Economist Removed from Plane for Algebra
washingtonpost.com
washingtonpost.com
These sort of events really highlight how dangerous the combination of stupidity and fear is.
All 3 cases are women reporting men, which is interesting.
It's meaningless; the sample is far too small and also not representative of the population of such reports.
Not dangerous at all, it's really quite convenient.
Can't have all those people sloshing around unsupervised, or even apparently unsupervised. Gotta show 'em.
One of my friends had a problem a few years ago because she had a compass in the carry on luggage. It has a sharp metal tip, so it's forbidden. She didn't have any problem, and she could put it in the main luggage.
I think he protractors are completely safe, at lest the plastic protractors ...
I'm guessing that there is a rule that if a passenger reports a suspicious person, then the plane must be held and law enforcement must be notified. Fortunately, at that point common sense was allowed to take over, rather than spiraling into multiple agencies mindlessly following bad procedures.
I don't see that. Could you point out what makes you say that?
The law enforcement agent quickly cleared it up after arriving.
Looks like all the staff here did the best they reasonably could do with the information they were given.
A passenger said they were too sick to fly, so the plane went back to the gate. When it reached the gate, the passenger changed their story and things got more complicated.
http://www.npr.org/2016/04/23/475388651/when-it-comes-to-fli...
(Closer to home: My father had an interesting experience once at a chemistry conference when a member of the public heard that he was studying "free radials". Language is weird.)
"1555 28 May - John Dee imprisoned for heresy and for being a magician accused of 'calculating' as a form of magic"
http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/john-dee.htm
To be fair, the 'calculating' in question was casting horoscopes of the Monarch - which was regarded as a political thing to be doing in those days.
They saw casting the horoscope of the royals in the same way that we would view someone now who had inside knowledge of (say) a major development project in some part of a city and who used that inside knowledge to buy land cheap in order to speculate.
What would a U.S. President with fascistic tendencies do with this kind of power over people's liberty?
We're about to find out.
http://web-facstaff.sas.upenn.edu/~gmenzio/index_files/self4...
Thats really troubling. How to solve this ? I mean, dirty-workaround-solve this, not wishfull thinking reeducate solve this.
Some karma system, involving how much a person is socially connected, how much it contributed to society, how much it got planned, how much is at stake in its life?
But however you refine that algorithm- you catch a lot of unwanted fish, and someone like mohamed atta slips right through. This is really tough. I guess the best indicator is how mono-thematic your life is. If all your searches, all your interests and all your communication partners are "themed" - you desserve some suspicion. He is a math-expert, get him.
Simple stereotyping works to an extent, but it's an incredibly dumb system. But at the other end of the scale, exerting increasing control over the environment means corrosion of personal freedoms. Infiltration of organizations by security services works really well for established groups, but that's also fraught, and does nothing to stop tiny groups or loners, or identify people on the fly. Least worst is always going to be a balance, but that balance point will change depending on the context of every case.
Data, financial and whatnot, can already be restored. Architecture can already be rebuilt. Once nobody is able to inflict any lasting damage on society, everyone can just chill and maybe no one would want to try any terrorism, knowing how futile it would be.
I struggle to understand why vague accusations of "suspicious behavior" are treated this way, over and over again.
The real problem is these wildly unqualified citizen-Paul(ine)-Blarts who saw on an episode of Criminal Minds that looking up and left while writing non-ASCII characters is an indicator of terrorist intent. She essentially pulled the fire alarm on a bunch of people because she's an idiot. What she did is functionally no different than calling in a false report about some random passenger on a plane that's about to take off. She should have to pay a fine for all the time and resources she wasted with her little ruse (I'm sure she felt very clever when she conceived it).
Imagine a Richard Reid scenario where some guy beats the piss out of his seat neighbor because he thinks he's trying to bomb the flight. If he's right, he's a hero (and he should be applauded for stopping a bombing). If he's wrong and the guy was just tying his shoes, he gets charged with assault. This is a good thing, because we don't want people seeing physical violence as a cost free option.
Being too dumb to tell the difference between an episode of 24 and your boring ass day is not a tolerated excuse to physically assault people. It shouldn't be tolerated as a reason to call in false alarms either. I'm sick of stupid people being able to inflict massive amounts of inconvenience and even degrees of suffering with no consequences for being wrong.
* I realize that stupid is perhaps an imprecise and mean choice of words, but I can't come up with a better explanation for adults who cannot appropriately assess the threat posed by a nerdy Italian guy writing in a notebook who doesn't want to talk to them. I get that calling people stupid isn't a way to make them smarter, and that it can have a negative developmental impact for younger kids to view things in a smart/stupid fixed-talent paradigm, but we need to somehow bring back some of the cultural rejection for acting like a goddamn idiot. I don't really care if she gets smarter (though that would be nice), I have lower aims. I want her to be afraid to be wrong because actions should have consequences. If there's no cost incurred to this person (actually, she'll probably be praised for her "vigilance" by people she respects) where do we draw the line?
It's perfectly reasonable procedure to bring the plane back to the gate if a passenger states she feels too ill to fly.
This, combined with most people's statistical illiteracy about which risks actually affect them, is the root cause for a lot of problems I think.
Naturally, there will be ~99% false positives but it's worth the risks! I mean he could have been writing Arabic... the horror...
Better safe than sanity.
Why would Guido Menzio delete this post?
http://web-facstaff.sas.upenn.edu/~gmenzio/index_files/self4...
No, it has the equally distinctive and extremely popular and well-known "Houndstooth" pattern.
Wikipedia entry for Houndstooth pattern:
"Houndstooth, hounds tooth check or hound's tooth (and similar spellings), also known as dogstooth, dogtooth, dog's tooth, or pied-de-poule, is a duotone textile pattern characterized by broken checks or abstract four-pointed shapes, often in black and white, although other colours are used."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houndstooth
Wikipedia entry for Check - Use in fabrics:
"Check-patterned fabrics display bands in two or more colours in woven cloth."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Check_%28pattern%29
Wikipedia, definition of keffiyeh:
"Its distinctive standard woven checkered pattern may have originated in an ancient Mesopotamian representation of either fishing nets or ears of grain,[2] but the true origin of the pattern remains unknown."
Now any scribble is a "threat" and indication of something might be wrong? I better close my console window here as well
Just as a reminder there are two types of fascists: fascists and anti-facists
First of all this is the kind of shit fascists typically say. Secondly how does that even follow?!
Google Image search Antifa for all the love and understanding
My flight was cancelled and everyone was standing in line to get rescheduled. When my turn in the line came the American Airlines official gave me a number and asked me to call on it to get help instead, he said it would be quicker. I obliged and stepped aside. I thought he'd say the same to the rest of the people in the line. But, that didn't happen. Instead, he continued helping people before me in the line. I called the number, the wait was too long and I came back to him and asked for help. He (I think pretended to) look at his computer and told me nothing is available. Later I called the number again and got a seat. I was puzzled with the behavior of the airlines staff. I thought may be earlier seat wasn't available. But, I was certainly not happy with there service.
Later I also found out that last year only that they were sued by African-American employees for overtly racist patterns and practices: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/8/24/1415082/-American-Ai...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2016/05/07/iv...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2016/05/07/iv...
The woman was undoubtedly unnerved by the terse response to her attempt to be sociable, having never encountered someone in the midst of mathing hard. Or perhaps she just feared the equation had a singular solution.
I don't think this scenario is less likely than assuming that the woman was really that "stupid" to behave that way.
Everyone's got their favoured narratives, I guess, and get uncomfortable when they're challenged.
And algebra was developed by Greeks on 3rd century, although al-Khwārizmī developed it further (note btw that he was not an Arab but Persian, although he worked in Baghdad).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Hindu–Arabic_nu...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_algebra#Indian_alge...
