Some nice subtle snarks there, but yeah. 50-60 years seems like a long time for "the preliminary reconnaissance of the solar system", but hey, yeah. Historically it's not really out of line with how it has happened in the past.
No big systems go into production that don't have a slew of bugs...of not working according to the intent of the programmers (and analysts, managers and stakeholders).
Apparently it was intended at one time, then discarded. I've done that with logic in programs, too (you make a mass substitution and miss a thing or two, etc).
So a lingering bug from a discarded architecture: what do you think the boss would have to say when you explain to him that "the bug must remain because that was the intent of one of the original, long-gone programmers"?
A buggy paragraph in a 2400 page text. Hmm. Actually, few systems go into production that big that don't have a slew of bugs...of not working according to the intent of the programmers.
Re:Shipping trash to China is not recycling
on
Recycling Is Dying
·
· Score: 1
One man's shit is another man's stuff. - paraphrased Carlin
Your stuff is shit, and my shit is stuff.
Re:The problem is that landfills are too cheap
on
Recycling Is Dying
·
· Score: 1
I agree, those are the basic categories, and should be communicated to all (yes, I know it should be common sense, but...).
Frankly, when we went to single stream, I rejoiced in it. I had assumed that many of the problems stated in these posts had been taken care, and I'm dismayed that they aren't, or are causing other problems.
Like other posts I've seen here, I feel my utility should do a better job of explaining the issues.
Technology can fix some of these problems, but are more expensive. One thought I have is that, while expensive now, if some of these technologies are good and useful, the prices will come down. And when they do, we'll sell them to the rest of the world.
Re:The problem is that landfills are too cheap
on
Recycling Is Dying
·
· Score: 1
You may want to read my reply to an actual (i believe) Gypsy, and mostly what HE wrote!
Well, what your "Gypsy" wrote, was an AC being a smartass. Let's try to keep the stereotypes to a lower level on this site.
we must at least use the right term: theft
Ok, you made your point. I too have (fill in ethnic stereotype here) coming around at night poking through the trash. As long as they don't make a mess I'm not going to go out there and chase them off. "There but for the grace of God go I", etc. I do understand that it can hurt the economics of the local recycling business. I don't really know how to resolve the issue without being draconian.
Re:The problem is that landfills are too cheap
on
Recycling Is Dying
·
· Score: 1
Here it's a dime for any bag, paper or plastic. The wife generally brings her cloth bags shopping, and I always forget. In that case, if I can choose I'll go plastic because I find them very useful for lining a small trash can or other utility purposes.
Instead of spending $68 Billion on a single high speed rail line between 2 cities that are already linked by several adequate transportation options, maybe we should use a fraction of that money for water projects? Moving water to where people live is a simple engineering problem. Why not solve it instead of being a victim of the weather?
Yea to cancelling SuperTrain(tm), Nay to moving water around is simple.
One could say that moving people around is a simple engineering problem.
The Central Valley and other broad expanses in Ca. used to be bottoms of seafloors. This means it is *outstanding* land for farming, and a valuable national resource. One of the reasons that Ca. is the 8th largest economy in the world.
Cheap water is indeed subsidizing low food prices for the world. That will be changing, of course. I don't expect that we will be "coming over and taking it from" you, we will be paying market prices. At some point people with excess water will be happy to sell it to Ca.
Hopefully it won't happen so quickly as to cripple the 8th largest economy in the world. That might not be good for anybody.
"Dogs flew spaceships! The Aztecs invented the vacation! Men and women are the same sex! Our forefathers took drugs! Your brain is not the boss! Yes! That's right! Everything you know is wrong!"
The bias is actually very visible in the article with the Freudian slip of "send Russians money" instead of "paying Russians for services rendered" which is the actual case.
It's pretty rare for fanboy crowd to slip that badly though. Usually it's at least masked as a more reasonable argument.
Yeah, they forgot the "at gunpoint" whenever talking about govt. (taxpayer) bucks.
An RTOS is an obvious advantage. I wonder what the disadvantages of it were, as I assume they would have considered this. Expense? Resources? Experience? All of the above?
Adding more people to a project does not necessarily increase the chances for success. And, since the Planetary Society has a lot of educational outreach, I'm guessing that they included a lot of relative novices that learned a *hell* of a lot from the successes, but even more from the failures.
Anyways, I include this Planetary Society blurb because I believe this is one of the pathways to the solar system.
"Through this proof-of-concept mission, we will use CubeSats to open new paths beyond Earth and, one day, potentially to other planets with an inexpensive, inexhaustible means of propulsion: photons, solar energy in its purest form."
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. Pluto is classified as a dwarf planet.
That's what I want to know!
Signed, S. Platyfish
Some nice subtle snarks there, but yeah. 50-60 years seems like a long time for "the preliminary reconnaissance of the solar system", but hey, yeah. Historically it's not really out of line with how it has happened in the past.
