9 ms·

New FAA Guidelines Permit More Device Use

118 points by sheri 13y ago

Osiris 13y ago
I just want to be able to read my kindle on takeoff and landing. I hope this goes into effect soon. The device uses the exact same power sitting in my lap with the case closed as it does while I'm reading it.
- blhack 13y ago
  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
  - rpedroso 13y ago
    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.
    - bradddd 13y ago
      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.
      - jerf 13y ago
        "SkyMall's SkyFall": http://priceonomics.com/skymalls-skyfall/ http://priceonomics.com/skymalls-skyfall/ HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6114009 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6114009
    - grecy 13y ago
      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.
      - hugs 13y ago
        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?
        icebraining 13y ago
        I don't fly, but wouldn't the in-flight audio be cut off if there was an emergency?
      - kylebgorman 13y ago
        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.
        onebaddude 13y ago
        >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.
  - DanBC 13y ago
    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_English.pdf https://kindle.s3.amazonaws.com/Kindle_User%27s_Guide_Englis... Page 20 > 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.
    - alexeisadeski3 13y ago
      And you know that the Kindle uses the same amount of energy when off as it does when it's "on" right?
      - PanMan 13y ago
        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.
        zevyoura 13y ago
        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.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
    - cobrausn 13y ago
      Speaking of nerd snark, calling flight attendants 'lowest-common-denominator' people is pretty arrogant on your part.
    - look_lookatme 13y ago
      Ugh... do you know any flight attendants? They are not the lowest common denominator by any stretch.
      - Fomite 13y ago
        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'
  - melling 13y ago
    They don't care and it's not their call. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
    - BlackDeath3 13y ago
      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.
      - melling 13y ago
        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.
        BlackDeath3 13y ago
        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".
        Karunamon 13y ago
        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?
  - mahyarm 13y ago
    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.
jcutrell 13y ago
This is fantastic news for people who fly a lot. I know that a "2-hour flight" for me _could_ mean a really good sprint on something, if it weren't for the interruptions that tell me when to put my computer away and ask me if I want peanuts.
- bradddd 13y ago
  I'll find this even more useful in short, 1-hour type flights. Out of the whole flight, you usually only get ~30 mins at altitude to pull out your tablet or laptop.
  - JshWright 13y ago
    But you're still welcome to pay $16 for in-flight WiFi during those 30 minutes!
    - brk 13y ago
      1 hour pass is usually "only" $4.95, but I get your point. I just pay $40 for a monthly pass.
swombat 13y ago
Please, let this be one area where Europe promptly copies the US!...
robomartin 13y ago
A number of years ago I wrote a bunch of Verilog code and ran simulations during a flight from LA to NY. The code, save a few minor issues, worked perfectly when tested on hardware. What's remarcable about this is that I wrote the code with pen and paper and ran the simulations similarly by hand on graph paper. No computer involved. After a couple of similar experiences I've resorted to using flights as an excuse to unplug for a few hours. A set of good noise cancelling headphones and a notebook can give you an opportunity to explore and think in ways that might be nearly impossible at the office.
- gwright 13y ago
  I often print out code and mark it up on paper. For some reason I get a more holistic view of the code on paper than I can paging or searching through it on the screen.
- GrinningFool 13y ago
  I've gotten out of the habit of this, and honestly don't know if I'm better off for it. When I didn't have access to a computer, I would fairly regularly 'implement' designs with pen and paper and test it too. As you experienced, these would then work perfectly or nearly so on actual systems. Now I almost always have a computer or computer-like device at hand so there's just no need. Sometimes it feels like this results in more experimenting, but less thinking.
  - robomartin 13y ago
    > less thinking. That's exactly my point in a way. I realized that I am always immersed in technology. There are one or more screens of some sort in front of me nearly any time I am awake. A lot of us have lost contact with the idea and practice of thinking. Of talking to yourself. Perhaps doodling in a notebook to explore ideas and thoughts in your mind. For some reason I started to use flights as an excuse to practice thought. As noisy and uncomfortable as that environment can be I have found it amazingly effective for the simple task of letting my mind take trips in various directions with nothing but a piece of paper and a pen in front of me. I no-longer do paper-coding in flight. I think.
