Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | WalterBright's commentslogin

My current car is 54 years old. I bought it in 1986.

Is it sitting on blocks on your lawn or does it actually roll?

> A small slice of those subsidies would make a big difference for people at the bottom.

More than half of the federal budget is for entitlements.


You’re missing the part of the budget that no longer exists because of tax reductions for the wealthy.

Also, so what? It should be more.


I've eschewed collision insurance, and what I've saved on those premiums is far more than the cars were worth.

> no excuses

Airplanes don't pay any attention to excuses. The only way to fly is do it perfectly, every time.


> You expect this behaviour from a first-timer in the sim, not a commercial cargo pilot.

I'm curious - are commercial pilots reprimanded for doing a go-round after messing up the approach?


No. They might have to say why they went around but they can't be punished for it (that's a great way to open yourself up to liability even stripping away all of the human elements). And I can't imagine any reason that an airline would truly care since they don't want their planes crashing so they don't want to discourage pilots from going around if they need to do so. The delay incurred is usually fairly small anyways, maybe 20-30 minutes.

However I will say that the majority of unstable approaches (97%!!) do continue to landing: https://flightsafety.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Go-aroun...

...but I think that most of these unstable approaches are likely marginally unstable and only in one dimension. This landing was so far outside the realm of normal it's actually mind boggling that it actually happened. Pilots are trained to immediately go around without questioning it if many of the things that happened on this flight occur (such as not being in landing configuration well before touching down!)


No, they're reprimanded for continuing.

https://skybrary.aero/tutorials/stabilised-approach


The most ridiculous one was a poster who claimed that MCAS would run the trim at double the rate of the trim switches.

The trim motors only have 2 speeds - on and off.


Somebody's got to work. Look at all the nice goodies we have.

I miss the 70's when I was in high school. I had a great time. It's one reason why I drive a '72 Dodge. I feel like a kid in it every time.

> the point of life is to explore and have fun and have human to human experiences

Not really. The point of life is successful reproduction. Because without it, we cease to exist. It wasn't that long ago when humans spent their entire lives struggling to live and protect their children.


In my experience, reproduction and child rearing is fun, and it also is a human to human experience.

Having children does make people happy.

> Children have no concept of violence or empathy or right or wrong

This is not correct. I remember having a sense of shame when I was 4 when I tried to hurt another kid. Kids will also hide the things they do wrong, because they know it is wrong.


> because they know it is wrong

Or they know they'll be told it was wrong. Children start knowing nothing then they slowly absorb what they're told again and again, and what they see around them until they feel it. They go from knowing nothing, to knowing what the adults told them, to internalizing that and feeling it rather than just knowing it (maybe these 2 concepts fully overlap in other people's minds).

But until they do get all of that, they'll spend a lot of time plucking wings off of insects, burning ants with a magnifying glass, pulling the cat by the tail, or throwing rocks at dogs and frogs.


That simply was not true for me.

How could it be possible for anyone to accurately reflect on the mechanisms shaping their emotional reaction to a specific situation when they were 4 years old? It should be transparently obvious that this is unknowable. First, by the time we begin to form memories, these influences have already been shaping us for months to years. Second, even if at 4 years old you remembered every moment from birth to now, you still wouldn't have the ability to actually reflect on all that data. Most adults aren't even capable of reflecting accurately on the influences affecting their current decisions!

I have other memories when I was 4, and talked about them with my parents years later. Another significant one is I wandered away and got lost in London, and some cops noticed me and picked me up and took me to the station.

My parents filled in some details, some of which I did not remember.

And yeah, I remember the emotions I felt.


I don't doubt that you have memories from when you were 4, I have memories from that time too. And I'm sure you felt the shame you described. But I know that it's impossible for a 4-year-old to accurately decipher why they feel shame when they do!

You disagreed with sevenzero when they claimed that concepts like violence and right and wrong are actively taught by parents instead of being innate to children. Assuming you read all three lines of sevenzero's comment before disagreeing: the perspective of your 4-year-old self is not a reliable source, because 4-year-old children cannot accurately differentiate between innate or taught feelings.


I would certainly agree that one gets taught more refined and nuanced notions of right and wrong, but those are innate feelings. At least for me.

I recall seeing a TV show where they studied very young people by putting them in right and wrong situations, and they definitely knew what was right and wrong.


> I would certainly agree that one gets taught more refined and nuanced notions of right and wrong, but those are innate feelings. At least for me.

How could a person who was taught social concepts of right and wrong since birth ever hope to reliably determine which parts of said concepts in their own mind are innate, and which aren't? Human minds are infamous for being terrible at introspecting their own mechanisms at the best of times.

> I recall seeing a TV show where they studied very young people by putting them in right and wrong situations, and they definitely knew what was right and wrong.

Unless said very young people were raised by wolves, chances are that they've been taught these concepts since birth as well. You can't determine the innateness by only looking at people who share this bias.


Some animals are social in behavior, others are not. Humans are social animals. Why would one believe that social behavior is learned, not inherited?

Selective breeding of foxes has turned them into social animals.


Because we have proof that humans who aren't taught a subset of social behaviors never show any of them. It doesn't matter what we've bred foxes to do - "sense of right and wrong" is not the same as "social behavior", and innate traits in one species can be non-innate in another. You cannot analyze a cantaloupe to determine the taste of bananas, no matter how hard you try.

It is important to understand our own human limits. We cannot reason our way through our own minds, we can only accept our biases and try to work around them. But the first step is being humble enough to accept that human intuition is no substitute for actual research.


I can't say whether it was or wasn't true for you. But I can say your certainty is misplaced.

Most of your memories and everything you think of now about early childhood were formed long after it. They were created from bits and pieces of real memories, stories, backsplanations for things that happened later, retrospective, etc. Even if you had now an accurate debug dump of your child brain, you'd still not be able to process that the way you processed it back then.

Your kid brain was a black box, a CPU with a different architecture running code that you've never before or since. You later tried to recreate that code for the CPU you have now, based on input from others who've also never seen that original code or have access to that type of CPU. And you are certain you recreated it accurately?


> And you are certain you recreated it accurately?

Yes.


> ... because they know it is wrong

No. They hide the things they do wrong because they learnt there are consequences and they dont want to get caught.


Not my experience.

I accidentally killed a baby bird when I was little. It still hurts when I think about it.

Some kids are indeed savages. But not all of us.


No, not all kids are a little sociopaths. They in fact hide things they have no experience of being reprimanded or punished for, because they feel bad about them. Kids do care about other kids, animals or adults in their lives. They do feel empathy - underdeveloped and sometimes weird, but they display it very clearly.

And they do care about right and wrong.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: