News:

  • February 19, 2018, 09:53:10 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 4006306 times)

1 Member and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

guihong

  • Member
  • Posts: 7024
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11535 on: January 14, 2018, 12:37:08 AM »
Four cashiers, two baggers, and a security guard were all fired the other day for theft  :o.  Now the rest of us have more hours than we know what to do with.



WolfWay

  • They burnt down my house... They ate my tailor!
  • Member
  • Posts: 2833
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11536 on: January 14, 2018, 11:11:15 PM »
I could not scroll, but here’s the direct link: http://www.wlwt.com/article/kings-school-board-member-player-parent-resigns-over-jersey-controversy/15050873

“Guilty of not saying no.” That’s just a fancy way of saying they condoned it, correct?  ::)

My Jerk to English reader says it means, "I thought it was hilarious until someone applied consequences and now I'm pretending to be sorry."
Also, "I totally didn't do it, some other nasty totally people did it, I just didn't say no to it".

I particularly like the phrase "We must learn somethings are never funny." They were never funny to begin with and the fact he's hiding behind claiming "it was a joke, bro" probably means he was 100% fine with the joke until people called them out on it.
<3

Cleargleam

  • Member
  • Posts: 150
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11537 on: January 15, 2018, 12:03:11 PM »
PD of the highest order: sending out false missile strike warnings to Hawaiians  :o

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/01/13/false-ballistic-missile-alert-rattles-hawaii/1031491001/

I think doing it *deliberately* (as a "joke") would be.  Human error still happens; people do make mistakes.

This incident *did* highlight a *process* that is broken (they are already saying that one corrective action is to require two individuals to initiate the alarm). 

I don't think one person should bear the accountability of the entire fiasco on his/her head alone.  As I understand it, the conditions in those bunkers is pretty unreal.  If my understanding is correct, there is too much time spent on training and testing ("too much" because the test becomes the only assessed metric).  This sort of situation led to mass cheating in the Air Force a few years ago.

The problem is the culture and the environment (and a broken process) more than simply one person's actions.

Tea Drinker

  • Member
  • Posts: 2204
  • Now part of Team Land Crab
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11538 on: January 15, 2018, 04:45:28 PM »
PD of the highest order: sending out false missile strike warnings to Hawaiians  :o

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/01/13/false-ballistic-missile-alert-rattles-hawaii/1031491001/

I think doing it *deliberately* (as a "joke") would be.  Human error still happens; people do make mistakes.

This incident *did* highlight a *process* that is broken (they are already saying that one corrective action is to require two individuals to initiate the alarm). 

I don't think one person should bear the accountability of the entire fiasco on his/her head alone.  As I understand it, the conditions in those bunkers is pretty unreal.  If my understanding is correct, there is too much time spent on training and testing ("too much" because the test becomes the only assessed metric).  This sort of situation led to mass cheating in the Air Force a few years ago.

The problem is the culture and the environment (and a broken process) more than simply one person's actions.

Another way the process is broken: most people had no idea of what they should do in response to an alarm. If you're setting up a warning system (for anything) you should also publish information about what to do if the event happens. I know a little more than I did a week ago, because one article I read about this false alarm included a pointer to ready.gov and a brief description of their advice.
Any advice that requires the use of a time machine may safely be ignored.

rashea

  • Member
  • Posts: 9709
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11539 on: January 16, 2018, 09:39:07 AM »
PD of the highest order: sending out false missile strike warnings to Hawaiians  :o

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/01/13/false-ballistic-missile-alert-rattles-hawaii/1031491001/

I think doing it *deliberately* (as a "joke") would be.  Human error still happens; people do make mistakes.

This incident *did* highlight a *process* that is broken (they are already saying that one corrective action is to require two individuals to initiate the alarm). 

I don't think one person should bear the accountability of the entire fiasco on his/her head alone.  As I understand it, the conditions in those bunkers is pretty unreal.  If my understanding is correct, there is too much time spent on training and testing ("too much" because the test becomes the only assessed metric).  This sort of situation led to mass cheating in the Air Force a few years ago.

The problem is the culture and the environment (and a broken process) more than simply one person's actions.

Another way the process is broken: most people had no idea of what they should do in response to an alarm. If you're setting up a warning system (for anything) you should also publish information about what to do if the event happens. I know a little more than I did a week ago, because one article I read about this false alarm included a pointer to ready.gov and a brief description of their advice.

And maybe have an "oops" or "all clear" message ready. I guess a lot of the delay in telling people that there was no threat is they hadn't written that message.
"Manners change, principles don't. It's about treating people with consideration, respect and honesty." Peter Post

Vermont

AnnaT

  • Member
  • Posts: 201
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11540 on: January 16, 2018, 04:58:06 PM »
And now it looks as if Japan has done the same thing...  :o

At least it only took them 5 minutes to send the "oops"...

