United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert • Hacker News Board

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

#581

Post by tanepiper » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 5:39 AM UTC

neilv wrote: post #178

I once consulted on some aviation-related software (not the safety work prominent on my resume), and a company announcement came through, that you must never use a few specific words commonly heard in software development. The two no-no words I recall were "crash" and "bomb". Don't write them in code or documents, don't say them on the phone or videoconf, etc. Those terms have senses that people in aviation take extr…

I was in New York for a conference 4 years ago, I was discussing with someone a previous project I had worked on in the UK that was a tool for companies to forecast certain risk scenarios "...you know like a building flooding or blowing up"

There were suddenly a lot of unhappy faces looking at me. I guess some folks are still a bit sensitive about that...

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

#582

Post by protocolture » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 5:40 AM UTC

plastic041 wrote: post #580

I kind of get that a device named BOMB made the plane turn back. However, I don't understand this part: > flight attendant told passengers over the PA system that they "must turn off Bluetooth immediately," or else the aircraft would have to turn around. If there's a BOMB, turning off Bluetooth won't make it much safer. I mean, a turned-off bomb is probably safer than a turned-on bomb, but it's still a bomb. Pilots:…

[flagged]

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

#583

Post by godelski » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 5:42 AM UTC

steve1977 wrote: post #544

kingofmen wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but why draw a line for WiFi names at all? Do you think an actual terrorist goes around drawing attention like that?

That's not even necessary. The fact that it could create panic is enough. And by the way, a terrorist is (by definition) someone who wants to incite terror in others. So any person knowingly broadcasting "we will all die” is a terrorist already.

You think... a device named "Free Palestine, F Israel" could... create panic? I'm sorry, that is crazy. Only a crazy person would panic over that

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

#584

Post by joxdosba » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 5:43 AM UTC

imoverclocked wrote: post #574

teiferer wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Being on the plane doesn't remove your right to free speech While I agree with you that this was obviously a ridiculous overreaction, an air plane is not a public space. It's more akin to being in someones living room in that the pilot has absolute authority over whom to kick out for whatever reason. If they don't like your hair, they can have you escorted out by police if you don't comply. They won't do it normall…

This. Many people are unaware of just how much authority a captain has; Failing to follow their instructions is (basically) a felony. It's best to just not mess around on an aircraft.

Am a pilot, this is totally wrong.

PIC authority is strictly limited to in-scope items, this very obviously wasn’t in scope unless it was e.g. causing other passengers to behave in an unruly manner.

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

#585

Post by epolanski » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 5:43 AM UTC

anon84873628 wrote: post #465

epolanski wrote: post #188

> During this incident, a Wi-Fi hotspot named "Free Palestine, F Zionists" prompted the pilot to issue a warning to the cabin, telling the passenger responsible that they had "30 seconds" to remove the name or the FBI would meet the aircraft. Wtf? I can understand a bomb, but this is just free speech.

I am curious about the laws governing something like that. Does it matter whether it's a domestic or international flight? Are pilots king of the vessel?

[flagged]

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

#586

Post by fsckboy » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 5:43 AM UTC

plastic041 wrote: post #580

I kind of get that a device named BOMB made the plane turn back. However, I don't understand this part: > flight attendant told passengers over the PA system that they "must turn off Bluetooth immediately," or else the aircraft would have to turn around. If there's a BOMB, turning off Bluetooth won't make it much safer. I mean, a turned-off bomb is probably safer than a turned-on bomb, but it's still a bomb. Pilots:…

it's not the case that the pilot has to think like you, it's that every passenger on the plane would need to. The pilot has unlimited discretion and every interest to keep the passengers on the plane calm, or act preemptively and land as soon as possible.

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

#587

Post by orbisvicis » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 5:43 AM UTC

steve1977 wrote: post #544

kingofmen wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but why draw a line for WiFi names at all? Do you think an actual terrorist goes around drawing attention like that?

That's not even necessary. The fact that it could create panic is enough. And by the way, a terrorist is (by definition) someone who wants to incite terror in others. So any person knowingly broadcasting "we will all die” is a terrorist already.

Or a nihilist, or a fatalist, or a pessimist, or an antinatalist, or a realist.

Don't go putting people into boxes. That's the path of persecution.

You have the inalienable right to say what you want on a plane, limited by what the government is allowed to prosecute. In a confined space, that is a bit riskier. That's a solely personal choice - no laws are being broken. The Captain has the right to ask you to conform or leave, but that's a separate issue.

People are being overly sensitive. A wifi name is not a protest. It does not disturb personal privacy and tranquility. It's about as offensive as an article titled "We’re All Gonna Die!" from your favorite news outlet - which by the way, is not an uncommon headline.

What if my wifi name was "peanut butter for all!" but unbeknownst to me and by some rare cosmic coincidence everyone on the plane was deathly allergic to peanut butter. Does that make me a terrorist? No! But I swear someone would try to drag me through decades of litigation regardless. These people seem to have divorced words and meanings from the mechanics of how the world works. Like, "this piece of paper says you shouldn't say this, so off with your head".

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

#588

Post by godelski » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 5:44 AM UTC

joxdosba wrote: post #564

akudha wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does naming WiFi hotspot to reflect one’s political views achieve anything? I am not against free speech or expression of freedom, just wondering if such “protests” (assuming that is what this is) have any affect at all? Flying is already a stressful experience - between security checks, waiting for flights, unruly passengers, super cramped seats etc. Why add more stress? Either protest seriously at an appropriate ti…

I’d certainly want everyone who’d feel uncomfortable because of a “Free Palestine” WiFi access point to feel maximally uncomfortable. I really don’t think this is an uncommon opinion.

It's a device name. Why is anyone feeling uncomfortable? It's crazy to be upset by such an easy to ignore thing

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

#589

Post by steve1977 » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 5:45 AM UTC

godelski wrote: post #583

steve1977 wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not even necessary. The fact that it could create panic is enough. And by the way, a terrorist is (by definition) someone who wants to incite terror in others. So any person knowingly broadcasting "we will all die” is a terrorist already.

You think... a device named "Free Palestine, F Israel" could... create panic? I'm sorry, that is crazy. Only a crazy person would panic over that

I don't fly very often, but every time there's at least one person I would consider crazy enough for that.

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

#590

Post by thomascountz » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 5:46 AM UTC

Eridrus wrote: post #189

neilv wrote: post #178

I once consulted on some aviation-related software (not the safety work prominent on my resume), and a company announcement came through, that you must never use a few specific words commonly heard in software development. The two no-no words I recall were "crash" and "bomb". Don't write them in code or documents, don't say them on the phone or videoconf, etc. Those terms have senses that people in aviation take extr…

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.

You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater…