This subreddit should enable sharing and discussing economic research and news from the perspective of economists. Academic work and summaries are welcome. Image and video submissions are not allowed.
--
If you have any questions about this removal, please contact the mods.
An aviation website reported 2 days ago that the FAA got a $875 million dollar contract back in June. Several congress members were concerned about it. "Any upgrades and changes to ATC systems must be made with safety as the first priority,” the lawmakers wrote in their letter to Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford. This from Flying Magazine published in October. The National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) said it was not “involved in the design, testing, or implementation” of the technology. The lawmakers said frontline aviation safety workers had either zero or very limited notice of SMART’s rollout.
Politico reported that the FAA’s negotiation for a warrant for ASI stock is the first known instance of the agency pursuing an ownership stake in a private company.
In the U.S., the practice is historically rare and typically reserved for times of crisis. But it is becoming more routine under President Donald Trump’s administration.
The report comes a few weeks after the Government Accountability Office (GAO) alleged the agency’s ATC modernization effort may face cost overruns, schedule delays, and unmet goals. FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford disputed that characterization. They recently implemented this new AI system at 22 air traffic control sites and the same 22 sites were the ones that had issues and were shut down yesterday. These locations are the only ones managed by the FAA. In addition they fired hundreds of FAA workers including people hired for FAA radar, landing and navigational air maintenance back in 2025. - Sources https://www.flyingmag.com/faa-workers-fired-amid-push-to-downsize-federal-workforce/. https://www.flyingmag.com/faa-seeks-ownership-stake-atc-contractor-asi/. https://avweb.com/aviation-news/faa-expands-ai-assisted-traffic-management/.
Unfortunately this administration really weakened the trust people have with the American government and all its institutions. Congress being a shitshow is one thing we all expect but FAA, EPA, CDC, and USDA also being fucked over in some way by this administration is just enraging.
As someone who deals with aviation, safety is the utmost priority and if these dudes are seriously just going "fuck it just do it and we'll deal with the blowback" on stuff like this, there will be deaths in the future.
I can't even listen to Duffy bloviate about how he needs more money and him and Trump are working on fixing this. Bro, wasn't there already a ton of money already set aside for this program? Wtf happened?
They prioritize making money over safety. They contracted with a new AI company that donated money to one of Duffy's relatives, ignored safety concerns and didn't follow the correct safety procedures. I am scared to fly anywhere now.
I understand the concern. If it is any consolation, flying commercially is one of the safest ways to travel. Much safer compared to driving. Doesn't erase the issues but it would take a lot more to make me not fly.
I really hope that someone would chase down some of these corrupt dickheads with new democrats getting sworn in but I won't hold my breath that any true punishment will happen.
Coincidentally, the AI traffic system was designed and tested by Terri Schiavo (no relation).
Glad to see that the ground stop has been lifted and planes are flying again. Even the one-day ground stop caused significant issues. Imagine if it had been longer.
It’s not AI that’s the problem, it’s corrupt humans trying to maximize profits using AI as their Trojan horse for lazy efforts.
If you look deeper at the SMART system it’s just more Trump admin corrupt money passed around their own circles. $875 million in government money to suggest alternate routes?
Just more gross humans using AI to justify massive expenses with horrible human oversight and integration. Shitty humans are going to be shitty, now they just have new buzz words and technology to fail with.
You could say the same thing both anything with code then or even the internet. “If everyone using the internet can’t be trusted to use it responsibly it shouldn’t be used.” What about cars? So many people can’t be trusted with them, so ban for everyone?
Humans are the problem here. This isn’t some evil superintelligence hacking our system, it’s humans who failed to understand the necessary engineering and infrastructure elements enough to implement a new system, it’s irrelevant if that system is human programming or AI.
You can point to any technology failing and typically what you’ll see behind it is greedy humans trying to pocket as much money as they can instead of doing things right.
