You make a good point that it was not a design flaw insofar as an actual failure or oversight would have been. They took some deliberate action to allow for the pilots to know what was happening, and the override buttons to attempt to remedy the situation. You make another good point when you say that AF447 was pilot error, and no amount of blaming the controls will change that.
Reading the BEA report, it really makes me wonder if the pilots were really that ill prepared for the situation, or if the critical information relating to the flight situation of the aircraft was being withheld by the "smart" cockpit. If the former is true, what airline should I be flying on? Probably not Air France? A major things stand out in the report regarding information to the pilots, namely the lack of any angle of attack gauge, a stall warning that does not sound when the airplane is so stalled as to be falling from the sky, and the lack of something making an enormous deal about the switch from normal law to alternative law flight mode.
Regarding the dual sticks with a dual input light, the key problem is this: when would averaging the joystick inputs actually be desirable? Do both pilots frequently fly at the same time and average it out? What happens when both pilots press the override button, do the inputs average again? The correct outcome for this situation is for the pilots to communicate and reach some census regarding what to do, and instead of forcing them to do so, this system delicately implores them to. There is not any problem when in normal flight, when the dual input buzzer is the most pressing concern, but exactly when the pilots need the most help from the control systems, they provide the least. From a control standpoint, the very best thing would be for the flightsticks themselves to emit some direct feedback to each pilot... something to the effect of having each stick vibrate (in addition to the existing system) when there is a dual input situation. Having direct physical feedback is more meaningful than a light somewhere else because it would be instantly recognized and impossible to ignore. Think, "you are touching the joystick, but it is vibrating, so you are accomplishing nothing."
No, people do exactly that with disquss. They spew toxic shit, then edit it later to look like the good guy. It is disingenuous. Write what you actually mean the first time, then stfu. Slashdot is worth a million shitty disquss threads.
Incorrect, there is no design flaw. As designed, if both pilots make a flight control input simultaneously, they will receive an aural warning: "Dual Input". They will know about it and either pilot can take priority over the other by pushing a button on the stick which will lock out the other.
Certainly this would have been the only alarm they were hearing or blinking light they were seeing, you know in a stalling aircraft.... A "Dual Input" light is just the kind of tired, stupid, shit, that an engineer would say is good enough, but really just is not.
Except again, from TFA, the city of Detroit was paying an enormous sum of money to a reputable vendor to maintain the system. How does that coalesce with this third world, wealth inequality theory?
Perhaps CIA agents do not like going on what would generally be considered suicide missions, but other would be plastic gun users are more enthusiastic.
When thinking of good models to emulate, are you thinking more of Egypt Revolution 1.0, which got taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood, or of Egypt Revolution 2.0, which got taken over by the military?
I think perhaps you have misunderstood the intention of my reply. It was directed at the post to which it replied, mostly when the guy said:
Understand? Or do I need to break out the image macros, as stupid memes like `curolation =! causashon' is probably a better learning tool for you. --Pseudonym Authority
Maybe he was lambasting someone that actually is ignorant, but the argument that he used was wrong and is wrong. Science is not about telling people that they are stupid and to listen to an expert. Scientific thought is about asking annoying questions, and finding answers through observation of physical phenomena.
The for example differential hypothesis is not my belief about what is happening on farms, I personally think that giving antibiotics to farm animals continuously is probably a bad idea. That said, if the evidence for the first conclusion (farm workers are getting MRSA from livestock) was really that rigorous, there would be a better answer to the second hypothesis (farm workers get MRSA from something else they have in common) than STFU. The best way to public policy action is airtight science, not arm waving and "scientific consensus".
sure. not to mention the atrocious efficiency of wind power. Just pump water to a reservoir instead and let it out when you need it.
I think that the article is trying to be clever, but missing an important point in doing so. Energy is generated from the compressed air using a more conventional turbine/generator setup... not a wind farm. This system is just an ENORMOUS UPS.
The fact the claim of over-indulgence in pre-emptive antibiotics use in cattle is a cause of resistant bacteria strains affecting humans is under-reported in the mainstream US media does not mean it is not supported by reputable scientific studies.
This has nothing to do with pro EU or anti-US but everything with pro-shady business or anti-consumer.
No, the transfer of antibiotic resistant bacteria from livestock hosts to humans is in fact poorly demonstrated. Most scientists and other humans think it should be true, and so fairly vehemently defend the claim. They are probably right, but the science is weak.
You have no understanding on bacteria, vaccination, or statistics. Please do not voice your uninformed opinion ever again.
You have no understanding of science! Correlation in fact does not provide sufficient evidence for a causation hypothesis. It is not just a meme. For example, a differential hypothesis might be: industrial farm workers spending more time in the hospital (lets suppose that factory farms are more dangerous than organic ones) could easily explain a higher presence of drug resistant bacteria in the test population. Would it be simple to further demonstrate the hypothesis stating that the MRSA actually came from the livestock? No, it would not... think DNA profiling of the bacterial strains. Is it appropriate to berate someones intelligence for remaining skeptical of an under-supported claim? No, not really.
