Boeing did all these dodgy hardware and software hacks just to avoid the time and cost of certifying a new type. This was a panicked rush to market, to compete with Airbus 320neo. Which isn't crippled by stubby landing gear like the 737, so its engines can placed in an inherently aerodynamically stable position.
Because it wasn't a new type, FAA did not require that pilots be certified. And furthermore Boeing buried the details of how to fully return the plane to manual control, because that would conflict with the story they told the FAA about unchanged flight characteristics. Unfortunately for all involved, Max 8 really did have a new flight characteristic: falling out of the sky under computer control.
So yes, Boeing is going to pay out the biggest settlement in aviation history. There is just no way to escape culpability. And we have a huge indictment of Trumpist deregulation too: industry didn't win by weakening FAA oversight, rather it lost big league.
You're the same guy who said he couldn't do long division, now you boast about your impressive capacity to understand higher math, a capacity apparently only you possess. In reality, you are just an ass who bets a boner from hearing himself talk.
Being able to rapidly make calculations to a couple of significant figures is a MUCH more useful skill and something I do a lot.
Oh, you mean like estimating each digit of the dividend? You just gave away that you never really did understand the division algorithm. You also seem to be confused about the difference between learning and memorizing. I hope you never did design a bridge, your attitude towards intellectual competency is disconcerting to say the least.
By "move on" do you mean, move on to the next jury award, so that evidence of a flippant attitude from AAPL may be used to guide jurors in assessing a more effective level of punitive damages?
So, they don't have you memorize the multiplication tables, through the 12's like they did back in my day or other things like that?
Teach them first how to compute the results and memorize the answers later. Not only does this introduce powerful tools and concepts early, it reduces anxiety in the common case that some entry in the multiplication table slips the mind - it can always be constructed.
Kids don't even need to learn the decimal multiplication algorithm to do this, repetitive adding is perfectly sufficient, especially when combined with memorizing some of the results that were computed earlier.
Bad analogy: algebra may be taught without reference to numbers at all, only abstract operations. So it is simply wrong to talk about an arithmetic horse pulling an algebra cart.
I view your position as coming out on the side of drudgery, at the risk of turning many potentially good students of math away in disgust. Arithmetic also includes square roots, does "mastering" arithmetic include learning an algorithm for computing square roots, or should the students already be learning other abstract concepts before that? Do they ever even need to master square root arithmetic? Do they need to learn complex multiplication, which is also arithmetic, or should they learn the principle of distribution first? Perhaps you have your own private definition of "mastery", which includes some subset of arithmetic. If so, the only issue is which subset. Personally, I favor introducing some abstract concepts such as variables and associativity immediately after learning single digit addition. After all, how much arithmetic do you really need, to understand that (a + b) + c = a + (b + c)? Kids can easily learn this one with lego blocks.
These days, arithmetic and other more abstract branches of mathematics are introduced early and together. Students on the whole tend to progress further and faster than we old folks ever did. Something to keep in mind when shouting at those teacher kids to get off your algebra lawn.
Actually, the correct statement is, arithmetic is a subset of math. Now what you missed is, rearranging the expression so that it consists as much as possible of even powers of tens is a kind of algebra. The kids don't know it, but they are learning a bit of algebra at the same time as simple arithmetic. As for who was braying, hint: one of us was shouting an unfounded claim. I hope that you now understand why your claim was unfounded, if not you should probably just stay far away from the education system.
Still don't see the point of getting kids to memorise and perform division algorithms at school.
Think of it as introduction to algorithms if you must. It's basic literacy, a accessory to actual math as opposed to arithmetic. I would not want to drive over a bridge designed by an engineer who couldn't do long division.
Maybe ten years after I graduated I found that the first years were doing noticeably harder integrals than I did at the same point. There's a pattern: students actually do progress further and faster these days than the good old days some of us like to brag about.
You're talking about arithmetic, not math. And exaggerating to boot. Maybe you didn't get the point of that particular exercise, you don't need to broadcast your ignorance as if it was something to be proud of.
Arithmetic needs no circles and lines. It is an algorithmic process.
You can approach it algorithmically and end up being able to get the right answer without understanding, or you can approach it algebraically and learn concepts that will be essential later.
Slashdot Mirror
Boeing did all these dodgy hardware and software hacks just to avoid the time and cost of certifying a new type. This was a panicked rush to market, to compete with Airbus 320neo. Which isn't crippled by stubby landing gear like the 737, so its engines can placed in an inherently aerodynamically stable position.
Because it wasn't a new type, FAA did not require that pilots be certified. And furthermore Boeing buried the details of how to fully return the plane to manual control, because that would conflict with the story they told the FAA about unchanged flight characteristics. Unfortunately for all involved, Max 8 really did have a new flight characteristic: falling out of the sky under computer control.
