Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
15 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

What's it take to be an ATC? Can I get my shifty, no good, bum of a nephew a job? Just needs to show up and pee in a cup and look at radars? He plays a lot of video games and can maybe repurpose his screen time to look at blips and boops on radar screen? I think he finally got his bachelors...

Planes are really big and when you sit in them it barely feels like you’re moving, they aren’t going that fast. They have the whole sky up there too. It’s super easy not to crash, you just watch them on the screen and remind them to be careful lol. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 2
Posted
Just now, 956 Worldwide said:

Planes are really big and when you sit in them it barely feels like you’re moving, they aren’t going that fast. They have the whole sky up there too. It’s super easy not to crash, you just watch them on the screen and remind them to be careful lol. 

and don't forget planes basically fly themselves these days and they're programmed to not run into each other so ATC's are kinda redundant anyway. thank goodness our current regime has both saved us money and made us safer. praise be

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

and don't forget planes basically fly themselves these days and they're programmed to not run into each other so ATC's are kinda redundant anyway. thank goodness our current regime has both saved us money and made us safer. praise be


And the safety will be even better with AI. 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

and don't forget planes basically fly themselves these days and they're programmed to not run into each other so ATC's are kinda redundant anyway. thank goodness our current regime has both saved us money and made us safer. praise be

You can just ChatGPT the instructions for what order they should land or takeoff or whatever. 

  • Haha 2
Posted
22 minutes ago, kevwun said:

It's supposed to be one of the most stressful jobs there is.  I've only ever interacted with one ATC and it was in Vegas.  He was off duty and gambling at the casino we were staying in.  He was so insane that it made me nervous about flying home.

WE'RE LANDING THIS BITCH, BABY!!!

 

p19055_i_h9_aa.jpg

  • Haha 3
Posted
26 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

What's it take to be an ATC? Can I get my shifty, no good, bum of a nephew a job? Just needs to show up and pee in a cup and look at radars? He plays a lot of video games and can maybe repurpose his screen time to look at blips and boops on radar screen? I think he finally got his bachelors...

I was Navy ATC. No thanks

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
I think just normal Canadian nonsense. They have issues all the time. 
 

NAVCANADA is the poster child for not privatizing your country's ATC. Incompetent buffoons, but at least polite.
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted
Yea the old “I have nothing to offer but I want everything you have!” negotiation tactic is a classic.

The other issue is that if the ACA subsidies are taken up and even passed as a “clean” standalone measure, DOTARD can just veto it or threaten to veto it, which Johnson/Thune will use as cover.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
5 hours ago, Zepol87 said:

I was Navy ATC. No thanks

Brother was Army ATC, then civilian after he got out. Saint Ronnie fired him and the world eventually ended up with yet another attorney then judge. 

Thanks a lot for that, Ronnie - yet another reason you sucked.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
10 hours ago, Firemans4Horn said:

Making America Great Again: the no statistics edition!

 

 

Puts everyone out of a job...

...but job reports can never be released.

The One Where Estelle Dies Episode 15 GIF by Friends

Touche, Mr. President.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Trying to fly back to SJC from BUR, and my flight is delayed 2 hours but only because of fog.

TSA pre-check took 43 seconds.

I guess that’s a win for the radical republicans.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
19 hours ago, Skipper said:

I'm not remotely paying attention to politics at the moment but do have business travel to east coast each of the next 2 weeks.    I know this is asking way too much for this board but is there a non-partisan breakdown (or linked article) of what exactly the biggest issues are and any best guesses as to how this gets resolved?    I can't fathom either party wants this fucking over Thanksgiving travel

lol what an idiot!

