http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...TAM&SECTION=US

martin

"martin" <martin.secrest220@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c7e90817-fd44-4970-95a6-1f384c2f00fc@e21g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...TAM&SECTION=US

I don't think color is relevant to this investigation. Other similar
accidents in the past year or so have involved non-African Americans texting
and using cellphones in violation of their employer's policies.

However, because I don't believe there is was a fire, I believe we'll be
able to test your drug hypothesis very quickly, as the toxicology tests on
the body will detect that sort of thing ...

Datesfat

On Jun 23, 5:31*pm, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:

Projecting again? Really meth baby get a life or better yet...end
yours.

On Jun 23, 6:31*pm, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...N_DERAILMENT_C...
>
> martin

It sounds like she did her job:

WASHINGTON – Investigators looking into the deadly crash of two Metro
transit trains focused Tuesday on why a computerized system failed to
halt an oncoming train, and why the train failed to stop even though
the emergency brake was pressed.

At the time of the crash, the train was also operating in automatic
mode, meaning it was controlled primarily by computer. In that mode,
the operator's main job is to open and close the doors and respond in
case of an emergency.

Debbie Hersman, an investigator with the National Transportation
Safety Board, said it was unclear if the emergency brake was actually
engaged when Monday's crash occurred. But the mushroom-shaped button
that activates it was found pushed down in the operator's compartment.

From: http://tinyurl.com/kth6pp

"Dean Hoffman" <dean.hoffman@ymail.com> wrote in message
news:848eebe4-b034-442a-a99e-1d0bef9ca4bd@t21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 23, 6:31 pm, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...N_DERAILMENT_C...
>
> martin
>
> It sounds like she did her job:
>
>WASHINGTON – Investigators looking into the deadly crash of two Metro
>transit trains focused Tuesday on why a computerized system failed to
>halt an oncoming train, and why the train failed to stop even though
>the emergency brake was pressed.
>
>At the time of the crash, the train was also operating in automatic
>mode, meaning it was controlled primarily by computer. In that mode,
>the operator's main job is to open and close the doors and respond in
>case of an emergency.
>
>Debbie Hersman, an investigator with the National Transportation
>Safety Board, said it was unclear if the emergency brake was actually
>engaged when Monday's crash occurred. But the mushroom-shaped button
>that activates it was found pushed down in the operator's compartment.

Don't contradict the racist with credible evidence. He'll have a mental
breakdown and then find some other crazy cause to embrace.

After the mental breakdown, here are some possibilities for him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unification_Church

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambla

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovahs_witnesses

I'm guessing Unification Church and selling flowers at the airport.

Datesfat

"martin" <martin.secrest220@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c7e90817-fd44-4970-95a6-1f384c2f00fc@e21g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...TAM&SECTION=US

And I bet you're a raving, racist cunt and I KNOW I'd win.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

On Jun 23, 7:10*pm, "Datesfat Chicks" <datesfat.chi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> "Dean Hoffman" <dean.hoff...@ymail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:848eebe4-b034-442a-a99e-1d0bef9ca4bd@t21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 23, 6:31 pm, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...N_DERAILMENT_C...
>
> > martin
>
> > * *It sounds like she did her job:
>
> >WASHINGTON – Investigators looking into the deadly crash of two Metro
> >transit trains focused Tuesday on why a computerized system failed to
> >halt an oncoming train, and why the train failed to stop even though
> >the emergency brake was pressed.
>
> >At the time of the crash, the train was also operating in automatic
> >mode, meaning it was controlled primarily by computer. In that mode,
> >the operator's main job is to open and close the doors and respond in
> >case of an emergency.
>
> >Debbie Hersman, an investigator with the National Transportation
> >Safety Board, said it was unclear if the emergency brake was actually
> >engaged when Monday's crash occurred. But the mushroom-shaped button
> >that activates it was found pushed down in the operator's compartment.
>
> Don't contradict the racist with credible evidence. *He'll have a mental
> breakdown and then find some other crazy cause to embrace.
>
> After the mental breakdown, here are some possibilities for him:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unification_Church
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambla
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovahs_witnesses
>
> I'm guessing Unification Church and selling flowers at the airport.
>
> Datesfat- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

DFC, yes, there is a small chance the operator was using drugs. If
not, I can stand the disappointment.
(DC transit probably has random drug testing.)

