The 1988 shooting down of Flight 655 as a user interface disaster • Hacker News Board

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

#611

Post by mardifoufs » Thu, Nov 30, 2023, 5:04 AM UTC

scotty79 wrote: post #602

mardifoufs wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an odd question. Obviously I'd rather live in the more peaceful side, but that has nothing to do with anything. If you had to chose between living in nazi occupied Paris and Stalingrad, which one would you chose? Does that mean that the Russians made a bad choice resisting the invaders? For some people, living comfortably isn't the most important thing they can have. Not getting conquered, invaded, or literall…

> Not getting conquered, invaded, or literally colonized is a good thing. Don't you agree? Actually I don't. It depends on the circumstances and the price. Sometimes getting colonized is the best outcome possible. Especially if the alternative is getting wiped out by way stronger opponent. US colonized large part of Mexico. Are people there better or worse because of that?

Mhmmm, I get what you are saying. And I even agree on a personal level. But I still think that there is a double standard as to who seems to be allowed to use violence in those cases. It's fine to even disagree with Palestinians, and I also understand that Israel has a right to exist at this point.

But the issue is when the west supports fully and unconditionally one side but condemns another for doing the same. It generates alienation and resentment especially when we try to rationalize that support and morally justify it, when in reality we just don't care when our side does it.

Which again, I understand, but the sugar coating is what triggers me.

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

#612

Post by arp242 » Thu, Nov 30, 2023, 5:20 AM UTC

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…

Do you think Iran would have acknowledged their mistake? The US immediately did, and ended up putting their money where their mouth is by both fixing the errors that lead to this mistake and paying damages to Iran.

Looking at the details of that Korean Air flight: "the Soviet Union initially denied knowledge of the incident, but later admitted to shooting down the aircraft, claiming that it was on a MASINT spy mission." That's not the same at all. Never mind "The Soviet Union found the wreckage under the sea two weeks later on September 15 and found the flight recorders in October, but this information was kept secret by the Soviet authorities until 1992, after the country's collapse", among a lot of other lies and misinformation.

This a hugely different response. We've seen this again with Russia's shooting of MH-17. I fully believe that too was accidental, yet even for accidents you have to take responsibility. Hell, they even lied to their own people with Kursk.

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

#613

Post by arp242 » Thu, Nov 30, 2023, 5:27 AM UTC

berdario wrote: post #230

peppermint_gum wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has declassified documents that confirm what the GP said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007#So... > It's actually astonishing that anyone who's been on this planet for more than a couple decades can take any of these narratives seriously. The only astonishing thing is that you reflexively rushed to Russia's defense instead of looking up the facts.

These are two separate incidents, with similarities but also important differences. We don't know how the US military would've reacted if Iran Air 655 would've overflown restricted airspace above the US. For sure the Soviets fucked up by not trying to call on 121.5 MHz, but is that worse than the US fucking up by being so close (arguably intruding) another country space, and yet not having equipment to monitor civili…

> We don't know how the US military would've reacted if Iran Air 655 would've overflown restricted airspace above the US.

We have to deal with the facts and reality as it exists, not as it "could have been" in a reality that does not exist.

And in the reality that exists, the US acted with infinite more grace and compassion than the Soviet Union. They found the wrecking and kept it a secret for years. I find it extremely unlikely the US would do anything like that in any circumstances even remotely similar.

> is that worse than the US fucking up by being so close (arguably intruding) another country space

It's not so much about that they messed up, but how they dealt with it. Do you accept responsibility and take action to prevent it in the future, or do you lie and cheat and do everything you can to weasel your way out of responsibility?

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

#614

Post by arp242 » Thu, Nov 30, 2023, 5:41 AM UTC

cies wrote: post #237

peppermint_gum wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you watch combat footage from eastern Ukraine, you will learn that many frontline towns and villages have been completely leveled by artillery. See for example[1]. And I don't have to mention Bucha[2] and other war crimes. The relatively low civilian casualty count isn't because "Russians are so noble", but because: 1. Frontlines are static, giving civilians plenty of time to evacuate 2. Civilians actually have wh…

Villages being leveled is different from genocide. And Ukraine screeming genocide is also different from actual genocide. Genocide needs numbers and the number are not there in Ukraine's case. > The relatively low civilian casualty count isn't because "Russians are so noble" I was not arguing their nobility, I was saying the word genocide may have been to easily used in Ukraine's case.

Given that Russia has literally genocided huge parts of the Ukrainian population in the recent past, it's not such a far-fetched or unreasonable. There is a lot of history here that you're ignoring.

But maybe those millions of people were also not a "real genocide".

And the Jews should also calm down when people start shouting Heil Hitler.

Or the blacks when people start talking about lynchings.

At any rate, whether it is or isn't "genocide" or whether it is or isn't "low on civ casualties" isn't important. It's a stupid invasion and every single casualty is a murder. Whether you want to classify this as "genocide" is a mostly unimportant semantic matter that distracts from the real issue.

