The problem occurs in those specific instances (such as they Hyatt Skywalk) where there isn't enough overall review. Reviewing such changes narrowly often results in encountering unforeseen but foreseeable difficulties.

I'm trying to avoid being a polarized element of Slashdot. I'm absolutely a believer in following the Yellow Brick Road - but to me, that's the narrow yellow stripe down the middle (and yes, I know that's a good way to get run over).

You're trying really hard, but all of those sarcastic points are 100% correct.
Impacts are nothing new. Impacts are not an immediate threat. People ARE looking for grant money we can't really afford, and if there is a serious threat the technology WILL magically appear when the US, China, and Russia are forced to bring out their secret military toys. Spending money now on projects that likely have a lot of overlap with existing (secret) tech already in use by certain governments IS a waste.

Ooh no woman your vagina. Little VAGINA.

It isn't disturbing because it concerns traitorous scum destroying the nation who are not subject to the rule of law.
Do you feel disturbed when a serial killer is executed?

what he said. While countermeasures can mediate the risk, you should assume that anything you send out electronically can be intercepted, decrypted and traced back to you. You can take steps to make this extremely difficult (hopefully more difficult than catching you is worth), you can certainly take steps I personally couldn't overcome without too much effort; but beating the intelligence gathering capabilities of one or more governments is at best an uncertain proposition (IMHO).

(n/t)

Have to admit - me too. Tried for an oatmeal stout from scratch once. I can say this - it had alcohol in it when I was done. It was even almost drinkable.

Please be specific. Try to express yourself with more than a thinly veiled one-line ad hominem statement. Written exposition demonstrating linguistic and reasoning skills appropriate to an adult would also be desirable.

Even pre-industrial humanity had that one figured out. Hell, even pre-historical humanity had it figured out.

There's got to be a better way to measure airspeed nowadays. Not necessarily cheaper, but better. Something with less failure modes?

System Crash.

The problem is that a human somewhere has to set up the automation. Even with the best designed automation, a human is involved somewhere. I'd like a human (or a computer that is at least as intelligent as a human) on site to mediate that risk. That means a flight crew aboard all commercial jets. I'm willing to accept the higher cost associated with that, in return for not putting absolute faith in a thing designed by the hand and eye of Man.

And when the M-5 unit fails? I can't run a starship with twenty crew.

The more automation we put into aircraft, the more pilots are trained to use it. Consider instrument flight - a condition where the pilot is actively ignoring his or her limited senses and trusting data provided by sensing devices installed on the aircraft. Never mind what the pilot sees when looking out the window or feels from his sense of balance, when the instruments indicate they're passing a marker (outer, middle, inner), they make specific inputs to the aircraft's flight controls. When the instruments say the aircraft is climbing/diving/rolling/yawing, the pilot manipulates the controls to adjust for it, even if he/she feels like the aircraft is in straight and level flight.

The better automation gets, the more pilots are trained to accept the automation despite their subjective feelings about flying the aircraft - especially when the automated action disagrees with their understanding of the situation. The automation is extensively tested and proven if used correctly, but even that is becoming more difficult as automated systems become increasingly complex. Simply run a Google search on "Controlled Flight Into Terrain" (CFIT) for numerous examples of both 1) pilots ignoring automation because they believe it is wrong, and 2) pilots incorrectly managing their automated systems.

It won't be. That's the point.

Brewers are either giving this stuff away for free or making as little as $30/ton so that they don't have to deal with it. They simply won't spend the $13M, since they have no reason to do so, and will instead landfill all of this stuff for cheap. Thus, this whole "beer price crisis" is a fictional event that will never occur.

If that equipment is going to be purchased, it will be purchased for the beer industry by the livestock industry, since they are the ones who stand to lose from this stuff going to landfills, but the article makes it pretty clear that most of them don't rely on this stuff. It's simply a nice addition, but hardly needed, for the vast majority of them. Some hobbyist ranchers will lose their hobby, but none of the serious ones are in any danger of going broke.