You know that Kindle can actually be turned off[1], right?
Arguing with low wage employees while they're having to deal with hundreds of passengers during the short pre-flight legally mandated checks makes you appear like an arsehole. They don't know every device on the market, nor whether that device is using 3G or wifi or is just sleeping or is off. And they don't need to know, they've been told to make sure that everything is turned off and that there are serious consequences if it doesn't happen.
The fact that the regulations are idiotic is not the fault of the busy, underpaid, low-skilled, attendants.
Power switch — puts your Kindle to sleep, wakes it up, and turns your Kindle on or off. The power switch is located just to the right of the micro-USB/power port. To put your Kindle to sleep, slide and release the power switch; the screensaver appears on the display. While your Kindle is asleep, other keys and buttons are locked so that you don’t accidentally change the place in your reading. For Kindle with Special Offers, the center of the 5-way controller is not locked while your Kindle is asleep. To turn your Kindle off, slide and hold the power switch for seven seconds until the screen goes blank and then release.
Low wage does not always imply low skill. You can find low wage employees who are extremely skilled at what they do. Their problem is that their skill, however high, is common, and so the laws of supply and demand drive their wage down.
Arguing with low wage employees
> ...
> low-skilled, attendants
I down-voted this comment because I found it to be condescending. I don't know anyone who works as a flight attendant nor have any relationship to the airline industry that I know of.
What you said is simply mean-spirited. Not everyone is an engineer. Not everyone understands technology. Not everyone needs to. How much they earn and how skilled they are at technology is no measure of a person. That's really offensive.
I know many people who are virtually poor and uneducated who are better human beings --by far-- than some PhD's I've come across in my life. Why must some in technology behave as though these people are beneath them? This is shameful. What a horrible thing to say.
Agreed. Not to mention, those low wage, low skilled attendents have quite a bit of training that can save your life if you are ever in an airplane accident. They may not know about the latest gadget from Amazon, but they do know their stuff.
I'm glad you see it this way. This could easily be the result of shooting off a post without taking a moment to read what you've written.
You are not the first person to do that, nor the last. I've done it plenty of times. Life goes on.
Sometimes I think these fora need to have a selectable posting delay setting. Let the user choose whether posting is immediate or not. I would probably set mine to at least a 15 minute delay. I'd sure save me from making an ass of myself on occasion.
Sometimes I think these fora need to have a selectable posting delay setting. Let the user choose whether posting is immediate or not. I would probably set mine to at least a 15 minute delay. I'd sure save me from making an ass of myself on occasion
Actually there is (at least here) look for the "delay" setting in your user page. It's the number of minutes between hitting submit and a post going live.
I'm pretty sure that's actually not the case. If so, why does my kindle switch itself 'off' after not using it for a few minutes? While the screen might take no energy to keep an image, I think it keeps other parts active to be ready to flip to the next page, and turns these off when, well, off.
It switches itself "off" to avoid unintentional page turns and other undesired user input. In addition, the mechanism you describe must still be active when "off" to listen to the power switch anyways.
Because the backlight is still on for a while. If they wanted, when they turn off the backlight, they could leave the page you were reading visible. They choose to show an "off" image, though.
Nobody said it's hard to understand. However, I can only imagine that the kind of people who frequent this site would also tend to be the kind of people who don't respond pleasantly to "because I said so!". I'm definitely one of those people.
You are not entitled to argue with everyone in every situation because you feel like you've got a clever point to make.
There's a time and a place for a discussion. That does seem to be hard for some people to understand. Yes, we all agree that some rules are stupid, but being a smart ass when 300 people are about to take off in a large commercial airliner full of fuel isn't one of those times.
So therefore, shut up, follow all stupid rules without question or delay.
That's what I'm getting from your posts here.
Sorry, but over in the real world, the only thing that gets stupid shit dealt with is people complaining about it. You want to talk entitlement? Who are you to say that the other guy has no right to question something that doesn't fit their internal logic?
It's not about making clever points, it's about establishing and enforcing rules that make sense. It's about balancing safety and freedom in such a way that one doesn't get to trample the other for no reason. And some would argue that takeoff would be one of the best times to ensure that the rules you're following are well-supported. Call it "being a smartass" if you like, I call it "not being a dumbass".
I've always had the theory that rules about electronic devices were not just about electromagnetic interference, but also about reducing distractions from crew-member instructions during takeoff/landing.
Someone might point out that they don't make you put physical books and magazines away, but they don't have the excuse of "electromagnetic interference" for physical books.