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
  • Fuck You 1
Posted (edited)

Agentic AI ATC controllers have to be spooling up as we speak, no?  Plug them in to the radar and away we go. Never need breaks or vacations, can monitor and communicate with all traffic simultaneously, don’t kill themselves from stress, don’t strike (yet), and are cheaper in the long term than a room full of chain smoking malcontents.  
 

enjoy your flights. 
 

actually you know what, might as well give them control of the traffic like a harbor pilot. Then they don’t have to worry about pilots fucking up.  Planes are fly by wire so remote control should be as simple as a network connection. 
 

goodbye near misses!

thank you for flying the friendly skies. 
 

and between takeoff and landing, planes should have a FSD so we can go ahead and 86 that pesky pilots union. 

Edited by Pato del Muerto
Posted
18 hours ago, SubliminalHorn said:

$140/month OOP is a lot of money to a lot of people 

Yep. When i was a poor I had insurance but I couldn't afford to see a specialist when I needed to. I'd be dead if I was still in that situation now.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Pancho said:

Trying to fly back to SJC from SNA, and my flight is delayed 2 hours but only because of fog.

TSA pre-check took 43 seconds.

I guess that’s a win for the radical republicans.

 

Me to myself 17 minutes after making this post:

 

 

Season 8 Tns GIF by THE NEXT STEP

 

 

Flight cancelled, auto rebooked. This is why I stopped flying Soufwest

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Agentic AI ATC controllers have to be spooling up as we speak, no?  Plug them in to the radar and away we go. Never need breaks or vacations, can monitor and communicate with all traffic simultaneously, don’t kill themselves from stress, don’t strike (yet), and are cheaper in the long term than a room full of chain smoking malcontents.  
 

enjoy your flights. 
 

actually you know what, might as well give them control of the traffic like a harbor pilot. Then they don’t have to worry about pilots fucking up.  Planes are fly by wire so remote control should be as simple as a network connection. 
 

goodbye near misses!

thank you for flying the friendly skies. 
 

and between takeoff and landing, planes should have a FSD so we can go ahead and 86 that pesky pilots union. 

There's a good faith argument to be made over using ML-driven systems to automate ATC for "normal" traffic, allowing a smaller group of human controllers to handle emergent scenarios that go outside the "normal" parameters. 

The real reason for having humans in the loop is to handle the scenarios that you don't already have data for, and that require snap judgements. Like when equipment fails at an inopportune moment, or there's some uncontrolled external factor

Posted
1 minute ago, Captainant said:

There's a good faith argument to be made over using ML-driven systems to automate ATC for "normal" traffic, allowing a smaller group of human controllers to handle emergent scenarios that go outside the "normal" parameters. 

The real reason for having humans in the loop is to handle the scenarios that you don't already have data for, and that require snap judgements. Like when equipment fails at an inopportune moment, or there's some uncontrolled external factor

Agreed but that's like years of training before deployment. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
4 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

Me to myself 17 minutes after making this post:

 

 

Season 8 Tns GIF by THE NEXT STEP

 

 

Flight cancelled, auto rebooked. This is why I stopped lying Soufwest

IMG_5431.thumb.webp.92c95c609299ab31ac0eac5defa05c43.webp

  • Haha 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

Me to myself 17 minutes after making this post:

 

 

Season 8 Tns GIF by THE NEXT STEP

 

 

Flight cancelled, auto rebooked. This is why I stopped lying Soufwest

fucked up GIF

  • Haha 3
Posted

It's going to be a shitshow and Americans are going to be out of a lot of money. Airlines look to be play

You think hotels, rental car companies, airport parking, lost time at work, etc. are going to re-imburse folks when they don't make it to and from their destinations as planned?

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
48 minutes ago, MissingInAction said:

Yep. When i was a poor I had insurance but I couldn't afford to see a specialist when I needed to. I'd be dead if I was still in that situation now.

If it weren't for my preventative care/biometric monitoring, yeah, I'd be screwed now too.  Luckily that shit caught my cancer early.  Anyone who doesn't have access to those things is likely hosed.