Religion, been an atheist since reaching puberty.

martin

On Jun 24, 12:28*pm, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 23, 7:10*pm, "Datesfat Chicks" <datesfat.chi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Dean Hoffman" <dean.hoff...@ymail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:848eebe4-b034-442a-a99e-1d0bef9ca4bd@t21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com....
> > On Jun 23, 6:31 pm, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...N_DERAILMENT_C....
>
> > > martin
>
> > > * *It sounds like she did her job:
>
> > >WASHINGTON – Investigators looking into the deadly crash of two Metro
> > >transit trains focused Tuesday on why a computerized system failed to
> > >halt an oncoming train, and why the train failed to stop even though
> > >the emergency brake was pressed.
>
> > >At the time of the crash, the train was also operating in automatic
> > >mode, meaning it was controlled primarily by computer. In that mode,
> > >the operator's main job is to open and close the doors and respond in
> > >case of an emergency.
>
> > >Debbie Hersman, an investigator with the National Transportation
> > >Safety Board, said it was unclear if the emergency brake was actually
> > >engaged when Monday's crash occurred. But the mushroom-shaped button
> > >that activates it was found pushed down in the operator's compartment.
>
> > Don't contradict the racist with credible evidence. *He'll have a mental
> > breakdown and then find some other crazy cause to embrace.
>
> > After the mental breakdown, here are some possibilities for him:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unification_Church
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambla
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovahs_witnesses
>
> > I'm guessing Unification Church and selling flowers at the airport.
>
> > Datesfat- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> DFC, yes, there is a small chance the operator was using drugs. If
> not, I can stand the disappointment.
> (DC transit probably has random drug testing.)
>
> Religion, been an atheist since reaching puberty.
>
> martin- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

And been an ingorant asshole since birth.

Beav wrote:
> "martin" <martin.secrest220@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c7e90817-fd44-4970-95a6-1f384c2f00fc@e21g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...TAM&SECTION=US
>
> And I bet you're a raving, racist cunt and I KNOW I'd win.

I have to wonder if Martin ever tires of looking like a complete idiot.

Per an Associated Press story in this morning's paper, the train in
question was "operating in automatic mode, meaning that it was
controlled primarily by computer" at the time of the crash. The
story goes on to note that "in this mode, the operator's main job
is to open and close the doors and respond in case of an
emergency."

It was also noted that the emergency brake button had been pressed
by the operator prior to the crash, but that the emergency brake
itself (which is also under automated control - apparently the brake
button is just an input to the automated system) failed to engage.

Bob M.

"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:h1tksu$15h$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>
> It was also noted that the emergency brake button had been pressed
> by the operator prior to the crash, but that the emergency brake
> itself (which is also under automated control - apparently the brake
> button is just an input to the automated system) failed to engage.

You paste in prose like this and then you think I'm being absurd when I
distrust fly-by-wire or electronic fuel injection?

I tend to mostly trust rods, cables, and bellcranks. Once you get beyond
that, I'm very skeptical.

Datesfat

Datesfat Chicks wrote:
> "Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
> news:h1tksu$15h$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>>
>> It was also noted that the emergency brake button had been pressed
>> by the operator prior to the crash, but that the emergency brake
>> itself (which is also under automated control - apparently the brake
>> button is just an input to the automated system) failed to engage.
>
> You paste in prose like this and then you think I'm being absurd when
> I distrust fly-by-wire or electronic fuel injection?

Yes, I do.

What we have in the above is a high-level description of the
apparent cause of the accident - and one which clearly does
not involve operator error, which was the point of noting this
to the OP.

We can talk more about whether these systems are worthy
of our trust when the root cause is finally determined - AND
when you have compared the failure rate of such systems,
overall, to other approaches. Or are you saying that you
don't accept any "newfangled" system unless it can demonstrate
a *perfect* operating record, even though the system it
replaces didn't come close to doing that?

Bob M.

