4 ms·

"because that was the biggest, we therefore we can't make them bigger" doesn't follow.

by throwaway_pdp09 6y ago

jedberg 6y ago
See my sibling comment. We’ve been trying to make a bigger engine for decades, and have yet to succeed.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  Your sibling comment (I presume https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23667336 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23667336) says nothing of the sort. It doesn't say nasa has been trying to make a bigger one for decades. > They still haven't figured it out. ...is not what the article said. They lost the plans, they're recreating them.
  - jedberg 6y ago
    > They lost the plans, they're recreating them. Which is exactly the point I made at first. That we've lost the knowledge to make the engine.
    - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
      They lost the plans. For this particular engine type. That's not the same as losing fundamental knowledge of how the engines work, or the ability to recreate one larger. And you have not acknowledged you misrepresented what the article said. What is it with you types that have to feel we're failing, going backwards? I had an argument once with a guy that insisted there were compiler optimisation that aren't used any more because they are now lost - there are literally books on those opts, web articles accessible in a few clicks, probably youtube vids (in fact, see godbolt's stuff) - why are you types so set on failure and ignorance? What exactly are you thinking when you post this inaccurate and negative stuff? Aren't there enough problems in the world without making up nonexistent ones?
      - hunta2097 6y ago
        I find a more extreme version of this thinking in anti-science subjects like flat earth and homeopathy. Those guys are always referencing ancient texts. Many parts of humanity stagnated for millennia - see cave systems in France and Eastern Europe which were occupied for thousands of years without any progress. I find it incredible that you could take a baby from that era, send them to school and they could be indiscernible from the rest of us.

"because that was the biggest, we therefore we can't make them bigger" doesn't follow.

jedberg 6y ago

See my sibling comment. We’ve been trying to make a bigger engine for decades, and have yet to succeed.

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
Your sibling comment (I presume https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23667336 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23667336) says nothing of the sort. It doesn't say nasa has been trying to make a bigger one for decades. > They still haven't figured it out. ...is not what the article said. They lost the plans, they're recreating them.
- jedberg 6y ago
  > They lost the plans, they're recreating them. Which is exactly the point I made at first. That we've lost the knowledge to make the engine.
  - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
    They lost the plans. For this particular engine type. That's not the same as losing fundamental knowledge of how the engines work, or the ability to recreate one larger. And you have not acknowledged you misrepresented what the article said. What is it with you types that have to feel we're failing, going backwards? I had an argument once with a guy that insisted there were compiler optimisation that aren't used any more because they are now lost - there are literally books on those opts, web articles accessible in a few clicks, probably youtube vids (in fact, see godbolt's stuff) - why are you types so set on failure and ignorance? What exactly are you thinking when you post this inaccurate and negative stuff? Aren't there enough problems in the world without making up nonexistent ones?
    - hunta2097 6y ago
      I find a more extreme version of this thinking in anti-science subjects like flat earth and homeopathy. Those guys are always referencing ancient texts. Many parts of humanity stagnated for millennia - see cave systems in France and Eastern Europe which were occupied for thousands of years without any progress. I find it incredible that you could take a baby from that era, send them to school and they could be indiscernible from the rest of us.