coin 13y ago
There is nothing about flight that "defy physics", in fact it is physics as to how airplanes fly
- jdminhbg 13y ago
  I don't think that was meant literally. It was an allusion to your subconscious intuition of physics being contradicted.
- jahewson 13y ago
  That phrase irked me too. Why the magic around airplanes? Saying "seemingly defy physics" would be a huge improvement, though it retains the tired metaphor. After all, it's a lack of sensible scientific thinking which led to the FAA maintaining this ban for so long!
  - alexeisadeski3 13y ago
    It's... a joke.
    - coryfklein 13y ago
      If it was, I must have missed the punchline. > Don’t start celebrating just yet – this doesn’t mean you can continue playing Candy Crush while waiting for your massive, heavy hunk of metal to defy physics and launch itself into the air as of this very moment.
kunai 13y ago
Part of me likes this. Another part of me hates this. I usually don't really do much during takeoff and landing. The thrill of an aircraft's takeoff and landing may wear for some, but it pretty much never does for me. I just stare out the window (if I'm lucky) observing the spoilerons deploy and close, and those flaps deploy and retract. I love hearing that slight loss of engine power for climb after takeoff to prevent overspeed. Cruise is pretty boring, but when I'm somewhere over Nevada or any picturesque area, I put my S7 to sleep and just watch the beautiful scenery. The pragmatist in me is saying, "Yay, now I and everyone else can work round-flight!" The Transcendentalist in me is saying, "How I wish others could see the beauty of a mass of metal rising to the heavens, and all that we can see below from above..."
- icebraining 13y ago
  Yeah, but I don't think preventing people from using electronics is really helping in making them see the beauty in the engineering feat. Though I can definitively relate to that feeling.
- CodeMage 13y ago
  I have a message for the Transcendentalist: most of us would love to enjoy that beauty, but having no leg space or access to a window kind of hamper us ;)
  - jrockway 13y ago
    First class is not that expensive anymore.
    - PhasmaFelis 13y ago
      Are you joking? Or are you not in touch with what constitutes "expensive" for most Americans? My recent coach-class round trip from Kentucky to Washington state and back cost $500. That's expensive. I looked into business class for the same trip, and it was about twice as expensive. Didn't even bother looking at first.
buckbova 13y ago
I was thinking about this the other day with all the smartwatch news. I can picture attendants telling passengers to shut off their watches.
bradly 13y ago
Link to the FAA.gov page: http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=15254&cid=TW189 http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId...
bloodroot 13y ago
I wish one of these articles would quote some actual regulations. As far as I understand, the CFRs (FARs) have been more advisory than regulatory in these details, generally leaving it up to the airlines to decide their policies on personal electronics, then approving those policies. The 10k foot rule that Techcrunch refers to was never in the FARs, as far as I've read, rather it is/was an FCC regulation. Seriously, I'd like to see the actual regulations that have changed, if anyone can find them.
- jcoby 13y ago
  FAR 91.21 is the rule that is being enforced: (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate, nor may any operator or pilot in command of an aircraft allow the operation of, any portable electronic device on any of the following U.S.-registered civil aircraft: (1) Aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate; or (2) Any other aircraft while it is operated under IFR. (b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to— (1) Portable voice recorders; (2) Hearing aids; (3) Heart pacemakers; (4) Electric shavers; or (5) Any other portable electronic device that the operator of the aircraft has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used. (c) In the case of an aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate, the determination required by paragraph (b)(5) of this section shall be made by that operator of the aircraft on which the particular device is to be used. In the case of other aircraft, the determination may be made by the pilot in command or other operator of the aircraft. Advisory Circular (AC) 91.21-1B is the recommended implementation of FAR 91.21 and includes the take off/landing and operation below 10,000 rules and seems to be what everyone is using. I assume that it's AC 91.21-1B that is being modified. Its text is too big to paste here but you can read it here: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%2091.21-1B.pdf http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/A...
greenlander 13y ago
Fortunately, FAA regulations also seem to require the flight attendants to sit in their seats during takeoff and landing. Once the flight attendants are done "policing" the isles and get in their seats, I just take out my Kindle and start reading again. So far, I haven't caused any aircraft crashes... and my fellow travelers have never called me out on it: apparently they also think the rules are stupid.