I mean obviously the decision comes from weighing the positives against the negatives in all these cases.
Still waiting to see the positive for AI. Is it worse products? Layoffs? Tens of thousands of cancelled flights? Maybe it’s the acceleration of climate change. Could be the water sources it’s drying up. I hear it makes a nice relaxing deafening drone for the people living nearby.
The positives from AI are immense, I’m sorry you’re not seeing them personally yet. Advancements in the medical field alone are incredibly exciting, especially the potential for those health care developments to be accessible to so many more people who wouldn’t have had access to that care, even in rural locations.
But you’re right that there’s a lot of negatives in the short term, especially if we let the people at the wheel continue with no regulation and oversight. We need to be legislating AI to ensure environmental oversight and a rising social safety net. AI’s water usage isn’t actually an issue right now if you compare it to most any other industry, but we’re allowing a negative environmental impact from data centers that doesn’t need to exist at this scale. We can greatly reduce that impact, but no one is telling these people no, since this current administration is only concerned with lining their own pockets.
What we need is nuanced legislation, not a team sport mentality of doomers vs cultists. The reality though is that the technology is here to stay whether any of us like it or not. Trying to get rid of it in one country isn’t going to stop its global impact, it’s just going to put the keys in other people’s hands as they consolidate that power while also taking all those jobs anyways.
AI has the potential to bring immense quality of life improvements to everyone, but it also has the potential to further consolidate power in the worst people. Without proper legislation, the latter will continue to be the path we see. With smart nuanced policy though we can all reap the benefits of these developments, so I hope we can continue voting intelligently and not emotionally.
Personally though I’d argue that social media is far worse for society and also a completely useless environmental impact. Just scrolling Instagram uses far more energy than someone prompting ChatGPT to save them a few hours of menial tasks. Sign me up for banning social media and properly legislating AI, but I do hear you on your concerns and emotions around how things have been progressing thus far.
AI doing work previously done by humans isn’t environmentally unfriendly. Using human labour is way more damaging to the environment. As for the positives, it allows humans to do more work. It’s no different than word processing or spreadsheets or email. There are tasks that need human intelligence to perform and tasks that are predictable and better done by machines. People used to add up all the numbers in a column, then they used to use a 10key, then they switched to excel. The human remains but the throughput per human hour increases massively. Now you can dump a stack of pdf invoices into AI and have it work out your spend. It’s still on that same abacus, 10key, spreadsheet evolution though.
I’ve yet to see an argument against skilled users streamlining their work with AI that wouldn’t equally apply to getting rid of word processors and going back to a typing pool.
The environmental impact argument seems to rest on resource consumption per hour of a human versus a model. The problem with this is the human doesn’t just cease to exist: the AI impact is a purely additive, compounding industrial load.
Furthermore, your argument ignores the Jevons Paradox: when a resource becomes drastically more efficient and cheaper to use, we don't use less of it: we use massively more.
A typewriter doesn’t need a dedicated substation to operate.
You’re right that typists using typewriters has a lower electricity consumption than word processing and you’re also right that the total volume of typing happening went up after the word processor was invented. Where you lose me is the argument that we shouldn’t use word processors because of this. That doesn’t seem fair to the millions of women who will go back to work in the typing pool.
Evidence that AI pollutes less per line of code than humans? The difference is so vast that it's undeniable. I don't need exact numbers to tell you that, just as I don't need to find an article published in Nature called "the Earth and the Sun: observations on relative volume" to tell you which is bigger.
And yes, it's on the exact same spectrum as word processing. First we handwrote everything. Then we started typing but it was still manual. Then we started photocopying. Then we started doing word processing. Then we started using primitive AI tools to take standard templates for things like engagement letters and to tweak them to the scenarios. Now we're using more advanced tools to write more sophisticated documents. People will say it's worse, but they also say that a handwritten letter is more heartfelt than a typed one. That doesn't mean we should go back to armies of secretaries writing everything by hand.
