Replies: 3 comments
Is this article a bit too idealistic?
Posted by Berna @ 10/04/2001 10:27 AM EST
"The answer is to change the technology to fit the new circumstances."
Really?
I think the answer is much more human. Understanding the psychology of terrorists. Being brave enough to challenge terrorists. And so forth.
Another thing to consider is that the next act of major terrorism is very unlikely to come from the (un)friendly skies. The next attack will be something like a car bomb at a nuclear reactor.
Again, in my opinion, this is not about technology, as Tog suggests.
You can't always cure social problems with technology. I'm curious about what others think.
Posted by John S. Rhodes @ 10/04/2001 12:55 PM EST
I remember watching a documentary a couple of years back about British Airways. The pilots were saying that on the long-haul routes, all they do is take the plane up in the sky and then land it at the other end. And, the modern jumbo jets can do both of those things for themselves anyway (with the assistance of ground controllers).
So, the interviewer asked why they still have pilots. The answer? Because the customers like to think someone on board is in control of the plane. But if they weren't, and the plane was being controlled automatically, how would a hijacker get control?
Posted by Alan @ 10/05/2001 06:03 AM EST