New FAA Guidelines Permit More Device Use(techcrunch.com)
techcrunch.com
New FAA Guidelines Permit More Device Use
http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/31/new-faa-guidelines-permit-more-device-use-all-the-way-from-take-off-to-landing/
93 comments
Since I am not flying the plane, how could I possibly cause you to "lose your ass in an accident" because my attention is on Angry Birds? The emergency maneuvers performed by airline passengers require prompt obedience but not lightning reflexes. There'll be plenty of time to put down the Angry Birds.
The reason for banning electronic devices during take-off and landing is because of EM interference, not because of distraction. If you want to ban distractions you need to ban books, sudoku, and noisy kids too, the electronic bit is immaterial.
Also people are already free to use devices during loading and unloading. Your complaint is that people don't have common courtesy, but that can't be regulated by FAA (and isn't currently)
Also people are already free to use devices during loading and unloading. Your complaint is that people don't have common courtesy, but that can't be regulated by FAA (and isn't currently)
I think of flight attendants as firemen (or firewomen) serving us drinks and food. Because that's what they are. They will be the ones saving your ass if the situation comes to that.
Yeah. But I'm still trying to figure out what to think of the Sky Marshall on the flight. I guess maybe he/she is like the cop who will be saving my ass when the shit hits the fan.
How so?
You could look it up by yourself, but here's the gist of it: the flight attendant's top priority is your safety, not your happiness or comfort. They are trained in emergency procedures and if at all possible they will be the ones who make sure you get out of a cabin full of smoke after a crash. To cite a recent example: http://jezebel.com/no-ones-talking-about-the-flight-attendan...
Couldn't agree more.
I used to fly a lot (family overseas, so accumulated a couple of million miles over the years). It never, ever, bothered me to turn off devices for 10-15 minutes. Quite the opposite. I always enjoyed the moment to pause my hyper-connected life and put my gadget addiction in perspective.
My most disgusting experience was with an a-hole sitting next row, impatiently speaking on the phone when we were landing. At the very last second the pilot noticed the runway wasn't clear -- there was a parked vehicle in the middle, and had to do a subtle maneuver and get the plane back on air. We had some very tense 30 seconds.
Of course the phone call had nothing to do with the error by the air traffic control, but any sort of electromagnetic interference at that precise moment could have killed us all.
People frequently ask FAA why we should turn devices off. I still think the correct question is why not?
I used to fly a lot (family overseas, so accumulated a couple of million miles over the years). It never, ever, bothered me to turn off devices for 10-15 minutes. Quite the opposite. I always enjoyed the moment to pause my hyper-connected life and put my gadget addiction in perspective.
My most disgusting experience was with an a-hole sitting next row, impatiently speaking on the phone when we were landing. At the very last second the pilot noticed the runway wasn't clear -- there was a parked vehicle in the middle, and had to do a subtle maneuver and get the plane back on air. We had some very tense 30 seconds.
Of course the phone call had nothing to do with the error by the air traffic control, but any sort of electromagnetic interference at that precise moment could have killed us all.
People frequently ask FAA why we should turn devices off. I still think the correct question is why not?
I just want to be able to read my kindle on takeoff and landing. I hope this goes into effect soon. The device uses the exact same power sitting in my lap with the case closed as it does while I'm reading it.
I've tried to explain this to flight attendants before, but they don't care.
"Turn your device off!"
"This is off. It's really neat, actually! Once the screen is rendered to the eink display it stays there until...nevermind, okay it's off now"
/sigh
"Turn your device off!"
"This is off. It's really neat, actually! Once the screen is rendered to the eink display it stays there until...nevermind, okay it's off now"
/sigh
You know that Kindle can actually be turned off[1], right?
Arguing with low wage employees while they're having to deal with hundreds of passengers during the short pre-flight legally mandated checks makes you appear like an arsehole. They don't know every device on the market, nor whether that device is using 3G or wifi or is just sleeping or is off. And they don't need to know, they've been told to make sure that everything is turned off and that there are serious consequences if it doesn't happen.
The fact that the regulations are idiotic is not the fault of the busy, underpaid, low-skilled, attendants.
[1] https://kindle.s3.amazonaws.com/Kindle_User%27s_Guide_Englis...
