> Deciding to change policies to effect the recommendation isn't their role.

And if it was the role of investigators to change policy, then there would be enormous pressure from industry to reach convenient conclusions, poisoning the investigation process.

In both cases, the controller's fate was grim. Peter Nielsen (Überlingen) was murdered by a relative of a crash victim. Robin Lee Wascher (LA), whose own parents had died in an earlier air crash, was crucified in the media and never worked as a controller again.

Both precedents are applicable, because the Laguardia controller is also going to be savaged.

Yes! But every news organization is leading with "I messed up." And the US President commented "They messed up", though it's unclear who that was in reference to.

Humans have a powerful need to affix blame and punish individuals. On the internet, you are forever the worst moment of your life.

We set air traffic controllers up to fail, and then when something goes wrong we torture them until they die, and then torture their memory after they die.

I agree. Nevertheless I wonder if this approach can help with certain other places where Git sometimes struggles, such as whether or not two commits which have identical diffs but different parents should be considered equivalent.

In the general case, such commits cannot be considered the same — consider a commit which flips a boolean that one branch had flipped in another file. But there are common cases where the commits should be considered equivalent, such as many rebased branches. Can the CRDT approach help with e.g. deciding that `git branch -d BRANCH` should succeed when a rebased version of BRANCH has been merged?

> I've always done my best to search from a browser context that isn't logged in as a result.

It isn't sufficient to avoid being logged in — you have to ensure that the search strings alone, grouped by IP address or some other signal, aren't enough to identify you. When AOL publicly released an archive with 20 million search strings in 2006, many users got exposed:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_log_release

There's also the issue of a site's Terms of Service when not logged in, which may allow an AI to be trained on your interactions — which could potentially bleed compromising information into the generative results other people see.