Why are Leukemia, prostrate and ovary cancer happening at a significantly (measurable) higher rate in Colorado? It's not a fair question just as the original post's strawman is invalid. The level in Colorado isn't safe because it's natural. Given the slightly better lifestyles measurable in lower obesity rates, one would 'expect' Colorado to be slightly better than average except for melanoma because of the thinner atmosphere/UV radiation.

http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/pp/cccr/1997-2007/CIC9707%20First%20Half%20(web).pdf

Would media covering bad places to live ever of that nature be tolerated excluding political motivation or a disaster event? There is a consistency in how information is filtered. There is a natural tendency for the media to keep a wet finger in the air to know which way the wind is blowing. The blowback from standing against the wind and being wrong is far riskier than standing with the wind and the wind being wrong.

It sometimes help to substitute the word 'music' which people assumes means the $1 paid for concept on their ipad presorted by large corporations with the word 'culture' which is a part of the fabric of their community.

If you really look at it, that's what is at stake.

Sextus Empiricus could have told us that 1750 years sooner if he had a mouse, a rat, a spare horse and a thousand-yard mine shaft.

Wow, two launches in one day. That's amaz..

Nevermind.

US pennies made before 1982 are mostly copper with a current melt down (illegal) value of $0.02 each. Post 1982, the content is 95+% zinc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_(United_States_coin)

My family has had a ranch in the mountains for about 100 years within line of sight of a military airport in more recent years.

The B17 and other wreckage there was horrible, uncommon and yet eventual.

You won't see those pictures on the Internet.

That's why you have the manager sign off on the requirements and functional specification. He can change his mind (and often does as a company better understands the market) but the cost is then his responsibility which he can balance with the potential reward in his decision and communicate a justification to stake holders. If you just make the box, the responsibility is then fairly yours. How was the manager to know the cost of his decision?

Tight algorithms are nice to have for most of the people actually using software. Engineering is an applied science. Engineers solve real problems which means clearly identifying the potential for their investment.

Identify who is going to use the software. Who is this person? Put together a profile on a couple sheets of paper. Have a face for this person. There may be a few personas that will use the software.

Given these personas. How do they accomplish the task you intend to improve today? What is painful in their current workflow? A possible answer is they can't do it.

Given these pain points. Create a list of pain points you can address. When you can say how these will be addressed, they become a functional specification. Part of the functional specification may include performance related concerns if it is driven by the persona.

Given a functional specification, you will need some architectural design to make the implementation possible, document that.

Now you have enough to say how you will test it; some will be unit tests and some will be operational. As you document the testing, you may find your functional specification needs to be more precise.

From there, use what you already know. Improve upon how you implement as time permits but keep the larger picture in mind.

Ideally you will have others review your documentation and code before letting it out the door.

When you are done, everything goes back to the original persona with pain points you are improving. If the tests are passing and the end user is not satisfied, you missed a requirement in your functional specification.