Page 20
> Power switch — puts your Kindle to sleep, wakes it up, and turns your Kindle on or off. The power switch is located just to the right of the micro-USB/power port. To put your Kindle to sleep, slide and release the power switch; the screensaver appears on the display. While your Kindle is asleep, other keys and buttons are locked so that you don’t accidentally change the place in your reading. For Kindle with Special Offers, the center of the 5-way controller is not locked while your Kindle is asleep. To turn your Kindle off, slide and hold the power switch for seven seconds until the screen goes blank and then release.
Arguing with low wage employees while they're having to deal with hundreds of passengers during the short pre-flight legally mandated checks makes you appear like an arsehole. They don't know every device on the market, nor whether that device is using 3G or wifi or is just sleeping or is off. And they don't need to know, they've been told to make sure that everything is turned off and that there are serious consequences if it doesn't happen.
The fact that the regulations are idiotic is not the fault of the busy, underpaid, low-skilled, attendants.
[1] https://kindle.s3.amazonaws.com/Kindle_User%27s_Guide_Englis...
Page 20
> Power switch — puts your Kindle to sleep, wakes it up, and turns your Kindle on or off. The power switch is located just to the right of the micro-USB/power port. To put your Kindle to sleep, slide and release the power switch; the screensaver appears on the display. While your Kindle is asleep, other keys and buttons are locked so that you don’t accidentally change the place in your reading. For Kindle with Special Offers, the center of the 5-way controller is not locked while your Kindle is asleep. To turn your Kindle off, slide and hold the power switch for seven seconds until the screen goes blank and then release.
Low wage does not always imply low skill. You can find low wage employees who are extremely skilled at what they do. Their problem is that their skill, however high, is common, and so the laws of supply and demand drive their wage down.
> Arguing with low wage employees
> ...
> low-skilled, attendants
I down-voted this comment because I found it to be condescending. I don't know anyone who works as a flight attendant nor have any relationship to the airline industry that I know of.
What you said is simply mean-spirited. Not everyone is an engineer. Not everyone understands technology. Not everyone needs to. How much they earn and how skilled they are at technology is no measure of a person. That's really offensive.
I know many people who are virtually poor and uneducated who are better human beings --by far-- than some PhD's I've come across in my life. Why must some in technology behave as though these people are beneath them? This is shameful. What a horrible thing to say.
I down-voted this comment because I found it to be condescending. I don't know anyone who works as a flight attendant nor have any relationship to the airline industry that I know of.
What you said is simply mean-spirited. Not everyone is an engineer. Not everyone understands technology. Not everyone needs to. How much they earn and how skilled they are at technology is no measure of a person. That's really offensive.
I know many people who are virtually poor and uneducated who are better human beings --by far-- than some PhD's I've come across in my life. Why must some in technology behave as though these people are beneath them? This is shameful. What a horrible thing to say.
Agreed. Not to mention, those low wage, low skilled attendents have quite a bit of training that can save your life if you are ever in an airplane accident. They may not know about the latest gadget from Amazon, but they do know their stuff.
You make a very good point. I'd like to apologize for my poor choice of words.
> Not everyone understands technology. Not everyone needs to.
This is more what I meant, and what I should have said. I agree that "low skilled" is really offensive.
> Not everyone understands technology. Not everyone needs to.
This is more what I meant, and what I should have said. I agree that "low skilled" is really offensive.
I'm glad you see it this way. This could easily be the result of shooting off a post without taking a moment to read what you've written.
You are not the first person to do that, nor the last. I've done it plenty of times. Life goes on.
Sometimes I think these fora need to have a selectable posting delay setting. Let the user choose whether posting is immediate or not. I would probably set mine to at least a 15 minute delay. I'd sure save me from making an ass of myself on occasion.
You are not the first person to do that, nor the last. I've done it plenty of times. Life goes on.
Sometimes I think these fora need to have a selectable posting delay setting. Let the user choose whether posting is immediate or not. I would probably set mine to at least a 15 minute delay. I'd sure save me from making an ass of myself on occasion.
Sometimes I think these fora need to have a selectable posting delay setting. Let the user choose whether posting is immediate or not. I would probably set mine to at least a 15 minute delay. I'd sure save me from making an ass of myself on occasion
Actually there is (at least here) look for the "delay" setting in your user page. It's the number of minutes between hitting submit and a post going live.
Actually there is (at least here) look for the "delay" setting in your user page. It's the number of minutes between hitting submit and a post going live.
RTFM. Funny, I guess I never paid attention to that.