At this point it seems like communications, mapping, logistics, and computation are cheap and well developed enough that each vehicle should be capable of having its own tracking / positioning module that can connect to and communicate independently with other nearby vehicles such that we don't need centralized control for airspace.
This is a typical cycle: Centralized systems, system costs deflate, decentralized system, new requirements are added that can't be met decentrally, centralized systems, system costs deflate... and on and on it goes.
So the next step in the cycle isn't super mega advanced ATC, it's distributed, decentralized, p2p, per-vehicle proximate-positional ATC.
Despite official denials, aviation analysts, lawmakers, and the public immediately questioned whether high-volume data streams or integration issues between modern software and decades-old hardware played a contributing role. In other words the AI rollout may have crashed it not because it went rouge but because it overpowered the legacy computer systems. That makes me wonder what other surprises we have in store.
Yeah, I was listening to a former FAA official describe how they prepared for Y2K, testing redundant systems in select locations first, doing everything slowly and methodically. He suspects it was more how they chose to do it than what they were installing
I think the explanation of the new voice recording systems they also just upgraded storing much more high def (and therefore larger) files is a much more likely explanation, since it directly involved the communications systems. But it doesn't involve AI so it got no headlines.
Whatever this administration touches, it falls apart. Pretty bold for Duffy to complain to Congress about lack of funding ( probably trying to insinuate that the not yet seated Dem majority Congress is to blame). They gave hime 10 billion and the situation is worse than ever
This has been hilariously sad to read as the story unfolds. Air traffic controllers have been short on supply since Reagan fired the striking union workers in the 1980s. The 1980s were 40 years ago, btw, and most of the controllers who were hired back then have retired by now. Because it’s a difficult and extremely stressful job and the government doesn’t pay them enough to make it worthwhile.
While I’m fine with an AI integration that is thoroughly tested before rollout and thoroughly tested in smaller batches after rollout, literal lives are on the line here, and we’re lucky no one died (afaik?) as a result of this reckless “move fast and break things” approach that works fine when your product is a video sharing app but does not work when the product is directing thousands of humans in the air.
This is why government agencies are supposed to be staffed with experienced experts, rather than Fox News hosts who say nice things about you but have no background in infrastructure or aviation.
It's still unclear what the scope of the AI system is, but an ai system working in a support capacity only in an air gapped fashion with regular atc driving decisions could be a totally fine roll out plan.
I think we probably won't get any information until the new year when the new Congress can investigate without stuff being shuffled under the rug unfortunately. My suspect is more that the FAA has just been ignoring infrastructure upgrades as air traffic has increased as a consequence of all the Doge stuff.
Yeah, I mean, if someone familiar with the systems had studied integrating AI or big data systems into the existing nationwide system before actually doing it, this wouldn’t be a headline, or a major story. But that’s not what typically happens in a corrupt system. It’s one more very public absolute self own by the Trump administration that I am sure will be investigated next year. (And if Jeffries wants to keep his job, he could gain more public support by opening the investigation now)
The first rule in aviation is redundancy. Every critical system must have an alternate system ready to go without delay if the main system fails. Clearly, the “redundant” system in place now is to pull the plug. That works to an extent but is not acceptable as stopping traffic on the ground does little for the aircraft in the air.
This is another cash grab from this administration. What a coincidence that all of this is happening and now they need 50 BILLION!! Dollars to fix the air control system. The level of theft occurring in this country is disgusting.
This subreddit should enable sharing and discussing economic research and news from the perspective of economists. Academic work and summaries are welcome. Image and video submissions are not allowed.
--
If you have any questions about this removal, please contact the mods.
It has already been confirmed that this was related to a hardware swap overloading their routers, and it was not related to software activity. Not only that, the SMART system is a recommendation engine, and not a communications tool.
This is rabblerousing at best, misinformation at worst.