- look_lookatme 13y ago
  And what's so difficult about following the rules and being inconvenienced for 20 minutes? The amount of entitlement in this HN discussion is nuts.
  - gnaffle 13y ago
    Yep. At least some HN members will get the same attitude back at them in the form of their users bragging to others about how smart they are since they managed to bypass the company firewall or some such thing, and saying "so far, I haven't caused any security breaches, so it can't hurt"..
    - enraged_camel 13y ago
      I think you chose a bad example. Company firewalls exist to manage risk and liability for upper management, not to provide any type of real security. If a security incident happens, management wants to be able to say they did their due diligence and paid for the "best" firewall on the market.
      - gnaffle 13y ago
        Would say that a company would be equally well protected by having all computers on their network with reachable IPs, with no filtering whatsoever?
  - greenlander 13y ago
    I spent a large part of my career working for a small company in Silicon Valley that became a Very Big Company. One of the things that the CEO liked to do for a while is have a "lunch with the interns” during the summer. He’d chat with them and give them an opportunity to ask questions. As the manager of a lot of interns, I was also invited, and I often went. I was (and still am) on a first-name basis with the CEO. One time an intern asked, “what do I need to become the CEO of a company like this?” The question made me laugh, because I already knew the answer. The answer is that there is no answer. You must have a vision about what you can do, and you must believe it. If you allow every idiot in the world to draw a box around your behavior, you won’t accomplish anything. I know that the Kindle (with wifi off) isn't going to crash the airplane. Amazon knows that the Kindle isn't going to crash the airplane. So why should I respect the opinion of the flight attendant? The flight attendant is, after all, a flight attendant because they would have never had make it through differential equations without sleeping with the professor. So why should I give that ditz any respect? This isn’t about ‘entitlement’. Take all that crap your professors at the university told you and put it in /dev/null where it belongs. Reframe the issue in terms of what is right and what is possible. If you want to be truly successful, you must learn about breaking the rules. (And by “truly” successful, I mean truly successful. If your goal is to accumulate $800K in your 401K and own a house in Sunnyvale, California outright… well you can do that by following all the rules and following Company Policies.) Write your own rules in life. Perhaps I already answered your question, “And what's so difficult about following the rules and being inconvenienced for 20 minutes.” And if you don’t feel that I did, it means that you’ll never find the answer. Maybe you’ll find success. Or maybe you won’t. But the feeling will be liberating. There is no man like a free man.
poulsbohemian 13y ago
I have flown a lot (IE: 100K+ miles/year) at various points in my career, and I'm disappointed by the commentary here about flight attendants. Think for a moment about their job - every day they are interacting with hundreds of people, assessing which ones might be a problem and trying to deal with each personality type with a smile, all while balancing (often in high heels) your drink at 30,000 feet in a vehicle traveling hundreds of miles per hour AND to add insult to injury, doing so on little sleep and for very little pay. Give 'em a break, eh? Separate from that, even as a frequent flyer, I'd rather people not have their attention stuck in their iDevice during takeoff and landing. Those are the times when a problem on the aircraft is most likely to materialize, and I'd rather not lose my ass in an accident because your attention was on Angry Birds. Further, in those minutes at the beginning of a flight if you are fooling around with your phone/kindle/etc and blocking the isle, you delay expedient loading and unloading of the aircraft. I've had colleagues busy on their [device] say things like "but, but I was just wrapping up a call, why was the flight attendant so rude!" No asshole, you were blocking the plane from loading / unloading. Think of others for a whopping ten minutes and put down the device so we can all safely load / unload and get on/off the ground.
- jhandl 13y ago
  I think of flight attendants as firemen (or firewomen) serving us drinks and food. Because that's what they are. They will be the ones saving your ass if the situation comes to that.
  - BlackDeath3 13y ago
    How so?
    - jhandl 13y ago
      You could look it up by yourself, but here's the gist of it: the flight attendant's top priority is your safety, not your happiness or comfort. They are trained in emergency procedures and if at all possible they will be the ones who make sure you get out of a cabin full of smoke after a crash. To cite a recent example: http://jezebel.com/no-ones-talking-about-the-flight-attendant-heroes-in-t-706818871 http://jezebel.com/no-ones-talking-about-the-flight-attendan...
mattsfrey 13y ago
Can anyone tell me what city is shown in the main picture?
- nrmilstein 13y ago
  San Francisco. That's the Bay Bridge.