I believe short buses, in honor of this conversation.
Stupid law. I've lived for a while in places that had that law. Annoying. Inefficient.
...It's just that the term had yet to be coined.
Well played.
No big systems go into production that don't have a slew of bugs...of not working according to the intent of the programmers (and analysts, managers and stakeholders).
Apparently it was intended at one time, then discarded. I've done that with logic in programs, too (you make a mass substitution and miss a thing or two, etc).
So a lingering bug from a discarded architecture: what do you think the boss would have to say when you explain to him that "the bug must remain because that was the intent of one of the original, long-gone programmers"?
A buggy paragraph in a 2400 page text. Hmm. Actually, few systems go into production that big that don't have a slew of bugs...of not working according to the intent of the programmers.
A closed cycle. Very efficient.
One man's shit is another man's stuff. - paraphrased Carlin
Your stuff is shit, and my shit is stuff.
I agree, those are the basic categories, and should be communicated to all (yes, I know it should be common sense, but...).
Frankly, when we went to single stream, I rejoiced in it. I had assumed that many of the problems stated in these posts had been taken care, and I'm dismayed that they aren't, or are causing other problems.
Like other posts I've seen here, I feel my utility should do a better job of explaining the issues.
Technology can fix some of these problems, but are more expensive. One thought I have is that, while expensive now, if some of these technologies are good and useful, the prices will come down. And when they do, we'll sell them to the rest of the world.
You may want to read my reply to an actual (i believe) Gypsy, and mostly what HE wrote!
Well, what your "Gypsy" wrote, was an AC being a smartass. Let's try to keep the stereotypes to a lower level on this site.
we must at least use the right term: theft
Ok, you made your point. I too have (fill in ethnic stereotype here) coming around at night poking through the trash. As long as they don't make a mess I'm not going to go out there and chase them off. "There but for the grace of God go I", etc. I do understand that it can hurt the economics of the local recycling business. I don't really know how to resolve the issue without being draconian.
Here it's a dime for any bag, paper or plastic. The wife generally brings her cloth bags shopping, and I always forget. In that case, if I can choose I'll go plastic because I find them very useful for lining a small trash can or other utility purposes.
So true, so true. That's a funny bit...you're lucky you aren't going to lose any karma 'cause...it's true, so true.
Instead of spending $68 Billion on a single high speed rail line between 2 cities that are already linked by several adequate transportation options, maybe we should use a fraction of that money for water projects? Moving water to where people live is a simple engineering problem. Why not solve it instead of being a victim of the weather?
Yea to cancelling SuperTrain(tm), Nay to moving water around is simple.
One could say that moving people around is a simple engineering problem.
Having said that, I do understand your sentiment.
The Central Valley and other broad expanses in Ca. used to be bottoms of seafloors. This means it is *outstanding* land for farming, and a valuable national resource. One of the reasons that Ca. is the 8th largest economy in the world.
Cheap water is indeed subsidizing low food prices for the world. That will be changing, of course. I don't expect that we will be "coming over and taking it from" you, we will be paying market prices. At some point people with excess water will be happy to sell it to Ca.
Hopefully it won't happen so quickly as to cripple the 8th largest economy in the world. That might not be good for anybody.
Run it up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes it.
"Dogs flew spaceships!
The Aztecs invented the vacation!
Men and women are the same sex!
Our forefathers took drugs!
Your brain is not the boss!
Yes! That's right! Everything you know is wrong!"
The bias is actually very visible in the article with the Freudian slip of "send Russians money" instead of "paying Russians for services rendered" which is the actual case.
It's pretty rare for fanboy crowd to slip that badly though. Usually it's at least masked as a more reasonable argument.
Yeah, they forgot the "at gunpoint" whenever talking about govt. (taxpayer) bucks.
Why don't we do world peace?
We do. It's all the malcontents out there that won't go with the program.
"We do these things, and the other things, not because they're easy, but because they're hard!"
An RTOS is an obvious advantage. I wonder what the disadvantages of it were, as I assume they would have considered this. Expense? Resources? Experience? All of the above?
Adding more people to a project does not necessarily increase the chances for success. And, since the Planetary Society has a lot of educational outreach, I'm guessing that they included a lot of relative novices that learned a *hell* of a lot from the successes, but even more from the failures.
Anyways, I include this Planetary Society blurb because I believe this is one of the pathways to the solar system.
"Through this proof-of-concept mission, we will use CubeSats to open new paths beyond Earth and, one day, potentially to other planets with an inexpensive, inexhaustible means of propulsion: photons, solar energy in its purest form."
It is/was like a normal corporate or any other project then?
No. It wasn't.
Sometimes one needs Real Engineering(tm). This is an engineering test. To get to the point where Real Science(c) can get done.