Posted
1 hour ago, Pancho said:

 

Me to myself 17 minutes after making this post:

Season 8 Tns GIF by THE NEXT STEP

Flight cancelled, auto rebooked. This is why I stopped flying Soufwest

if you're at bur, guy's highball lounge has a great bourbon selection.

Posted
20 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Planes are really big and when you sit in them it barely feels like you’re moving, they aren’t going that fast. They have the whole sky up there too. It’s super easy not to crash, you just watch them on the screen and remind them to be careful lol. 

 

Posted
30 minutes ago, Firemans4Horn said:

Making America Great Again: Social Security Administration workers starve to death edition

 

 

 

The other fun thing is that anyone dealing with elder care issues is basically fucked. My mom is in memory care and we are trying to get the everything set up for when she runs out of savings..  That means working with the SSA and Medicare, but everything is on hold, except the hemorrhaging of the retirement funds.  I've got a few months before shit gets critical, but it has to be hitting some folks at exactly the wrong time.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 5
Posted (edited)
Quote

Before 1980, shutdowns didn’t happen. When funding gaps occurred, federal agencies kept operating. The understanding was straightforward: Congress would eventually pass the funding, everyone would get paid, and life would go on. Budget negotiations did not routinely devolve into national crises.

Then came the memo. In 1980, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel issued a new interpretation of the Antideficiency Act. Beginning with Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti, the OLC concluded that this old statute required most government operations to cease the moment appropriations lapsed. OLC lawyers offered their opinion on how things should work and everyone just sort of went along with it.

 

 

 

Edited by Chopper
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, mchookem said:

Exactly.

There can be no deal that requires trust.  Period.  It just can't happen.  

That's what happens when your counterpart is a fucking consistent liar who doesn't stick to what he promises.  In cases like this, "negotiations" require hostages to ensure compliance.  I'm dead serious.  Look into the differences between high trust and low trust societies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-trust_and_low-trust_societies

Remember reading how deals between barons, kings and such during feudal times often included the opposing party having your son stay in his castle as a "guest?"  He was a hostage.  The understood situation was that if you backed out on your deal to stay on your side of the river or whatnot, I'd kill your son.

That's where we are.  Oh, and low trust societies are really shitty, not prosperous, etc.  They're just mafia fiefdoms and shit, good only for a select few at the very top.  Sound familiar?

Zero trust of Donald Trump.  LESS than zero.  Knowing that, act accordingly.  No deals unless he gives you a hostage.  In terms of legislation, that means that all bills need to be bundled together.  Any term I want has to be an element of the bill containing the terms YOU want.  Full stop.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Exactly.

There can be no deal that requires trust.  Period.  It just can't happen.  

That's what happens when your counterpart is a fucking consistent liar who doesn't stick to what he promises.  In cases like this, "negotiations" require hostages to ensure compliance.  I'm dead serious.  Look into the differences between high trust and low trust societies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-trust_and_low-trust_societies

Remember reading how deals between barons, kings and such during feudal times often included the opposing party having your son stay in his castle as a "guest?"  He was a hostage.  The understood situation was that if you backed out on your deal to stay on your side of the river or whatnot, I'd kill your son.

That's where we are.  Oh, and low trust societies are really shitty, not prosperous, etc.  They're just mafia fiefdoms and shit, good only for a select few at the very top.  Sound familiar?

Zero trust of Donald Trump.  LESS than zero.  Knowing that, act accordingly.  No deals unless he gives you a hostage.  In terms of legislation, that means that all bills need to be bundled together.  Any term I want has to be an element of the bill containing the terms YOU want.  Full stop.

Yep.  It's like the Bocchicchio Clan "negotiator" from the Godfather, who was playing cards with Clemenza's men (and was being allowed to win) while Michael met with Solozo and the police captain.  

 

Spoilered so as not to threadjack too much.

