←back to thread

247 points po | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.579s | source
Show context
renewiltord ◴[] No.43531562[source]
The entire story is pretty interesting, actually.

When the pilot ejected and landed, the 911 dispatcher goes through some sort of flowchart like a call-center guy in Calcutta except at approximately 0.25x the pace https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCk3yk_38Fc (seriously, it's like watching an LLM execute on CPU).

Then there's the plane that no one could find for a while

Then the military said the reason they had to demote him was that while a normal pilot could have done what he did, he was a test pilot and they're supposed to run closer to the redline.

Overall, that combined with the contemporaneous Secret Service gaffes that nearly had the President whacked while they stood around in photo-op poses, really made me think: What if these people are all playing at their roles and they don't actually know what to do? I know it's general Millennial jokes that "nobody knows what they're doing; we're all just making it up as we go along".

But that's not true. I kind of know a lot of what I'm doing. There's a whole bunch of things where I can just execute with low error rate. These guys are doing something more important and their ancestors did it better. Which makes me think that they're not so good at what they do.

replies(1): >>43531881 #
stevage ◴[] No.43531881[source]
> (seriously, it's like watching an LLM execute on CPU).

I dunno, it seems fine to me. The person starts the call by saying they need an ambulance, so she is going through trying to collect information about what the injuries are.

The problem is that the pilot wanted to contact 911 to warn them about the plane crash, but somehow that got misinterpreted by the homeowner and got them on this ambulance track, and the pilot isn't doing a good job of saying "don't worry about me, let's talk about the plane". He keeps chiming in with these questions about the plane crash that seem to come out of nowhere.

He also doesn't even mention that he's concerned that the plane crash might have injured someone else.

Maybe there's more to this that was edited out.

But I'm not sure what the criticism is: she's supposed to stop asking questions about his injuries, and suddenly ask about a possible plane crash that they haven't had any reports of yet? What would that even achieve?

replies(1): >>43532266 #
1. chgs ◴[] No.43532266[source]
I suspect an average dispatcher is an order magnitude more likely to have someone reporting they crashed a plane than actually did crash a plane.
replies(1): >>43540921 #
2. stevage ◴[] No.43540921[source]
Ha, interesting example of a sensitivity/specificity test.