You don't just "throw the entire problem to a computer and let if grind out possibilities" without a lot of time-consuming programming, and air search/rescue doesn't come with programmers. A few weeks of hiring, and you'll be ready to get started!
Plus instead of the arcs they show on the screen, it would actually be a cone, with different surface-drawn arcs depending on the altitude, and the combination serves to make the guesses that much fuzzier.
Also, a cheapo bug-scanner like a private investigator uses would detect the transmission. If they brought some basic anti-tracking tools with them on board, it seems reasonable that after 7 hours they'd find the plug. 2nd ping they realize it pings every hour, 3 rd, 4th, 5th, 6th pings they're getting close to where it is, then once they find the antenna, 30 minutes to trace it to a place they can cut. That's with just standard off-the-shelf security equipment and one person in that role. So no reason to assume the signal ending means the plane crashed or landed.
Actually, it is tricky; it sounds like they know more than they do. They talk about 2 flight paths, but actually it is a giant arc from Pakistan to Thailand to the Indian Ocean, and they don't even have a direction. Just a range from the satellite based on the signal strength, which produces an arc that it probably was in when the ping transmitted. There are 2 obvious "flight corridors" in that arc, so those are the best guesses. Sounds clearer than it is.
Also nothing has been released about if they stopped for fuel, or if it is known. The US keeps saying they think they crashed into the sea in 1 of 2 areas, which implies that they don't know that they DID refuel; but the way they phrase the combination of statements, I think they don't have information to negate refueling, they don't have indication of it. And without refueling, and assuming it was in one of those two corridors, then it would have likely crashed.
Also they're assuming that the fuel supply is based on having been properly fueled for a flight to Beijing, but no public information has said anything at all about having verified on the ground how much fuel was loaded, or if that can be accurately checked up on with certainty. Seems like airport corruption would have to be 0% in order for them to even know. I'm under the impression that airports in Malaysia actually have a significant corruption problem, and so it is probably impossible to go back and check in the past how much fuel was really taken on. Maximum range at maximum load for the 777-200ER is 7,725 nmi (14,310 km, 8,892 mi), a whole lot more than the 2500 nmi circles the media is drawing on the screens.
So if they re-fueled OR if they loaded extra fuel, they could be anywhere, and the Indian Ocean flight corridor that is speculated on would lead to waypoints to the middle east. I'm guessing Iran, but it could just as easily be in Sudan or Pakistan.
Yeah but in this case, the Chinese companies might not be so willing to falsify part numbers.
the passengers however, was probably killed when they climbed to 45.000 feet
The official service ceiling is 43,100 ft. So you can be darn sure that 45000 ft (44000 in the most detailed reports) is not going to kill anybody. You do know the cabin is pressurized, right?
damned thing can easily be disguised as civilian traffic and can fly around the world and place it where ever they want...
Not without turning on a transponder. And while you can obviously fly over Malaysia without one and not raise an eyebrow, getting over Western countries without a transponder might prove more difficult. Somebody doesn't just peek up from the ground and say, "ah, gee, looks civilian, let it pass." They actually see it on radar, and most countries will scramble fighters and intercept something large that doesn't have a transponder, or isn't scheduled to be in the area. They then fly close and identify markings. They fly close enough to see faces in the windows when they're doing an escort. An empty plane with no transponder is going to get shot down. So it is substantially more complicated.
There was at least 1 fairly high level American business exec on the flight. There is significant hostage value there. If they are religious nuts they probably don't care the slightest bit what the "value" in dollars of the airplane is, they care about the propaganda value.
If the incentive was financial, (highly unlikely) the parts value of the plane is very low, or zero, but the whole plane has significant value as an AWACS type of platform for a smaller country. And while selling parts would be problematic, buying them might not be. 30 years ago, maybe. Not now.
If they were going to use it as a bomb, the most realistic targets would be India, or a US military base somewhere where they don't control the airspace.
If there was a reason to search for it, they would. There is none. The question about Flight 19 is, why did it happen, and how to prevent it? That is all understood now. You don't let some hotshot look out his window and fly by the seat of his pants guessing at unlikely locations, when his subordinates knew where they were. Finding the crashed airplanes is meaningless; the crews are all dead and there was no sensitive cargo.
The problem with that is that "better" means what? Better managed? No, better sales and marketing. And they don't get that from education. It isn't data-driven, it is sales-personality driven. That is the dealership market. This isn't theory.
I love the way you ask a question I already answered, speculate as to the answer as if it is unknown... and then quote it! Yeah, you're engaging in an intellectually honest exchange... NOT.
If people aren't motivated they're not going to use it anyways. This idea that an education factory can produce results in children is what steals attention and resources away from the kids who are motivated to learn.
Kids who aren't motivated should have more attention paid to teaching them to get along, to play nice, to learn multiple trades, etc.
Yeah, my brother "can read," but barely. He can indeed read road signs, so "basic" literacy is very, very valuable. But technical information, even in his own field, would glass over his eyes in 10 seconds. Anything important, like a letter from the DMV, he'll have to have somebody explain it to him, even though it is already dumbed down.
He graduated high school with average grades, too.
Many people who are used to being the smartest person in the room say that they feel stupid when talking to Bill Gates.
There are multiple possible explanations for that. One is the obvious one, that he is some sort of super-genius. Another is that they believe he is, but what he is saying sounds crazy, so they resolve that conflict deferentially by assuming it is going over their head.
If you're convinced the crazy guy under the bridge is a great poet, you'll likely find deep meaning in his rantings.
Gates' book is very good, and has important insights. He might be as smart as they say. But your argument is whack.
The main use case is not for private data. Private data is likely to fit into their free plan. This is for businesses who are using google services already, and want to share a lot of data "in the cloud."
I agree. Feature thrash sent me from fanboy to "slowly migrating away, one service at a time."
Citation needed. Management skills help, but talk to former employees; many of these dealerships are publicly documented as having awful management practices, even to the point of being hostile towards employees. If sales is strong, the margins are high, and since they are run by single dictatorial owners, there is no feedback or oversight. They can simply be horrid managers and still be on top.
It went right over your head. Look at what you're asking me to address, and then click/scroll back to my actual comment. And you'll see I'm not addressing the "difficulty" of going to management, precisely because I'm advocating NOT doing that, and instead complaining to OVERSIGHT, which is Congress. And has none of that difficulty.
And it is certainly not "career suicide" in comparison to leaking to the press and being a wanted fugitive sheltering in Neo-Soviet Russia.