DanaJ

  • Member
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11541 on: January 16, 2018, 05:11:15 PM »
This incident *did* highlight a *process* that is broken (they are already saying that one corrective action is to require two individuals to initiate the alarm). 

There is a photo circulating of what the screen looks like that resulted in the bad click. It is a really, really bad user interface design. It was a list that basically looks like:
  • Amber Alert - Statewide
  • Amber Alert - County Only
  • Missle Alert
  • Tsunami Warning
  • Landlside Road Closure
  • Drill - Missle Alert
  • High Surf Warning
Then there is a Yes/No confirmation. That this false alarm hasn't happened before now is shocking.

jedikaiti

  • Swiss Army Nerd
  • Member
  • Posts: 2862
  • A pie in the hand is worth two in the mail.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11542 on: January 16, 2018, 11:06:50 PM »
I keep seeing on tech subreddits that it's also a largely untested system, aside from looking like a toddler's first web page in 1996.
What part of v_e = \sqrt{\frac{2GM}{r}} don't you understand? It's only rocket science!

"The problem with re-examining your brilliant ideas is that more often than not, you discover they are the intellectual equivalent of saying, 'Hold my beer and watch this!'" - Cindy Couture

Shalamar

  • Member
  • Posts: 354
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11543 on: January 17, 2018, 04:41:08 PM »
I told my husband, only half-jokingly, that the delay in sending out the "Oops" might have been because the person responsible spent the next 20 minutes in an utter panic, wondering what on earth to do.

I work in I.T., and on the (thankfully) rare occasions that I've screwed up royally, it usually takes me several minutes to gather my courage to tell my boss.

(Mind you, my mistakes aren't liable to result in a statewide panic ...)

DanaJ

  • Member
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11544 on: January 17, 2018, 04:43:34 PM »
I told my husband, only half-jokingly, that the delay in sending out the "Oops" might have been because the person responsible spent the next 20 minutes in an utter panic, wondering what on earth to do.

I'm sure I would have been pounding the "undo" keys thunderously for at least 15.

Hillia

  • Member
  • Posts: 3395
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11545 on: January 17, 2018, 05:06:00 PM »
The famous "ohnosecond" - that tiny bit of time between realizing you've hit the wrong key and seeing the effect.

Mel the Redcap

  • Scheming Foreign Hussy married to a Good Ethnic Boy!
  • Member
  • Posts: 2353
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11546 on: January 17, 2018, 05:30:26 PM »
The article says that at least part of the delay was because that system has access to the emergency text system to send warnings, but was never granted access to send retractions, apparently because nobody thought of it before.

I bet it has access now.
"Set aphasia to stun!"

DanaJ

  • Member
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11547 on: January 18, 2018, 01:50:10 PM »
CRUD MONKEYS!, can you imagine if firealarms were set up like that? You have a fire drill and it won't stop until you bulldose the building.

Cleargleam

  • Member
  • Posts: 150
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11548 on: January 18, 2018, 05:30:59 PM »
I told my husband, only half-jokingly, that the delay in sending out the "Oops" might have been because the person responsible spent the next 20 minutes in an utter panic, wondering what on earth to do.

I work in I.T., and on the (thankfully) rare occasions that I've screwed up royally, it usually takes me several minutes to gather my courage to tell my boss.

(Mind you, my mistakes aren't liable to result in a statewide panic ...)

According to a friend who said he worked in a nuclear facility (I have no verification of the assertion), one of the exacerbating problems at Three Mile Island was - in fact - a series of other buttons pushed. 

The Rule, therefore, came down that in the event of an emergency, the first step a technician was to take was to put both hands in the air and touch *nothing*.

No idea whether it's true. 

It makes too much sense to actually be the case.  :/


atirial

  • Member
  • Posts: 3450
  • just 'plane mad
    • Tirial & Errror blog
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #11549 on: January 19, 2018, 05:41:52 AM »
According to a friend who said he worked in a nuclear facility (I have no verification of the assertion), one of the exacerbating problems at Three Mile Island was - in fact - a series of other buttons pushed. 

The Rule, therefore, came down that in the event of an emergency, the first step a technician was to take was to put both hands in the air and touch *nothing*.

No idea whether it's true. 

It makes too much sense to actually be the case.  :/
One of the best places I worked had a similar rule: Whatever error you made on a live server was 'no blame' as long as you told someone immediately. Trying to cover it or fix it without getting a second pair of eyes was a firing offense.