It's not a bad practice to automatically dismiss any pilot who ejects from a plane (other than test pilots) except in cases which are wholly obvious equipment failures. It will ensure that for these planes which cost hundreds of millions of dollars, the pilot doesn't eject unless, yes, they really fucking need to eject.
Will this mean you accidentally fire some great pilots? Yes. But given the cost of these airplanes it is better to spend some more money on training a few more pilots.
I think you’ll find that the cost to train pilots is also substantial. Mostly pilots have 100-1000s of hours to be “combat ready” at many $1000s/flight hr. Google says around $10M for F-35 pilot.
Better to follow protocol and eject. The link is a story where a good pilot followed protocol but still got screwed over.
Implicit in this view is that a pilot’s life has a cash value and that value is something less than “hundreds of millions of dollars” or a single digit multiple thereof.
The plane in this incident was valued at $136M USD.
He was in reality about 1900 feet AGL at the time of ejection. Planes fall around 160 feet per second when stalled.
How much money would you accept to not pull an ejection lever for a few more seconds in a zero-visibility setting without instruments in a falling/stalling plane that you personally are sitting inside? How about at 1900 feet AGL? That’s 12 seconds before impact on a good day.
> Eject and lose your career means more pilots will crash.
Maybe, maybe not. But I do expect that if another pilot finds himself in Del Pizzo's situation, they're going to do a more thorough survey of the plane's capabilities before ejecting. Maybe that's the outcome the Marines is looking for, even if it puts their pilots at risk more often.
You have no real reason to believe that, you are pulling the reasons out of your rear. Read the reports, literally the investigations themselves concluded that most pilots would have ejected and that there was no misconduct.
The cost of the pilot will always be less than the cost of the plane. So why provide the capability to eject in the first place? Presumably you get better pilots when they know a problem with the plane doesn’t mean death for them or their career.
Not just that, but training pilots takes time, and getting them the experience they need to be seasoned pilots takes even more time. While you can certainly put a dollar amount on the cost of that training and experience, it's harder to quantify how much it's worth to have a trained, experienced pilot right now, vs. a new one that's starting from scratch and won't be at the same level for years.
First of all, the F-35's job is to kill people, let's not get overly moralistic here, but of all places, the military is quite explicit about using human lives as expendable resources to achieve military objectives. If the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is asked to choose between losing 20 enlisted privates in a training accident vs. losing 20 B-2 bombers which one is he going to choose?
Western societies have higher social trust which enabled them to outcompete the rest of the world. Business moves at the speed of trust. Now that western society has increasing contact with the low trust world it is regressing to the mean.
This uses the economists' definition of "productivity" creating a confusing headline.
In reality, "productivity" as a layperson would understand it hasn't increased at all and the reason isn't very "curious." What's happened (by the economists' own conclusion) is that more people are ordering take-out and fewer people are eating in the restaurant, causing the restaurant to make more money per unit of labor. This is a trend that is probably going to make things like social isolation etc. worse, so not really something to celebrate.
They tend to have cult dynamics because the people who subscribe to the cult dynamics are the ones who get promoted. If you’re happy to just make a living as a software engineer instead of trying to propel your way up the ladder of the world’s richest companies then you can live very happily and comfortably.
Yes, but this is not the people they'll hire for this kind of job. They're looking for the batshit crazy that will do this kind of stuff. This is the reason for the psychological profile they do in lieu of interview, when hiring managers.
I agree for something like a McDonalds employee or even entry level software engineer but this is a senior managerial role at Facebook. Nobody needs to do this job. Unless your spending is out of control you do not need this income. So if it comes with unreasonable demands, I don’t really care. There are problems worth caring about and this ain’t one of them.
What the leadership does will be mirrored down to the grunt. I have never lead a multi billion dollars corporation but from my view if your team can discard someone easily, they can also bear not having that person around for two weeks. Or a year.
Honestly I feel that father and mothers getting back from a years parental leave usually comes back with better focus.
It’s definitely funny along the lines of “A Modest Proposal” from Swift. If you can’t detect sarcasm that’s on you, not the author, especially for something so obviously sarcastic to drive the point home about the ridiculousness of the theory that jailing homeless people will somehow produce less violence in the broader community by making a similar comparison correlating murder and people playing music loudly in public which is a minor annoyance at worst.
Why? Pausing a surgery to take an insurance call is highly unusual. It’s a very serious allegation. Why shouldn’t its veracity be subject to scrutiny and verification by a court?
Fair question. Because there's no meaningfully deterrent penalty for a meritless defamation claim, and the costs and consequences of going to court are highly asymmetric—to the hard-working surgeon in a bloody white coat; as opposed to the lawfare attorney who performs barratry for a living.
It's in the public interest to proactively defend freedom of speech, particularly that of people who have important things to say (i.e. physicians who witness gross insurer abuses), from the speech-chilling effects of a dysfunctional and unjust tort system.
I'm not a lawyer or defamation law expert, so I will quote a person who is both:
- "I don’t know if this doctor lied about United Healthcare. I do know if I had unlimited money and no scruples and wanted to bully people into silence, Claire Locke would be a top choice to hire." –Ken White
Because people need freedom, including freedom to speak their minds, especially about political and social matters, especially about the powerful. If everything you say has to be tried in court with legal expenses, there is no freedom and no check on the powerful.
People make spurious claims all the time, including on news, in commercials, in business and legal contexts, by corporations - look at what UnitedHealth says at times. It's absurd that someone can be sued - there would be no freedom of speech.
Spurious claims that damage someone else's reputation are libel or slander, and are rightly actionable.
I've long thought that doing to this what copyright trolls did to copyright infringement is a road to profit for social media companies. Help connect the outspoken with the damaged and take a cut.
You're ignoring the problem I mentioned above. That's not a solution, just pretending the system you envision is viable. Let's look at the problem and make it viable.
I'd consider it an improvement over the current situation, where discourse is drowned in a sea of sanctionable incivility. Technology that has made spreading the shit easier needs to be matched by technology to control the shit.
It isn't unusual. I worked for Blue Cross Blue Shield's call center 20 years ago. Doctors will def come out of surgery if it's regarding being able to do a heart surgery, or lung transplant, etc etc. Now it's been a long time, but I recall due to HIPAA, I could only talk to the doctor about it. I think the PA/nurse could put the claim in, but I had to talk the PCP/doctor about it.
This is why I only use Google fonts. They're all permissively licensed so I don't have to worry about anything.