Tinfoil Hat Also, approximately 90% of my time spent reading in-flight magazines is a result of the takeoff/landing electronics prohibition.
That's a great point about the in-flight magazines. I wonder if there's an substantial return on those, and if so, if any airlines would maintain the current policy in attempts to keep people engaged. It'd be interesting to see if some airlines adopt a more lax policy sooner than others.
Also to reduce distractions from actual problems during takeoff landing.
If you're playing games on your iPad with your headphones in, you're probably less likely to be aware of the little rattle, or to spot the flames coming out of the engine, etc.
Everyone on board an aircraft is required during takeoff and landing to be actively aware and help spot potential problems. Also, if there is a problem, you'll have better situational awareness of what's going on and you'll be ready sooner to take action to deal with that situation.
This is an absurd idea. Enormous amounts of alcohol are consumed in airports and aboard planes, which impairs people's abilities to attend, act quickly, precisely, etc. If something bad happens, I'm going to be way more worried about the pissed guy next to me than the fact that he's listening to some wicked prog tunes on his iPod.
This is an absurd idea. Enormous amounts of alcohol are consumed in airports and aboard planes
You aren't getting on a plane when you're evidently intoxicated, either. Nor are they serving you alcohol to the point of intoxication on the plane. That's a lawsuit waiting to happen.
If that were true, wouldn't they tell you to also put away your books and magazines? And not listen to in-flight audio through the audio jack found in the armrest?
Just hide the screen face down, or just put it in the pocket in front of you. As soon as they are sitting down and buckled up for the actual take off, you can start using your device again with no one hassling you until landing. %100 success rate for me so far.
Anyone who can deal with airline passengers, day in and day out without perpetrating a horrific massacre when they see their paycheck is far from 'lowest common denominator'
Comments
I've tried to explain this to flight attendants before, but they don't care.
"Turn your device off!"
"This is off. It's really neat, actually! Once the screen is rendered to the eink display it stays there until...nevermind, okay it's off now"
/sigh
You know that Kindle can actually be turned off[1], right?
Arguing with low wage employees while they're having to deal with hundreds of passengers during the short pre-flight legally mandated checks makes you appear like an arsehole. They don't know every device on the market, nor whether that device is using 3G or wifi or is just sleeping or is off. And they don't need to know, they've been told to make sure that everything is turned off and that there are serious consequences if it doesn't happen.
The fact that the regulations are idiotic is not the fault of the busy, underpaid, low-skilled, attendants.
[1] https://kindle.s3.amazonaws.com/Kindle_User%27s_Guide_Englis...
Page 20
Low wage does not always imply low skill. You can find low wage employees who are extremely skilled at what they do. Their problem is that their skill, however high, is common, and so the laws of supply and demand drive their wage down.
I down-voted this comment because I found it to be condescending. I don't know anyone who works as a flight attendant nor have any relationship to the airline industry that I know of.
What you said is simply mean-spirited. Not everyone is an engineer. Not everyone understands technology. Not everyone needs to. How much they earn and how skilled they are at technology is no measure of a person. That's really offensive.
I know many people who are virtually poor and uneducated who are better human beings --by far-- than some PhD's I've come across in my life. Why must some in technology behave as though these people are beneath them? This is shameful. What a horrible thing to say.
Agreed. Not to mention, those low wage, low skilled attendents have quite a bit of training that can save your life if you are ever in an airplane accident. They may not know about the latest gadget from Amazon, but they do know their stuff.
You make a very good point. I'd like to apologize for my poor choice of words.
This is more what I meant, and what I should have said. I agree that "low skilled" is really offensive.
I'm glad you see it this way. This could easily be the result of shooting off a post without taking a moment to read what you've written.
You are not the first person to do that, nor the last. I've done it plenty of times. Life goes on.
Sometimes I think these fora need to have a selectable posting delay setting. Let the user choose whether posting is immediate or not. I would probably set mine to at least a 15 minute delay. I'd sure save me from making an ass of myself on occasion.
Sometimes I think these fora need to have a selectable posting delay setting. Let the user choose whether posting is immediate or not. I would probably set mine to at least a 15 minute delay. I'd sure save me from making an ass of myself on occasion
Actually there is (at least here) look for the "delay" setting in your user page. It's the number of minutes between hitting submit and a post going live.
RTFM. Funny, I guess I never paid attention to that.