Edit: See tuna-piano's comment below where he links a picture of Guido Menzio wearing a scraggly beard and keffiyeh combo.
http://web-facstaff.sas.upenn.edu/~gmenzio/index_files/self4...
Edit: Guido Menzio has since deleted, or made inaccessible to the general public the relevant Facebook page.
If she did come forward, I suspect that we would get a more nuanced and complete explanation for why she became suspicious of Menzio. There are already clues in Menzio's own account where he notes that he maintained a dismissive and non-committal attitude to her attempts at conversation, and remained locked with 'laser like' focus on his writing. In short, he was behaving in a strange and hostile manner.
Also, since when has practicing mathematics on a plane become a "strange and hostile" activity? Would she have reported him if he was focused on a Sudoku puzzle?
Either way, the woman sounds like a genuinely disturbed and extremely paranoid person.
Most people have never experienced a desire to do a bunch of math. They don't get it. They don't understand the need to concentrate or why one might voluntarily subject oneself to math. It's strange behavior. For some people it is also intellectually threatening; people don't react well to things that could make them feel stupid.
She may also be used to having men nearly always willing to chat with her. The fact that he is unwilling is strange and possibly insulting.
She is likely an extrovert, and expects it of others. Social interaction is expected. She expects others to enjoy what she herself enjoys; why would you not? Of course people want to chat!
As an extreme introvert myself, I have become used to being accused of rudeness, snobbery, hostility and general weirdness. Strangers and acquaintances become appreciably tense if I dare to produce a book, or abstract myself in thought.
The trick is to set such people at ease. Show goodwill, talk about the weather for fifteen seconds max, and then switch off. The irony is that if Guido Menzo had taken the trouble to explain what he was writing, with the appropriate nerdish enthusiasm, he would have been guaranteed to be left alone for the rest of the flight.
While I think this borders on victim-blaming, I can't help but smile broadly when I try to imagine the scene: woman with flight anxiety tries to connect with in-row neighbour, and unwittingly opens a can of algebraic worms, symbols and Greek letters.
I'm sorry, but if I'm trying to achieve something (whether reading, writing, or trying to get some sleep), I would definitely consider it hostile for a random stranger to keep trying to start a conversation with me.
As an introvert myself, I find extroverts attempts to start a conversation to be intrusive and very tiring, so I have developed techniques to set them at ease. As I noted in another reply, Guido Menzio could have achieved perfect peace for the rest of the journey simply by attempting to explain, in minute technical detail, exactly what he was doing.
You also comment else where about Menzio's picture, where he wears a "Yasser Arafat" scarf. Another commenter has remarks on his hair and beard as well, claiming that the combination of Menzio's dress and hair tripped the alarms of the passenger that reported him. Based on Menzio's portrait, he looks like a bit of a hipster or one of the several colleagues I have that are too lazy to shave on a daily basis. His behaviour was probably best categorised as being rude.
The Washington Post article also says: "Instead this quick-thinking traveler had Seen Something, and so she had Said Something. That Something she’d seen had been her seatmate’s cryptic notes, scrawled in a script she didn’t recognize."
And
"Menzio showed the authorities his calculations and was allowed to return to his seat, he told me by email."
Clearly these events may not have been reported perfectly accurately, but there is nothing to suggest that any of the actions were reasonable. Also serious question: I also don't understand how one mistakes calculus for the script of a foreign language. In my mind they do not look anything alike.
I suspect his fellow passenger's account would bear little resemblance to either the Washington Post's spin on events, or how Menzio himself chose to interpret the matter on his Facebook page.
Reading between the lines, it would appear that Guido Menzio was pointedly and gratuitously rude to his neighbor when she attempted to initiate friendly conversation. He responded to her questions with curt non-answers, and remained pointedly focused on his work. Overly talkative people can be severely annoying, but that did not justify Guido Menzio's overt rudeness to his neighbor. He could have saved a lot of trouble with a little diplomacy.
