Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)

Started by kishnevi, November 09, 2016, 06:04:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

drogulus

     

     In the U.S. an economic agenda that the majority of people support will be called leftist or progressive. A well known political party that opposes what people want appeals to them on the basis of race, religion, abortion and sexual orientation views. Repubs have an unpopular economic agenda for their donors, and a regionally popular social agenda for their voters. For everything else the epithets are used.

     Calling ideas associated with self described progressives paleo-conservative or libertarian should call attention to how little the epithets have to do with fixed positions. How progressive are the 8 hour day, child labor laws, Social Security, bank regulation, food and drug safety regs, government investments in just about everything the economy is built on? Does being labeled progressive tell you anything about whether we should "repeal and replace" these programs?

     By some measures I'm a progressive and others I'm not. So what? I'm aware that people will ascribe degrees of progressiveness to new program proposals and make bold claims about the super importance of the epithets. I insist that conversations about who's a socialist or a progressive are not conversations about the merits of the programs themselves.

     If I oppose programs conservatives offer it will have more to do with what's in the programs than what's in the label. While I recognize the labels do have meaning in the political realm and use them myself I try to keep distinct the use of the labels for political groupings and the misuse of them as substitutes for critical analysis of programs.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

JBS

Quote from: 71 dB on March 14, 2019, 02:15:45 AM
Did you even watch that video? Kulinski criticized AOC for not supporting Ilhan Omar enough/the right way and he is himself the guy who wrote the political agenda behind AOC, he is the co founder of Justice Democrats. Kulinski criticized even Bernie Sanders sometimes! So please stop with the "as biased" as any Fox News host.

That's just it.  Kulinski is a leftist, and is advocating leftism. You agree with his positions, so you treat his advocacy as fact, when it is merely opinion.

That you don't recognize this shows how little you know about American politics.

Hollywood Beach Broadwalk

JBS

Quote from: drogulus on March 14, 2019, 06:01:18 AM
     
A well known political party that opposes what people want appeals to them on the basis of race, religion, abortion and sexual orientation views.

Which describes the Democrats just as much as the Republicans.

Hollywood Beach Broadwalk

drogulus

Quote from: JBS on March 14, 2019, 06:15:51 AM
Which describes the Democrats just as much as the Republicans.

    That would have to be the case, yes, Dems are mostly on the other side of the social issues. The nature of Dem inclusiveness is an unavoidable fact about their coalition that is getting more representation in the political leadership. Repub exclusion is mirrored by Dem inclusion. The parties define themselves that way.

   
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

André

Quote from: BasilValentine on March 14, 2019, 05:45:48 AM
No. He's a traitor, a career criminal, and the son of a career criminal. He's skated his whole life. Real justice would be dividing up the proceeds of his and his family's crimes to pay back those he has spent his life ripping off. Then a month or two in a pillory on Times Square to be spat upon by immigrants from every nation on earth and shat upon by pigeons. Then the rest of his life in a cell.

Isn't the pigeon thing a cruel and unusual punishment ?

SimonNZ

Quote from: 71 dB on March 14, 2019, 02:22:41 AM
I have to say I semi-agree with Trump with this. He just expresses it in a weird way. The training of pilots doesn't keep up with sophistication of planes and we encounter situations where the plane and the pilot work against each other because the pilot doesn't understand completely what is happening.


What are you basing this opinion on?

SimonNZ

Is aviation included in Trump's calls for deregulation?

drogulus


     
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 14, 2019, 08:34:57 AM
What are you basing this opinion on?

     That's what some pilots say. There is a feature that allows pilots to disable the system that forces the nose down and crashes the plane, but the instruction manual doesn't make it clear how to use it. 71dB is correct that the training is inadequate, though there may be other things wrong too.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Ghost of Baron Scarpia

#15588
Quote from: 71 dB on March 14, 2019, 02:22:41 AM
I have to say I semi-agree with Trump with this. He just expresses it in a weird way. The training of pilots doesn't keep up with sophistication of planes and we encounter situations where the plane and the pilot work against each other because the pilot doesn't understand completely what is happening.

Sometimes older simpler solutions are better. Not perhaps in planes, but in some stuff.

Given the choice I also find myself preferring a simple solution. I find myself astonished that people want to outfit their homes so that they turn on the lights by issuing commands to their 'digital assistant' rather than flipping a switch. I'm especially irked by computer interfaces that guess what I want to do and make it harder for me to override them to do what I actually want to do.

But that has nothing to do with this latest drivel from Trump. I didn't strike me as reflecting any wisdom. It was the opining of a grouchy old man who has no actual knowledge of the subject. It is the sort of thing that should be muttered while waiting on line at MacDonalds, not a statement to the public by the President. A President is supposed to solicit the advice of people with expertise then make a decision based on that knowledge, his core values and the interests of the public. He is not supposed to make decisions based on his vague, uninformed notions and a desire to pander to his "base."

It is entirely appropriate for aircraft to become more automated. Pilot error used to be a common cause of crashes, and automation has made aviation much, much safer than it used to be. This is a case where Boeing screwed up badly and they were more concerned with the legal and financial implications of admitting the problem than the possibility that more people would be killed. And Trump let his pal at Boeing drive his decision, until the public outcry became intolerable.