118 points by sheri 13y ago

I just want to be able to read my kindle on takeoff and landing. I hope this goes into effect soon. The device uses the exact same power sitting in my lap with the case closed as it does while I'm reading it.

blhack 13y ago
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
- rpedroso 13y ago
  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.
  - bradddd 13y ago
    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.
    - jerf 13y ago
      "SkyMall's SkyFall": http://priceonomics.com/skymalls-skyfall/ http://priceonomics.com/skymalls-skyfall/ HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6114009 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6114009
  - grecy 13y ago
    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.
    - hugs 13y ago
      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?
      - icebraining 13y ago
        I don't fly, but wouldn't the in-flight audio be cut off if there was an emergency?
    - kylebgorman 13y ago
      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.
      - onebaddude 13y ago
        >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.
- DanBC 13y ago
  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_English.pdf https://kindle.s3.amazonaws.com/Kindle_User%27s_Guide_Englis... Page 20 > 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.
  - alexeisadeski3 13y ago
    And you know that the Kindle uses the same amount of energy when off as it does when it's "on" right?
    - PanMan 13y ago
      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.
      - zevyoura 13y ago
        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.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
  - cobrausn 13y ago
    Speaking of nerd snark, calling flight attendants 'lowest-common-denominator' people is pretty arrogant on your part.
  - look_lookatme 13y ago
    Ugh... do you know any flight attendants? They are not the lowest common denominator by any stretch.
    - Fomite 13y ago
      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'
- melling 13y ago
  They don't care and it's not their call. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
  - BlackDeath3 13y ago
    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.
    - melling 13y ago
      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.
      - BlackDeath3 13y ago
        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".
      - Karunamon 13y ago
        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?
- mahyarm 13y ago
  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.

jcutrell 13y ago

This is fantastic news for people who fly a lot. I know that a "2-hour flight" for me _could_ mean a really good sprint on something, if it weren't for the interruptions that tell me when to put my computer away and ask me if I want peanuts.

bradddd 13y ago
I'll find this even more useful in short, 1-hour type flights. Out of the whole flight, you usually only get ~30 mins at altitude to pull out your tablet or laptop.
- JshWright 13y ago
  But you're still welcome to pay $16 for in-flight WiFi during those 30 minutes!
  - brk 13y ago
    1 hour pass is usually "only" $4.95, but I get your point. I just pay $40 for a monthly pass.

swombat 13y ago

Please, let this be one area where Europe promptly copies the US!...

robomartin 13y ago

A number of years ago I wrote a bunch of Verilog code and ran simulations during a flight from LA to NY. The code, save a few minor issues, worked perfectly when tested on hardware. What's remarcable about this is that I wrote the code with pen and paper and ran the simulations similarly by hand on graph paper. No computer involved. After a couple of similar experiences I've resorted to using flights as an excuse to unplug for a few hours. A set of good noise cancelling headphones and a notebook can give you an opportunity to explore and think in ways that might be nearly impossible at the office.

gwright 13y ago
I often print out code and mark it up on paper. For some reason I get a more holistic view of the code on paper than I can paging or searching through it on the screen.
GrinningFool 13y ago
I've gotten out of the habit of this, and honestly don't know if I'm better off for it. When I didn't have access to a computer, I would fairly regularly 'implement' designs with pen and paper and test it too. As you experienced, these would then work perfectly or nearly so on actual systems. Now I almost always have a computer or computer-like device at hand so there's just no need. Sometimes it feels like this results in more experimenting, but less thinking.
- robomartin 13y ago
  > less thinking. That's exactly my point in a way. I realized that I am always immersed in technology. There are one or more screens of some sort in front of me nearly any time I am awake. A lot of us have lost contact with the idea and practice of thinking. Of talking to yourself. Perhaps doodling in a notebook to explore ideas and thoughts in your mind. For some reason I started to use flights as an excuse to practice thought. As noisy and uncomfortable as that environment can be I have found it amazingly effective for the simple task of letting my mind take trips in various directions with nothing but a piece of paper and a pen in front of me. I no-longer do paper-coding in flight. I think.

