> make each unit responsible for detecting its own faults and shutting up if it can't guarantee correctness

Does this mean you have to trust the already compromised system?

For errors due to radiation the probability is extremely low, since it would need to flip the same bit at the same time in two different places.

Then why 8 instead of 3?

How do you know that op doesn't know what he is talking about?

I have written code for real time distributed systems in industrial applications. It runs since years 24/7 and there never was a failure in production.

I also think nasa is full of shit.

Well for one, if you follow their profile and a few more clicks, you get to their resume, and while it's an impressive one and I'm sure they know a lot of shit I don't, what's notably missing is anything even remotely close to Aerospace, rocketry, guidance systems, positioning, etc.

For another, if an engineer has an axe to grind with a public facing project, I would expect them to just grind the thing, not echo a bunch of the same lame and stale talking points every layperson does (bureaucracy bad, government bad, old tech, etc.). I'm not saying NASA in general and Artemis in particular are flawless, I'm just saying if you're going to criticize it, let's hear it. Otherwise you just sound like another contrarian trying to get attention, like a 14 year old boy saying Hitler had some good points.

We have a lot more software developers than 50 years ago and intelligence is still normally distributed.

What’s your point?

The average coder in the 1970s was a lot smarter than today. Think about the people who would be interested to start a career in this field at that time.

Oh I see what you mean. I agree 100%

I think people mean so many different things when talking about agile. I'm pretty sure a small team of experts is a good fit for critical systems.

A fixed amount of meetings every day/week/month to appease management and rushing to pile features into buggy software will do more harm than good.

Don’t count your chickens before they hatch.

I'm not sure you really understood my comment. A large portion of the kind of value I'm talking about comes from attempting the hard thing. If these chickens do not hatch that will be tragic, but we will still have learned something from it. In some ways, we will have learned even more, by getting taught about what we don't know.

Anyway, let's all hope for a safe landing tonight.

It depends on by what metric you define what is optimal.

For the health system or public transport the nash equilibrium of offer and demand is not what feels optimal to most people.

For manufacturing s.th. like screws, nails or hammers; I really can't see what should be wrong with it.

Or, paper clips…

> There is no money in generative AI.

It's really annoying that there is so much AI generated music on youtube. The problem though is more that you get tricked into listening to it by "creators". These people just squeeze money without adding anything positive to the game.

On the other hand it would be interesting if you could generate your own music spcifically for the mood you currently have.

I just open ymovies.cc

> For some even xAI is good fit.

Grok makes sense if you want s.th. less censored that is not biased towards woke ideology.

I don't see how this matters for coding though. I only use it to give me a summary of recent news (so I don't have to actually read the bs newspapers and X posts myself).