That is the part you drew a false conclusion without understanding. Something not having a motor does not mean bits in a computer do not get flipped. The 787 uses a fly by wire system. Computer bits can get flipped. Programming can flip the bits. Do I need to say this slower for you?

No one said anything about "Requiring". You are using strawman tactics.

NO. The report specifically the flight data recorder logged a change in position. That does not mean necessarily mean the switches changed position. Again, please read up on fly by wire systems.

First of all it was 6 seconds before Engine 1's switch was recorded to RUN. Then Engine 2 shortly after that. Facts matter. But you have evidence the pilot physically switched them back? Please provide such evidence to the proper authorities as they would like to have. Oh you don't?

In the summary of the article, it mentioned an exact recorded case. Did you not bother to read the summary?

You:"Fucking hell . . .your fucking imagination. . ."
Also you: "quit trying to project emotions"
That statement is ironic at best.

And I have explained that "cutoff" is a very specific wording that might ONLY mean these switches as it is not part of international pilot terms. You seem not to accept this. ONLY THESE SWITCHES.

Let's go over this AGAIN. You said cutoff does not show anywhere else but the warning. So when the pilot uses the herm, he can only MEAN these switches and nothing else. ONLY THESE SWITCHES.

Again ONLY THESE SWITCHES. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

It was NOT written in the preliminary report. Please cite where it was located because it was not.

And no switches can ever fail in any way?

Dude you really need to take a chill pill. You got very angry that we can't read your mind because you didn't bother to explain yourself. Everyone should have somehow read your mind and connected all the dots. And that is somehow my problem. Do you I understand your anger correctly?

When did that change?

You shouldn't have Sharepoint on the open internet. It needs to be behind a VPN. The VPN should be the only exposed entrypoint on the internet.

Most laptop sizes are dictated by the screen size. On most modern laptops, the keyboard usually doesn't even fill up the bottom half of the laptop.

The Thinkpad 701 was tiny, less than 10 inches wide, 640x480 LCD. Wikipedia says:

If Bush hadn't invaded Iraq, then Putin wouldn't have invaded Ukraine. It's the mistake that keeps on giving.

It wasn't about Ukraine being a peaceful nation. It was about Ukraine selling basically every weapon in their inventory. No one wanted the nuclear weapons to end up in the hands of terrorists. Russia did a better job of securing weapons than Ukraine.

The Budapest Memorandum was way too optimistic. It said the problem would be resolved in the UN.

Tim: "Well, that's no ordinary rabbit! That's the most foul, cruel, and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on! Look, that rabbit's got a vicious streak a mile wide! It's a killer! He'll do you up a treat, mate."

While Boeing has not done well in the last decades or so, this case may not be on Boeing. 1) In this case, the plane was 24 years old and not brand new. At that point, it is more on Delta for maintenance of the plane. 2) Boeing does not make engines.

Looking, I'm not seeing much. Can you name a few cases so I can see what happened?
I'm actually seeing more exonorations because of DNA. I did find one case, but that was a police lab contaminating a sample by not properly cleaning equipment, not a DNA database problem.
I've read write-ups where they find a relative of a suspected offender in the DNA database, but in those cases the officers DID go for collaborative evidence. More DNA from more relatives, for example, to nail down the actual suspect.
For example, my dad found a relative via DNA testing, she was the result of an affair. Having DNA from multiple relatives allowed him to narrow down the possible father to two brothers. That is enough for a warrant, but probably not an arrest.
'Too many officers' isn't a problem I think we're anywhere near yet, more the wrong type as officers.

The police can screw anything up, of course, and prosecutors are sometimes little better. However, I'm not aware of any actual arrests based 'solely' or even mostly on a cosanguinity comparison. Instead, they use the cosanguity match along with other evidence to get a warrant for the suspect's DNA.
My dad, before he passed, got big into genealogy and ancestry. A 4% match, while a low percentage, is still enough to reliably indicate relationship. We have stenography systems that can still make a match with less remaining.
I've read some write-ups on what can happen. They get the initial hit of a possible cousin or such. They can then hit up other people in the family tree in many cases. The parents, a different cousin, it can all help nail down what section of the family tree the sample matches. Eventually they get it down to a person.
At this point, they generally haven't actually arrested anybody, but gotten a warrant for a DNA sample.
Haven't seen any cases where they both arrested and took somebody to trial without a direct DNA match.
As for bail - you do get bail money back if you pay the bail directly. It is a bail bond, where you pay a 3rd party to put up the bail money, that you don't get it back.
For what is generally a 'cold case', they don't arrest people willy-nilly.

That and I think one of the main reasons this existed was larger displays were more expensive relatively than they are today. So it was gimmicky solution to the problems of the day.

1) And where should they be moved? They were located under the throttle. That seems natural to locate all the controls related to engine power near each other. Also in the event of an emergency like an engine fire, the controls should be easily accessible. 2) They were. Normally it requires a 2 step motion to move the switch position. They must be pulled up then moved.

Very few businesses that are involved in IT in any way have anything remotely close to decent security.

Basically, they need to reintroduce the US' Internet Czar, who should have meaningful authority and who should impose meaningful IT security standards. That small companies can't afford to hire security staff is irrelevant as they mostly either work in the cloud using SAAS, at which point their provider should be handling all the security. If you want to roll your own, then you should accept the burden of paying for adequate security. Minimum standards apply to just about everything else in life, and I'd rate getting IT security right just a little bit more important than getting cars to not roll over (you can usually survive a roll) or preventing toasters from spontaneously combusting (you can park electrical appliances away from flammable stuff).

You can avoid catastrophes with defective appliances but you can't avoid catastrophes with defective IT systems.