Fortunately, Hacker News has a setting called "delay" (which you can set by clicking on your name) which does just what you are describing.
And you know that the Kindle uses the same amount of energy when off as it does when it's "on" right?
I'm pretty sure that's actually not the case. If so, why does my kindle switch itself 'off' after not using it for a few minutes? While the screen might take no energy to keep an image, I think it keeps other parts active to be ready to flip to the next page, and turns these off when, well, off.
Because the backlight is still on for a while. If they wanted, when they turn off the backlight, they could leave the page you were reading visible. They choose to show an "off" image, though.
Really? Whispernet and wifi and etc are using the same power when the machine is on, and when the machine is sleeping, and when the machine is off?
They don't care and it's not their call. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
Nobody said it's hard to understand. However, I can only imagine that the kind of people who frequent this site would also tend to be the kind of people who don't respond pleasantly to "because I said so!". I'm definitely one of those people.
You are not entitled to argue with everyone in every situation because you feel like you've got a clever point to make.
There's a time and a place for a discussion. That does seem to be hard for some people to understand. Yes, we all agree that some rules are stupid, but being a smart ass when 300 people are about to take off in a large commercial airliner full of fuel isn't one of those times.
There's a time and a place for a discussion. That does seem to be hard for some people to understand. Yes, we all agree that some rules are stupid, but being a smart ass when 300 people are about to take off in a large commercial airliner full of fuel isn't one of those times.
So therefore, shut up, follow all stupid rules without question or delay.
That's what I'm getting from your posts here.
Sorry, but over in the real world, the only thing that gets stupid shit dealt with is people complaining about it. You want to talk entitlement? Who are you to say that the other guy has no right to question something that doesn't fit their internal logic?
That's what I'm getting from your posts here.
Sorry, but over in the real world, the only thing that gets stupid shit dealt with is people complaining about it. You want to talk entitlement? Who are you to say that the other guy has no right to question something that doesn't fit their internal logic?
The impression I got was that, correctly, melling suggested choosing your battles wisely.
You chose to put words in his/her mouth instead and be condescending.
Just for the record: that is not a good thing to do, and you should stop doing that.
You chose to put words in his/her mouth instead and be condescending.
Just for the record: that is not a good thing to do, and you should stop doing that.
It's not about making clever points, it's about establishing and enforcing rules that make sense. It's about balancing safety and freedom in such a way that one doesn't get to trample the other for no reason. And some would argue that takeoff would be one of the best times to ensure that the rules you're following are well-supported. Call it "being a smartass" if you like, I call it "not being a dumbass".
I've always had the theory that rules about electronic devices were not just about electromagnetic interference, but also about reducing distractions from crew-member instructions during takeoff/landing.
Someone might point out that they don't make you put physical books and magazines away, but they don't have the excuse of "electromagnetic interference" for physical books.
Tinfoil Hat Also, approximately 90% of my time spent reading in-flight magazines is a result of the takeoff/landing electronics prohibition.
Someone might point out that they don't make you put physical books and magazines away, but they don't have the excuse of "electromagnetic interference" for physical books.
Tinfoil Hat Also, approximately 90% of my time spent reading in-flight magazines is a result of the takeoff/landing electronics prohibition.
That's a great point about the in-flight magazines. I wonder if there's an substantial return on those, and if so, if any airlines would maintain the current policy in attempts to keep people engaged. It'd be interesting to see if some airlines adopt a more lax policy sooner than others.
"SkyMall's SkyFall": http://priceonomics.com/skymalls-skyfall/
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6114009
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6114009
Also to reduce distractions from actual problems during takeoff landing.
If you're playing games on your iPad with your headphones in, you're probably less likely to be aware of the little rattle, or to spot the flames coming out of the engine, etc.
Everyone on board an aircraft is required during takeoff and landing to be actively aware and help spot potential problems. Also, if there is a problem, you'll have better situational awareness of what's going on and you'll be ready sooner to take action to deal with that situation.
If you're playing games on your iPad with your headphones in, you're probably less likely to be aware of the little rattle, or to spot the flames coming out of the engine, etc.
Everyone on board an aircraft is required during takeoff and landing to be actively aware and help spot potential problems. Also, if there is a problem, you'll have better situational awareness of what's going on and you'll be ready sooner to take action to deal with that situation.
