Well, it is for a single generator. The power source is removed from the system so that not subsequent failures can damage the aircraft. Problem is: This applies to a single generator, not the entire aircraft. Aircraft power systems are designed so that an alternate source can take over for the failed one. But if they all go off line together, not so safe.

There's the principle of lessons learned. And not rewriting everything from scratch. This problem has been addressed and solved in numerous RTOSs and libraries. And even if these could not be used, simple things like overflows, underflows and other sorts of out of range variables are supposed to be caught by the sorts of rigorous analysis avionics s/w is supposed to be subject to. That this was caught in a lab test (and this far after the system went into service) is problematic as well. The complexity of most software (particularly real-time apps) rules out being able to cover all combinations of use cases by overall system tests.

... couldn't make heads or tails of the bill.

Sounds like BS to me. A service rep can't spot itemized long distance charges? More like, "We're gonna start making bundles off this dotty old geezer. Keep him going as long as possible."

Cthulhu has fiber and I'm stuck with Comcast's excuse for broadband.

No. This is a "What the f* were you goofballs thinking when you wrote this code? And if this is all the better you can do, what other gotchas are hiding in there?"

Don't worry. The 787 can always fail over to battery power ...... Umm, oh, oh.

... for the fault in the reviews. Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have been sacked.

... that Russia stands to gain the most from global warming. Huge swaths of permafrost tundra are changing into what could be arable land. So, should we even attempt to slow AGW down by reducing CO2 emissions, we stand a pretty god chance of angering them and triggering nuclear war.

... climatology included a study of proctology.

Because Robock is pulling the threat of nuclear war right out of his ass. Sadly, the nations most likely to suffer from geoengineering gone wrong, or failing to fix the climate 'problem' using geoengineering are too small and weak to threaten anyone with nukes. The few big players in the nuclear game are also big enough globally that, unless we have their cooperation, unilaterally trying to tweak the climate just won't work.

We can do what we want. But unless China, India and Russia get behind such an effort, they can pretty much push the climate any way they want.

Currently, there is no mechanism in place to track demand. Other than what the broadband companies do for themselves. With regulated utilities (which broadband providers should become), service requests and response times are tracked and reported to various utilities commissions.

If there were some centralized point where requests for service could be accumulated, then Comcast and its ilk couldn't claim that there is insufficient demand in a particular area to justify construction.

That would be a kind of 'false positive'. A report of an aircraft in a position where there is none. Soon, false negatives (no ADS-B where surveillance radar shows one) will be investigated by the dispatch of armed fighter aircraft. False positives can be handled in a similar manner by tracking the source of spoof signals and dispatching the appropriate countermeasures.

Radar is so twentieth century. ADS-B broadcasts GPS position, heading and some air data. Every other aircraft in the area is free to recieve and display nearby planes and tracks.

.... waiting to handle an event.

Clearly Gizmag and Best Buy are depending on technology to defeat an enemy of far superior numbers and resources. These measures, while innovative, are clearly destined to end in defeat.

In this case, disruptive means that the people who need to prop up the peso/dollar exchange rate to pay back loans denominated in dollars will get screwed. Because the supply of pesos flowing through the system available for the banks to skim will dry up. And US investment banks who took risks wil have to renegotiate loans. Or accept default.

And if there's one thing we know about wealthy investors: They never take a loss on a gamble. Someone else must be found to make them whole.