The only difference was, the no-haggle price meant the salesman sold the car purely on features, style, or the company backing the car.
I never understood the appeal of the "no-haggle" price thing. Every car dealership everywhere has no-haggle advertised prices clearly displayed on the window sticker. No negotiation acumen is needed to pay full price, you just show up with money.
The sticker prices at a new car stores always--even when haggling is not, "necessary"--contain a lot of padding to cover expenses related to financing, telling a customer their trade is worth 2x more than it is, etc, etc.... All you get for not negotiating is to pay like a high-risk financing customer, with a million dollar turd trade in.
Saturn was a subsidiary of GM and, because of that, considered to be under the same set of rules as GM.
Thanks for this, but the matter is still not clear to me. How was GM able to circumvent the manufacturer != dealer rules?
They didn't. Saturns were sold at GM dealerships, just they tricked some hapless suckers into thinking that they were buying them direct form the manufacturer. Want a Saturn part today? Call your local Chevy dealership.
You cede one good point while ignoring an even better one, namespace pollution in a huge function is almost as horrible as using a bunch of global variables.
For what it's worth, and to hell with all of the naysayers that this post is guaranteed to attract, I hate monolith functions more than any other nasty programming habit. So, good for you.
What is the difference between this DSTAR and encryption then? If I don't pay then it sure sounds like it is obscured to me.
It is more like security through obscurity than encryption. Remember than anyone can buy a DSTAR radio to listen in, without knowing any secrets shared among the other parties.
There are plenty of innocent reasons for QRM as well, such as someone operating a much more powerful transmitter than you are using. Since they can not hear you, there is no way to know they are interfering.
Gall, I cant believe that you can not see the difference between a gas pump and a vodka bottle. Let me show you some pictures of how different they are.
The Chinese have successfully copied Cisco's HW so there's no reason to buy the genuine product.
I thought that Cisco's advantage over its competitors was in its SW, not HW...
Actually, their business advantage is in figuring out how to make people pay enormous sums of money for things that should be, and otherwise are, nearly free.
Slashdot Mirror
The design does not require the pilots to do anything at all like that.
You make a good point that it was not a design flaw insofar as an actual failure or oversight would have been. They took some deliberate action to allow for the pilots to know what was happening, and the override buttons to attempt to remedy the situation. You make another good point when you say that AF447 was pilot error, and no amount of blaming the controls will change that.
Reading the BEA report, it really makes me wonder if the pilots were really that ill prepared for the situation, or if the critical information relating to the flight situation of the aircraft was being withheld by the "smart" cockpit. If the former is true, what airline should I be flying on? Probably not Air France? A major things stand out in the report regarding information to the pilots, namely the lack of any angle of attack gauge, a stall warning that does not sound when the airplane is so stalled as to be falling from the sky, and the lack of something making an enormous deal about the switch from normal law to alternative law flight mode.
Regarding the dual sticks with a dual input light, the key problem is this: when would averaging the joystick inputs actually be desirable? Do both pilots frequently fly at the same time and average it out? What happens when both pilots press the override button, do the inputs average again? The correct outcome for this situation is for the pilots to communicate and reach some census regarding what to do, and instead of forcing them to do so, this system delicately implores them to. There is not any problem when in normal flight, when the dual input buzzer is the most pressing concern, but exactly when the pilots need the most help from the control systems, they provide the least. From a control standpoint, the very best thing would be for the flightsticks themselves to emit some direct feedback to each pilot... something to the effect of having each stick vibrate (in addition to the existing system) when there is a dual input situation. Having direct physical feedback is more meaningful than a light somewhere else because it would be instantly recognized and impossible to ignore. Think, "you are touching the joystick, but it is vibrating, so you are accomplishing nothing."
[...] like the mess that was Pulse Audio or the shit that was early KDE 4 and Gnome 3? Too bad, fuck you, you update or its shit time for you.
I tried Gnome 3 and it was shit time for me.
No, people do exactly that with disquss. They spew toxic shit, then edit it later to look like the good guy. It is disingenuous. Write what you actually mean the first time, then stfu. Slashdot is worth a million shitty disquss threads.
Incorrect, there is no design flaw. As designed, if both pilots make a flight control input simultaneously, they will receive an aural warning: "Dual Input". They will know about it and either pilot can take priority over the other by pushing a button on the stick which will lock out the other.
Certainly this would have been the only alarm they were hearing or blinking light they were seeing, you know in a stalling aircraft.... A "Dual Input" light is just the kind of tired, stupid, shit, that an engineer would say is good enough, but really just is not.
It is so you can not drive by troll someone, and then cowardly delete you turd comments.
Except again, from TFA, the city of Detroit was paying an enormous sum of money to a reputable vendor to maintain the system. How does that coalesce with this third world, wealth inequality theory?
Or did the summary make little or no sense when read as conventional English?