"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:h1tovr$966$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
> Datesfat Chicks wrote:
>> "Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:h1tksu$15h$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>>>
>>> It was also noted that the emergency brake button had been pressed
>>> by the operator prior to the crash, but that the emergency brake
>>> itself (which is also under automated control - apparently the brake
>>> button is just an input to the automated system) failed to engage.
>>
>> You paste in prose like this and then you think I'm being absurd when
>> I distrust fly-by-wire or electronic fuel injection?
>
> Yes, I do.
>
> What we have in the above is a high-level description of the
> apparent cause of the accident - and one which clearly does
> not involve operator error, which was the point of noting this
> to the OP.
>
> We can talk more about whether these systems are worthy
> of our trust when the root cause is finally determined - AND
> when you have compared the failure rate of such systems,
> overall, to other approaches. Or are you saying that you
> don't accept any "newfangled" system unless it can demonstrate
> a *perfect* operating record, even though the system it
> replaces didn't come close to doing that?

I think it has more to do with the modes of failure than with the failure
rate.

If you have a cable and bellcrank system, certainly even with proper
inspection you're going to have things go wrong. Agreed.

But when you get to software systems, you have an incredible ability to
conceal behavior and behave in unexpected ways.

Can you accidentally have a system that will invert the plane and crash it
if the airspeed on landing is a prime number greater than 160? Sure, you
can.

This is my bible for what I think of software systems:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25

http://sunnyday.mit.edu/therac-25.html

It isn't the probability, it is the modes.

Datesfat.

Sounds like electronic terrorism, call out the FBI computer terrorist
squads AL GORE created.

martin wrote:
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...TAM&SECTION=US
>
> martin

"Ricky" <TxTrucker@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Zfw0m.2030$lv5.1930@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Sounds like electronic terrorism, call out the FBI computer terrorist
> squads AL GORE created.
>
> martin wrote:
>> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...TAM&SECTION=US

Top-posting is another form of electronic terrorism.

Datesfat

On Jun 24, 11:20*am, "Datesfat Chicks" <datesfat.chi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> "Bob Myers" <nospample...@address.invalid> wrote in message
>
> news:h1tksu$15h$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>
>
>
> > It was also noted that the emergency brake button had been pressed
> > by the operator prior to the crash, but that the emergency brake
> > itself (which is also under automated control - apparently the brake
> > button is just an input to the automated system) failed to engage.
>
> You paste in prose like this and then you think I'm being absurd when I
> distrust fly-by-wire or electronic fuel injection?
>
> I tend to mostly trust rods, cables, and bellcranks. *Once you get beyond
> that, I'm very skeptical.

You forgot hydraulics!!! Oh and the one sure way to know that you
shouldn't start a radial motor? It isn't dripping oil into the drip
pan. That means the oil tank is empty!

"Datesfat Chicks" <datesfat.chicks@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:PJ6dna6TUMhnEt_XnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@giganews.com ...
> "Ricky" <TxTrucker@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:Zfw0m.2030$lv5.1930@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
>> Sounds like electronic terrorism, call out the FBI computer terrorist
>> squads AL GORE created.
>>
>> martin wrote:
>>> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...TAM&SECTION=US
>
> Top-posting is another form of electronic terrorism.
>
> Datesfat

As is crossposting to unrelated groups...

On Jun 24, 2:37*pm, Ricky <TxTruc...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Sounds like electronic terrorism, call out the FBI computer terrorist
> squads AL GORE created.

Ah you want levle 9 then, second warehouse on the left and use the
side entrance. Tell them Mikey sent you.

On Jun 24, 2:55*pm, "armpit" <armarmpit...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Datesfat Chicks" <datesfat.chi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:PJ6dna6TUMhnEt_XnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@giganews.com ...
>
> > "Ricky" <TxTruc...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> >news:Zfw0m.2030$lv5.1930@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com.. .
> >> Sounds like electronic terrorism, call out the FBI computer terrorist
> >> squads AL GORE created.
>
> >> martin wrote:
> >>>http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...N_DERAILMENT_C....
>
> > Top-posting is another form of electronic terrorism.
>
> > Datesfat
>
> As is crossposting to unrelated groups...

