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

This approach has yielded us Icelandair's with fewer idiots therefore no baseless claims for lawsuit.

You see.. they fall into these boiling pools of mud. Problem solved.


We don’t need it. We all saw how this ended in Japan, Fukushima and how they haven’t even figured basic stuff out.

See recent article on BBC here: https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-asia-54566978


Please, tell us what happened in Fukushima with comparisons to other forms of energy production. Include dollar costs, life costs of humans, animals, and plants, costs in terms of physical footprint, noise, net carbon output, and any other relevant factors you can think of.

No form of energy comes without trade-offs and dangers.


It’s quite simple, most other ways of energy creation does not yield hazardous waste. I’m referring to motion and geothermal.

You tell me how wind energy danger is compared to nuclear?

How is nuclear energy a sustainable energy source in unstable world?


Also should we just rely on nuclear because it’s accessible technology to us right now? We need new forms of energy creation, accepting nuclear energy as our defacto power source will be equivalent to our ancestors choosing coal when looking back at history. Don’t be naive.

You do also know that older nuclear power plants are a major headache to most governments


Does a plane accident imply we haven't figured out flight yet?

Because there's hundreds of nuclear power plants that have been working without major issues for decades now. And that's not including subs/ships.


> Does a plane accident imply we haven't figured out flight yet?

The 737MAX implies that we can't be trusted with following sound technical processes to ensure safety of complicated machinery where there's a financial incentive to cut corners.


Shifting the goalposts, but still a magnificent example: does the 737MAX invalidate all other dozens of airplane models with billions of passenger/mile without issues?


The 737 Max implies that third world pilot training programs should come under deeper scrutiny. It wasn’t a coincidence that both crashes had “pilot mill” pilots. The FO on Ethiopian had less hours than required to get a commercial certificate in the US, let alone an ATP rating required by US law to fly airliners. And Lion Air was a maintenance joke with a long history of 737 accidents and incidents.


The incidents were unrelated to maintenance. They were only related to training in the sense that the airlines in question didn't have access to the training that would have informed pilots of the serious design flaws inherent in this aircraft.


The Indonesian accident was definitely related to maintenance - the AoA snsors are external, and at least one AoA sensor had been damaged.

The Indonesian NTSB found the pilots, mechanics and Boeing equally responsible.


New revealings in the report include the discovery of the reason the AOA sensor was feeding faulty information to the flight control computer was that it was most likely improperly repaired by a U.S.-based maintenance repair facility. [0]

So, the seemingly racist thread hypothesis of "Indonesians are too stupid to operate modern aircraft" still doesn't hold.

[0] https://www.aviationtoday.com/2019/10/28/lion-air-737-max-fi...


This is not equivalent in terms of risk assessment. One broken product does not endanger environmental ecosystems or countries at the same scale as nuclear.

Bear in mind that this was a pretty routine earthquake that is still causing issues almost a decade later.


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

Search: