From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, RATWARE_MS_HASH,RATWARE_OUTLOOK_NONAME autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: "Thaddeus L. Olczyk" Subject: The stupidity of all the Ariane 5 analysts. Date: 1997/07/17 Message-ID: <01bc92e6$7a6f9e40$287b7b7a@tlo2>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 257373352 References: <33C835A5.362A@flash.net> <33CC0548.4099@flash.net> <5qitoi$fdv$1@news.irisa.fr> <33CD6512.2404@flash.net> Organization: InterAccess, Chicago's best Internet Service Provider Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1997-07-17T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Frankly I'm getting a little tired of all the stupidity of the language enthusiasts and methodologists who are out there saying "Ariane 5 crashed because they didn't use my language or my methodology". They are all ignoring one basic fact: the backup and primary systems were identical. Effectively this meant that most bugs or generic hardware defects were likely to be duplicated, eliminating most of the safety that a backup system provides. While not strongly conversant in the design of fault tolerant systems, I do know that some systems use backups which are the same and others use backups which are entirely different ( different hardware, software, and methodology ). I believe that it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that among the later are thingfs like: missle launching systems, remote facilities and rockets.