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

The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

octodon.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 695 posts

Re: The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

#351

Post by ceejayoz »

graphe wrote: post #347
ceejayoz wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially with an element of "I might personally get blown up" involved.

Yet the Cuban missile crisis with the stake of the entire world didn't escalate.

1. More time to think. An incoming F-14 is a minutes/seconds scenario; the Cuban crisis lasted 10 days.

2. "X did not happen" does not mean "Y was not a factor in X". The "about to get blown up" factor was part of the reason the Cuban missile crisis happened; it's also probably part of the resolution.

Re: The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

#352

Post by graphe »

ImaCake wrote: post #114
JimDabell wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of the recent OpenAI events that were posted here were links to Twitter and I’ve seen plenty of people point this out as evidence that Twitter still is at the centre.

This is part of the current cycle of fragmentation. Twitter is no longer the centre, but it still holds certain cultural niches. Other niches have migrated to Mastodon or elsewhere. I am personally pretty excited to see this diversification and fragmentation as it should help provide more niches for more people.

Which niches have migrated? The only people that use mastodon hate Twitter/Elon if you count that as a niche, there are no notable groups on mastodon.

Substack is significantly more threatening and interesting to Twitter.

Re: The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

#353

Post by gosub100 »

m463 wrote: post #94

I wonder when a tesla will show up in a courtroom with a situation like this. I'm not talking about autopilot. I'm talking about the continuous (past ridiculous) removal of physical controls from their vehicles. For example, the original model S/X had dedicated controls for lots of functions - turn signals, gear shift, wipers, autopilot, steering wheel tilt, etc. On the steering wheel, there were two buttons and a sc…

> there are NO stalks. turn signals are touch areas on the steering wheel. so are high beams, horn, wipers

I didn't realize how important wipers were till last winter. I was on a 2-lane road at highway speed going into a turn. There had been light snow the previous day which was thawed on the roads, so it was wet and muddy conditions. A truck in the oncoming lane either hit a puddle or otherwise deposited a large splash of muddy water on my windshield instantly, and due to the turn coming up I had to see where I was going. I had about 1 second to find the wipers (it was someone else's vehicle) or I would have gone off the road or into oncoming traffic. That's not the time to hastily search for the wiper button on a touch screen!

Re: The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

#354

Post by mardifoufs »

raxxorraxor wrote: post #211
toyg wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those answers are preposterous and your argument is laughable. This is indeed a "both sides" issue, because otherwise it wouldn't have remained a hot conflict after 70 years. There are legitimate and now multi-generational grievances on both sides, that are really difficult to recompose. You can't engage with simplistic attitudes if you want to be intellectually honest.

You don't like the argument because you know it to be true. The exception is the settlements in the West Bank, but those began after extremism in Israel rose considerably. That is a severe problem, but if people excuse terrorism as resistance, the same would apply here.

That's one hell of an exception lol. The only exception being a blatant disregard for Palestinian sovereignty, and proof that Palestinians will never be left alone even if they'd stop fighting (which is mostly the case in the west bank, compared to Gaza) as Israel is clearly seeking their entire territory, if it is is an exception, still disproves your entire point.

Re: The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

#355

Post by mardifoufs »

mlrtime wrote: post #171
toyg wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They could just send one rocket Putin could do the same to half of Europe, eh. The fact that he doesn't, doesn't mean his actions are justified. Not applying overwhelming force doesn't mean that applying any other type of force is justified. > Isreal has been trying to keep their morals for decades There are no morals left, in that conflict, since the 1982 mass murder of thousands of Lebanese civilians in Beirut at…

This is not a "both sides" issue. Thought experiment for you. Q: What would happen today if Hamas and supporters permanently gave up all their weapons and surrendered? A: Israel would immediately stop any wartime action. Q: What would happen today if Israel gave up it's defenses and military, took down the borders? A: Iran and Hamas would kill every last Jew in Israel. They have to, it is their charter. Also, how man…

Yes that's exactly what happened in the west bank. Once they stopped fighting, they were left alone! Oh wait no, it just led to massive colonial projects backed by the Israeli government. Oopsie!

