-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 07/29/2015 08:59 PM, grarpamp wrote: [ ... ]
That's why I am much more interested in the prospects of a manufacturing process built for radical transparency, using "commercial best practice" technology
All part of it.
at conventional production facilities.
Except this, unless you're demonstrating a way to convince these untrustable closed entities to open up their entire process and production line for your inspection pursuant to each and every audited run you want to put through it. If you're not, then you can't be certain that what you put in is what you get out.
That's exactly what I'm talking about: Essentially taking over the production process and working alongside facility staff, with particular attention to choke points where validation is both possible and productive. ISO quality programs include provision for onsite participation by clients; it's more a question of money, and picking a facility that can readily accommodate the requirements, than of getting anyone to open up any closed process. This might deprive one of the advantages of "commercial trade secret" techniques belonging to the facility's owners, but that's kind of the whole point of the exercise. Smaller facilities with older equipment would be better prospects than the mega-shops. One should never be certain that one is receiving exactly what was specified, regardless of validaiton. Somewhere, the rising curve of security costs will cross a falling curve of security risks, and that's as good a place as any to draw a line. Mark the other side of the line "here be dragons - maybe." End users can pick up any perceived slack if and as they want to spend the money to do so.
IMO the same kind of radical transparency should apply to all industrial processes that pose large potential hazards to public health & safety, i.e. nuclear power stations, transgenic agriculture, etc.
You should be able to read the as-built blueprints of all of these things online, access all areas of plants for independant inspection, raise enforceable design and safety flags, etc.
Damn straight. I'm especially picky about the inspection records of nuclear power facilities; IMO they should include video of the inspectors at work, especially in hazardous / PITA locations they might be inclined to skip. I recall at least one case where reactor inspection logs were casually falsified for years, very nearly causing a catastrophic core breach due to undetected containment vessel deterioration located "around a corner and out of sight" from casual view. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVuYInAAoJEDZ0Gg87KR0LnlAQANaYgr/vJ0oiIy1c5XHzTLT0 vKtYUxg07dJksSmv9UdGE+fDjLO+w9ojRMm5iGLTWUhfi1FF3nNLaSkR5o1Ho7kH vwLB/UknMxNlsP5Nfe2+JBVOcGh/r4w/QgrmYpksO5NSrc3vpeq3hmJQLq31uwNQ 4S90svYIyPI6r/TcuKJopIirDBAMKlC2FN5mWwUQ1wK5frFQ7QX467t/Nw7x/fIm GKKEHKtXFk3KtgCUWpEw9k0b0FiZR4g22jPhBxEqVatpwPBhUiiqkQ084202jH2V hLgF+Qlpoo0aPbY/8xGfULwtGRenJRv0YP2Wc7GXtQyDRRy7k7p6/YzA4jaO2qyJ 3NATz9p/xWzf5CeurPKmhJ4Kxz08+SrXesJDCOizoNLa0Glv98FLNisC2risrHyL D8N+VjQTHgczxgYXpb+ubbK6W8t4M6WkbEM721xqdgMdGTqa/AS/dMSTzARTQtqH GpvpxqkfWdmiFHpNjMVG+XSiZZMiKXybqwqI4jDCMbcZN9iOHcBRLviMtwkhkRjm M7yoXIRTEAD9OyIbZbg/n7IjYrI3/RXDfjwGm7H7893v+2XmLJOtOeMTw00TuO66 rPSI1zE5/rY1Bx3/F7ZwqY1LlP9RqbCNp0tIylQx+4Lz7tdEM+DzSHoJeE+c5dEm TEIAjPgbol14M/VViP5I =hsKV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----