This is their second attempt.

I feel like Blue Origin wasted money on an expensive hard to build rocket.

Why is that wasted money? Because its main competitor SpaceX thinks VERY HARD about manufacturability. Compare the speed at which SpaceX hauls out new Starships and Raptor engines. The USA used to know that manufacturability was important. That's how WW2 was won. One example, the Opel Blitz truck built by the Germans versus the GMC CCKW (nicknamed "deuce and a half"). The problem with the Opel Blitz was that it was hard to manufacture, hard to maintain. The GMC CCKW had "simpler" design that was easy to manufacture and easy to repair. The bolts were all the same sizes, interchangeable, and things like that. While Germany struggled to build 27,000 trucks in 1943, America produced over 560,000 GMC trucks alone. Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

If you're locked inside an ATM, have you tried banging on the case to alert passers by?

Almost nobody uses "untyped languages". Few of those even exist, with Forth and various assembly languages being the main examples. (C, with its type system that is as airtight as a sieve, gets an honorary mention.)

You're probably harping about dynamically typed languages. In such languages, the runtime still knows *exactly* what type every item of data has. These are not weakly typed. But what you obviously prefer are "statically typed" languages.

Static typing might statistically reduce some errors, but it certainly can't "eliminate whole classes". Consider "set_warhead_target(float latitude, float longitude)". Did the type system give you any protection from accidentally swapping the two parameters? That's really the problem that you're so worried about: accidentally using the wrong data value in the wrong place.

However, very few statically typed languages (with Rust being a notable exception) have eliminated the biggest source of type errors in computing: Null, which is a bogus placeholder that matches any pointer type (or reference type, depending on the language's nomenclature). So in many cases you have no less risk with static typing than you do with accidentally feeding a string into a Python sqrt() function. And in the case of C or C++, you can be much worse off, as in segfaults and remote exploits.

Humans didn't die until the 21st century?

[X] Irrational paranoia about the above

You do realize your butt isnâ(TM)t supposed to be in the toilet water, right? Thereâ(TM)s a reason the toilet seat exists, use it!

Theft is when someone takes something from you without mutual agreement (force) or without your knowledge.

Are both parties aware? Your post is false equivalency. Flight attendants for example only get paid for the time for when the airplane doors close until landing. They don't get paid for the fixed time spent traversing through the airport. They don't get paid for any pre-flight task such as prepping the cabin or boardingin passengers. Both parties are aware of those employment conditions and agreed to it. It's vastly different than "theft" which occurs without full disclosure.

Employees only got paid for their time during mouse and key presses, not releases.

We should also deport people who lack basic logic skills and can't handle factual information. I was stating an actual reality. If any company knows it has to pay you for waiting for Windows to load, they would adjust for that in your salary offer. That's a fact.

Oh, it's Windows. Nevermind .. my bad. That said, how long did it take for them to realize they weren't being paid for that time? If you knew the terms for which you're being paid why did you stick to the job longer than say 4 to 8 weeks (the time it takes to find a new gig). I mean, I used to work at companies where parking was sparse .. did they owe me for the time I spent hunting for a parking spot? If I didn't like it I could quit and find a McDonald's to work at. If the company had to pay for that time, they ould just make my salary lower to adjust.

Class action lawsuits are way for lawyers to make money.

After attending Trump University ... :-)

And... pretty soon you'll be able to get your pills through TrumpRx -- not making that up. (*heavy-sigh*)

If you only had to make 9 widgets, you save money not making the tenth widget. You may claim that in mass manufacture it all costs the same, but then you'd have more employees "buying" your product too.

You are missing the point. Lower manufacturing cost is what every company must aim for. The idea that a company should pay its workers higher so that a market for their product can exist is nonsensical. It makes no sense to give someone money to buy your product. If making extra product somehow reduces costs and increases profits, then you could make extra product and incinerate it.

No company benefits from making a product that its employees can afford. Each sale to an employee is a loss. You realize that right? If you pay someone $10 so they can buy your product for $8 you are losing $8. You just paid the employee to use company resources and make himself a product. Thus, every sale to an employee is a loss sale. Now before you say what about a company that sells plastic cups for 50 cents each and has employees making $100k a year? Yes even in that, every plastic cup sold to an employee is a loss. Your company is only profitable because it sells to non-employees. You have to sell cups to non-employees to make up for the loss that your company is incurring by employees buying your own product. The way a company makes the most profit is by having the lowest possible expenses (fewest employees) and the highest possible sales. You have to sell products to employees of other companies who have money.