Hacker News Reader

Comment by bel8 | Hacker News Reader

fair but that's also a matter of time, in my opinion.

1) software doesn't commit suicide like some pilots did.

2) software has superhuman reflexes, processing power and are not affected by emotion.

3) software also will eliminate a whole class of failure modes that caused many crashes in the past like: "I won't seek nearest and safer airport because that will be expensive in fuel costs"

4) software is already landing planes and saving lives in the process: https://youtu.be/XawXSLRCM3o

5) Most part of a comercial flight is already controlled by software anyway. Pilots mostly take off/land and input coordinates and altitudes.

6) push for fully automous aircraft during modern war is going to speed up development and test of the tech.

I think it's a matter of time here too.

View on HN

> I won't seek nearest and safer airport because that will be expensive in fuel costs

If, and that's a big if, a pilot did choose a less safe airport because of monetary cost to his airline, it would be because those are the guidelines of the airline. And those guidelines would obviously be in the software too.

There's a fuzzy gray line here. Whether formalized or not, the way I see it, pilots will de facto be penalized for making decisions that cost an airline a ton of money, especially if it turns out to not have been an actual emergency.

I have no idea what legislation is in place regarding this topic and protecting pilots. But even with really good protections, there's no way that it won't affect your social standing with the higher ups if you divert and cost the company exorbitantly.

So pilots do have to make judgment calls about how much they're willing to risk their lives and the lives of their passengers versus a perceived risk, and worse, this judgment call exists in a weird fuzzy area where they're "allowed" to make the safe bet, but in practice, they will be punished for it.

Software doesn't (generally) have this luxury. It decides whether to land or continue flying based on some defined set of conditions.

It can still decide to risk the lives of the passengers. But that decision has to be approved by the airline, and can't live as an informal "you will lose brownie points with management" sword over the necks of the flight crew.

Unless we start to incorporate LLMs and probabilistic models into autopilots... but no-one would ever do that, right? ....

My points is it does not matter that the autopilot is superior to humans we still don’t replace pilots fully.

Nothing about modern airplanes prevents pilots from doing a Malaysian 370.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com