Economics-ModTeam | 6 hours ago
This subreddit should enable sharing and discussing economic research and news from the perspective of economists. Academic work and summaries are welcome. Image and video submissions are not allowed.
--
If you have any questions about this removal, please contact the mods.
pit_of_despair666 | 8 hours ago
An aviation website reported 2 days ago that the FAA got a $875 million dollar contract back in June. Several congress members were concerned about it. "Any upgrades and changes to ATC systems must be made with safety as the first priority,” the lawmakers wrote in their letter to Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford. This from Flying Magazine published in October. The National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) said it was not “involved in the design, testing, or implementation” of the technology. The lawmakers said frontline aviation safety workers had either zero or very limited notice of SMART’s rollout. Politico reported that the FAA’s negotiation for a warrant for ASI stock is the first known instance of the agency pursuing an ownership stake in a private company.
In the U.S., the practice is historically rare and typically reserved for times of crisis. But it is becoming more routine under President Donald Trump’s administration.
The report comes a few weeks after the Government Accountability Office (GAO) alleged the agency’s ATC modernization effort may face cost overruns, schedule delays, and unmet goals. FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford disputed that characterization. They recently implemented this new AI system at 22 air traffic control sites and the same 22 sites were the ones that had issues and were shut down yesterday. These locations are the only ones managed by the FAA. In addition they fired hundreds of FAA workers including people hired for FAA radar, landing and navigational air maintenance back in 2025. - Sources https://www.flyingmag.com/faa-workers-fired-amid-push-to-downsize-federal-workforce/. https://www.flyingmag.com/faa-seeks-ownership-stake-atc-contractor-asi/. https://avweb.com/aviation-news/faa-expands-ai-assisted-traffic-management/.
UltimateLifeform | 7 hours ago
Everytime I try to give the benefit of the doubt, these idiots prove further and further that no, they really are that corrupt and stupid.
pit_of_despair666 | 7 hours ago
I don't trust anything that comes out of their mouth.
UltimateLifeform | 6 hours ago
Unfortunately this administration really weakened the trust people have with the American government and all its institutions. Congress being a shitshow is one thing we all expect but FAA, EPA, CDC, and USDA also being fucked over in some way by this administration is just enraging.
As someone who deals with aviation, safety is the utmost priority and if these dudes are seriously just going "fuck it just do it and we'll deal with the blowback" on stuff like this, there will be deaths in the future.
I can't even listen to Duffy bloviate about how he needs more money and him and Trump are working on fixing this. Bro, wasn't there already a ton of money already set aside for this program? Wtf happened?
pit_of_despair666 | 5 hours ago
They prioritize making money over safety. They contracted with a new AI company that donated money to one of Duffy's relatives, ignored safety concerns and didn't follow the correct safety procedures. I am scared to fly anywhere now.
UltimateLifeform | 4 hours ago
I understand the concern. If it is any consolation, flying commercially is one of the safest ways to travel. Much safer compared to driving. Doesn't erase the issues but it would take a lot more to make me not fly.
Other_Breakfast7505 | 7 hours ago
Why stupid? They know they all getting pardons in the end of the day.
UltimateLifeform | 6 hours ago
I really hope that someone would chase down some of these corrupt dickheads with new democrats getting sworn in but I won't hold my breath that any true punishment will happen.
Crismus | 6 hours ago
The only thing that will block the massive pardons coming from Trump is if he has a sudden incapacity.
Probably Vance would take over and pull the same charging for pardons system though.
The public are screwed no matter what.
The-Young-Lion | 8 hours ago
Coincidentally, the AI traffic system was designed and tested by Terri Schiavo (no relation).
Glad to see that the ground stop has been lifted and planes are flying again. Even the one-day ground stop caused significant issues. Imagine if it had been longer.
[OP] One-Emu-1103 | 8 hours ago
Wait until they roll out Ai for the banks. That will be as much fun as a barrel of monkeys
GrizzlyP33 | 8 hours ago
It’s not AI that’s the problem, it’s corrupt humans trying to maximize profits using AI as their Trojan horse for lazy efforts.
