immediate costs; could not see the massive cost increases when you don't ask, "If we don't do this, then what will it eventually cost us." Unfortunately those massive cost increases from bad quality or insufficient security do not appear on spread sheets for maybe a decade later - when the executive has long left with massive bonuses and severance pay.

Just another example of why the spread sheets can never measure what current exists and what future costs will really be. Just another example of why management must come from where the work gets done; not from business schools.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by tw

Just another example of why the spread sheets can never measure what current exists and what future costs will really be. Just another example of why management must come from where the work gets done; not from business schools.

What's your take on the VW emissions cheating scandal, tw?

I'm not sure if the cheating was done at the direction of management or if an engineer piped up in some meeting that they can beat the test with a little code.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

What's your take on the VW emissions cheating scandal, tw?

GM did things similar to cover up their bad gas mileage numbers. For example, a Corvette would detect less acceleration, then assume this was an EPA mileage test. Computer would change engine parameters and bypass second gear to make their mileage appear higher.

I routinely exceed Honda's EPA highway mileage numbers in local driving. But I could never obtain GM's highway mileage in their cars. All consumers could see this. But most consumers ignore facts and numbers (observe so many who pay the highest prices for gasoline in Wawa, Sheets, Costco, Hess, US Gas, Giant, Turkey Hill, Valero, etc).

This particular VW event is not observable by consumers. However, how many spend massively on a surge protector for their computers ... that does not even claim to protect from destructive surges. How many buy probiotics that have no proven benefits. Or supplements in health food store when most do not even have what they claim on the label (that lie is legal). How many buy something because it creates a healthy heart? That only means it does not kill you; never says it improves health.

Scams are easy. Consumers would not know about VWs fraud. But then consumers even ignore scams that should be obvious to them - if for no other reason because they demand numbers.

Why did so many GM owners just assume EPA highway mileage could not be obtained - and call that acceptable? Most all but set themselves up to be scammed. Need we cite Listerine?

Apparently the VW scam was identified by researchers in the University of West Virginia by doing testing on platforms different from what the EPA uses. Later it was exposed that the computer intentionally changed engine parameters to 'fake' emission tests. This is apparently different from the Toyota brake problem that was created by bad engineering – in the tenure of Wantanabe who wanted to increase sales rather than make better products.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by tw

This particular VW event is not observable by consumers.

Not yet. The recall of these cars and the "fix" for the problem will almost certainly be observable. Either by poor vehicle performance as the software patch dials down engine performance and improves engine emissions, or by the addition of hardware in the car in the form of a new adblue tank taking up space in the trunk. And don't forget the decrease in resale value.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

The recall of these cars and the "fix" for the problem will almost certainly be observable.

Quite likely. Because an intentional software fraud would have been done for good reason - ie they could not make the engine work properly. Or, like in GM, because cars designed by business school graduates (without innovation) would have crappy gas mileage numbers.

That is speculation. But based in what seems reasonable. VW will install new software (without doubt) and may also need additional hardware. Estimated cost $7 billion.

A recent and new trend exists. Top executives were previously exempt from prosecution if they admitted to the crime - and got stockholders to pay for it. A recent Federal court jury verdict against a Georgia Peanut processor puts that chief executive in jail for 28 years for murder. Because 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management. The reason should be held criminally responsible - not just for Enron executives.

Its about time we made chief executives responsible. Including their bonus is not paid for ten years - when spread sheets finally report whether those executives did anything productive.

VW top management had plenty of time to come clean. They stalled. He clearly knew about the problem when he was negotiating for not fixing the problem - to deny it existed. That should be criminal.

Opposite was Toyoda who testified before Congress on a Camry computer problem. He had already started a program to undo the major disasters created by Wantanabe. But as we know, that can take 4 to 10 years. Toyoda was only there for 1 year when he said bankruptcy is a 5 step process - and Toyota was already at step 3. He knew and was actively trying to undo many disasters. Toyoda was trying to undo damage when the Camry problem and Wantanabe's coverups were exposed - apparently even surprised him.

We have no reason to believe top management in VW was doing anything but a coverup. They were negotiating this problem at least a year ago when even 2015 cars were sold with the problem. Expect this solution to have consequences because the software fraud was intentionally done to mask some sort of problem. Toyota's problem and VWs problem existed for two completely different reasons.