The Buchochios were known as an extremely violent family who took vendetas to the extreme. They made their money selling a hostage service to guarantee the safety of parties to meetings between different mafia families. The way it worked as I understand:

Solozzo would've paid the Buchuchio clan to provide a member of their own family as a hostage (who they called the negotiator) who would stay with the Corleones until Michael safely returned from the meeting with Solozzo. This would give the Corleones assurance that Michael wouldn't be harmed. If anything were to happen to Michael, the Corleones would kill the hostage. Then, the Buchuchio clan would have a vendetta against Solozzo to avenge their dead family member, since they would hold Solozzo responsible.

If the Corleones killed the hostage even though Michael was unharmed, they would've gained the Buchuchio vendetta, so it would've been a dumb move for them to harm the hostage. So the only assumption to make would be they released the hostage safely back to the Buchuchios.

 

https://godfather.fandom.com/wiki/Bocchicchio_clan

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

I just saw an article saying senate D are demanding one year of guaranteed health insurance subsidies… surely that’s not all?!

Posted
Just now, dcbc said:

Yep.  It's like the Bocchicchio Clan "negotiator" from the Godfather, who was playing cards with Clemenza's men (and was being allowed to win) while Michael met with Solozo and the police captain.  

 

Spoilered so as not to threadjack too much.

 

  Hide contents

The Buchochios were known as an extremely violent family who took vendetas to the extreme. They made their money selling a hostage service to guarantee the safety of parties to meetings between different mafia families. The way it worked as I understand:

Solozzo would've paid the Buchuchio clan to provide a member of their own family as a hostage (who they called the negotiator) who would stay with the Corleones until Michael safely returned from the meeting with Solozzo. This would give the Corleones assurance that Michael wouldn't be harmed. If anything were to happen to Michael, the Corleones would kill the hostage. Then, the Buchuchio clan would have a vendetta against Solozzo to avenge their dead family member, since they would hold Solozzo responsible.

If the Corleones killed the hostage even though Michael was unharmed, they would've gained the Buchuchio vendetta, so it would've been a dumb move for them to harm the hostage. So the only assumption to make would be they released the hostage safely back to the Buchuchios.

 

https://godfather.fandom.com/wiki/Bocchicchio_clan

 

Bottom line, it's how deals get done when the Rule of Law dies.  Because the dirty secret is that the Rule of Law isn't the power to force courts to make people do what they promised.  Having the Rule of Law and the courts there to enforce it is a REMINDER that we keep our word and follow through on our deals.

The guy you signed a contract with to deliver your new Buick doesn't deliver the car because he's afraid of getting sued.  He delivers it because....that's just what you do when you make a deal to deliver a car.

Imagine a world where what deters people from killing someone is NOT the underlying ethic of "murder is wrong," but rather strictly the threat of suffering a reprisal killing from his family if you kill him.  Well, you don't need to imagine much longer.  That's where we're going.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, bluto said:

I just saw an article saying senate D are demanding one year of guaranteed health insurance subsidies… surely that’s not all?!

Get a year for the subsidies, hope to flip the House (and maybe Senate) in '26 mid-terms and then you can run out the clock on Trump 2.0.

(Yes, I know. There's going to be so much fucky-fucky with the '26 midterms. MAGA gonna cheat like motherfuckers -- if we have them at all. If we don't flip the House at least in '26, the country's gone and it won't fucking matter about the subsidies anyways after next year.)

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Get a year for the subsidies, hope to flip the House (and maybe Senate) in '26 mid-terms and then you can run out the clock on Trump 2.0.

(Yes, I know. There's going to be so much fucky-fucky with the '26 midterms. MAGA gonna cheat like motherfuckers -- if we have them at all. If we don't flip the House at least in '26, the country's gone and it won't fucking matter about the subsidies anyways after next year.)

Removing the subsidies is already law.  Having a majority in Congress wouldn't be enough to override a veto.  (But it would be enough to force the vote and the veto.) 

  • Hook 'Em 1


×
×
  • Create New...