Re: The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

#356

Post by thereddaikon »

dontlaugh wrote: post #348
thereddaikon wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was in the 1980's. Who had the US invaded in the middle east?

The US orchestrated a coup in Iran and later helped Iraq invade. All for oil money.

>Claims the US was invading countries in the middle east >Lists things that isn't invading the middle east.

Re: The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

#357

Post by Kim_Bruning »

kortilla wrote: post #90
locallost wrote: post #29

Everything's possible, but there would be no debate about UI mistakes if it was Iran shooting down a US plane. They would've done because they are evil by nature, or at least perceived as such. In that case the media and the public buys into its own reality, but of course the UI discussion could be a distraction from the public maybe starting to question if that's actually the reality. Also from the Wiki page about t…

That’s a stupid comparison because the USSR intentionally shot down a plane without trying to contact it and then didn’t cooperate at all on search efforts. Additionally, the pilot positively identified it was a passenger jet due to the double decker windows but shot anyway because they were shooting down “spy planes”, not anything that was an actual threat. This is in contrast to the US incident where they tried to…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007

So steelmanning...

To the commanders, shooting the plane down was somewhat defensible at the time. It was well off course and -due to that- happened to enter soviet airspace not once but twice!

The pilot who actually visually identified the plane did actually see it was a passenger airliner, but passenger airliners are sometimes converted to military configuration. And seeing the flight profile, it could totally have been converted for a MASINT mission or something.

But the behavior of the soviet union during the search and rescue operation afterwards? I'm not sure how that can be excused quite so easily.

Re: The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

#358

Post by tpm »

klibertp wrote: post #254
tpm wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you believe they bombed the theater because they were actively trying to kill Ukrainian children? Yes. They are also actively bombing clinics (including the maternity ward in Mariupol too, look it up) and they have done that in Syria too. It's pretty well documented. They are evil, but more than that, it's a strategy. They are currently also bombing civilian areas, fully aware that they are civilian areas. There…

> They are currently also bombing civilian areas, fully aware that they are civilian areas. They might be "fully aware" that those areas are used by the "enemy" to stockpile materiel and gather personnel. That would make those areas legitimate targets. Can you prove a) there were no military targets there, or b) the attackers were "aware" there were no military targets there? I can't - nobody can. That's why when you…

> Can you prove

I am not going to prove anything to you. It's very well publicly documented, within 5 minutes of googling you can see hundreds of cases of russians targeting civilian infrastructure and civilians themselves. The only way you can deny it's happenning is if you decline to believe all of those cases, in which case there is no way you will believe anything anyone writes about the subject.

> the attackers were "aware" there were no military targets there? I can't - nobody can.

Except for obviously targeting civilians, they were for a period of time also targeting grain depots and even quite open about that, thus exposing your lie. A grain depot is not a military target unless the aim of the military operation is starving civilian population, which again is a crime against humanity.

Re: The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

#359

Post by Cyph0n »

graphe wrote: post #347
ceejayoz wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially with an element of "I might personally get blown up" involved.

Yet the Cuban missile crisis with the stake of the entire world didn't escalate.

There were some close calls during the Cold War. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Soviet_nuclear_false_alar...

Re: The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster

#360

Post by knallfrosch »

kortilla wrote: post #91
knallfrosch wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really a UX error when your helicopter-carrier invades Iran after one of your helicopters invaded Iran. In wartime. What were these warships even doing in the PERSIAN gulf? And why do they shoot Iranian airplanes in Iranian airspace while they themselves are in Iran? I image "UX error" wouldn't cut it if a chinese missile cruiser shot down an US airliner while steaming up the Hudson.

They were in wartime, you answered your own question. >I image "UX error" wouldn't cut it if a chinese missile cruiser shot down an US airliner while steaming up the Hudson. Yes, that would be up for debate if the US were in an active war with China.

Iran was at war with Iraq, not the US with Iran.
Post reply on HN