Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Risk Management (Score 1) 733

by TheCarp (#49369289) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

Then they should be issued to the public who can't seem to stop shitting themselves every time there is an incident. Frankly I think planes are victims of their own success, so safe that crashes are too unusual and people can't handle it makes them freak out more.

Fact is when this happens it is major international news. That right there tells you something. This is not even worth the time we have spent talking about it, never mind wasting time playing musical chairs every time someone has to take a piss.

Comment: Re:Risk Management (Score 2, Insightful) 733

by TheCarp (#49344081) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

The thing is, this really is a freak occurance. So many flights, every single day, over every single city. People need to piss and shit, its simple biology. Every time someone goes for a piss break, someone else needs to be called in? That is just silly and insulting to the people involved.

In the grand scheme of things to worry about, this isn't really one of them. Its ridiculous to feel we need new regulations every time something happens...the next tragedy will always happen. It is inevitable.

Comment: Re:it could have been an accident (Score 3, Insightful) 733

by TheCarp (#49343991) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

In addition to all of the other evidence against this.... its rare that a person feints while in a seated position, its far more common while standing. A pilot, especially one alone in the cockpit is in a seated position. Also you are assuming that people who feint are representative of the population as a whole and of the population of active working pilots; where there is likely some medical self selection bias at work in both of those assumptions.

Also for the most part, both pilots can leave the cockpit, or take a nap, and the plane shouldn't crash. This isn't exactly a wright brother's special here, this is a modern commercial airliner.

There really isn't a lot of room here for an accident based on the TFAs claims

Comment: Re:Check their work or check the summary? (Score 1) 485

by TheCarp (#49336229) Attached to: No, It's Not Always Quicker To Do Things In Memory

Except that frictionless spherical cows are not realistic even if they are very helpful in physics.

When is the last time you actually talked to raw hardware? if its recent, you are a special case, and likely write drivers....in which case, good for you.

When you write "to disk" you are working in memory because its going to be a buffered access, likely reads as well, especially if it is something you recently wrote.

Exceptions will exist but, they are exceptions to the rule.

Comment: Re:Let me guess (Score 1) 224

by TheCarp (#49329787) Attached to: $1B TSA Behavioral Screening Program Slammed As "Junk Science"

I wouldn't want to live in a home so unhospitable to life that it didn't have some insects.

You may feel the need for constant pest control but, I have never had such a service nor felt the need. Most pest issues that have rarely cropped up have been quite easy to control without professional help, much less retaining a service.

This is more like, retaining a pest service because you read in a book that insects exist and it made you shit yourself.

Comment: Re:Let me guess (Score 4, Insightful) 224

by TheCarp (#49328331) Attached to: $1B TSA Behavioral Screening Program Slammed As "Junk Science"

Effective implies effect. Effect implies change, what is it you are looking to change? Currently we have an average of 0 terrorist attacks a day, adding up to 0 per year....a number which has, aside from a statistically insignificant number of anomalies, has been the case for well....more than my entire lifetime, which is a bit more than 3 and a half times the lifespan so far of the TSA.

Implementing the invasive and expensive program of questioning everyone with trained staff seems excessive given the magnitude of the problem.

Comment: Re:Security theater (Score 1) 224

by TheCarp (#49328269) Attached to: $1B TSA Behavioral Screening Program Slammed As "Junk Science"

> It lets you go back to the pre 9/11 security screening procedure.

You mean, the excessive procedure that was security theater and hardly needed EVEN THEN? Yes paying more to get back to what was already excessive theater sounds like quite a win.

at least back then the fact that the security had to answer to people with a reason to keep customers happy was a very important check on how ridiculous it got, we lost that.

Comment: Re: Security theater (Score 5, Insightful) 224

by TheCarp (#49328201) Attached to: $1B TSA Behavioral Screening Program Slammed As "Junk Science"

Actually thats demonstrably false. The only evidence I need is.... the entire history of airport security prior to the creation of the TSA.

Was airport security always a joke? You bet it was. It was always as much of a joke as it is now, but, it was a lot cheaper and, private security was not NEARLY as abusive to paying customers.

Fact is, without government intervention, all this security mumbo jumbo would quickly blow over and security would be downsized appropriately. We pay quite a lot for the ever present paranoia of committees charged only with pissing themselves at every shadow.

Comment: Re:Five Years? (Score 1) 569

If they kill someone as a result....shouldn't both parties be guilty? Seems like they are willing accomplices to me. They are the ones offering the service of sending a violent gang of thugs to someone's front door, a service that's largely not needed at all and really just a jobs program, and usually one run by a private company.

The primary use of swat teams is busting down doors over flowers, usually of unarmed people. They are not what they pretend to be except in the most rare of circumstances, circumstances more rare then their misuse.

They are at least as guilty as he is, if not more for setting up a situation that causes such predictable harm without any legitimate reason.

You are lost in the Swamps of Despair.

Working...