This is an absurd idea. Enormous amounts of alcohol are consumed in airports and aboard planes, which impairs people's abilities to attend, act quickly, precisely, etc. If something bad happens, I'm going to be way more worried about the pissed guy next to me than the fact that he's listening to some wicked prog tunes on his iPod.
>This is an absurd idea. Enormous amounts of alcohol are consumed in airports and aboard planes
You aren't getting on a plane when you're evidently intoxicated, either. Nor are they serving you alcohol to the point of intoxication on the plane. That's a lawsuit waiting to happen.
You aren't getting on a plane when you're evidently intoxicated, either. Nor are they serving you alcohol to the point of intoxication on the plane. That's a lawsuit waiting to happen.
If that were true, wouldn't they tell you to also put away your books and magazines? And not listen to in-flight audio through the audio jack found in the armrest?
I don't fly, but wouldn't the in-flight audio be cut off if there was an emergency?
Just hide the screen face down, or just put it in the pocket in front of you. As soon as they are sitting down and buckled up for the actual take off, you can start using your device again with no one hassling you until landing. %100 success rate for me so far.
[deleted](2)
I wish one of these articles would quote some actual regulations. As far as I understand, the CFRs (FARs) have been more advisory than regulatory in these details, generally leaving it up to the airlines to decide their policies on personal electronics, then approving those policies. The 10k foot rule that Techcrunch refers to was never in the FARs, as far as I've read, rather it is/was an FCC regulation. Seriously, I'd like to see the actual regulations that have changed, if anyone can find them.
FAR 91.21 is the rule that is being enforced:
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate, nor may any operator or pilot in command of an aircraft allow the operation of, any portable electronic device on any of the following U.S.-registered civil aircraft: (1) Aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate; or (2) Any other aircraft while it is operated under IFR. (b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to— (1) Portable voice recorders; (2) Hearing aids; (3) Heart pacemakers; (4) Electric shavers; or (5) Any other portable electronic device that the operator of the aircraft has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used. (c) In the case of an aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate, the determination required by paragraph (b)(5) of this section shall be made by that operator of the aircraft on which the particular device is to be used. In the case of other aircraft, the determination may be made by the pilot in command or other operator of the aircraft.
Advisory Circular (AC) 91.21-1B is the recommended implementation of FAR 91.21 and includes the take off/landing and operation below 10,000 rules and seems to be what everyone is using.
I assume that it's AC 91.21-1B that is being modified. Its text is too big to paste here but you can read it here: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/A...
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate, nor may any operator or pilot in command of an aircraft allow the operation of, any portable electronic device on any of the following U.S.-registered civil aircraft: (1) Aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate; or (2) Any other aircraft while it is operated under IFR. (b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to— (1) Portable voice recorders; (2) Hearing aids; (3) Heart pacemakers; (4) Electric shavers; or (5) Any other portable electronic device that the operator of the aircraft has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used. (c) In the case of an aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate, the determination required by paragraph (b)(5) of this section shall be made by that operator of the aircraft on which the particular device is to be used. In the case of other aircraft, the determination may be made by the pilot in command or other operator of the aircraft.
Advisory Circular (AC) 91.21-1B is the recommended implementation of FAR 91.21 and includes the take off/landing and operation below 10,000 rules and seems to be what everyone is using.
I assume that it's AC 91.21-1B that is being modified. Its text is too big to paste here but you can read it here: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/A...
There is nothing about flight that "defy physics", in fact it is physics as to how airplanes fly
That phrase irked me too. Why the magic around airplanes? Saying "seemingly defy physics" would be a huge improvement, though it retains the tired metaphor. After all, it's a lack of sensible scientific thinking which led to the FAA maintaining this ban for so long!
It's... a joke.
If it was, I must have missed the punchline.
> Don’t start celebrating just yet – this doesn’t mean you can continue playing Candy Crush while waiting for your massive, heavy hunk of metal to defy physics and launch itself into the air as of this very moment.
> Don’t start celebrating just yet – this doesn’t mean you can continue playing Candy Crush while waiting for your massive, heavy hunk of metal to defy physics and launch itself into the air as of this very moment.
I don't think that was meant literally. It was an allusion to your subconscious intuition of physics being contradicted.
Link to the FAA.gov page: http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId...
I was thinking about this the other day with all the smartwatch news. I can picture attendants telling passengers to shut off their watches.
Part of me likes this.
Another part of me hates this.
