Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Directly monitored switches? (Score 1) 54

Obviously the black box can only record what the computer tells it is the state of the switches. There's no camera looking at the switches to confirm they actually were moved. No doubt the switches are wired such that a short or an open circuit will not fool the computer into thinking the switch was moved and shut the engines down. But if something caused the computer to think (pardon the expression) the switches had changed state, it would shut the engines down and the flight recorder would dutifully record this change of state.

Suppose for a moment a computer glitch did shut the engines down. The pilot, upon noticing this asks the copilot about it and he says, no I didn't shut them down. Knowing he has to do something, reaches over, flips them to off and back to on again to try to get them going again, after which the engines did restart but sadly not in time to prevent disaster.

Comment Re:Don't blame the pilot prematurely (Score 0) 54

Mods, this should not have been rated -1 flamebait! Totally inappropriate mod.

I deeply respect Captain Steeeve and his videos are great. Any nervous flyer should watch his videos (except the Air India ones!). And indeed Captain Steeeve's summary of the report is accurate. And his videos about the cutoff switches are accurate too. The chance of those switches being flipped inadvertently or on their own from mechanical wear and vibration is zero. And indeed the computer shows that inputs from those switches went from on to off and back to on again with timing suggestive of human intervention.

That said, one of Captain Steeeve's youtube collaborators, Garybpilot with whom he has done videos about Air India (Hanger Talk) has done his own videos on Air India. In one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0n3iIjvQk8) he mentioned that at Air India, there is not one pilot who believes the official report blaming the pilots. These are pilots who knew well both of the pilots in the cockpit on that tragic flight and find the suggestion difficult to believe. The Indian investigation board has been mired in political intrigue and controversy the whole time (before even). They were definitely under pressure to exonerate Air India and blame the pilots. Also to exonerate Boeing. Not that long ago a 787 had both engines shut down during landing. And there is a minor history of electrical anomalies on 787s, including RATs deploying mid flight for no discernible reason.

If the pilots did not shut the engines down, I don't think we will ever know what actually happened unless there is another accident. And given the problems Boeing has had in recent years (and other planes with engine shutdowns during flight), another accident is a possibility.

Comment Re:Don't blame the pilot prematurely (Score 1) 54

Those words were said, definitely. and the other guy responded, "I did not."

I don't know anything about what conspiracy theories are going around on the Internet, but I do know there among some professional pilots there is skepticism. There are no pilots at Air India who knew well these two pilots who believe they were simply suicidal. Plus there was at least one other incident this year with a 787 where both engines shut down during landing. The investigation has certainly been fraught with political tension. Obviously it's in Air India and Boeing's best interests to blame the pilots.

Comment Re:AI is just limited. (Score 2) 119

I find the various LLMs are helpful as a form of search engine, enabling me to drill down to potentially useful information more quickly. However at the same time they are far worse than a search engine because they aren't able to actually give you the sources to check. When ChatGPT generates a chunk of code, if you ask it where it got it from, it will say it didn't get it from a specific site, it just knows this stuff. Which of course ends up wrong half the time. So you end up with wrong stuff confidently passed off as accurate, which is ultimately stolen from real human sources. When I was in uni it was drilled into me to list my sources. Why should LLMs be held to any different standard? Google's AI summary does show sources, at least few, which is good. I always check them.

Even Claude AI which is supposed to be geared towards coding suffers from these same problems. I am trying to do some esoteric Qt 6 programming involving OpenGL, and all the AIs really struggle here because there's a limited amount of source material to steal from. It's certainly not capable of digesting the API documents and synthesizing code to do something without first seeing someone else's code. Claude AI seems to work best if you use a popular library or framework with lots of online discussion and github code for it. The popular languages and frameworks of the day.

Comment Re:Make more (Score 1) 24

Make more what? Dragon capsules? Currently SpaceX has no plans to make any more dragons beyond the five they currently have. I believe the fifth capsule had its inaugural flight this year with the private Axiom-4 excursion. These dragon capsules are currently rated for just five flights each, but SpaceX and NASA are working to extend their certifications to 15 flights each. Currently the contract with SpaceX does not include additional missions that would have been flown by Boeing. While it's possible NASA could try to buy some more flights, I don't think they will. SpaceX has the falcon 9 pretty well booked, and their other resources are fixed on Starship. I'm not saying NASA "needs" the Starliner, though. Just that it's not a simple thing to substitute Dragon for Starliner.