The value of the system in question is controvertible. The most common form of pilot error is pulling the nose too high, disrupting airflow over the wings and killing lift. Then the plane drops like a stone. Systems to detect and prevent this error make perfect sense. A few years ago an Air France plane crashed into the Atlantic when the plane hit turbulent air and an airspeed indicator malfunctioned. The pilot's instinct was to gain altitude by pulling up the nose but they stalled the plane. They were still trying to pull up the nose when the plane hit the water. This system would have prevented that.

The insidious thing is that once a plane has stalled it is very hard to recover, so aggressive action is warranted to prevent a stall. The way to escape from a stall is to nose the plane down, restore airflow over the wings, then pull up. Maybe that's what the software was trying to do, even though the plain hadn't stalled. Unless you are at high altitude to begin with, you might have already hit the ground before you've completed that maneuver.

The problem seems to be that the system does not detect and appropriately react to faulty instrument readings, it engages itself even when the pilot thinks he or she is in control of the plane and can only be disabled by an arcane procedure that pilots are not adequately trained on.

This is the sort of thing we can look forward to when cars are self-driving. Accidents will be much less frequent, but every once in a while there will be a failure and a dramatic crash in a situation where a driver would have had no difficulty. People will notice the dramatic failures and not notice that crashes have become much more rare.

71 dB

Quote from: JBS on March 14, 2019, 06:13:08 AM
That's just it.  Kulinski is a leftist, and is advocating leftism. You agree with his positions, so you treat his advocacy as fact, when it is merely opinion.

That you don't recognize this shows how little you know about American politics.

Kulinski is a leftist looked through the Overton window positioned far right. If the Overton window was where it should be, Kulinski would look pretty centrist. Kyle Kulinski is a prime example of someone who bases his opinions on facts and he can defend his positions very well. In Politicon 2018 Scottie Nell Hughes was the only one brave enough to debate Kyle Kulinski:

https://www.youtube.com/v/_0H-8b_aSco

The video is 55 minutes so I don't expect you to suffer that much, but if you are curious...

He advocates leftism because what he represent is labeled leftist in the US. He advocated it to make the US better. To remove money on politics to restore democracy instead of current oligarchy. To give people healthcare like every other developped country. To give all Americans equal opportunities (not equal outcomes) with tuition free education. To legalize, tax and regulate drugs to minimize drug related problems in society, to end unnecessory wars and directing half of the military budget on the infrastructure in the US and so on. To make life better for most Americans. You maybe think it's a bad thing to advocate something that benefits most Americans. I don't. I think that's what any sane and democratic society should be doing.

Maybe before Trump won and I didn't pay that much attention to American politics I was as clueless as you think I am today, but it seems it's you who hasn't been paying attention.
Spatial distortion is a serious problem deteriorating headphone listening.
Crossfeeders reduce spatial distortion and make the sound more natural
and less tiresome in headphone listening.

My Sound Cloud page <-- NEW Jan. 2024 "Harpeggiator"

71 dB

Quote from: BasilValentine on March 14, 2019, 05:45:48 AM
No. He's a traitor, a career criminal, and the son of a career criminal. He's skated his whole life. Real justice would be dividing up the proceeds of his and his family's crimes to pay back those he has spent his life ripping off. Then a month or two in a pillory on Times Square to be spat upon by immigrants from every nation on earth and shat upon by pigeons. Then the rest of his life in a cell.

I know I know. I hope you understand what I mean.
Spatial distortion is a serious problem deteriorating headphone listening.
Crossfeeders reduce spatial distortion and make the sound more natural
and less tiresome in headphone listening.

My Sound Cloud page <-- NEW Jan. 2024 "Harpeggiator"

71 dB

Quote from: André on March 14, 2019, 08:30:46 AM
Isn't the pigeon thing a cruel and unusual punishment ?

Well, Trumps wants waterboarding and "much worse" while spitting on the constitution and it's amendments so pigeons would be only poetic justice.
Spatial distortion is a serious problem deteriorating headphone listening.
Crossfeeders reduce spatial distortion and make the sound more natural
and less tiresome in headphone listening.

My Sound Cloud page <-- NEW Jan. 2024 "Harpeggiator"

71 dB

Quote from: SimonNZ on March 14, 2019, 08:34:57 AM
What are you basing this opinion on?

At this point on hunch. A Finnish aviation expert commented these accidents saying this. Maybe he is right, maybe he is not.
Spatial distortion is a serious problem deteriorating headphone listening.
Crossfeeders reduce spatial distortion and make the sound more natural
and less tiresome in headphone listening.

My Sound Cloud page <-- NEW Jan. 2024 "Harpeggiator"

71 dB

Quote from: SimonNZ on March 14, 2019, 09:30:05 AM
Is aviation included in Trump's calls for deregulation?

Don't know, but all pilots named Einstein will be FIRED!!  >:D
Spatial distortion is a serious problem deteriorating headphone listening.
Crossfeeders reduce spatial distortion and make the sound more natural
and less tiresome in headphone listening.