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

#615

Post by arp242 » Thu, Nov 30, 2023, 5:45 AM UTC

architect01 wrote: post #278

The whole thing would have been avoided if the US didn't push their Navy around Iran why the hell is there a US navy ship there to begin with and why the hell is it that easy for them to shout at whatever is moving in the sky yes it might have been a UI issue but the root of the problem is "a US navy ship next to iran's border"

It was protecting neutral shipping traffic during the Iraq-Iran war.

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

#616

Post by arp242 » Thu, Nov 30, 2023, 5:47 AM UTC

WheatMillington wrote: post #494

When Americans shoot down an airliner they get to describe it as a "user interface error". After denying they did it for a long period first, of course.

> After denying they did it for a long period first, of course.

Lies.

Reagan acknowledged and apologized within days.

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

#617

Post by bigfudge » Thu, Nov 30, 2023, 6:56 AM UTC

ta1243 wrote: post #342

bigfudge wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To open: I am not apologising for what Hamas has done at all. I think their actions are revolting. Whatever your view of the history of the region, the aim to eliminate Israel as a Jewish state is unrealistic, extreme and counterproductive. Nonetheless, I do find the claim they are using human shields as interesting. Whatever you think of Hamas' aims and methods (and I strongly disapprove of both), Palestinians engag…

> No, Israel is not in direct control of Gaza It does however have a complete blockade on Gaza, and has done for decades. It also has control over a signifiant amount of territory inside the wall -- get too close and you get shot. Gaza is on the sea, but you can't import water, fuel, food etc from the sea because Israel will sink any boat trying to.

This is exactly the point I make above. That they are in effective control.

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

#618

Post by bigfudge » Thu, Nov 30, 2023, 6:58 AM UTC

bionsystem wrote: post #223

bigfudge wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To open: I am not apologising for what Hamas has done at all. I think their actions are revolting. Whatever your view of the history of the region, the aim to eliminate Israel as a Jewish state is unrealistic, extreme and counterproductive. Nonetheless, I do find the claim they are using human shields as interesting. Whatever you think of Hamas' aims and methods (and I strongly disapprove of both), Palestinians engag…

It's bogus to compare french resistance to Hamas. French resistants had no intention of destroying Germany or killing all germans. If anything, the german military were the one committing a genocide (albeit not against the french I can give you that). All politicians leaders of Palestinian people have eventually refused a 2-states solution. Israël does recognize a few groups as valid diplomatic partners but not Hamas…

I agree in part. But my question was basically this: when Hamas is eliminated and less extreme groups come to power, but are still committed to armed struggle … how should they proceed? Would it be legitimate to use guerilla tactics like the French resistance?

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

#619

Post by inferiorhuman » Thu, Nov 30, 2023, 7:36 AM UTC

quietbritishjim wrote: post #379

quench wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>unlike on a Boeing (at the time at least) where they're physically connected so you can't have contradictory inputs in the first place Air France seemed to manage it https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/air-france-crew-fought-e... Also glad to see that airbus are planning to put force feedback side-sticks in future.

> Air France seemed to manage it [on a Boeing] Hence my "at the time" bracket. Since then, newer Boeing planes have actually removed the physical connection between the sticks! Absolutely bonkers decision given the background. (I put "at least" at the end of my bracket because I wasn't 100% sure I rememebered correctly.) But maybe there is a good reason - e.g. like a sibling comment suggested, if one gets stuck.

As the sibling comment points out the 777 has mechanically linked yokes. The 787 does too. With the Air France go around, the pilots were pulling hard enough that the mechanical connection between the yokes was broken. Both pilots continued to provide contradictory inputs.

On an Airbus this would trigger a "dual input" annunciator, and there's a "priority takeover" button that would lock out one set of controls.

On the Boeing once the torque tube splits each yoke controls one side of the aircraft.

The synchronization and feedback intuitively seem like a good idea, but the reality is that at the point where you need to notice that the other pilot is doing something wrong you're already up shit creek and you're no more likely to notice an increase in force required to move the yoke than you are an annunciator. Linked controls aren't a substitute for CRM.

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

#620

Post by raxxorraxor » Thu, Nov 30, 2023, 7:57 AM UTC

mardifoufs wrote: post #349

raxxorraxor wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

War is rarely about morals. But if they did drop them, we would be talking about casualties 20-30 times higher. This isn't about morals, since that would demand that every death is one too many. Killing just as many Palestinians as Jews were killed would be a fundamentally unmoral justification as well. I think there is different expectation towards Israel, every country would have reacted to an attack like it happen…

That's funny because to me, there's so much more leniency towards Israel. Blockading an entire city for almost two decades, and controlling almost every external aspect of its life while also openly and proudly colonizing the west bank with 0 repercussions is something only Israel can get away with. Bombing a city into rubbles with 0 official international condemnation from the west is also a thing only Israel can do…

Israel withdrew from Gaza and a requirement was a blockade of weapons and material that could be weaponized. That was also demanded by the PA and Egypt for obvious reasons.