Slashdot Mirror
In-Flight Reboot?
steelem writes "The Washington Post is running a story about how the F-22 Raptor's software requires in-flight reboots. Apparently the 2 million line software project is 93% done. Knowing most projects I've been on, it'll stay that way for another few years."
Even better than software that never crashes is no software at all.
Why use software when a simple mechanical device will suffice?
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
From the article:
"...the F/A-22 is the absolute most-awesome killing machine I have ever, ever flown."
"This is the 'let's go kill people' software."
"...use the information you have in the cockpit to go and kill somebody..."
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for having a great military and defending freedom and whatnot... But is it any wonder that other countries see Americans as barbaric imperialist bringers of doom?
The backend is running a "light" version of the Micro$haft "Jet" database which apparently is 93% complete.
It is interesting that the Micro$haft "Jet" database that ships with Windoze has 4 million lines of code and is 93% incomplete...
From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
But I can't fault the crackhead mods on this one - it combines Star Wars and "M$" bashing. Very shiny beads indeed - for loser geeks who like to play god on Slashbork from their parents' basement in Wisconsin.
OK, rant over.
> I was reading somewhere (possibly Scientific American) about the building of systems (computer software or robots) which can tolerate a restart or failureof one or more of them and keep working.
Yes, and I seriously considered writing a letter to the editors suggesting that 99.999% of the goals of that research could be met simply by switching from Windows to Linux. I wish I had written it; I don't object to research into fault tolerant systems, but I do object to the idea that reliability is something you graft onto a system as an afterthought.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade