OESF Portables Forum
General Forums => General Discussion => Topic started by: boosalis on May 20, 2004, 08:24:11 pm
-
Granted computers even as small as the Z are as powerful as the computers that once filled a room at NASA.
But look at what they were able to do with Fortran 66 and a computer with less cpu power then your cell phone. They got men to the moon and back.
I doubt that we could even land a man on the moon today, as the system would be so complex that a snafo would surely arise. Proof of this are mars landers which failed, and a lot of blunders with NASA satelites, also throw in space shuttle failures, and the space station as well, which will probable die on the vine from its own burocratic weight.
Oh well, perhaps space travel will become old world, and in the future we will just simulate space exploration on a computer.
-
Stating that, did we ever go to the moon? </conspiracy theory>
ehehehe
-
Speaking of SNAFO\'s I posted it as a new reply.
Houston I have a problem !!!
sorry about that
-
I doubt that we could even land a man on the moon today, as the system would be so complex that a snafo would surely arise. Proof of this are mars landers which failed, and a lot of blunders with NASA satelites, also throw in space shuttle failures,
It is true that we lack the hardware (propulsion, not navigation) to land a man on the moon today, but that is more a reflection of politics than science--we have no \"Evil Empire\" to beat in a space race.
However, it is unfair to cite Mars lander problems as evidence of incompetence at NASA--those were unmanned probes where the risk/benefit considerations favored \"go,\" even at the risk of destruction, rather than \"no-go\" because of the risk of life. Those catastrophic failures occurred during descent/landing, which was a sufficiently insurmountable challenge on the moon--far closer than Mars--as to prevent the USSR from ever achieving a soft-landing.
The shuttle failures have both occurred because known problems were ignored in a drive to stay on-time, on-budget, on-schedule in an inherently dangerous endavour which has seen much of its gee-whiz wonder, lofty goals, and public madate to \"kick Russkie butt\" eroded over time.
Oh well, perhaps space travel will become old world, and in the future we will just simulate space exploration on a computer.
How will we simulate discovering the unknown? :wink:
-
How will we simulate discovering the unknown? :wink:
:?::$ make_space_simulation < /dev/urandom
-
Ethereal,
I guess I\'m off-topic but... I noticed your signature, did you finally got the SL-6000L? I remember you have been waiting for something to develop with SL-6000W availability, did Sharp anti-marketing won again?
We wonder about men on the moon, it seems Sharp is incapable of sending their machines out of Japan.....\'\'
-
Ethereal,
I guess I\'m off-topic but... I noticed your signature, did you finally got the SL-6000L? I remember you have been waiting for something to develop with SL-6000W availability, did Sharp anti-marketing won again?
We wonder about men on the moon, it seems Sharp is incapable of sending their machines out of Japan.....\'\'
Some things about old Amiga marketing resemble Sharp attitude. Some said that if Amiga was KFC, they\'re slogan would be something like \"Eat our cold dead thing\"...
-
Ethereal,
I guess I\'m off-topic but... I noticed your signature, did you finally got the SL-6000L? I remember you have been waiting for something to develop with SL-6000W availability, did Sharp anti-marketing won again?
Yes, with the Socket BT CF card problem solved, it was no longer really a practical question. However, I felt like, if I didn\'t buy, I was one more data point supporting the argument of those at Sharp who think these things should be marketed only to businesses, with tire-changer and arc welder CF attachments. If I bought, I was one more example of the slack-jawed roundeye yokels who will snap up any blinky-light crumb of technology Sharp deings to brush from their table.
I opted for the latter. :?
-
Back to the original misplaced post. To be candid the space race wasn\'t really the US versus Russia, as it was more our German\'s versus their Germans. Just like to give credit where credit is due.
And I am no NASA basher. Just wish they would get back to science instead of politics.
-
Speaking of SNAFO\'s I posted it as a new reply.
Houston I have a problem !!!
sorry about that
er, foo, bar, baz .... fubar and snafu (army/military terms?)
of course, I made one up: snafubar (and if you\'re a unix geek in the military, then perhaps snafubarbaz [snafoobarbaz?])
Scott
ps: situation normal, all fouled up .... fouled up beyond all recognition