If you look deeper at the SMART system it’s just more Trump admin corrupt money passed around their own circles. $875 million in government money to suggest alternate routes?
Just more gross humans using AI to justify massive expenses with horrible human oversight and integration. Shitty humans are going to be shitty, now they just have new buzz words and technology to fail with.
kelpyb1 | 8 hours ago
This is the same dumb argument with guns
If people can’t use it responsibly and non destructively, it shouldn’t be used.
GrizzlyP33 | 8 hours ago
You could say the same thing both anything with code then or even the internet. “If everyone using the internet can’t be trusted to use it responsibly it shouldn’t be used.” What about cars? So many people can’t be trusted with them, so ban for everyone?
Humans are the problem here. This isn’t some evil superintelligence hacking our system, it’s humans who failed to understand the necessary engineering and infrastructure elements enough to implement a new system, it’s irrelevant if that system is human programming or AI.
You can point to any technology failing and typically what you’ll see behind it is greedy humans trying to pocket as much money as they can instead of doing things right.
kelpyb1 | 8 hours ago
I mean obviously the decision comes from weighing the positives against the negatives in all these cases.
Still waiting to see the positive for AI. Is it worse products? Layoffs? Tens of thousands of cancelled flights? Maybe it’s the acceleration of climate change. Could be the water sources it’s drying up. I hear it makes a nice relaxing deafening drone for the people living nearby.
Stop me when I hit it.
GrizzlyP33 | 4 hours ago
The positives from AI are immense, I’m sorry you’re not seeing them personally yet. Advancements in the medical field alone are incredibly exciting, especially the potential for those health care developments to be accessible to so many more people who wouldn’t have had access to that care, even in rural locations.
But you’re right that there’s a lot of negatives in the short term, especially if we let the people at the wheel continue with no regulation and oversight. We need to be legislating AI to ensure environmental oversight and a rising social safety net. AI’s water usage isn’t actually an issue right now if you compare it to most any other industry, but we’re allowing a negative environmental impact from data centers that doesn’t need to exist at this scale. We can greatly reduce that impact, but no one is telling these people no, since this current administration is only concerned with lining their own pockets.
What we need is nuanced legislation, not a team sport mentality of doomers vs cultists. The reality though is that the technology is here to stay whether any of us like it or not. Trying to get rid of it in one country isn’t going to stop its global impact, it’s just going to put the keys in other people’s hands as they consolidate that power while also taking all those jobs anyways.
AI has the potential to bring immense quality of life improvements to everyone, but it also has the potential to further consolidate power in the worst people. Without proper legislation, the latter will continue to be the path we see. With smart nuanced policy though we can all reap the benefits of these developments, so I hope we can continue voting intelligently and not emotionally.
Personally though I’d argue that social media is far worse for society and also a completely useless environmental impact. Just scrolling Instagram uses far more energy than someone prompting ChatGPT to save them a few hours of menial tasks. Sign me up for banning social media and properly legislating AI, but I do hear you on your concerns and emotions around how things have been progressing thus far.
Some-Band2225 | 7 hours ago
AI doing work previously done by humans isn’t environmentally unfriendly. Using human labour is way more damaging to the environment. As for the positives, it allows humans to do more work. It’s no different than word processing or spreadsheets or email. There are tasks that need human intelligence to perform and tasks that are predictable and better done by machines. People used to add up all the numbers in a column, then they used to use a 10key, then they switched to excel. The human remains but the throughput per human hour increases massively. Now you can dump a stack of pdf invoices into AI and have it work out your spend. It’s still on that same abacus, 10key, spreadsheet evolution though.