Perhaps CIA agents do not like going on what would generally be considered suicide missions, but other would be plastic gun users are more enthusiastic.
When thinking of good models to emulate, are you thinking more of Egypt Revolution 1.0, which got taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood, or of Egypt Revolution 2.0, which got taken over by the military?
And then probably also by the Muslim Brotherhood.
Understand? Or do I need to break out the image macros, as stupid memes like `curolation =! causashon' is probably a better learning tool for you. --Pseudonym Authority
Maybe he was lambasting someone that actually is ignorant, but the argument that he used was wrong and is wrong. Science is not about telling people that they are stupid and to listen to an expert. Scientific thought is about asking annoying questions, and finding answers through observation of physical phenomena.
The for example differential hypothesis is not my belief about what is happening on farms, I personally think that giving antibiotics to farm animals continuously is probably a bad idea. That said, if the evidence for the first conclusion (farm workers are getting MRSA from livestock) was really that rigorous, there would be a better answer to the second hypothesis (farm workers get MRSA from something else they have in common) than STFU. The best way to public policy action is airtight science, not arm waving and "scientific consensus".
sure. not to mention the atrocious efficiency of wind power. Just pump water to a reservoir instead and let it out when you need it.
I think that the article is trying to be clever, but missing an important point in doing so. Energy is generated from the compressed air using a more conventional turbine/generator setup... not a wind farm. This system is just an ENORMOUS UPS.
The fact the claim of over-indulgence in pre-emptive antibiotics use in cattle is a cause of resistant bacteria strains affecting humans is under-reported in the mainstream US media does not mean it is not supported by reputable scientific studies.
This has nothing to do with pro EU or anti-US but everything with pro-shady business or anti-consumer.
No, the transfer of antibiotic resistant bacteria from livestock hosts to humans is in fact poorly demonstrated. Most scientists and other humans think it should be true, and so fairly vehemently defend the claim. They are probably right, but the science is weak.
You have no understanding on bacteria, vaccination, or statistics. Please do not voice your uninformed opinion ever again.
You have no understanding of science! Correlation in fact does not provide sufficient evidence for a causation hypothesis. It is not just a meme. For example, a differential hypothesis might be: industrial farm workers spending more time in the hospital (lets suppose that factory farms are more dangerous than organic ones) could easily explain a higher presence of drug resistant bacteria in the test population. Would it be simple to further demonstrate the hypothesis stating that the MRSA actually came from the livestock? No, it would not... think DNA profiling of the bacterial strains. Is it appropriate to berate someones intelligence for remaining skeptical of an under-supported claim? No, not really.
Censorship on slashdot? Wow.
Probably not.
So, you're illiterate and proud of it. Cool.
So, you're a dick, and don't know it. Awsome.
I think he probably knows.
The only difference was, the no-haggle price meant the salesman sold the car purely on features, style, or the company backing the car.
I never understood the appeal of the "no-haggle" price thing. Every car dealership everywhere has no-haggle advertised prices clearly displayed on the window sticker. No negotiation acumen is needed to pay full price, you just show up with money.
The sticker prices at a new car stores always--even when haggling is not, "necessary"--contain a lot of padding to cover expenses related to financing, telling a customer their trade is worth 2x more than it is, etc, etc.... All you get for not negotiating is to pay like a high-risk financing customer, with a million dollar turd trade in.
Saturn was a subsidiary of GM and, because of that, considered to be under the same set of rules as GM.
Thanks for this, but the matter is still not clear to me. How was GM able to circumvent the manufacturer != dealer rules?
They didn't. Saturns were sold at GM dealerships, just they tricked some hapless suckers into thinking that they were buying them direct form the manufacturer. Want a Saturn part today? Call your local Chevy dealership.
You cede one good point while ignoring an even better one, namespace pollution in a huge function is almost as horrible as using a bunch of global variables.
For what it's worth, and to hell with all of the naysayers that this post is guaranteed to attract, I hate monolith functions more than any other nasty programming habit. So, good for you.
Many business radios have significantly better electronics than cheep ham stuff.
What is the difference between this DSTAR and encryption then? If I don't pay then it sure sounds like it is obscured to me.
It is more like security through obscurity than encryption. Remember than anyone can buy a DSTAR radio to listen in, without knowing any secrets shared among the other parties.
There are plenty of innocent reasons for QRM as well, such as someone operating a much more powerful transmitter than you are using. Since they can not hear you, there is no way to know they are interfering.
Gall, I cant believe that you can not see the difference between a gas pump and a vodka bottle. Let me show you some pictures of how different they are.
http://www.drinkhacker.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/absolut-vodka.jpg
http://www.instantnewsfortbend.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Gas-Pump.jpg
Obviously, these two things have nothing in common, they look different!
The Chinese have successfully copied Cisco's HW so there's no reason to buy the genuine product.
I thought that Cisco's advantage over its competitors was in its SW, not HW...
Actually, their business advantage is in figuring out how to make people pay enormous sums of money for things that should be, and otherwise are, nearly free.