SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
An unconfirmed incident near Heathrow Airport in London may fuel calls for a drone ban:
A plane approaching Heathrow Airport is believed to have hit a drone before it landed safely, the Metropolitan Police has said. The British Airways flight from Geneva was hit as it approached the London airport at about 12:50 BST with 132 passengers and five crew on board. After landing, the pilot reported an object - believed to be a drone - had struck the front of the Airbus A320. Aviation police based at Heathrow have launched an investigation. Police said no arrests have been made.
If confirmed, it is believed to be the first incident of its kind in the UK. A British Airways spokesman said: "Our aircraft landed safely, was fully examined by our engineers and it was cleared to operate its next flight." The airline will give the police "every assistance with their investigation", the spokesman added.
Also at The Guardian and Reuters.
Previously: Call for Research after Drone Near-Misses in the UK
(Score: 2) by Arik on Monday April 18 2016, @12:29AM
Noun
(uncountable)
(slang) Annoyance because of a perceived insult.
(slang) Upset because of a perceived injustice.
He's just full of butthurt because I insulted him.
Despite the weakness of the dictionary definition, I am able to correctly parse the word in the context of your posts.
You should learn to do the same for the word drone. You can refer back to the picture. There may well be corner cases but the vast majority are perfectly clear. A toy airplane is not a drone. A drone is a working craft, as in it has a job to do.
If this plane had impacted a drone there would have been damage. Most likely it bumped some sort of bird.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Monday April 18 2016, @12:59AM
Ad hominem much?
You like yourdictionary.com better than the OED or Random House, fine:
-- http://www.yourdictionary.com/drone [yourdictionary.com]
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday April 19 2016, @12:40PM
Sorry, but it seems people are stubbornly refusing to stick to the officially mandated meaning of the word "drone".
But then again, there isn't one, so that's fine.
Dictionaries are descriptive, not proscriptive, and are generally slightly behind the times.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 1) by Arik on Tuesday April 19 2016, @03:06PM
You start with two words that clearly describe two ends of a spectrum.
Then you get people confusing the two words, either deliberately or through ignorance.
Then you get relativists defending their mistakes using the same logic you just stated.
And finally you get a language that no longer has two words to describe two ends of a spectrum, but instead two words that are now synonyms, and no simple way to express what was simply and easily expressible before.
This is how a culture commits suicide. Why are you assisting?
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday April 19 2016, @04:38PM
Then you get relativists defending their mistakes using the same logic you just stated.
I'm not defending anything. It's simply the way English works and will continue to work, whether you like it or not.
Culture is not "commiting suicide" because one word is now slightly more ambiguous than it was before. It's hardly the first time this has happened and it won't be the last.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by Arik on Tuesday April 19 2016, @04:52PM
It's not a given, it's not 'just how English works' that meaningful words are stripped of meaning and conversation made progressively more difficult.
If it were as you paint it, every random error would just automatically become correct English over time, and that's never been the case. (If it were, English would by this point be essentially incapable of expressing any denotative meaning - all words would over time be reduced nearly to synonyms with only emotive distinctions remaining fully expressible.)
What happens is ONLY IF large number of people, including particularly *literate* people who engage in reading and writing every day, do not accept it, classify it simply as an error, then it remains an error. It is OUR language, and it is OUR duty to defend it. You're advocating we surrender instead, whether that's what you intend to do or not.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday April 19 2016, @06:08PM
It is OUR language, and it is OUR duty to defend it. You're advocating we surrender instead, whether that's what you intend to do or not.
No, I'm saying you've already lost this one. Get over it.
Are you offended every time someone says "that's so cool" when they don't mean a thing is of low temperature? Do you cringe every time someone uses "bloody" as an intensifier, because it might be mistaken for "covered in blood"?
It is OUR language, and it is OUR duty to defend it.
No, it's not. I've as much right to use words as I see fit as you have. I could start saying "blarb" instead of "cheese" but I'd be an idiot to expect anyone else to join in (but hey, it might take off). It's our "duty" simply to use - and modify - language as best suits our needs. If the "loss" of the word drone becomes such an encumberance (which, let's face it, is hardly likely) the system will correct itself in time. A word for buzzy flying toys was "needed" as they became more popular; "drone" wasn't doing all that much (and in most dictionaries it covers them anyway) so it's been co-opted.
It's hardly in the same class as "literally" where a meaning really has been lost (replaced almost by its opposite), and can be nearly impossible to judge from context. I'm still hoping that'll sort itself out and the new usage will die off, but who knows.
Good grief, if it was up to the likes of you we'd still be saying "forsooth" and "gadzooks" and calling each other "sirrah" instead of "buddy."
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 1) by Arik on Tuesday April 19 2016, @07:58PM
Neither of those uses conflict with the primary denotative meaning. Neither of them collapse a semantic space obstructing conversation.
You're comparing meaningful slang expressions to *errors* that strip meaning rather than adding to it.
"A word for buzzy flying toys was "needed" as they became more popular"
No, it wasn't. We already have terms for these, and if I am wrong on that, if a new term is genuinely needed for some reason, then fine, coin a new term. Don't take a term that already has a meaning, a similar but nevertheless very different meaning, and just misuse it willy-nilly.
Drone was doing an awful lot, in fact, that's simply ignorance speaking. Drone has been in continuous use in this sense in the military since at least 1935.
"Good grief, if it was up to the likes of you we'd still be saying "forsooth" and "gadzooks" and calling each other "sirrah" instead of "buddy.""
Not at all. Those are just more examples where you're just citing slang expressions. I never objected to slang expressions. You're missing the point entirely.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?