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

United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

simpleflying.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 1001 posts

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#231

Post by zamadatix »

diab0lic wrote: post #134
Insanity wrote: post #130

Which bomb would advertise itself as such.. this is something I’d expect in the movie Airplane!, not something to happen in real life.

I completely agree from a logical perspective. However if the plane blew up and it came out that some passengers had posted online that there was a “bomb” blue tooth device and they didn’t turn around… the court of public opinion would be pretty harsh. This was more or less their only choice from a liability perspective.

The court of public opinion would probably be upset an actual bomb made it through the security theatre while their water bottle did not. If there was actually someone intending to actually bomb the plane, giving them the entire flight back to the origin airport decide to go through with it or head back to the waiting authorities would not go over well in the court of popular opinion either.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#232

Post by eh_why_not »

analogpixel wrote: post #224
eh_why_not wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI Reddit "s" links require login, an unnecessary burden. For your purpose here a direct link would have sufficed: https://old.reddit.com/r/unitedairlines/comments/1tse6mq/ua_...

I don't have a reddit login and was able to view the link just fine.

Hmm I see. I only use "old" reddit and it does require login there to resolve to a real address. In any case, it is a special link that enables tracking (unnecessary, to say the least).

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#233

Post by userbinator »

jeroenhd wrote: post #22
samgranieri wrote: post #9

A 16 year boy apparently named his Bluetooth speaker “bomb” and couldn’t turn it off, as it was probably in checked luggage. Woof.

You can't rename most Bluetooth speakers. "Bomb" was the name the selling brand gave the speaker. By making everyone turn off their Bluetooth, the kid whose speaker had turned on probably couldn't even see the device broadcasting the name. People linked to one by a company made Hellotec but Hama has a similarly named device, and plenty of other speaker manufacturers try to make a pun out of "boombox" by naming their…

but Hama has a similarly named device

...I mentally appended an "s" to that, and was momentarily very confused.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#234

Post by nilamo »

866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #196
Eridrus wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is trying to sanewash totally insane levels of risk aversion. Do you think terrorists are really going to name their Bluetooth speaker "bomb"? Do you think this behaviour has any meaningful true positives? This is the kind of brainworms thinking that has people throwing our their 150ml liquids out at TSA and taking their shoes off.

[flagged]

I've never heard of that before, is it common behavior?

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#235

Post by 866-RON-0-FEZ »

HNisCIS wrote: post #209
866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it means none of that. It's code. No one that matters looks at it or cares. Making unnecessary changes to code does zero in solving any societal ills.

[flagged]

> Soooo it's fine to name all your variables slurs then?

Except that never happened. It's fantasy.

What did happen was words like "black hat" and "white hat" got re-classified as hateful language.

I'm actually surprised the conference was spared by the mob.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#236

Post by [deleted] »

stouset wrote: post #169
Kye wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sure about that? >> "All that we have to do is to send two mujahidin to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al-Qaida, in order to make the generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic, and political losses without their achieving for it anything of note other than some benefits for their private companies." https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/11/continuing…

They were bragging that they could provoke this type of response as a result of having flown two planes into the World Trade Center and one into the Pentagon, killing thousands , and causing fear, panic, and self-sabotaging outsized reactions like pouring trillions into wars that accomplish nothing. Getting a dozen of their operatives arrested for an idiotic prank that just resulted in a handful of planes being turne…

[deleted]

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#237

Post by School-Cotton »

kube-system wrote: post #73
stefan_ wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3. The level of tech illiteracy combined with airplane security theater is an affront to all thinking people.

4. A normal level of risk aversion in one of the most risk averse industries If airlines ignored every threat that was “probably not” a real threat, they’d ignore all of them. It’s better to inconvenience a few thousand passengers than it is to kill a few hundred.

A normal level of risk aversion? Are you being serious? They inconvenienced a few thousand passengers to save zero.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#238

Post by phlakaton »

claw-el wrote: post #197
Eridrus wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is trying to sanewash totally insane levels of risk aversion. Do you think terrorists are really going to name their Bluetooth speaker "bomb"? Do you think this behaviour has any meaningful true positives? This is the kind of brainworms thinking that has people throwing our their 150ml liquids out at TSA and taking their shoes off.

What if it is not the terrorists naming them? What if it is a good samaritan trying to warn the pilot but this is the only way they can get a message out?

[flagged]

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#239

Post by School-Cotton »

jamwil wrote: post #30
root-parent wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I was talking about this with someone the other day… How many real terrorism threats have been preceded by the terrorist telegraphing their intentions with a phone call beforehand? My prior is that this number is essentially 0 and we should ignore bomb threats as a society.

It was standard practice during the Troubles in Northern Ireland, for example.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#240

Post by acwan93 »

justinhj wrote: post #112

This is like the Adam Sandler movie where he says bomb on an airplane. It's an overreaction, is it not? A terrorist is not going to call their bomb's bluetooth trigger bomb. Even if they are, are you telling me we have no idea whether there is a bomb in luggage or not?

Ben Stiller right? That’s Meet the Parents.
Post reply on HN