Comment Re:Competition (Score 4, Interesting) 98

Well it's a problem or the US too. The last bastion of American industry is heavy equipment including construction and agricultural machines. Interestingly this is also a prime industry for Europe too. A lot of stuff is still made locally. But China is now making their own versions and just beginning to exporting them. And it's a double whammy. They can make them cheaper, but choose to just barely undercut western equivalent products (say by 20%), making a huge profit.

Comment Re:Europe is discovering what Canada discovered (Score 4, Insightful) 98

Except that in the case of Canada, there was a great deal of trade in both directions, in terms of commodities and also finished goods. It was a mutually beneficial trade arrangement too. It promoted the US' interests without ham-fisted authoritarian threats. This sort of trade made the US the powerhouse it was. In other words this was a sharp shift in US government attitude from one of friendship to one of an adversary (which is really how all relationships and business deals have ever been done in Trump's life). Sadly there's no going back. The damage is done and the US will never ever recover the good will and trade benefits it once had with its closest allies and trading partners, no matter what a future Democrat does to try to undo the damage, now that Trump's attitude has become the attitude of the GOP.

With China, though, there was no abrupt shift. China's goals have always been clear. The only thing they want from the west in terms of trade is raw commodities and foreign currencies. Whereas the west demands cheap goods, full stop. So China's domination of European industry and economies has been ongoing for years, and it's benefited by European policy and attitudes. China is happy to build high quality items and sell them for a premium, but there's no very little demand from the west. If there was demand, we wouldn't have seen local manufacturing capability disappear in the first place. Tariffs are not going to change these fact.

Comment Re:For the record (Score 1) 108

Very interesting point. For all the talk of how efficient EVs are, the fact is at higher speeds you need much more energy to accelerate. In other words going from 0-20 in an instant requires not much kw compared to trying to accelerate from 60 to 80 mph.. This is why EVs have such ludicrous motor power ratings for their direct drive systems. And in reality all EVs have a gear train even if it's a fixed ratio with few parts. It's a real head scratcher why more don't use a two speed gearbox to better handle the difference in energy requirements for high speed acceleration vs low speed. Could use much smaller and cheaper electric motors too with good efficiency.

Comment Re:Anything for money (Score 3, Informative) 108

In some ways US standards are way stricter than European. In other ways, not so much. So mainly the standards are different and focus on different aspects of safety. American standards focus on things like rollover protection more than European standards do. US crash test standards are higher too. I think this might have to do with everyone driving big SUVs here in North America. Europe focuses on other safety features including driver assistance technologies. AI tells me that European regs are now requiring emergency button to call for help. Also Europe allows headlights that have no clear high or low beam, but can transition between as the car detects oncoming traffic, and steerable headlights, which have stricter requirements in the US. Also different configurations are allowed for tail lights than the US does.

Besides the tariffs and outright ban on Chinese EVs, they would have to change their vehicles for North America, and I suspect they will once the US reverses the ban.

Canada is about to allow Chinese EVs in and reduce tariffs, but the reality is that only chinese Teslas will met safety regs here. Canada is way too small a market for other Chinese companies to build special vehicles for.

Comment Re:Who uses MS file Explorer? (Score 1) 69

Caldera Linux was first released in 1997, which is 28 years ago. Slackware Linux goes back 32 years. Red Hat Linux was 30 years ago now. Hard to believe. I first used Red Hat 5.1 28 years ago during the libc to glibc transition. KDE 1.0 came out about that same time and was a huge leap forward in Linux desktop usability for new users. Also StarOffice 5. Memory lane.

Comment Re:Arduino "commitment to open-source is unwaverin (Score 1) 45

Maybe, maybe not. However given that we know who the poster is and what he has contributed to the Arduino community, I would give what he says a lot more weight than what you say!

Although I do have to ask him, would it be okay if Qualcom took Arduino in the direction you've taken Teensy, with a proprietary, closed-source,and un-clone-able boot loader to prevent clones of the new Arduino boards? I'm quite torn on that one.

Comment Disappointing but not surprising (Score 2) 3

AI slop documentaries are becoming mainstream now, sadly. I can only imagine what History channel is like these days, not having watched any of that in years.

I'm not surprised Curiosity Stream has jumped on the AI gravy train. I hope a lot of their creators will withhold permission to sell their work for AIs to copy, but I don't know under what terms their creators publish on that platform. I had thought it different and better in how creators were treated than on youtube but perhaps not.

Slashdot Top Deals

Can't open /usr/fortunes. Lid stuck on cookie jar.

Working...