I usually don't really do much during takeoff and landing. The thrill of an aircraft's takeoff and landing may wear for some, but it pretty much never does for me. I just stare out the window (if I'm lucky) observing the spoilerons deploy and close, and those flaps deploy and retract. I love hearing that slight loss of engine power for climb after takeoff to prevent overspeed.
Cruise is pretty boring, but when I'm somewhere over Nevada or any picturesque area, I put my S7 to sleep and just watch the beautiful scenery.
The pragmatist in me is saying, "Yay, now I and everyone else can work round-flight!"
The Transcendentalist in me is saying, "How I wish others could see the beauty of a mass of metal rising to the heavens, and all that we can see below from above..."
Another part of me hates this.
I usually don't really do much during takeoff and landing. The thrill of an aircraft's takeoff and landing may wear for some, but it pretty much never does for me. I just stare out the window (if I'm lucky) observing the spoilerons deploy and close, and those flaps deploy and retract. I love hearing that slight loss of engine power for climb after takeoff to prevent overspeed.
Cruise is pretty boring, but when I'm somewhere over Nevada or any picturesque area, I put my S7 to sleep and just watch the beautiful scenery.
The pragmatist in me is saying, "Yay, now I and everyone else can work round-flight!"
The Transcendentalist in me is saying, "How I wish others could see the beauty of a mass of metal rising to the heavens, and all that we can see below from above..."
Transcendentalist: You need to take some flying lessons. Seriously. I recommend helicopters. R22s and R44s have wide-open canopies with a magical view. If it's summer and warm, take the right-hand (pilot side) door off (you won't fall out, don't worry). Nothing you can see out of the cramped windows of a commercial cattle-class airliner comes close.
I have a message for the Transcendentalist: most of us would love to enjoy that beauty, but having no leg space or access to a window kind of hamper us ;)
First class is not that expensive anymore.
Are you joking? Or are you not in touch with what constitutes "expensive" for most Americans? My recent coach-class round trip from Kentucky to Washington state and back cost $500. That's expensive. I looked into business class for the same trip, and it was about twice as expensive. Didn't even bother looking at first.
Well, FWIW AirTran used to offer <$60 business class upgrades. Not sure if they still do.
Yeah, but I don't think preventing people from using electronics is really helping in making them see the beauty in the engineering feat. Though I can definitively relate to that feeling.
I am studying philosphy on my own and I thought transcendentalism meant something else: that all people are inherently good and social structures takes that away.
Bright Romanticism also deals with the appreciation of nature and natural living. Thoreau, Whitman, and Emerson emphasized natural beauty and individualism, although the belief in an innate morality is also true.
I think it's different if you learn about the Transcendentalists through a literary medium, rather than a philosophical medium. The literary emphasizes every aspect of the works, while philosophical texts emphasize the more metaphysical and abstract concepts that one can receive from deeper understanding into the initial takeaway.
I think it's different if you learn about the Transcendentalists through a literary medium, rather than a philosophical medium. The literary emphasizes every aspect of the works, while philosophical texts emphasize the more metaphysical and abstract concepts that one can receive from deeper understanding into the initial takeaway.
Thanks for the explanation.
This is fantastic news for people who fly a lot.
I know that a "2-hour flight" for me _could_ mean a really good sprint on something, if it weren't for the interruptions that tell me when to put my computer away and ask me if I want peanuts.
I know that a "2-hour flight" for me _could_ mean a really good sprint on something, if it weren't for the interruptions that tell me when to put my computer away and ask me if I want peanuts.
I'll find this even more useful in short, 1-hour type flights. Out of the whole flight, you usually only get ~30 mins at altitude to pull out your tablet or laptop.
Please, let this be one area where Europe promptly copies the US!...
A number of years ago I wrote a bunch of Verilog code and ran simulations during a flight from LA to NY. The code, save a few minor issues, worked perfectly when tested on hardware. What's remarcable about this is that I wrote the code with pen and paper and ran the simulations similarly by hand on graph paper. No computer involved.
After a couple of similar experiences I've resorted to using flights as an excuse to unplug for a few hours. A set of good noise cancelling headphones and a notebook can give you an opportunity to explore and think in ways that might be nearly impossible at the office.
After a couple of similar experiences I've resorted to using flights as an excuse to unplug for a few hours. A set of good noise cancelling headphones and a notebook can give you an opportunity to explore and think in ways that might be nearly impossible at the office.