Obviously we are discussing two different concepts - data manipulated by the powers that be and data manipulated by outside 'enemies'. The former is why companies need Inspector Generals. Latter is why companies need executive who empower the little people to make decisions - as William Edward Deming made obvious even 50 years ago.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by tw

GM did things similar to cover up their bad gas mileage numbers. For example, a Corvette would detect less acceleration, then assume this was an EPA mileage test. Computer would change engine parameters and bypass second gear to make their mileage appear higher.

No, no, no, you and your sinister plots.
There was no deception involved. Detect an EPA test? Even you aren't that dumb. Yes, it was to improve the gas mileage on the high performance models, and it worked, because it kept city drivers from running higher revs in a lower gear when they didn't need it. But if they seriously made an effort to do so, they could. There's also a bunch of aftermarket companies who sell a disabling tool for a few bucks. You see there's a lot of childish, unpatriotic, Americans who don't want to drive the crap you do.

From the Corvette manual, hardly a secret...

One-to-Four Shift Light (Manual Transmission)
When this light comes on, you can only shift from FIRST (1) to FOURTH (4)instead of FIRST (1) to SECOND (2).
You must complete the shift into FOURTH (4) to turn off this feature. This helps you get the best possible fuel economy.
After shifting to FOURTH (4), you may downshift to a lower gear if you prefer.

Notice: Forcing the shift lever into any gear except FOURTH (4) when the 1 TO 4 SHIFT light comes on may damage the transmission.
Shift only from FIRST (1) to FOURTH (4) when the light comes on.
This light will come on when:
• The engine coolant temperature is higher than
169°F (76°C),
• you are going 15 to 19 mph (24 to 31 km/h) and
• you are 21 percent throttle or less.

15 to 19 mph and less than 21% throttle, is noodling along in city traffic.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

You see there's a lot of childish, unpatriotic, Americans who don't want to drive the crap you do.

Apparently you are again using the head on your dic for a brain.

You have quoted from the wrong model year citing a completely different transmission. GM only offered automatics when and to subvert EPA mileage tests.

Meanwhile, back to reality and intelligent concepts in the next post. Can you make the transition? It is hard for you. I understand.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by tw

You have quoted from the wrong model year citing a completely different transmission. GM only offered automatics when and to subvert EPA mileage tests.

No, dumbfuck. First, you didn't cite a year, as usual with your lies. Second, the EPA requires EVERY combination of engine/transmission available in EVERY model to be tested. There's no, well this engine/transmission combo is OK in this car, so we'll use it in that car too. The window sticker will reflect the test results for what's in THAT vehicle, tested in THAT model. It ain't 1966 where they can take any car they make and drop in any engine they want. ANY change to the driveline requires at least a million dollars and a year or more lead time, in testing and certification by the government. That's the reason they built my truck for two years before they could put in the engine they wanted to from the git go.

There's no way they can only submit automatic Corvettes, or anything else, unless that's all they sell. Yes, they modified automatics to increase mileage/cut emissions also, just like the skip-shift sticks so fucking what, it was well known, and well documented (and reviled).

But mileage is only a small part of the requirements, emissions for hot and cold start play a significant role in the combination of goals the makers must meet. My Ex had a four cylinder, stick shift, station wagon, with a vacuum breaker, that would kill engine vacuum when shifting so it didn't suck fuel when it wasn't going to use it. Yes it had a carburetor, and stick your 1930s/40s, aircraft fuel injection technology up your ass. That shit only ran acceptably in a small RPM range and was dirty as hell.

The mechanical fuel injection in cars was just as bad and needed expensive maintenance at least monthly, more often if you used it for anything but racing a stick shift so you could keep the engine in a small RPM power band.. and it was still dirty. It wasn't until hardened electronic fuel injection was perfected, not invented, perfected, that it became a superior option. That perfecting was one of the reasons $3000 cars are now $30000.


Your poorly conceived bullshit conspiracy theories don't fit the law or the facts.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

No, dumbfuck. First, you didn't cite a year, as usual with your lies.

Of course I did not. Because you were supposed to know this stuff before posting your cum in the board - you dic. Now when you decide to return to an adult attitude, then I need not continue using the language that only the dumbest among us appear to understand. You do not even have to apologize to me even though you owe me one.

Signed - the adult here.