Fortunately, Hacker News has a setting called "delay" (which you can set by clicking on your name) which does just what you are describing.
And you know that the Kindle uses the same amount of energy when off as it does when it's "on" right?
I'm pretty sure that's actually not the case. If so, why does my kindle switch itself 'off' after not using it for a few minutes? While the screen might take no energy to keep an image, I think it keeps other parts active to be ready to flip to the next page, and turns these off when, well, off.
It switches itself "off" to avoid unintentional page turns and other undesired user input. In addition, the mechanism you describe must still be active when "off" to listen to the power switch anyways.
This can be said of any soft power switch.
Because the backlight is still on for a while. If they wanted, when they turn off the backlight, they could leave the page you were reading visible. They choose to show an "off" image, though.
Really? Whispernet and wifi and etc are using the same power when the machine is on, and when the machine is sleeping, and when the machine is off?
They don't care and it's not their call. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
Nobody said it's hard to understand. However, I can only imagine that the kind of people who frequent this site would also tend to be the kind of people who don't respond pleasantly to "because I said so!". I'm definitely one of those people.
You are not entitled to argue with everyone in every situation because you feel like you've got a clever point to make.
There's a time and a place for a discussion. That does seem to be hard for some people to understand. Yes, we all agree that some rules are stupid, but being a smart ass when 300 people are about to take off in a large commercial airliner full of fuel isn't one of those times.
So therefore, shut up, follow all stupid rules without question or delay.
That's what I'm getting from your posts here.
Sorry, but over in the real world, the only thing that gets stupid shit dealt with is people complaining about it. You want to talk entitlement? Who are you to say that the other guy has no right to question something that doesn't fit their internal logic?
The impression I got was that, correctly, melling suggested choosing your battles wisely.
You chose to put words in his/her mouth instead and be condescending.
Just for the record: that is not a good thing to do, and you should stop doing that.
It's not about making clever points, it's about establishing and enforcing rules that make sense. It's about balancing safety and freedom in such a way that one doesn't get to trample the other for no reason. And some would argue that takeoff would be one of the best times to ensure that the rules you're following are well-supported. Call it "being a smartass" if you like, I call it "not being a dumbass".
I've always had the theory that rules about electronic devices were not just about electromagnetic interference, but also about reducing distractions from crew-member instructions during takeoff/landing.
Someone might point out that they don't make you put physical books and magazines away, but they don't have the excuse of "electromagnetic interference" for physical books.
Tinfoil Hat Also, approximately 90% of my time spent reading in-flight magazines is a result of the takeoff/landing electronics prohibition.
That's a great point about the in-flight magazines. I wonder if there's an substantial return on those, and if so, if any airlines would maintain the current policy in attempts to keep people engaged. It'd be interesting to see if some airlines adopt a more lax policy sooner than others.
"SkyMall's SkyFall": http://priceonomics.com/skymalls-skyfall/
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6114009
Also to reduce distractions from actual problems during takeoff landing.
If you're playing games on your iPad with your headphones in, you're probably less likely to be aware of the little rattle, or to spot the flames coming out of the engine, etc.
Everyone on board an aircraft is required during takeoff and landing to be actively aware and help spot potential problems. Also, if there is a problem, you'll have better situational awareness of what's going on and you'll be ready sooner to take action to deal with that situation.
This is an absurd idea. Enormous amounts of alcohol are consumed in airports and aboard planes, which impairs people's abilities to attend, act quickly, precisely, etc. If something bad happens, I'm going to be way more worried about the pissed guy next to me than the fact that he's listening to some wicked prog tunes on his iPod.
You aren't getting on a plane when you're evidently intoxicated, either. Nor are they serving you alcohol to the point of intoxication on the plane. That's a lawsuit waiting to happen.
If that were true, wouldn't they tell you to also put away your books and magazines? And not listen to in-flight audio through the audio jack found in the armrest?
I don't fly, but wouldn't the in-flight audio be cut off if there was an emergency?
Just hide the screen face down, or just put it in the pocket in front of you. As soon as they are sitting down and buckled up for the actual take off, you can start using your device again with no one hassling you until landing. %100 success rate for me so far.
[deleted]
Speaking of nerd snark, calling flight attendants 'lowest-common-denominator' people is pretty arrogant on your part.
Ugh... do you know any flight attendants? They are not the lowest common denominator by any stretch.
Anyone who can deal with airline passengers, day in and day out without perpetrating a horrific massacre when they see their paycheck is far from 'lowest common denominator'