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

Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

flightradar24.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 421 posts

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#251

Post by TurkTurkleton »

Aeolun wrote: post #216
runarberg wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think majority of jobs are low wage with no future prospects, and quite a lot of jobs have bosses or—worse—shareholders taking away the profits for their own private climate devastating opulence. Why would you work hard for these people? Why would you do anything more than the absolute minimum? I think this supposed American dream was only ever a ruse, a Hollywood propaganda. If it ever existed it only applied to a…

> Why would you do anything more than the absolute minimum? For personal satisfaction? You are going to be there anyway, you might as well do a good job. I’m not saying to put in more hours than contracted, but those hours should be high quality (or as high as you can make them, under the circumstances).

Personal satisfaction, like exposure, is not legal tender.

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#252

Post by xp84 »

aendruk wrote: post #139

Screenshot: https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmcjrYXR934QZqBuMHioRdcZEmo... On small displays this is otherwise obstructed by a cookie popup that offers only an “accept all” button. What’s even the point of the popup then?

There has never been a point to cookie popups, as with most things resulting from technically-illiterate politicians trying to help with technology matters.

Their ideas are at best slightly lower-quality than the results of letting my 2-year-old wash the windows.

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#254

Post by slyrus »

culi wrote: post #242
slyrus wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the average annual carbon footprint for one person in the US.

> The average US household produces 7.5 tons of CO2 equivalents per year. https://www.ccfpd.org/Portals/0/Assets/PDF/Facts_Chart.pdf

Or 15.52 tons according to worldometer. Not sure who's right here.

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/us-co2-emissions...

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#255

Post by maximinus_thrax »

supernova87a wrote: post #46

I find it just really endearing that at companies, regardless of how many other issues they have or the dysfunctions and bland corporate culture, there are people who keep the pride of purpose and "olden days / traditions" in their memory and do things like this. Or are able to call on institutional memory of something bygone, that reappears once in a while. (whether it's a big gesture like this or small cultural day…

> there are people who keep the pride of purpose and "olden days / traditions" in their memory and do things like this.

My inner cynic cannot ignore the fact that this was a planned flight, with several layers of approvals, not something a small group of enthusiasts did as an homage to the olden days. I bet this is a PR stunt and nothing else. Yes, I am very fun at parties.

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#257

Post by slyrus »

culi wrote: post #242
slyrus wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the average annual carbon footprint for one person in the US.

> The average US household produces 7.5 tons of CO2 equivalents per year. https://www.ccfpd.org/Portals/0/Assets/PDF/Facts_Chart.pdf

And, either way, this maneuver seems like it generated CO2 emissions roughly equal to those that would be saved by 10 people line drying their clothes for a year. Which 10 people are we gonna pick?

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#258

Post by mulmen »

wkat4242 wrote: post #244
sofixa wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would've thought a larger fleet of smaller planes would be less efficient because it increases operational cost and you have more overhead weight to move around. You'd be wrong. Airline bosses (Willie Walsh? Almost sure it was him) have said it literally costs less to have two 787 fly one after the other than a single A380. The fuel efficiency of twin engine planes compared to 3 or 4 older engines compensates for…

But the 4-engined models can fly more direct routes over oceans and uninhabited areas right? Because of ETOPS. Of course this is not a problem on many routes.

ETOPS is what allows twins to fly routes that would otherwise require trijets or four engines. I'm not sure what the limits are but flights to Hawaii for example are routinely done with twins.

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#259

Post by jacquesm »

daveslash wrote: post #22
jacquesm wrote: post #3

The world's largest vector plotter. Good thing they didn't have to do PU/PD.

Vector Display you say? Now... the next logical step is to make it play Doom (or Quake)..... with an extremely low framerate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMli33ornEU

The CO2 impact of one level would be astronomical :)

Re: Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight

#260

Post by xp84 »

chrismorgan wrote: post #200
knodi123 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What’s even the point of the popup then? Complying with idiotic bureaucratic regulations. Nobody wants to be popping that thing up, but if they don't, they can get reamed by the EU.

The trouble is that popups like this don’t even comply with the relevant legislation. (Which is the ePrivacy Directive after the 2009 amendment, though people largely ignored this part of it until the advent of the GDPR which came into force in 2018. Simplified, ePD says “most cookies must be opt-in”.) If anything, putting such wildly non-compliant popups should make you more liable to punishment, because it undermin…

If these silly laws were enforced, you'd have to shut down the whole Internet anyway.
Post reply on HN