I've gotten out of the habit of this, and honestly don't know if I'm better off for it. When I didn't have access to a computer, I would fairly regularly 'implement' designs with pen and paper and test it too. As you experienced, these would then work perfectly or nearly so on actual systems.
Now I almost always have a computer or computer-like device at hand so there's just no need. Sometimes it feels like this results in more experimenting, but less thinking.
Now I almost always have a computer or computer-like device at hand so there's just no need. Sometimes it feels like this results in more experimenting, but less thinking.
> less thinking.
That's exactly my point in a way. I realized that I am always immersed in technology. There are one or more screens of some sort in front of me nearly any time I am awake. A lot of us have lost contact with the idea and practice of thinking. Of talking to yourself. Perhaps doodling in a notebook to explore ideas and thoughts in your mind. For some reason I started to use flights as an excuse to practice thought. As noisy and uncomfortable as that environment can be I have found it amazingly effective for the simple task of letting my mind take trips in various directions with nothing but a piece of paper and a pen in front of me. I no-longer do paper-coding in flight. I think.
That's exactly my point in a way. I realized that I am always immersed in technology. There are one or more screens of some sort in front of me nearly any time I am awake. A lot of us have lost contact with the idea and practice of thinking. Of talking to yourself. Perhaps doodling in a notebook to explore ideas and thoughts in your mind. For some reason I started to use flights as an excuse to practice thought. As noisy and uncomfortable as that environment can be I have found it amazingly effective for the simple task of letting my mind take trips in various directions with nothing but a piece of paper and a pen in front of me. I no-longer do paper-coding in flight. I think.
Flights are unpleasant enough for me that try to find some mindless entertainment to make the time go faster. I'm too tall to comfortably use a computer in my seat (especially when the ass-hat in front of me inevitably reclines). I don't know when unapplied thinking dropped from my list of entertainment options...
I have a trip coming up next week, seems like it might be a good opportunity to try to do something a bit more useful.
Thanks for your original comment and the sidebar conversation that led me to realize it'd be a Good Thing to get back to it!
I have a trip coming up next week, seems like it might be a good opportunity to try to do something a bit more useful.
Thanks for your original comment and the sidebar conversation that led me to realize it'd be a Good Thing to get back to it!
I often print out code and mark it up on paper. For some reason I get a more holistic view of the code on paper than I can paging or searching through it on the screen.
Can anyone tell me what city is shown in the main picture?
San Francisco. That's the Bay Bridge.
Fortunately, FAA regulations also seem to require the flight attendants to sit in their seats during takeoff and landing.
Once the flight attendants are done "policing" the isles and get in their seats, I just take out my Kindle and start reading again.
So far, I haven't caused any aircraft crashes... and my fellow travelers have never called me out on it: apparently they also think the rules are stupid.
Once the flight attendants are done "policing" the isles and get in their seats, I just take out my Kindle and start reading again.
So far, I haven't caused any aircraft crashes... and my fellow travelers have never called me out on it: apparently they also think the rules are stupid.
And what's so difficult about following the rules and being inconvenienced for 20 minutes?
The amount of entitlement in this HN discussion is nuts.
The amount of entitlement in this HN discussion is nuts.
Yep. At least some HN members will get the same attitude back at them in the form of their users bragging to others about how smart they are since they managed to bypass the company firewall or some such thing, and saying "so far, I haven't caused any security breaches, so it can't hurt"..
I think you chose a bad example. Company firewalls exist to manage risk and liability for upper management, not to provide any type of real security. If a security incident happens, management wants to be able to say they did their due diligence and paid for the "best" firewall on the market.
Would say that a company would be equally well protected by having all computers on their network with reachable IPs, with no filtering whatsoever?
Following the rules simply for the sake of following the rules only does not make you better than anyone else, or noble, or good, or any other such thing. It makes you obedient.
Following stupid rules empowers stupid people.
Stupid is as stupid does right? Also when the going gets tough, the tough get going. And don't forget rome wasn't built in a day. A quitter never wins, and a winner never quits.
Hacker News is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're going to get.
For the record, I don't really advocate disobeying or even arguing with air crewmembers. That's a well-considered holdover from maritime law that probably goes back a thousand years: their boat, their rules. However, if nobody pushed back, the annoying parts of the rules would never be fixed.
