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

651–660 of 1001 posts

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

#651

Post by pepperoni_pizza »

bschwindHN wrote: post #511
fsckboy wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I can't tell if this is sarcastic or not, but what exactly is your vision of HN "without politics"? It's very hard to avoid because so many technical things have overlap with politics, and lots of technical decisions have political implications. HN currently loves talking about all things AI, and that's probably one of the biggest political topics out there.

Oh it's easy! There's just two genders - male and political. Just two races - white and political. Just two beliefs - conservative and political.

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

#652

Post by ExoticPearTree »

anigbrowl wrote: post #451
godelski wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is trying to sanewash totally insane levels of risk aversion. To add more credence to your point, let's not forget this beautiful line in TFA | 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. This is clearly not a threat…

Actually, I don't think it's a good idea to bring your politics into a an enclosed pace like this where people are forced to be a captive audience, notwithstanding that I agree with theparticular sentiment expressed. > you have the right to express it Out in public sure. In an airplane you're in someone else's private space (ie the airline's) and everyone is not only confined with you in minimal comfort, they have no…

> In an airplane you're in someone else's private space (ie the airline's) and everyone is not only confined with you in minimal comfort, they have no way to leave.

Its not private space. Its public because they sell tickets. Its like going to any other event, and I don’t think there’s a constitutional exception to free speech on airplanes where you can’t express your opinions.

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

#653

Post by latexr »

godelski wrote: post #379
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.

> This is trying to sanewash totally insane levels of risk aversion. To add more credence to your point, let's not forget this beautiful line in TFA | 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. This is clearly not a threat…

> I'm not trying to make a political statement and not going to say what side of this issue I'm on, but whatever your side is you have the right to express it.

Maybe, maybe not. The Supreme Court of the USA has ruled that speech is not protected at all times and in all places. There are “time, place, and manner restrictions”.

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

I have a hard time believing courts wouldn’t side with the captain here. All they have to say is they are in charge, perceived a threat to their crew, provided a chance for resolution, and ultimately played it safe. All of which are true.

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

#654

Post by gspr »

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…

There's a story (apocryphal or not) that does the rounds among mathematicians: two young PhD students in differential geometry (or topology in some variations) on the way to their first conference. They're eagerly discussing as they board their flight: "… and then, you blow up the points on this plane …" :-)

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

#655

Post by atoav »

Barbing wrote: post #537
_moof wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Actually, I don't think it's a good idea to bring your politics into a an enclosed pace like this where people are forced to be a captive audience, notwithstanding that I agree with theparticular sentiment expressed. That is a very, very, very different statement than "I'm calling the FBI." You're talking about should or shouldn't. The issue here is past that point: whether it's then right to involve people who are…

I think if the captain doesn’t like you, what they say goes & it’s a federal matter. I think the reason for the captain not liking you is secondary and could get him fired but it’s still: mess around in federal airspace, deal with the feds. Follow all instructions of all flight crew or you’re a criminal, regardless (I think). Not actually the FBI though is it? Captain probably wanted to sound serious (mission accompl…

So what you're saying is if the captain doesn't like you because you're Zionist they can remove you?

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

#656

Post by prmoustache »

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.

terrorist/terrorism are words that should be removed from anyone's vocabulary as they have lost their meaning.

Similar to woke/wokism, these have become words used by far right extremists and politicians around the world to name anything that is against their hatred and opinions.

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

#657

Post by bonesss »

contubernio wrote: post #615
serialNumber wrote: post #604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The latest was 9/11 and that is still quite relevant to us today.

It's as recent as WWII was when Nixon got elected.

And Nixon followed through with countless post-WW2 policies, practices, and acted on concerns that stemmed specifically from that conflict. The Cold War and all related funding being an easy example.

I’d also be very wary of recency bias when looking at the extremist fringes of religious and political situations that have been ongoing for centuries. We might feel a couple decades is a long time, but in conflicts all parties can veto the other parties subjective interpretations.

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

#658

Post by bonesss »

godelski wrote: post #635
pdonis wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The right of free speech is not wholly encompassed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. And there are other human rights besides the right to free speech, which have to be balanced. One of them is the right to safe travel. That means people who are responsible for the safety of a planeload of people have to err very strongly on the side of being safe rather than sorry. And mature adults are sup…

> One of them is the right to safe travel. I'm sorry, but you're acting crazy if you think someone naming their device "free Palestine" is a credible threat. That's absolutely bonkers

How about taking the full quote, and defining the terms in that full quote? Otherwise you’re just straw-manning based on cherry picking.

Threats in airplanes, post 9/11, land different. “Free D.C., Fuck Americans” says something different to fellow passengers than “Free D.C.”.

Not crazy, not bonkers. Yes, a threat. And in an airline context: they are all treated as credible… that’s why your shoes get checked, and water gets stopped, and babies banana smoothies get confiscated because of potassium content.

Plus, there’s a red line from the PLO and hijackings through 9/11 to the current state of airline security. That’s not neutral, and not incidental, for an airline that knows recent history.

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

#659

Post by stef25 »

godelski wrote: post #379
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.

> This is trying to sanewash totally insane levels of risk aversion. To add more credence to your point, let's not forget this beautiful line in TFA | 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. This is clearly not a threat…

[flagged]

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

#660

Post by [deleted] »

K0balt wrote: post #156

This is a hilariously stupid reaction to a stupidly hilarious decision made by a speaker manufacturer. And also a new vector for a ransom-attack on the Bluetooth namespace in certain environments via malicious BLE advertising. The worst thing that could have happened here was for someone to take this seriously.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN