3 ms·

`The override is missing the droneship or blowing itself up.` Disagree, that's not an override. That's a program written by a human programmer (who makes mistak

`The override is missing the droneship or blowing itself up.` Disagree, that's not an override. That's a program written by a human programmer (who makes mistakes) that autonomously decides that something went wrong. I would argue there has "got" to be an override precisely because humans make mistakes all the time and so there's no reason to think that an autonomous failsafe should work in all possible situations. I don't know much about rocketry, but if it's true that there's no remote abort capability, that seems like a deeply misguided decision.

NikolaeVarius 6y ago
>> I don't know much about rocketry There you go. You are welcome to try and disagree with decades of rocket launch practices. The range safety officer can blow up the rocket if the rocket veers off and is in danger of overshooting the safe area. Otherwise, you know the reason why we launch over water? Since it doesn't goddamn matter after it clears the tower and clears the danger zone. It either blows up over water, and who cares, it lands in the water, who cares, or it blows up in the upper atmosphere, and who cares. Also, the rocket blowing itself up is a reference to the fact that if it is going off course, there is damn good chance it will destroy itself since aerodynamic forces are calculated to a specific launch window with upper weather. If not following a calculated path, good chance it will rip itself apart. Also many abort modes are disabled for the first few seconds in flight so a dumb human or computer wont accidentally trigger a abort after flight starts and blow up the launch pad
- matmatmatmat 6y ago
  >> You are welcome to try and disagree with decades of rocket launch practices. >> The range safety officer can blow up the rocket if the rocket veers off and is in danger of overshooting the safe area. I'm confused. Am I not the one arguing for a remote abort command (which, so far as I know, has been standard practice for a while) and you, above, argue that rockets don't need one because humans are bad at modeling rocket aerodynamics?

NikolaeVarius 6y ago

>> I don't know much about rocketry There you go. You are welcome to try and disagree with decades of rocket launch practices. The range safety officer can blow up the rocket if the rocket veers off and is in danger of overshooting the safe area. Otherwise, you know the reason why we launch over water? Since it doesn't goddamn matter after it clears the tower and clears the danger zone. It either blows up over water, and who cares, it lands in the water, who cares, or it blows up in the upper atmosphere, and who cares. Also, the rocket blowing itself up is a reference to the fact that if it is going off course, there is damn good chance it will destroy itself since aerodynamic forces are calculated to a specific launch window with upper weather. If not following a calculated path, good chance it will rip itself apart. Also many abort modes are disabled for the first few seconds in flight so a dumb human or computer wont accidentally trigger a abort after flight starts and blow up the launch pad

matmatmatmat 6y ago
>> You are welcome to try and disagree with decades of rocket launch practices. >> The range safety officer can blow up the rocket if the rocket veers off and is in danger of overshooting the safe area. I'm confused. Am I not the one arguing for a remote abort command (which, so far as I know, has been standard practice for a while) and you, above, argue that rockets don't need one because humans are bad at modeling rocket aerodynamics?