Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

liveandletsfly.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 262 posts

Re: Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

#221

Post by kwhitefoot »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #85
kwhitefoot wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't transmit continuously. The little CR2032 cell in my Tesla key would be dead in a day or two but in fact it lasts about at least six months, probably more like a year. I presume that they listen for a ping from the car and only then transmit. Unless you press a button of course. I've had the car almost five years and I think I have only replaced the battery four times.

An AirTag transmits constantly yet it manages to last 6 months too. They do not wait for phones to ping them, they just beacon all the time. Not saying this is what Tesla do. For privacy reasons it would be way better to not transit until it sees the car. But battery life isn't proof of this.

All the time? Or at intervals? At what interval and what is the expected distance at which they can be detected?

Re: Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

#222

Post by School-Cotton »

Maursault wrote: post #197
School-Cotton wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Notice that while “etymonline” may not like it, serious dictionaries like OED give its meaning without any value judgments. Because scientists who study language seriously understand that trying to stem the tide of random language change is futile and pointless.

Lexicographers are neither linguists nor philologists, and any among the latter two worth their salt will tell you that "irregardless" is an erroneous and contradictory word, and further point out that whomever the neologist was that originally coined it made the mistake of double negative, such that "irregardless" must mean "with regard" as opposed to "regardless," and, as such, is superfluous.

You are simply wrong, at least about linguists.

Re: Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

#223

Post by School-Cotton »

rzzzt wrote: post #217
oefnak wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You use hard words to say simple thing. This cost a lot of mind power. Why?

"Sometimes words, you no need use but need need for talk talk." There are prescriptive and descriptive schools of linguistics, with one trying to gently nudge/direct/drive/correct the use of a language, while the other concentrates on documenting it as it happens in the wild.

> There are prescriptive and descriptive schools of linguistics

That’s not true. There are no “prescriptivists” whatsoever in the modern science of linguistics.

Re: Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

#224

Post by School-Cotton »

YurgenJurgensen wrote: post #209
School-Cotton wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether people “should” use a particular word is your subjective aesthetic judgment.

The purpose of language is to communicate. Adding words which mean exactly the same thing as existing (shorter) words consumes cognitive resources without enhancing the language's ability to communicate. Therefore, objectively, people shouldn't use them.

So you’re categorically against the existence of synonyms?

Re: Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

#225

Post by wildrhythms »

filmgirlcw wrote: post #126

Delta has had RFID on all baggage tags for nearly a decade, meaning you can track your bag in the app to make sure it got on the plane and even when it has been delivered to baggage claim. It’s something that probably adds pennies to their costs and makes for a much better baggage situation. I love AirTags and agree that it will be impossible for Lufthansa to enforce this on any level, but it’s striking that more air…

I have never encountered anything resembling RFID on my Delta bag tags.

Re: Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

#226

Post by rzzzt »

School-Cotton wrote: post #223
rzzzt wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Sometimes words, you no need use but need need for talk talk." There are prescriptive and descriptive schools of linguistics, with one trying to gently nudge/direct/drive/correct the use of a language, while the other concentrates on documenting it as it happens in the wild.

> There are prescriptive and descriptive schools of linguistics That’s not true. There are no “prescriptivists” whatsoever in the modern science of linguistics.

Interesting to hear! What happened to those guys?

Re: Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

#227

Post by jen20 »

sccxy wrote: post #205
jakub_g wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always find those kinds of comments hilarious. Did you actually fly all of the airlines above, or you just hate LH because you normally fly Singapore Airlines? (perspective is important in those discussions). As a rule of thumb the oldschool companies always suck less than the cheap companies who try to squeeze every penny out of you in every way. (Or have barely enough fuel so they need to call emergency landing o…

Have you flown with LH recently? If something happens then they shut down service desk and don't help you at all. Find your own solution and then they ignore you if you want hotel/travel costs paid back. I'm still waiting ~4000 eur from them. But only one human reply that they forwarded claim to another department. 3 months and counting... And I resend all my claims weekly and hope for the best. Phone support is even…

Yes, I flew with them on Thursday, and the Saturday before that. Their hard product in Europe is second only to Turkish Airlines and Virgin Atlantic, neither of which go many places without very inconvenient routing at best.

I typically fly LH economy, though have had a few upgrades (meaningless in Europe) over the years. Their business class is not as good as Singapore or Virgin, or modern United, but better than BA, and typically fine.

I don’t buy tickets through LH, only through United, who answer the phone (to me) with a knowledgeable human in under 1 minute as someone with top status.

Re: Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

#228

Post by andylynch »

bobbylarrybobby wrote: post #195
School-Cotton wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How will the school even know if she has a phone, as long as she keeps it turned off and hidden? She should just keep taking it anyway regardless of the bullshit policy and simply not use it at school.

Some schools in the US have metal detectors. Not sure about the UK.

Some do, to detect knives - but I don’t think it’s widespread and certainly not outside high schools.

Re: Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

#229

Post by andylynch »

YurgenJurgensen wrote: post #209
School-Cotton wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether people “should” use a particular word is your subjective aesthetic judgment.

The purpose of language is to communicate. Adding words which mean exactly the same thing as existing (shorter) words consumes cognitive resources without enhancing the language's ability to communicate. Therefore, objectively, people shouldn't use them.

One might say such word choices are ungood.

Re: Lufthansa has not banned AirTags

#230

Post by aliqot »

s3p wrote: post #187
aliqot wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Airtags are explicitly not meant to track people. Apple goes out of their way to ensure them and their accessory partners do not advertise them being on a person regardless of age or relation to the airtag owner. In this same spirit, gun ads don't have intruders being arbitrated in the ads. Why would Apple display people being tracked? reply

You're comparing the advertisement strategies of a TRACKING device with a weapon capable of killing a human... I do not think it is a good idea to make a false equivalency between the two.

Airtags will get you killed without needing a gun.
Post reply on HN