Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:So... (Score 1) 31

Then again, this was the NASA that thought it could ignore engineers and launch Challenger with frozen, leaky SRBs.

Since the same engineers had been telling them for five years that it was safe to launch with leaky SRB's (A part that's usually left out of the tale and most people are unaware of*) - I think NASA was more than justified in being a little skeptical of their last minute change in heart that they offered no justification more.

* That's why NASA was able to trot out a revised joint design so fast after the accident. The joint was a known problem and even though it was considered "safe" to continue flying, NASA and Morton-Thiokol were already working on a solution. (That the kludge that was the first flown joint design should never have entered service in the first place is another story.)

Comment Re:Wrong industry? (Score 1) 67

For instance, for any mission critical component NASA may have three different programs, each written in a different language and running on a unique platform.

Nope, the record (which was the Shuttle's control system) is two different programs running on identical hardware. They weren't even identical programs, the first had all mission features, the second had just enough to reach orbit and to return from orbit to earth. But even that was highly unusual - the norm is two identical computers running identical software.

If at any time one of the programs gives an answer that is not consistent with the other two then the minority report is discarded and the other two are presumed to be correct. No need to halt the proceedings and debug at that point.

Where the three comes in is the primary Shuttle flight control was three copies of the same software running on three identical computers. The minority report is in fact disregarded.

Comment Re:Wrong industry? (Score 1) 67

Not really in this case. This is not a situation where multiple programs do the same thing. Others match DNA identifiers to find a match where the one in question matches the statistical probably of identifiers being a match. Its kind of like the difference between determination of a pipeline diameter by measuring the pipeline verses measuring the flow rate and working back. So while the objective is the same, the approach is different enough to be separated from each other.

Comment Re:Yep (Score 1) 7

So is what we have some sort of mutual amusement society? I must confess you're the more fun of the two. damn_registrars takes on the appeal of rotating machinery burning up a bearing when he attempts to say that I'm "lying" about something or other. It's one thing to be as wrong as he is; it's another to be so tedious about it.

Comment Re:"The bible says, with breath comes life" (Score 1) 98

No, the entire abortion debate is about your desire to control and subjugate women.

I don't even subjugate my wife, much less women beyond my own roof. If your task is to keep me laughing, you're winning #BigTime.

It is the birthday that people celebrate.

So you're not alive, not even human, prior to then? I remain fascinated the desperate mental gymnastic routines of those fiendishly trying to justify murder.

Comment Re:Yep (Score 1) 7

I have to confess admiration of your steadfast willingness to strawman a strawman's strawman. Were you to strawman it any harder, it could venture toward borderline homoerotic.

Comment Re:The answer is, "Republiucans and Democrats" (Score 1) 37

Yeah, I didn't think you were going to do more than proclaim a full diaper.
As a thought experiment, putting you in a position where offering a substantial idea was an unavoidable task for you would be the height of amusement. Because I'm not sure your results would differ substantially from the current parade of jackwagons in office.

Comment "The bible says, with breath comes life" (Score 1) 98

Do you mean to quote Genesis 2:7? Are we all dead, then if God hasn't given us mouth-to-nose on a personal basis?
I'm the first to agree that, while the Bible is truth, that truth has an interpretation spectrum ranging from literal to figurative. The exegetical task is to (prayerfully) take the Bible as a whole, and not just run around proof-texting. Perhaps you prefer Psalm 139?:

13. For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.
14. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.

The abortion conversation is really about whether you respect humanity in both the unborn and adult phases. Men have no business (and I'm no saint in that regard) spraying their essence about indiscriminately, like common dogs. But if you want to be a dog, and want to spray, and want consequence-free targeting, then you'll rationalize the necessary murders.
As a legal matter, SCOTUS has OKed this holocaust.
I, for one, will continue to support at least the separation of public tax dollars from this disgusting immoral falsehood.
And may God have mercy on all who support it.

The Macintosh is Xerox technology at its best.