3 ms·

If we're seriously arguing in HN over whether something as fundamental as this is going on , imagine the confusion among potential users of Signal.

• tialaramex 6y ago
  The fact users can become confused of something doesn't affect whether it's a fact or not. An insistence upon truths that contradict the facts works just fine except for the practical implications which are stubbornly unchanged. During WW2 there was tremendous innovation in the field of electronics and radio. Some way through the war, both sides began fitting relatively small radio transmitters to aircraft, which enables an equipped aircraft to actively transmit. So one obvious idea is to transmit "Hey I'm friendly" and then you know not to send up interceptors. So there's a nice switch on your bomber aeroplane that activates this fancy new "I'm friendly" transmitter, you are trained to switch it on as you return to base, and the chap fitting it seems damn sure it's important to switch it off when leaving. Which is odd right? I mean, it prevents getting shot down, stands to reason you'd turn it on all the time. And so, despite the urging of those who understood how it works, leaving it switched on was indeed common practice, and commanders would defend their crews for doing this, arguing that the perceived safety of the "Don't shoot me down" transmitter allowed them to press home attacks in conditions where it might otherwise be prudent to withdraw. Which is funny because of course the reason to switch off the transmitter is that it's a free homing beacon for enemy fighters and anti-aircraft weapons, so in choosing to do this they were actually significantly increasing their danger of death.