So yes, Boeing is going to pay out the biggest settlement in aviation history. There is just no way to escape culpability. And we have a huge indictment of Trumpist deregulation too: industry didn't win by weakening FAA oversight, rather it lost big league.
The problem is rar.
Anyone who willingly creates a rar file deserves to get owned by Winrar bugs.
You're the same guy who said he couldn't do long division, now you boast about your impressive capacity to understand higher math, a capacity apparently only you possess. In reality, you are just an ass who bets a boner from hearing himself talk.
When there's a hole there instead of screen, or a notch, then you also don't have anything displayed there. You're not making sense.
Being able to rapidly make calculations to a couple of significant figures is a MUCH more useful skill and something I do a lot.
Oh, you mean like estimating each digit of the dividend? You just gave away that you never really did understand the division algorithm. You also seem to be confused about the difference between learning and memorizing. I hope you never did design a bridge, your attitude towards intellectual competency is disconcerting to say the least.
and yours isn't?
Typical faith-based troll from a typical AAPL shill.
By "move on" do you mean, move on to the next jury award, so that evidence of a flippant attitude from AAPL may be used to guide jurors in assessing a more effective level of punitive damages?
AAPL stopped paying patent royalties you say? Sounds like starting a battle to me.
So what you are saying is, the next fine needs to be considerably larger?
Why does everybody like it so much when Apple takes one on the legal chin? Two words: "round corners".
So, they don't have you memorize the multiplication tables, through the 12's like they did back in my day or other things like that?
Teach them first how to compute the results and memorize the answers later. Not only does this introduce powerful tools and concepts early, it reduces anxiety in the common case that some entry in the multiplication table slips the mind - it can always be constructed.
Kids don't even need to learn the decimal multiplication algorithm to do this, repetitive adding is perfectly sufficient, especially when combined with memorizing some of the results that were computed earlier.
The article talks about the case where "math topics became more challenging", which clearly excludes simple arithmetic.
What is ambiguous about "ignore"?
Bad analogy: algebra may be taught without reference to numbers at all, only abstract operations. So it is simply wrong to talk about an arithmetic horse pulling an algebra cart.
I view your position as coming out on the side of drudgery, at the risk of turning many potentially good students of math away in disgust. Arithmetic also includes square roots, does "mastering" arithmetic include learning an algorithm for computing square roots, or should the students already be learning other abstract concepts before that? Do they ever even need to master square root arithmetic? Do they need to learn complex multiplication, which is also arithmetic, or should they learn the principle of distribution first? Perhaps you have your own private definition of "mastery", which includes some subset of arithmetic. If so, the only issue is which subset. Personally, I favor introducing some abstract concepts such as variables and associativity immediately after learning single digit addition. After all, how much arithmetic do you really need, to understand that (a + b) + c = a + (b + c)? Kids can easily learn this one with lego blocks.
These days, arithmetic and other more abstract branches of mathematics are introduced early and together. Students on the whole tend to progress further and faster than we old folks ever did. Something to keep in mind when shouting at those teacher kids to get off your algebra lawn.
Actually, the correct statement is, arithmetic is a subset of math. Now what you missed is, rearranging the expression so that it consists as much as possible of even powers of tens is a kind of algebra. The kids don't know it, but they are learning a bit of algebra at the same time as simple arithmetic. As for who was braying, hint: one of us was shouting an unfounded claim. I hope that you now understand why your claim was unfounded, if not you should probably just stay far away from the education system.
various riffs on elementary algebra
I suspect that you don't know what elementary algebra actually is.
Still don't see the point of getting kids to memorise and perform division algorithms at school.
Think of it as introduction to algorithms if you must. It's basic literacy, a accessory to actual math as opposed to arithmetic. I would not want to drive over a bridge designed by an engineer who couldn't do long division.
He must have confused division with addition, after all the symbols are nearly the same, aren't they.
Maybe ten years after I graduated I found that the first years were doing noticeably harder integrals than I did at the same point. There's a pattern: students actually do progress further and faster these days than the good old days some of us like to brag about.
You're talking about arithmetic, not math. And exaggerating to boot. Maybe you didn't get the point of that particular exercise, you don't need to broadcast your ignorance as if it was something to be proud of.
Arithmetic needs no circles and lines. It is an algorithmic process.
You can approach it algorithmically and end up being able to get the right answer without understanding, or you can approach it algebraically and learn concepts that will be essential later.
I was impressed to find my kid being taught something about symmetry in grade 5, something they may return to if they ever get to advanced physics.
You're talking about arithmetic, not math. Arithmetic is to math as spelling is to composition. Roughly.