Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



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:Ummmm ... duh? (Score 1) 351

by smellsofbikes (#49357965) Attached to: Modern Cockpits: Harder To Invade But Easier To Lock Up

Would it help much? A rogue pilot has the advantage of surprise. They get the first punch - and with a little luck and some practice, one punch is enough. Lock door, punch unsuspecting attendant in the face, pummel them unconscious before they recover.

Or, as I've posted elsewhere, don't even bother with a physical flight. In the US, where two people are required on the flight deck, all flight personnel are automatically eligible to be Federal Flight Deck Officers, meaning that after taking some amount of training they can carry firearms on the plane with them, and other flight officers/staff are prohibited from asking or knowing that they're carrying weapons. If pilots want to crash a plane, it's not going to be difficult for them to succeed.

Comment: Re:Ummmm ... duh? (Score 1) 351

by smellsofbikes (#49357083) Attached to: Modern Cockpits: Harder To Invade But Easier To Lock Up

Much less likely, I'd be more worried about the "depressed narcissistic arsehole" overpowering the stewardess and crashing the plane anyway.

Or just pulling out a gun and shooting the other person in the cockpit, locking the door, and doing the same thing that happened here.
All flight crew members are automatically Federal Flight Deck Officers and are allowed to carry guns on the plane, and other flight officers are prohibited from knowing that their coworkers may be carrying guns.

Comment: Re:Ummmm ... duh? (Score 3, Insightful) 351

by smellsofbikes (#49356917) Attached to: Modern Cockpits: Harder To Invade But Easier To Lock Up

Would this not merely cause people to avoid psychiatric care?

In the case of pilots, there is a legal requirement for the pilot to get checked out medically on a regular basis. For US airline pilots the maximum time between medical checkouts is six months.

However, that statement is completely orthogonal to the other problem, which is that many people who could pass a psychiatric assessment kill themselves or others, and a large number of people who would come out of a psychiatric assessment with a big thick file of observed problems are perfectly reliable individuals in their daily lives and would likely be completely competent pilots.

Comment: Re:The real booth babes ain't on the floor at RSA. (Score 5, Interesting) 323

by MBGMorden (#49349013) Attached to: RSA Conference Bans "Booth Babes"

Well, I guess it is a result of selecting differently based on personal preferences, parties and companies that need bought women, vs those who don't.

This weird taboo attitude towards sex confuses me.

Compare it to say, food. How much sense would it make if someone was proudly proclaiming their social and masculine prowess because they flew into a foreign town and then managed to track down a random stranger and after several hours of conversation and work, they convinced this stranger to cook them dinner. Might not even be a good dinner, but by golly they cooked it.

You'd consider them half crazy for not just going to a restaurant and ordering something - that would have probably been more enjoyable. As crazy as it sounds though, we attach that same thought process to sex. A guy who spends 4 hours worth of time and $200 in drinks and dinner to bed some random girl is seen as awesome while a guy who cuts to the chase with a $300 prostitute is shunned.

And the best (or I guess worst) excuse I've heard - from women - as to why prostitution shouldn't be legalized? Because if men had access to sex that easily they'd lose too much power in the relationship. That's the honest to goodness answer I've heard from quite a few of them.

Comment: Re:it could have been an accident (Score 1) 727

by MBGMorden (#49347773) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

If that happens one bullet doesn't typically "push" the other one out. Typically a bore obstruction will cause pressure to build dramatically resulting in a buldged and potentially ruptured barrel. You'd still quite possibly die with the gun to your head - but you wouldn't likely have 2 bullets in it.

BTW - usually this occurs on accident, not intentionally. Often times following what's termed a "squib" - a round of ammunition with a primer seated but no gun powder. The primer detonates and is enough to drive the bullet slightly into the barrel, but not out of it.

This is particularly a problem on a revolver. On a semi-auto a squib usually won't cycle the action, meaning you'd have to clear a jam first and might likely realize that something is wrong (a squib sounds very, very quiet compared to a normal shot). On a revolver though if you're shooting the next cylinder will just rotate into place and fire - the action isn't powered by the previous shot.

Comment: Re:Unfortunately, it's still on piano (Score 1) 59

> And the German word for "piano" is "Klavier".

I don't know about modern German, but in Bach's time any keyboard instrument would be called a Klavier.

However, you are certainly correct about the Well-Tempered Clavier being by design particularly suited, more than any of Bach's other music, to newer instruments that were more closely approaching the modern piano than anything that had come before. That's the whole point of the piece, in fact.

"We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company."

Working...