3 ms·
What an idiot. There would be lots of freeware involved if not on the aircraft. And that is preferable to the alternative in many cases.
by michaelneale 18y ago
What an idiot. There would be lots of freeware involved if not on the aircraft. And that is preferable to the alternative in many cases.
- aneesh 18y agoWell, for starters, the video screens on the seatbacks of 777s (and other aircraft) are running some flavor of Linux. But that's not a counterexample to her argument, per se, since the video screens aren't critical to the plane's operation.
- dag 18y agoThe counterargument is that, if I am to fly, I would like the ability to check for myself that the physics equations used to design the plane are correct.
- michaelneale 18y agoAnd I am sure there is no SAS software running on the plane, AT ALL - so the whole thing doesn't make sense. Actually for critical control software, I want it to be boring and simple.
- neilc 18y agoThe argument wasn't that SAS software is used to run systems on the plane, it is that SAS was used to design the airplane. However, the argument is still obviously laughable.