I’ve yet to see an argument against skilled users streamlining their work with AI that wouldn’t equally apply to getting rid of word processors and going back to a typing pool.
lonestar-rasbryjamco | 6 hours ago
The environmental impact argument seems to rest on resource consumption per hour of a human versus a model. The problem with this is the human doesn’t just cease to exist: the AI impact is a purely additive, compounding industrial load.
Furthermore, your argument ignores the Jevons Paradox: when a resource becomes drastically more efficient and cheaper to use, we don't use less of it: we use massively more.
A typewriter doesn’t need a dedicated substation to operate.
Some-Band2225 | 4 hours ago
You’re right that typists using typewriters has a lower electricity consumption than word processing and you’re also right that the total volume of typing happening went up after the word processor was invented. Where you lose me is the argument that we shouldn’t use word processors because of this. That doesn’t seem fair to the millions of women who will go back to work in the typing pool.
kelpyb1 | 7 hours ago
And I imagine you have actual data for any of these claims?
Also you actually believe AI is equivalent in compute to word processing?
Worth-Lead-5944 | 6 hours ago
Evidence that AI pollutes less per line of code than humans? The difference is so vast that it's undeniable. I don't need exact numbers to tell you that, just as I don't need to find an article published in Nature called "the Earth and the Sun: observations on relative volume" to tell you which is bigger.
And yes, it's on the exact same spectrum as word processing. First we handwrote everything. Then we started typing but it was still manual. Then we started photocopying. Then we started doing word processing. Then we started using primitive AI tools to take standard templates for things like engagement letters and to tweak them to the scenarios. Now we're using more advanced tools to write more sophisticated documents. People will say it's worse, but they also say that a handwritten letter is more heartfelt than a typed one. That doesn't mean we should go back to armies of secretaries writing everything by hand.
kelpyb1 | 6 hours ago
So in other words, you don’t actually have this evidence.
TimSylvester_ | 4 hours ago
At this point it seems like communications, mapping, logistics, and computation are cheap and well developed enough that each vehicle should be capable of having its own tracking / positioning module that can connect to and communicate independently with other nearby vehicles such that we don't need centralized control for airspace.
This is a typical cycle: Centralized systems, system costs deflate, decentralized system, new requirements are added that can't be met decentrally, centralized systems, system costs deflate... and on and on it goes.
So the next step in the cycle isn't super mega advanced ATC, it's distributed, decentralized, p2p, per-vehicle proximate-positional ATC.
gingerzombie2 | 7 hours ago
I'm sorry, I can't read that name without the song from Family Guy getting stuck in my head
basil_not_the_plant | 6 hours ago
Being from the Tampa Bay area, I got this.
(I was wondering where I'd heard the name Schiavo.)
[OP] One-Emu-1103 | 8 hours ago
Despite official denials, aviation analysts, lawmakers, and the public immediately questioned whether high-volume data streams or integration issues between modern software and decades-old hardware played a contributing role. In other words the AI rollout may have crashed it not because it went rouge but because it overpowered the legacy computer systems. That makes me wonder what other surprises we have in store.
MrAckerman | 8 hours ago
Wouldn’t be the first time somebody skipped thorough load testing due to pressure to deliver on an unrealistic deadline.
[OP] One-Emu-1103 | 8 hours ago
Just like a typical Microsoft release. I work in IT and every time they have an update something unexpected happens or stops working
AX_99 | 8 hours ago
Oceangate Titan?
unaskthequestion | 8 hours ago
Yeah, I was listening to a former FAA official describe how they prepared for Y2K, testing redundant systems in select locations first, doing everything slowly and methodically. He suspects it was more how they chose to do it than what they were installing
Dux_Ignobilis | 7 hours ago
From what I read last night, it sounds like they only tested the system at a singular smaller airport.. and that was it. No testing anywhere else.
They also didn't have any ATC helping with the project either. Just insane.
unaskthequestion | 7 hours ago
I wish I was surprised
ICLazeru | 8 hours ago
"It's not that the AI made a mistake (yet), it's that the entire system exploded when we plugged it in!"
