* Posts by sosipiuk

4 publicly visible posts • joined 3 May 2019

WTF is Boeing on? Not just customer databases lying around on the web. 787 jetliner code, too, security bugs and all

sosipiuk

If Boeing is so confident...

Wouldn't it be best to let IOActive onboard a 787 and tell them, "Have at it!"? If the plane is truly unhackable, as Boeing claims, then IOActive will not be able to do any harm, and Boeing will then be able to loudly and publicly proclaim that their own internal experts and an unpaid but motivated group of third-party pen testers were unable to find any exploits. Might even bump up Boeing's reputation, not to mention share price. Seems like a win-win to me.

They're not willing to do that? I wonder why.

Another rewrite for 737 Max software as cosmic bit-flipping tests glitch out systems – report

sosipiuk

There is a narrative that it is 100% Boeing's fault and the poor pilots who fought valiantly and heroically could have done nothing at all to save the plane. Reality is more complicated, but people don't seem to like that and the votes here reflect that.

The pilots of Ethiopian 302 did not follow the checklist fully. Read the preliminary report. Here is the checklist (from Air Canada, but Ethiopian should have had a comparable one): https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1080x1177/thumbnail_03dc14b910e0b79951314db9c04969b942057c2b.jpg

They retracted the flaps. Any pilot who had actually read the information available about MCAS at the time should have known not to do this. MCAS is disarmed with flaps deployed.

They allowed their speed to get dangerously high. There are human factors issues for why they did, but it was still a mistake.

The trim system is designed in such a way that pilots can always override MCAS motion with the thumb switch. No, they do not need to wait until MCAS fully screws them over for 10 seconds; I say again they can interrupt it. And MCAS will not interrupt them as they wind the trim back - although it will take them longer as (perversely) they can only command a slower rate of change than the computer. Unless there is a yet-unrevealed further trim control problem (which would be the biggest bombshell yet) the pilots still had enough control to counter MCAS.

Of course Boeing is at fault. But that doesn't leave the pilots saintly and blameless. What they were faced with, is a high-stakes game of Bop It. They should not have been made to play it, and Boeing must accept the blame for that, but it was not an unwinnable game.

The designers and engineers in comfortable offices had years to get it right. The pilots had a few minutes amid a cacophony of alarms and the threat of death. The pilots did not deserve to be in that situation. But they still had a chance and did not grasp it. That is the unfortunate story here. It should not be taboo to say this.

Zorin OS 15 nods at Ubuntu and welcomes Windows escapees

sosipiuk
Unhappy

Re: The 39 Steps

tied in knots by cups

Out of curiosity, how is CUPS these days? I remember trying to set it up some 10 years ago or so and it still ranks as the most rage-inducing, user-hostile experience I've ever... well, experienced.

I blocked most of it from my memory (happens with seriously traumatic experiences, I'm told) but it had some kind of admin account that was totally different from the system accounts that I didn't know the password to, and I needed to configure it by pointing a browser atmy own machine (?!?!) because it ran its own pseudo-webserver (?!?!?how is any of this needed for bloody printing?!?!?) and something about queues (?!?!?).

It was a wired network printer. I had its static IP and its model, that's all that should be necessary for me to input. I couldn't even get that far. I never did get it to work, and I went back to Windows where it still works fine.

The whole experience spooked me so badly that, although I do run Linux on my laptop, I haven't even tried to set up printing on it.

A real head-scratcher: Tech support called in because emails 'aren't showing timestamps'

sosipiuk

Top-posting makes sense unless you're reading your emails weirdly

No. Top-posters reasonably expect you'll have already read the previous emails, and will want new content displayed immediately, at the top, without needing to scroll to find it.

The quoted material below that is a backup in case the email gets read outside that normal context, e.g. by a new person joining the chain, or from an archive much later.

Top-posting increases reading convenience in the most-common, intended use-case while decreasing it for the unusual, edge use-cases. That makes it the reasonable choice.

Sincerely,

A top-poster who doesn't want to scroll past shit I've already read ten minutes ago to find new content.