coin 13y ago

There is nothing about flight that "defy physics", in fact it is physics as to how airplanes fly

jdminhbg 13y ago
I don't think that was meant literally. It was an allusion to your subconscious intuition of physics being contradicted.
jahewson 13y ago
That phrase irked me too. Why the magic around airplanes? Saying "seemingly defy physics" would be a huge improvement, though it retains the tired metaphor. After all, it's a lack of sensible scientific thinking which led to the FAA maintaining this ban for so long!
- alexeisadeski3 13y ago
  It's... a joke.
  - coryfklein 13y ago
    If it was, I must have missed the punchline. > Don’t start celebrating just yet – this doesn’t mean you can continue playing Candy Crush while waiting for your massive, heavy hunk of metal to defy physics and launch itself into the air as of this very moment.

kunai 13y ago

Part of me likes this. Another part of me hates this. I usually don't really do much during takeoff and landing. The thrill of an aircraft's takeoff and landing may wear for some, but it pretty much never does for me. I just stare out the window (if I'm lucky) observing the spoilerons deploy and close, and those flaps deploy and retract. I love hearing that slight loss of engine power for climb after takeoff to prevent overspeed. Cruise is pretty boring, but when I'm somewhere over Nevada or any picturesque area, I put my S7 to sleep and just watch the beautiful scenery. The pragmatist in me is saying, "Yay, now I and everyone else can work round-flight!" The Transcendentalist in me is saying, "How I wish others could see the beauty of a mass of metal rising to the heavens, and all that we can see below from above..."

icebraining 13y ago
Yeah, but I don't think preventing people from using electronics is really helping in making them see the beauty in the engineering feat. Though I can definitively relate to that feeling.
CodeMage 13y ago
I have a message for the Transcendentalist: most of us would love to enjoy that beauty, but having no leg space or access to a window kind of hamper us ;)
- jrockway 13y ago
  First class is not that expensive anymore.
  - PhasmaFelis 13y ago
    Are you joking? Or are you not in touch with what constitutes "expensive" for most Americans? My recent coach-class round trip from Kentucky to Washington state and back cost $500. That's expensive. I looked into business class for the same trip, and it was about twice as expensive. Didn't even bother looking at first.

buckbova 13y ago

I was thinking about this the other day with all the smartwatch news. I can picture attendants telling passengers to shut off their watches.

bradly 13y ago

Link to the FAA.gov page: http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=15254&cid=TW189 http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId...

bloodroot 13y ago

I wish one of these articles would quote some actual regulations. As far as I understand, the CFRs (FARs) have been more advisory than regulatory in these details, generally leaving it up to the airlines to decide their policies on personal electronics, then approving those policies. The 10k foot rule that Techcrunch refers to was never in the FARs, as far as I've read, rather it is/was an FCC regulation. Seriously, I'd like to see the actual regulations that have changed, if anyone can find them.

jcoby 13y ago
FAR 91.21 is the rule that is being enforced: (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate, nor may any operator or pilot in command of an aircraft allow the operation of, any portable electronic device on any of the following U.S.-registered civil aircraft: (1) Aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate; or (2) Any other aircraft while it is operated under IFR. (b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to— (1) Portable voice recorders; (2) Hearing aids; (3) Heart pacemakers; (4) Electric shavers; or (5) Any other portable electronic device that the operator of the aircraft has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used. (c) In the case of an aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate, the determination required by paragraph (b)(5) of this section shall be made by that operator of the aircraft on which the particular device is to be used. In the case of other aircraft, the determination may be made by the pilot in command or other operator of the aircraft. Advisory Circular (AC) 91.21-1B is the recommended implementation of FAR 91.21 and includes the take off/landing and operation below 10,000 rules and seems to be what everyone is using. I assume that it's AC 91.21-1B that is being modified. Its text is too big to paste here but you can read it here: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%2091.21-1B.pdf http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/A...

greenlander 13y ago

Fortunately, FAA regulations also seem to require the flight attendants to sit in their seats during takeoff and landing. Once the flight attendants are done "policing" the isles and get in their seats, I just take out my Kindle and start reading again. So far, I haven't caused any aircraft crashes... and my fellow travelers have never called me out on it: apparently they also think the rules are stupid.