For the record, I don't really advocate disobeying or even arguing with air crewmembers. That's a well-considered holdover from maritime law that probably goes back a thousand years: their boat, their rules. However, if nobody pushed back, the annoying parts of the rules would never be fixed.
It does sound a bit contrived, but I agree. Following rules 'cause they're rules doesn't set a good precedent.
I spent a large part of my career working for a small company in Silicon Valley that became a Very Big Company.
One of the things that the CEO liked to do for a while is have a "lunch with the interns” during the summer. He’d chat with them and give them an opportunity to ask questions. As the manager of a lot of interns, I was also invited, and I often went. I was (and still am) on a first-name basis with the CEO.
One time an intern asked, “what do I need to become the CEO of a company like this?” The question made me laugh, because I already knew the answer. The answer is that there is no answer. You must have a vision about what you can do, and you must believe it. If you allow every idiot in the world to draw a box around your behavior, you won’t accomplish anything.
I know that the Kindle (with wifi off) isn't going to crash the airplane. Amazon knows that the Kindle isn't going to crash the airplane. So why should I respect the opinion of the flight attendant? The flight attendant is, after all, a flight attendant because they would have never had make it through differential equations without sleeping with the professor. So why should I give that ditz any respect?
This isn’t about ‘entitlement’. Take all that crap your professors at the university told you and put it in /dev/null where it belongs. Reframe the issue in terms of what is right and what is possible.
If you want to be truly successful, you must learn about breaking the rules. (And by “truly” successful, I mean truly successful. If your goal is to accumulate $800K in your 401K and own a house in Sunnyvale, California outright… well you can do that by following all the rules and following Company Policies.) Write your own rules in life.
Perhaps I already answered your question, “And what's so difficult about following the rules and being inconvenienced for 20 minutes.” And if you don’t feel that I did, it means that you’ll never find the answer.
Maybe you’ll find success. Or maybe you won’t. But the feeling will be liberating. There is no man like a free man.
One of the things that the CEO liked to do for a while is have a "lunch with the interns” during the summer. He’d chat with them and give them an opportunity to ask questions. As the manager of a lot of interns, I was also invited, and I often went. I was (and still am) on a first-name basis with the CEO.
One time an intern asked, “what do I need to become the CEO of a company like this?” The question made me laugh, because I already knew the answer. The answer is that there is no answer. You must have a vision about what you can do, and you must believe it. If you allow every idiot in the world to draw a box around your behavior, you won’t accomplish anything.
I know that the Kindle (with wifi off) isn't going to crash the airplane. Amazon knows that the Kindle isn't going to crash the airplane. So why should I respect the opinion of the flight attendant? The flight attendant is, after all, a flight attendant because they would have never had make it through differential equations without sleeping with the professor. So why should I give that ditz any respect?
This isn’t about ‘entitlement’. Take all that crap your professors at the university told you and put it in /dev/null where it belongs. Reframe the issue in terms of what is right and what is possible.
If you want to be truly successful, you must learn about breaking the rules. (And by “truly” successful, I mean truly successful. If your goal is to accumulate $800K in your 401K and own a house in Sunnyvale, California outright… well you can do that by following all the rules and following Company Policies.) Write your own rules in life.
Perhaps I already answered your question, “And what's so difficult about following the rules and being inconvenienced for 20 minutes.” And if you don’t feel that I did, it means that you’ll never find the answer.
Maybe you’ll find success. Or maybe you won’t. But the feeling will be liberating. There is no man like a free man.
> The flight attendant is, after all, a flight attendant because they would have never had make it through differential equations without sleeping with the professor. So why should I give that ditz any respect?
I was with you until this smug bullshit. Using your Kindle during takeoff isn't entitled at all, but thinking your college grades make you a better person than a hard-working wage-earner is both ludicrously entitled and plain stupid.
Lemme clue you in here: The flight attendant knows your Kindle won't crash the plane. The gas station attendant knows your cell phone won't blow up the pump. They do not get to make the rules; they only get to follow them, or else lose their jobs. By all means, go about your business once the attendant is settled in for takeoff; but respect them while they're trying to do their job. They probably work harder than you, for less respect and less pay.
I was with you until this smug bullshit. Using your Kindle during takeoff isn't entitled at all, but thinking your college grades make you a better person than a hard-working wage-earner is both ludicrously entitled and plain stupid.