My Sound Cloud page <-- NEW Jan. 2024 "Harpeggiator"

71 dB

Quote from: drogulus on March 14, 2019, 09:47:54 AM
     
     That's what some pilots say. There is a feature that allows pilots to disable the system that forces the nose down and crashes the plane, but the instruction manual doesn't make it clear how to use it. 71dB is correct that the training is inadequate, though there may be other things wrong too.

Yes. I think the Finnish aviation expert mentioned a dirty speedometer can cause problems like this.
Spatial distortion is a serious problem deteriorating headphone listening.
Crossfeeders reduce spatial distortion and make the sound more natural
and less tiresome in headphone listening.

My Sound Cloud page <-- NEW Jan. 2024 "Harpeggiator"

Ghost of Baron Scarpia

#15595
Quote from: 71 dB on March 14, 2019, 11:19:48 AM
Yes. I think the Finnish aviation expert mentioned a dirty speedometer can cause problems like this.

Quite so, a bad airspeed indicator caused the crisis that brought down the Air France plane. It iced over and the auto-pilot switched off, and the pilots panicked. But it was the angle-of-attack sensor failure that caused the previous 737 Max failure.

In any case, automatic controls have reduced the accident rate by a factor of 10. The problem now is to give pilots enough to do that they remember how to fly if there is an emergency. Maybe the auto-pilot should be programmed to switch off at random times and say "Ok, your turn" just to keep pilots awake.

BasilValentine

#15596
Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on March 14, 2019, 09:51:27 AM

The value of the system in question is controvertible. The most common form of pilot error is pulling the nose too high, disrupting airflow over the wings and killing lift. Then the plane drops like a stone. Systems to detect and prevent this error make perfect sense. A few years ago an Air France plane crashed into the Atlantic when the plane hit turbulent air and an airspeed indicator malfunctioned. The pilot's instinct was to gain altitude by pulling up the nose but they stalled the plane. They were still trying to pull up the nose when the plane hit the water. This system would have prevented that.


The analysis I heard (on NPR) was that the software fix was intended to counter the effects of a modification the original 737 design should not have been forced to bear: For the Max 8 Boeing added new heavier engines and pylons (there was some repositioning too) to the basic airframe, which caused a shift in the center of gravity and a tendency for the plane to go nose up. The software fix was an ad hoc solution to a problem that should never have existed. According to the expert I heard, the right approach would have been to redesign the whole plane to solve the problem structurally, but Boeing wanted a cheaper and faster to market solution. Saved them from having to engineer and retest a new design and to make expensive modifications to the production process. Seems they were penny wise and pound foolish.   

Quote from: André on March 14, 2019, 08:30:46 AM
Isn't the pigeon thing a cruel and unusual punishment ?

Hah! That wasn't part of the punishment, but just an inevitable consequence of leaving anything stationary in the open air in Manhattan. ;) One thing I do regret is that I should have placed the pillory in Columbus Circle, near Trump Tower, which I used to have to walk by several times a week.

Ghost of Baron Scarpia

Quote from: BasilValentine on March 14, 2019, 03:31:13 PM
The analysis I heard (on NPR) was that the software fix was intended to counter the effects of a modification the original 737 design should not have been forced to bear: For the Max 8 Boeing added new heavier engines and pylons (there was some repositioning too) to the basic airframe, which caused a shift in the center of gravity and a tendency for the plane to go nose up. The software fix was an ad hoc solution to a problem that should never have existed. According to the expert I heard, the right approach would have been to redesign the whole plane to solve the problem structurally, but Boeing wanted a cheaper and faster to market solution. Saved them from having to engineer and retest a new design and to make expensive modifications to the production process. Seems they were penny wise and pound foolish. 

I also read something to that effect. Presumably that change in flight dynamics was the motivation for the software design consideration, but all airliners have some sort of anti-stall system, at the very least an audible warning, visible warning, stick shaker or pusher, etc. The one on this aircraft seems to be more aggressive than what pilots are accustomed to.

Ghost of Baron Scarpia

#15598
Quote from: BasilValentine on March 14, 2019, 03:31:13 PMHah! That wasn't part of the punishment, but just an inevitable consequence of leaving anything stationary in the open air in Manhattan. ;) One thing I do regret is that I should have placed the pillory in Columbus Circle, near Trump Tower, which I used to have to walk by several times a week.

Maybe, for irony, the pillory could be 14 ct gold, made by melting down and recasting his famous gold toilet. :)

BasilValentine

#15599
Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on March 14, 2019, 03:55:56 PM
Maybe, for irony, the pillory could be 14 ct gold, made by melting down and recasting his famous gold toilet. :)

Why recast it? One could just chain him to it outdoors, neatly solving the only significant logistical problem for a long-term pillorying. And when you think about it, that gold toilet was acquired using the proceeds of decades-long tax fraud by the Trump family, which means: The public paid for that gold toilet and they should get to see their tax dollars at work. Feeding would take care of itself. With his head poking through the stocks, the passersby, or Cub Scouts out for a service badge, could make him compete for french fries with the pigeons and rats.