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

So long and thanks for all the bits

ncsc.gov.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 82 posts

Re: So long and thanks for all the bits

#51

Post by andrewflnr »

thombat wrote: post #40
fundad wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

doesn't bits refer to genitals?

In British vernacular about a quarter of all common words can be used to refer to genitals and/or intimate acts, especially when said out loud with the right intonation. One time in London I lost my rag with a local colleague and snarled at him "is there nothing you can't make innuendo from?!?" And without missing a beat he simply leered back "in-YOUR-end-o"

It may be more widespread in Britain, but I assure you it's equally possible anywhere. :)

Re: So long and thanks for all the bits

#52

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

ak39 wrote: post #43
kitd wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It reminds me of the accidental Hawaii nuclear missile alert a few years back. AIUI, the button to test the system was in close proximity to the button to send the real thing.

“That’s one heck of a nurse” after hitting the Nuke button which was right next to the “Nurse” button. Can you guess which music video that’s from?

Land of Confusion

I really like that music video.

Re: So long and thanks for all the bits

#53

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

So maybe a B-17 pilot can explain: From the image, I can't see what the problem is. If you reach for the gear switch to put the gear down, but hit the flap switch instead and put the flaps down... shouldn't that be just fine? Wouldn't you want the flaps down during landing anyway? Shouldn't putting the gear down cause more drag than the flaps, so you're already prepared for any changes there too?

Re: So long and thanks for all the bits

#54

Post by ilyt »

ableal wrote: post #3

Worth the read just for the horrible B-17 bit used as opener. Good hook.

Personally I was more impressed by the director being a dolphin, altho they coud've found better photo of him, he looks a bit fat.

But to be fair It's not that bad when you realize using flaps and gear is time correlated - you slow down, enable flaps, get near the airport, then put the gear down.

There is no "I want to put the gear down in situation when enabling flaps would fuck stuff up too much"

Re: So long and thanks for all the bits

#55

Post by ilyt »

pmarreck wrote: post #48
Arrath wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were some choices gif/memes to come out of that, though like the top one here: https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a...

omg, that gif is triggering me. I CANNOT STAND UI's that are interactable before they have completed their layout rendering! Or things like notifications that suddenly push everything down, right when you were about to tap on one of those elements! Why is this still a thing? Any UI element that shifts or appears should have like a user-adjustable half-second delay before it becomes interactable again

Yeah I love when I click a thing then a different think appears under it 0.5ms before click registers.

> Why is this still a thing?

HTML/CSS/JS stack makes that the default and coding your way out of that is hard

Re: So long and thanks for all the bits

#56

Post by chanandler_bong »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #53

So maybe a B-17 pilot can explain: From the image, I can't see what the problem is. If you reach for the gear switch to put the gear down , but hit the flap switch instead and put the flaps down ... shouldn't that be just fine? Wouldn't you want the flaps down during landing anyway? Shouldn't putting the gear down cause more drag than the flaps, so you're already prepared for any changes there too?

I'm confused as well. I can't imagine a B-17 landing without flaps. I am a pilot, but never flown a B-17, so take it with a grain of salt...

You'd want both the gear and flaps down on landing, so both switches would be in the down position. If the switches weren't in sync, e.g. you need one switch up and the other down for landing, that would be a problem.

Re: So long and thanks for all the bits

#57

Post by Arrath »

ilyt wrote: post #55
pmarreck wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

omg, that gif is triggering me. I CANNOT STAND UI's that are interactable before they have completed their layout rendering! Or things like notifications that suddenly push everything down, right when you were about to tap on one of those elements! Why is this still a thing? Any UI element that shifts or appears should have like a user-adjustable half-second delay before it becomes interactable again

Yeah I love when I click a thing then a different think appears under it 0.5ms before click registers. > Why is this still a thing? HTML/CSS/JS stack makes that the default and coding your way out of that is hard

> Yeah I love when I click a thing then a different think appears under it 0.5ms before click registers.

Its just the worst

Re: So long and thanks for all the bits

#58

Post by UncleEntity »

ilyt wrote: post #54
ableal wrote: post #3

Worth the read just for the horrible B-17 bit used as opener. Good hook.

Personally I was more impressed by the director being a dolphin, altho they coud've found better photo of him, he looks a bit fat. But to be fair It's not that bad when you realize using flaps and gear is time correlated - you slow down, enable flaps, get near the airport, then put the gear down. There is no "I want to put the gear down in situation when enabling flaps would fuck stuff up too much"

> There is no "I want to put the gear down in situation when enabling flaps would fuck stuff up too much"

Unless, maybe, you just limped your plane in because it’s missing a big chunk of a wing.

One thing the military does is try to make it hard to make a simple mistake and kill a bunch of your own troops.

During the last Iraq invasion I was running around with a fuel tanker which had a pony motor to offload the fuel. It was pretty complicated with a bunch of levers and valves you had to set to get the fuel flowing the right way (and not on the ground) but had a data plate to tell you what to do, easy peasy. One day we were at a bag farm dumping fuel and this staff sergeant wandered up and says I’m doing it wrong. “Data plate” I say and point at the data plate but she started to get all huffy so, whatever, do what she says which was all fine and good until the tanker starts filling up because it is set up backwards. She made some lame excuse for not following the law of the one true god, the data plate, and wandered off to bother someone else.

Re: So long and thanks for all the bits

#59

Post by kayodelycaon »

chanandler_bong wrote: post #56
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #53

So maybe a B-17 pilot can explain: From the image, I can't see what the problem is. If you reach for the gear switch to put the gear down , but hit the flap switch instead and put the flaps down ... shouldn't that be just fine? Wouldn't you want the flaps down during landing anyway? Shouldn't putting the gear down cause more drag than the flaps, so you're already prepared for any changes there too?

I'm confused as well. I can't imagine a B-17 landing without flaps. I am a pilot, but never flown a B-17, so take it with a grain of salt... You'd want both the gear and flaps down on landing, so both switches would be in the down position. If the switches weren't in sync, e.g. you need one switch up and the other down for landing, that would be a problem.

From what I remember from a WW2 training video, you begin the landing 1/3 flaps. If you’re close to stall speed, the drag from unexpected full flaps could be enough to stall the plane.

In the reverse hitting flaps up before gear up is likely to cause problems.

Re: So long and thanks for all the bits

#60

Post by lmm »

pmarreck wrote: post #48
Arrath wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were some choices gif/memes to come out of that, though like the top one here: https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a...

omg, that gif is triggering me. I CANNOT STAND UI's that are interactable before they have completed their layout rendering! Or things like notifications that suddenly push everything down, right when you were about to tap on one of those elements! Why is this still a thing? Any UI element that shifts or appears should have like a user-adjustable half-second delay before it becomes interactable again

I suspect the real reason it's still a thing is that it makes users more likely to click on ads, which is after all how most of the internet makes its money.
Post reply on HN