look_lookatme 13y ago
And what's so difficult about following the rules and being inconvenienced for 20 minutes? The amount of entitlement in this HN discussion is nuts.
- gnaffle 13y ago
  Yep. At least some HN members will get the same attitude back at them in the form of their users bragging to others about how smart they are since they managed to bypass the company firewall or some such thing, and saying "so far, I haven't caused any security breaches, so it can't hurt"..
  - enraged_camel 13y ago
    I think you chose a bad example. Company firewalls exist to manage risk and liability for upper management, not to provide any type of real security. If a security incident happens, management wants to be able to say they did their due diligence and paid for the "best" firewall on the market.
    - gnaffle 13y ago
      Would say that a company would be equally well protected by having all computers on their network with reachable IPs, with no filtering whatsoever?
- greenlander 13y ago
  I spent a large part of my career working for a small company in Silicon Valley that became a Very Big Company. One of the things that the CEO liked to do for a while is have a "lunch with the interns” during the summer. He’d chat with them and give them an opportunity to ask questions. As the manager of a lot of interns, I was also invited, and I often went. I was (and still am) on a first-name basis with the CEO. One time an intern asked, “what do I need to become the CEO of a company like this?” The question made me laugh, because I already knew the answer. The answer is that there is no answer. You must have a vision about what you can do, and you must believe it. If you allow every idiot in the world to draw a box around your behavior, you won’t accomplish anything. I know that the Kindle (with wifi off) isn't going to crash the airplane. Amazon knows that the Kindle isn't going to crash the airplane. So why should I respect the opinion of the flight attendant? The flight attendant is, after all, a flight attendant because they would have never had make it through differential equations without sleeping with the professor. So why should I give that ditz any respect? This isn’t about ‘entitlement’. Take all that crap your professors at the university told you and put it in /dev/null where it belongs. Reframe the issue in terms of what is right and what is possible. If you want to be truly successful, you must learn about breaking the rules. (And by “truly” successful, I mean truly successful. If your goal is to accumulate $800K in your 401K and own a house in Sunnyvale, California outright… well you can do that by following all the rules and following Company Policies.) Write your own rules in life. Perhaps I already answered your question, “And what's so difficult about following the rules and being inconvenienced for 20 minutes.” And if you don’t feel that I did, it means that you’ll never find the answer. Maybe you’ll find success. Or maybe you won’t. But the feeling will be liberating. There is no man like a free man.

poulsbohemian 13y ago

I have flown a lot (IE: 100K+ miles/year) at various points in my career, and I'm disappointed by the commentary here about flight attendants. Think for a moment about their job - every day they are interacting with hundreds of people, assessing which ones might be a problem and trying to deal with each personality type with a smile, all while balancing (often in high heels) your drink at 30,000 feet in a vehicle traveling hundreds of miles per hour AND to add insult to injury, doing so on little sleep and for very little pay. Give 'em a break, eh? Separate from that, even as a frequent flyer, I'd rather people not have their attention stuck in their iDevice during takeoff and landing. Those are the times when a problem on the aircraft is most likely to materialize, and I'd rather not lose my ass in an accident because your attention was on Angry Birds. Further, in those minutes at the beginning of a flight if you are fooling around with your phone/kindle/etc and blocking the isle, you delay expedient loading and unloading of the aircraft. I've had colleagues busy on their [device] say things like "but, but I was just wrapping up a call, why was the flight attendant so rude!" No asshole, you were blocking the plane from loading / unloading. Think of others for a whopping ten minutes and put down the device so we can all safely load / unload and get on/off the ground.

jhandl 13y ago
I think of flight attendants as firemen (or firewomen) serving us drinks and food. Because that's what they are. They will be the ones saving your ass if the situation comes to that.
- BlackDeath3 13y ago
  How so?
  - jhandl 13y ago
    You could look it up by yourself, but here's the gist of it: the flight attendant's top priority is your safety, not your happiness or comfort. They are trained in emergency procedures and if at all possible they will be the ones who make sure you get out of a cabin full of smoke after a crash. To cite a recent example: http://jezebel.com/no-ones-talking-about-the-flight-attendant-heroes-in-t-706818871 http://jezebel.com/no-ones-talking-about-the-flight-attendan...

mattsfrey 13y ago

Can anyone tell me what city is shown in the main picture?

nrmilstein 13y ago
San Francisco. That's the Bay Bridge.