 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:54:28 +0100, "Phil Cook"
<phi### [at] nospamrocain freeservecouk> wrote:
>
>When in Rome...
Eat "Gnocchi alla Romana" :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> NO, it isn't. People haven't died because of MS security vulnerabilities.
That is in part because MS explicitly says it's not supposed to be good
enough for life-critical situations.
And I wouldn't be surprised, anyway, if some MS software had a bug that
caused some patient to get over-dosed with radiation during cancer
treatment or some such.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail Shaw wrote:
>> (You see what I did there?)
>
> Hint: pointing out your own puns makes them irritating more than funny
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=puns
(That said, "You see what I did there?" is a meme not unlike lolcats or
some such. Pointing it out with *that* phrase actually makes it funny
again.)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:56:40 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
>> NASA?
>>
>> Aren't they those guys who tried to launch a rocket with a faulty
>> O-ring?
>
> Um, yeah, and it blew up, killing all crew on board. :-(
It wasn't actually a faulty O-ring. It was an O-ring used outside the
environment the engineers knew it was supposed to be used in
(temperature-wise).
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:17:21 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> NO, it isn't. People haven't died because of MS security
>> vulnerabilities.
>
> That is in part because MS explicitly says it's not supposed to be good
> enough for life-critical situations.
Yeah, that's true enough. Most commercial software vendors have that
clause in the license agreement.
> And I wouldn't be surprised, anyway, if some MS software had a bug that
> caused some patient to get over-dosed with radiation during cancer
> treatment or some such.
I would be, since the machines that control that sort of thing tend to be
custom-built and not PC-controlled, at least not that I've seen
(admittedly, I've not spent a lot of time in cancer treatment facilities).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:19:58 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:56:40 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>
>>> NASA?
>>>
>>> Aren't they those guys who tried to launch a rocket with a faulty
>>> O-ring?
>>
>> Um, yeah, and it blew up, killing all crew on board. :-(
>
> It wasn't actually a faulty O-ring. It was an O-ring used outside the
> environment the engineers knew it was supposed to be used in
> (temperature-wise).
Point - yeah, the ring itself wasn't faulty as far as anyone knows.
While the commission didn't find fault with the ring itself, it is
possible that it was faulty - don't suppose we'll ever know for certain
if it was or not. The report itself, though, had to state a conclusion
so the program could move on.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
>> And I wouldn't be surprised, anyway, if some MS software had a bug that
>> caused some patient to get over-dosed with radiation during cancer
>> treatment or some such.
>
> I would be, since the machines that control that sort of thing tend to be
> custom-built and not PC-controlled, at least not that I've seen
> (admittedly, I've not spent a lot of time in cancer treatment facilities).
I remember seeing the heart monitor in a NICU reboot. Looked like it was
running some customized *NIX judging by the lines of boot information
that scrolled across.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:56:32 -0500, Mike Raiford wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>>> And I wouldn't be surprised, anyway, if some MS software had a bug
>>> that caused some patient to get over-dosed with radiation during
>>> cancer treatment or some such.
>>
>> I would be, since the machines that control that sort of thing tend to
>> be custom-built and not PC-controlled, at least not that I've seen
>> (admittedly, I've not spent a lot of time in cancer treatment
>> facilities).
>
> I remember seeing the heart monitor in a NICU reboot. Looked like it was
> running some customized *NIX judging by the lines of boot information
> that scrolled across.
That seems most common - for implementations that involve life and death,
the systems tend to be custom-built for a specific purpose, not based on
a general purpose operating system.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> That seems most common - for implementations that involve life and death,
> the systems tend to be custom-built for a specific purpose, not based on
> a general purpose operating system.
It's not just the software, all the hardware will also need to be certified
for applications where human life is at risk. You think your PC is
reliable? You trust it enough, that if it ever failed you'd die? Didn't
think so :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> It wasn't actually a faulty O-ring. It was an O-ring used outside the
> environment the engineers knew it was supposed to be used in
> (temperature-wise).
But the million dollar question is, was the shuttle taking off in ambient
conditions outside of the designed temperature range, or had the designers
failed to check that every component would remain within its operating range
during take off?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
