Whenever I tried the same with Google in the past, more often than not I couldn't find what I was looking for, because I didn't know the correct keywords to search for in order to start getting relevant results. With ChatGPT & co. I can just pose the question in natural language, get results and continue exploring.

The immediate and obvious response would be for the foreign branches of those companies to be declared "of national interest", nationalized and forced to keep operating.

Exactly. If there's an issue, I'd much rather delegate control to the pilots or train drivers who have been trained to deal with such issues.

I feel WAY more safe knowing that the vehicle is operated by trained professionals and there's an extremely robust system around them to ensure safety, rather than whatever semblance of control I think I have driving my car.

- The American political system has been very successful in telling its people that the only acceptable way to show discontent and enact change is by voting on elections.

- Lots of people are okay with it because it can only happen to the "bad guys", and why would it ever happen to them since they're the "good guys"... right?

"it still requires genuine expertise to spot the hallucinations"

"works very well if you do know what you are doing"

I asked ChatGPT for help with Wordle the other day, by asking for a 5-letter word that contained P, M, K and Y. It said:

> Yes, the word skimp contains the letters P, M, K, and Y

Would you say that wrong is not a concept that applies to this answer?

People finding out that voting against free movement means movement will no longer be free remains my favorite Brexit trope.

> This is also not the NTSB or FAA doing direct investigation . Without certainty no one is issuing a directive, at this stage it is simply too early and only a possibility

You are mistaken. The first MAX crash resulted in emergency directives being issued barely a week after the crash. That investigation was conducted by the Indonesian authorities, not US ones.

Emergency directives aren't issued when there's complete certainty, quite the opposite. Hence the "emergency" bit.

> I wouldn’t read so much intent during high stress part of takeoff from two non native speakers

I agree there's some fuzziness since the exact transcription wasn't provided. But "why did you cut out the engines" is by no means a normal question when facing sudden thrust loss.

- The specific mention of "cut off" in the CVR is very telling. If both pilots were genuinely surprised, you'd expect they'd say something like "engine failure" or "loss of thrust" first. Noone thinks the engines have been shut down as a knee-jerk reaction to a sudden loss of thrust.

- If investigators had the slightest indication there's a software or hardware bug out there that randomly causes dual engine failures, an emergency airworthiness directive would have been issued by now. This hasn't happened.

If they had a credible indication of a technical failure that causes engines to randomly shut down, they would have already grounded 787 fleets, which hasn't happened.

Muscle memory allows you to perform both actions effectively but doesn't make you confuse them. Especially when the corresponding sequence of callouts and actions is practiced and repeated over and over.

All of us have muscle memory for activating the left blinker in our car and pulling the handbrake, but has anyone pulled the handbrake when they wanted to signal left?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44488956

Points: 8

# Comments: 0