Allowing for the OP who makes braindead cocker spaniels look like
rhodes scholars. The subject is a fair one imo. FBW is nice but if you
ain't running enough redundancy to make NASA happy I wont trust it.
This train wreck proves the point...that or they were running Win 3.1.

Schiffner wrote:
> On Jun 24, 11:20 am, "Datesfat Chicks" <datesfat.chi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I tend to mostly trust rods, cables, and bellcranks. Once you get beyond
>> that, I'm very skeptical.
>
> You forgot hydraulics!!! Oh and the one sure way to know that you
> shouldn't start a radial motor? It isn't dripping oil into the drip
> pan. That means the oil tank is empty!

I'm still waitin' patiently for the lecture on proper use of a grease
gun. Wait a minute, isn't that hydraulics of a sort? Never mind ...

On Jun 24, 3:58*pm, Doug Payne <dwpa...@ist.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> Schiffner wrote:
> > On Jun 24, 11:20 am, "Datesfat Chicks" <datesfat.chi...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> I tend to mostly trust rods, cables, and bellcranks. *Once you get beyond
> >> that, I'm very skeptical.
>
> > You forgot hydraulics!!! Oh and the one sure way to know that you
> > shouldn't start a radial motor? It isn't dripping oil into the drip
> > pan. That means the oil tank is empty!
>
> I'm still waitin' patiently for the lecture on proper use of a grease
> gun. Wait a minute, isn't that hydraulics of a sort? Never mind ...

Oh go for it you know you want to go there. ;^)
--
Keith

Datesfat Chicks wrote:
> I think it has more to do with the modes of failure than with the
> failure rate.

The specific modes don't matter. What matters - the ONLY thing
that matters in this sort of discussion - is whether or not the
failure in question is survivable, and the likelihood of the failure.

>
> If you have a cable and bellcrank system, certainly even with proper
> inspection you're going to have things go wrong. Agreed.
>

And those "things that go wrong" can kill you, just as dead as
if the failure had been due to software inverting the plane or
whatever.

The bottom line is always going to be: I get on the plane, I have
a 1 in N chance of not surviving the trip. N is presumably a fairly
large number for ANY sort of control system which has been
accepted for use in manned aircraft - or any other sort of vehicle
- but if it's 1 in 10,000 for a mechanical system, and 1 in 100,000
for whatever alternative I'm offered (whether that alternative is as
easy for *me* to understand or not), the choice is pretty clear.

Bob M.

"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:h1v1at$hab$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...

>
> The bottom line is always going to be: I get on the plane, I have
> a 1 in N chance of not surviving the trip. N is presumably a fairly
> large number for ANY sort of control system which has been
> accepted for use in manned aircraft - or any other sort of vehicle
> - but if it's 1 in 10,000 for a mechanical system, and 1 in 100,000
> for whatever alternative I'm offered (whether that alternative is as
> easy for *me* to understand or not), the choice is pretty clear.
>

and that is precisely why I always feel it is the safest to fly right after
a crash. I figure I've got 999,999 more take off and landings before that
magic number comes up again.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@windstream.net

"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:h1v1at$hab$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
> Datesfat Chicks wrote:
>> I think it has more to do with the modes of failure than with the
>> failure rate.
>
> The specific modes don't matter. What matters - the ONLY thing
> that matters in this sort of discussion - is whether or not the
> failure in question is survivable, and the likelihood of the failure.

You are right.

Me harping about failure modes I don't like doesn't change the math.

Datesfat

"Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREMOVE@windstream.net> wrote in message
news:61832$4a430add$452897e0$7830@ALLTEL.NET...
>
> "Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
> news:h1v1at$hab$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>
>>
>> The bottom line is always going to be: I get on the plane, I have
>> a 1 in N chance of not surviving the trip. N is presumably a fairly
>> large number for ANY sort of control system which has been
>> accepted for use in manned aircraft - or any other sort of vehicle
>> - but if it's 1 in 10,000 for a mechanical system, and 1 in 100,000
>> for whatever alternative I'm offered (whether that alternative is as
>> easy for *me* to understand or not), the choice is pretty clear.
>>
>
> and that is precisely why I always feel it is the safest to fly right
> after a crash. I figure I've got 999,999 more take off and landings
> before that magic number comes up again.

There is a certain related argument and some humor that involves the same
error about conditional probability.

