Hacker News Reader

That's a pretty bad take away - no one wanted to drive trough the hurricane. The captain thought he was further away from the storm than he was, perhaps because of his use of an outdated weather feed.

A better take away might be, for important decisions, you should deeply understand the data(and importantly, it's limitations) you are using to make the decision.

View on HN

The report seems to suggest that his decision to drive where he did was baffling, even with the information he had available. All his officers were telling him to do otherwise, multiple times.

He was looking at different data then they were looking at.

If that were all it was, then why are the investigators surprised by his decision-making?

Why?

I mean, there seems to be no reasonable reason why that should be the case, he can see (and be notified) of everything they're seeing and he can substantiate his decision by pointing towards the data, and should do so - because in this case the other officers might have noticed problems with that data.

"...you should deeply understand the data(and importantly, it's limitations) you are using to make the decision."

Very apt also for the Air France 447 crash this author wrote about.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com