Lemme clue you in here: The flight attendant knows your Kindle won't crash the plane. The gas station attendant knows your cell phone won't blow up the pump. They do not get to make the rules; they only get to follow them, or else lose their jobs. By all means, go about your business once the attendant is settled in for takeoff; but respect them while they're trying to do their job. They probably work harder than you, for less respect and less pay.
Thank you for proving the parent's point about entitlement. "So why should I give that ditz any respect?" Seriously? "There is no man like a free man"? As if reading your Kindle during takeoff is going to turn you into a Randian ubermensch ready to disrupt every industry in the world?
Sometimes, people actually are entitled. Something to think about.
This isn't to say that the engineer is necessarily correct and the flight attendant necessarily incorrect, and I don't agree that the "sleeping with the professor" statement can necessarily be applied in general, but following rules 'cause rules are rules is not really something to aspire to. It's unfortunate that for many, blind conformity seems to be the order of the day.
This isn't to say that the engineer is necessarily correct and the flight attendant necessarily incorrect, and I don't agree that the "sleeping with the professor" statement can necessarily be applied in general, but following rules 'cause rules are rules is not really something to aspire to. It's unfortunate that for many, blind conformity seems to be the order of the day.
I agree with you. I think the rule is asinine as well, I'm glad it's dead, and I think we should be pushing back against stupid things. And following rules for rules' sake is a stupid thing.
But I don't think that meaningless platitudes or misogynistic stereotypes are a good justification for entitlement. Someone who's read the literature and understands why there's almost no way consumer electronics can affect a modern airliner's avionics might be more entitled than someone who thrives on 'breaking the rules' and thinks flight attendants are stupid 'ditzes'. What happens when that stupid ditz says something that turns out to be right?
But I don't think that meaningless platitudes or misogynistic stereotypes are a good justification for entitlement. Someone who's read the literature and understands why there's almost no way consumer electronics can affect a modern airliner's avionics might be more entitled than someone who thrives on 'breaking the rules' and thinks flight attendants are stupid 'ditzes'. What happens when that stupid ditz says something that turns out to be right?
>Someone who's read the literature and understands why there's almost no way consumer electronics can affect a modern airliner's avionics might be more entitled than someone who thrives on 'breaking the rules' and thinks flight attendants are stupid 'ditzes'.
I'm not really sure that we disagree here, although you seem to suggest that there is some mutual exclusion between people who are informed and people who enjoy breaking stupid rules, which is silly.
>What happens when that stupid ditz says something that turns out to be right?
I don't know, what happens? I didn't suggest that flight attendants are always wrong, nor that stupid people are always wrong (nor that flight attendants are always stupid). Though I think that my issue here is less about being factually correct and more about providing adequate justification for why you're correct.
I'm not really sure that we disagree here, although you seem to suggest that there is some mutual exclusion between people who are informed and people who enjoy breaking stupid rules, which is silly.
>What happens when that stupid ditz says something that turns out to be right?
I don't know, what happens? I didn't suggest that flight attendants are always wrong, nor that stupid people are always wrong (nor that flight attendants are always stupid). Though I think that my issue here is less about being factually correct and more about providing adequate justification for why you're correct.
Try to exercise some abstract thinking once in a while. It will improve your programming skill if nothing else.
I don't even understand what you are saying here. All you are doing is spewing anecdotes and platitudes.
You want to be successful I guess? Good for you. I don't know how that's germane to this discussion. Also don't assume everyone here went to university. And don't assume anyone shares your idea of what success is.
Now put your fucking Kindle away like everyone else or find a different way to get to where you are going. It's that simple.
You want to be successful I guess? Good for you. I don't know how that's germane to this discussion. Also don't assume everyone here went to university. And don't assume anyone shares your idea of what success is.
Now put your fucking Kindle away like everyone else or find a different way to get to where you are going. It's that simple.
Separate from that, even as a frequent flyer, I'd rather people not have their attention stuck in their iDevice during takeoff and landing. Those are the times when a problem on the aircraft is most likely to materialize, and I'd rather not lose my ass in an accident because your attention was on Angry Birds. Further, in those minutes at the beginning of a flight if you are fooling around with your phone/kindle/etc and blocking the isle, you delay expedient loading and unloading of the aircraft. I've had colleagues busy on their [device] say things like "but, but I was just wrapping up a call, why was the flight attendant so rude!" No asshole, you were blocking the plane from loading / unloading. Think of others for a whopping ten minutes and put down the device so we can all safely load / unload and get on/off the ground.