Unfortunately, I can't really post it. Using a certain word that begins
with B together in a sentence with a certain word that begins with A, even
for mathematical illustration, may very well attract the attention of some
government entities whose names begin with F, T, and/or D.

Because a certain category of illegal activity beginning with T is such a
hotbutton these days ... I just can't go there, even in the most benign of
mathematical examples.

Datesfat

On Jun 25, 1:27*am, "Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREM...@windstream.net>
wrote:
> "Bob Myers" <nospample...@address.invalid> wrote in message
>
> news:h1v1at$hab$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>
>
>
> > The bottom line is always going to be: I get on the plane, I have
> > a 1 in N chance of not surviving the trip. *N is presumably a fairly
> > large number for ANY sort of control system which has been
> > accepted for use in manned aircraft - or any other sort of vehicle
> > - but if it's 1 in 10,000 for a mechanical system, and 1 in 100,000
> > for whatever alternative I'm offered (whether that alternative is as
> > easy for *me* to understand or not), the choice is pretty clear.
>
> and that is precisely why I always feel it is the safest to fly right after
> a crash. *I figure I've got 999,999 more take off and landings before that
> magic number comes up again.

LOL! Good one.

On Jun 23, 9:53*pm, Dean Hoffman <dean.hoff...@ymail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 23, 6:31*pm, martin <martin.secrest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...N_DERAILMENT_C...
>
> > martin
>
> * * It sounds like she did her job:
>
> WASHINGTON – Investigators looking into the deadly crash of two Metro
> transit trains focused Tuesday on why a computerized system failed to
> halt an oncoming train, and why the train failed to stop even though
> the emergency brake was pressed.
>
> At the time of the crash, the train was also operating in automatic
> mode, meaning it was controlled primarily by computer. In that mode,
> the operator's main job is to open and close the doors and respond in
> case of an emergency.
>
> Debbie Hersman, an investigator with the National Transportation
> Safety Board, said it was unclear if the emergency brake was actually
> engaged when Monday's crash occurred. But the mushroom-shaped button
> that activates it was found pushed down in the operator's compartment.
>
> *From: *http://tinyurl.com/kth6pp

(Trimmed massive x-post list)

Yes; today's Washington Post reports that the NTSB investigators have
found that the operator actuated both the regular manual brake and the
emergency brake when the automatic braking feature failed.

"The steel rails show that [operator Jeanice McMillan] activated the
emergency brakes 300 to 400 feet before the pileup, which occured on a
curved secton of track."

"The speed limit where the crash occurred is 59mph, the top speed on
the metro system. If the track circuit failed to detect the idling
train, computers inboard McMillan's train would have set her train's
speed at 59mph, making it difficult for her to hit the emergency
brakes in time to avoid a crash."

Racist asswipes like the OP are beneath contempt.

"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:h1tksu$15h$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
> Beav wrote:
>> "martin" <martin.secrest220@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:c7e90817-fd44-4970-95a6-1f384c2f00fc@e21g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>>> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...TAM&SECTION=US
>>
>> And I bet you're a raving, racist cunt and I KNOW I'd win.
>
> I have to wonder if Martin ever tires of looking like a complete idiot.

Obviously not.
>
> Per an Associated Press story in this morning's paper, the train in
> question was "operating in automatic mode, meaning that it was
> controlled primarily by computer" at the time of the crash. The
> story goes on to note that "in this mode, the operator's main job
> is to open and close the doors and respond in case of an
> emergency."

I don't think anyone seriously thinks train drivers actually drive trains
anymore. computers do the driving, controlled by other computers that are
supposed to know what else is on track.
>
> It was also noted that the emergency brake button had been pressed
> by the operator prior to the crash, but that the emergency brake
> itself (which is also under automated control - apparently the brake
> button is just an input to the automated system) failed to engage.