> I also don't understand how one mistakes calculus for the script of a foreign language.
From the Washington Post article, it appears that the woman complained to security that Guido Menzio was intensely doing math, so clearly she did not mistake a differential equation for 'terrorist writing'. It was not the math that unnerved her, but his behavior.
>You also comment else where about Menzio's picture, where he wears a "Yasser Arafat" scarf.
I was wrong about the "Yasser Arafat" scarf. The article doesn't suggest that he was wearing one at the time. Again, there is no indication that Menzio's appearance was the cause of the incident, but rather his behavior.
Have you considered the possibility he has a fear of flying and was using mathematics to take his mind off it, and he was desperately trying to fend off her disrupting his productively distracting train of thought? There's all sorts of very good reasons not to talk to strangers.
There is a narrative here, which appears at first very compelling, especially to readers of HN: gentle intellectual persecuted by hysterical ignoramus...
But the narrative gradually reveals holes and inconsistencies which makes it at best inconclusive, and in my considered opinion, strongly supports a radically different interpretation: Menzio behaved like a demented nut-job, terrified his fellow passenger, published a self-serving narrative on facebook which was picked up by the Washington Post and spun even further.
Where is your skepticism?
He is not wearing a keffiyeh in that picture. A keffiyeh is a square scarf that is worn on the head.
In that picture he is wearing a non-square (fringed) scarf, and around his neck.
Only a nut would look at that scarf and make the leap "Yasser Arafat" -> "Palestinian Liberation Organization" -> "terrorist" as you do.
TV cook Rachel Ray made an ad for Dunkin Donuts a few years ago, in which she wore a scarf around her neck. The Trump-supporting type nutcases came out of the woodwork and said she was wearing the scarf to support the terrorists. You can see a sample of it if you Google "Dunkin Donuts" "Rachel Ray" and "keffiyeh". Most of the articles are by people who appear on Fox News regularly.
Only a wack job makes the leap from a math professor who is presumably an American of Italian descent that wears a scarf to the scarf being a keffiyeh! That Yasser Arafat wore! Who was in the PLO! Which is proscribed as terrorist! By make the leap I mean make the leap like you did.
A keffiyeh can also be worn around the neck (the favored way for Westerners, though also found in the M.E.) covering the face, or even wound into a turban. Wikipedia:
"The Palestinian keffiyeh is a gender-neutral chequered black and white scarf that is usually worn around the neck or head."
>Only a nut would look at that scarf and make the leap "Yasser Arafat" -> "Palestinian Liberation Organization" -> "terrorist" as you do.
Here, we are in total agreement. Menzio himself made a point of calling it his "Arafat scarf" and posted an image of himself wearing it to the Facebook discussion in order support his delusion that he was 'racially profiled' by a racist Trump supporter who was unable to distinguish mathematical notation from 'terrorist writing'.
If you are looking for a nutter, you need look no further than Menzio himself.
Also, no statement about a politician rises to the level of "deserving" to be removed from a plane.
ahem... Isn't it still Obama's America? Wait till November to accuse future Trump's presidency of your past misfortunes.
Instead of simply dismissing this person as ignorant, I hope folks on this forum will take a moment to reflect on the tragic state of the entire system. If we're going to enable / empower all classes of people we (those in a position to make a difference) need to do a better job of raising the bar, and helping all those in need to raise their own bar too.
I apologize, but it's just not worth continuing this conversation because we are talking about completely different things.
I think you fail to realize that these idiots affect mainly minorities, as that is how uneducated minds work: they can't see past their own identity (and by the power of numbers, most idiots are white). So what you're effectively saying is "I'm okay with idiots harrassing minorities".
(edit to add an unwarranted disclaimer: by "idiot", I'm not referring to the lady in the original story, but to the OP's description of the "tragically ignorant, in need of raising their bar")
Please let me know if you manage to catch the witches you appear to be hunting.