[OP] One-Emu-1103 | 8 hours ago
That's it Exactly! It's as though they're placing the engine of a Ferrari into a Mazda Miata without the proper modifications.
thedudedylan | 8 hours ago
Thanksgiving is coming up. One of the highest flight traffic weeks of the year. Hold on to your butts everybody.
Mayutshayut | 8 hours ago
yOU mEan Si? (/s)
hogue9733 | 8 hours ago
Si señor
Mayutshayut | 8 hours ago
El inglés es el idioma oficial de los Estados Unidos.
hogue9733 | 7 hours ago
!jajajajaja¡
zeezle | 8 hours ago
I think the explanation of the new voice recording systems they also just upgraded storing much more high def (and therefore larger) files is a much more likely explanation, since it directly involved the communications systems. But it doesn't involve AI so it got no headlines.
[OP] One-Emu-1103 | 7 hours ago
But that didn't ground all flights in the United States either
HourOpposite527 | 8 hours ago
Whatever this administration touches, it falls apart. Pretty bold for Duffy to complain to Congress about lack of funding ( probably trying to insinuate that the not yet seated Dem majority Congress is to blame). They gave hime 10 billion and the situation is worse than ever
wbruce098 | 7 hours ago
This has been hilariously sad to read as the story unfolds. Air traffic controllers have been short on supply since Reagan fired the striking union workers in the 1980s. The 1980s were 40 years ago, btw, and most of the controllers who were hired back then have retired by now. Because it’s a difficult and extremely stressful job and the government doesn’t pay them enough to make it worthwhile.
While I’m fine with an AI integration that is thoroughly tested before rollout and thoroughly tested in smaller batches after rollout, literal lives are on the line here, and we’re lucky no one died (afaik?) as a result of this reckless “move fast and break things” approach that works fine when your product is a video sharing app but does not work when the product is directing thousands of humans in the air.
This is why government agencies are supposed to be staffed with experienced experts, rather than Fox News hosts who say nice things about you but have no background in infrastructure or aviation.
way2lazy2care | 7 hours ago
It's still unclear what the scope of the AI system is, but an ai system working in a support capacity only in an air gapped fashion with regular atc driving decisions could be a totally fine roll out plan.
I think we probably won't get any information until the new year when the new Congress can investigate without stuff being shuffled under the rug unfortunately. My suspect is more that the FAA has just been ignoring infrastructure upgrades as air traffic has increased as a consequence of all the Doge stuff.
wbruce098 | 57 minutes ago
Yeah, I mean, if someone familiar with the systems had studied integrating AI or big data systems into the existing nationwide system before actually doing it, this wouldn’t be a headline, or a major story. But that’s not what typically happens in a corrupt system. It’s one more very public absolute self own by the Trump administration that I am sure will be investigated next year. (And if Jeffries wants to keep his job, he could gain more public support by opening the investigation now)
grumpyliberal | 7 hours ago
The first rule in aviation is redundancy. Every critical system must have an alternate system ready to go without delay if the main system fails. Clearly, the “redundant” system in place now is to pull the plug. That works to an extent but is not acceptable as stopping traffic on the ground does little for the aircraft in the air.
Intrepid_Vanilla_381 | 6 hours ago
This is another cash grab from this administration. What a coincidence that all of this is happening and now they need 50 BILLION!! Dollars to fix the air control system. The level of theft occurring in this country is disgusting.
Economics-ModTeam | 6 hours ago
This subreddit should enable sharing and discussing economic research and news from the perspective of economists. Academic work and summaries are welcome. Image and video submissions are not allowed.
--
If you have any questions about this removal, please contact the mods.
S-192 | 6 hours ago
It has already been confirmed that this was related to a hardware swap overloading their routers, and it was not related to software activity. Not only that, the SMART system is a recommendation engine, and not a communications tool.
This is rabblerousing at best, misinformation at worst.