There's no stroy in blaming a button though. Buttons can't do drugs, can't
drink and can't go to sleep, or in this case, can't wake up.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

"Datesfat Chicks" <datesfat.chicks@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uZmdnbmjXdOh_d_XnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@giganews.com ...
> "Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
> news:h1tksu$15h$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>>
>> It was also noted that the emergency brake button had been pressed
>> by the operator prior to the crash, but that the emergency brake
>> itself (which is also under automated control - apparently the brake
>> button is just an input to the automated system) failed to engage.
>
> You paste in prose like this and then you think I'm being absurd when I
> distrust fly-by-wire or electronic fuel injection?
>
> I tend to mostly trust rods, cables, and bellcranks. Once you get beyond
> that, I'm very skeptical.

Rods, cables and bellcranks. None of which ever fail.

--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

"Datesfat Chicks" <datesfat.chicks@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:TZ-dndtI8sb78t_XnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> "Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
> news:h1tovr$966$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>> Datesfat Chicks wrote:
>>> "Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:h1tksu$15h$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>>>>
>>>> It was also noted that the emergency brake button had been pressed
>>>> by the operator prior to the crash, but that the emergency brake
>>>> itself (which is also under automated control - apparently the brake
>>>> button is just an input to the automated system) failed to engage.
>>>
>>> You paste in prose like this and then you think I'm being absurd when
>>> I distrust fly-by-wire or electronic fuel injection?
>>
>> Yes, I do.
>>
>> What we have in the above is a high-level description of the
>> apparent cause of the accident - and one which clearly does
>> not involve operator error, which was the point of noting this
>> to the OP.
>>
>> We can talk more about whether these systems are worthy
>> of our trust when the root cause is finally determined - AND
>> when you have compared the failure rate of such systems,
>> overall, to other approaches. Or are you saying that you
>> don't accept any "newfangled" system unless it can demonstrate
>> a *perfect* operating record, even though the system it
>> replaces didn't come close to doing that?
>
> I think it has more to do with the modes of failure than with the failure
> rate.
>
> If you have a cable and bellcrank system, certainly even with proper
> inspection you're going to have things go wrong. Agreed.
>
> But when you get to software systems, you have an incredible ability to
> conceal behavior and behave in unexpected ways.
>
> Can you accidentally have a system that will invert the plane and crash it
> if the airspeed on landing is a prime number greater than 160? Sure, you
> can.
>
> This is my bible for what I think of software systems:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25
>
> http://sunnyday.mit.edu/therac-25.html
>
> It isn't the probability, it is the modes.

I think it's time for a nick change. "Luddite" springs to mind.

--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

"Datesfat Chicks" <datesfat.chicks@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Lc-dnSXCqN1Ygd7XnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> "Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREMOVE@windstream.net> wrote in message
> news:61832$4a430add$452897e0$7830@ALLTEL.NET...
>>
>> "Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:h1v1at$hab$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>>
>>>
>>> The bottom line is always going to be: I get on the plane, I have
>>> a 1 in N chance of not surviving the trip. N is presumably a fairly
>>> large number for ANY sort of control system which has been
>>> accepted for use in manned aircraft - or any other sort of vehicle
>>> - but if it's 1 in 10,000 for a mechanical system, and 1 in 100,000
>>> for whatever alternative I'm offered (whether that alternative is as
>>> easy for *me* to understand or not), the choice is pretty clear.
>>>
>>
>> and that is precisely why I always feel it is the safest to fly right
>> after a crash. I figure I've got 999,999 more take off and landings
>> before that magic number comes up again.
>
> There is a certain related argument and some humor that involves the same
> error about conditional probability.
>
> Unfortunately, I can't really post it. Using a certain word that begins
> with B

Bin Laden? Bitch? Bastard? Bollocks? Bullshit?

together in a sentence with a certain word that begins with A,


Asshole? Arab? Actual? Ameoba?

even
> for mathematical illustration, may very well attract the attention of some
> government entities whose names begin with F,

Fuckers? Federali? Firearms? Fart?

T,

Twats? Tossers? Two-faced? Tobacco?

and/or D.

Drugs?

>
> Because a certain category of illegal activity beginning with T

Terrorism? Fuck me, this is paranoi at its best.

>is such a hotbutton these days ... I just can't go there, even in the most
>benign of mathematical examples.

How about, Bin Laden is an Arab asshole who fucks the federali's with
firearms and then tosses the two-faced twats into the drugs mix to make them
look like terrorists + 1 paranoid Usenet poster = fear?


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19