NASA Had To Bring in the OLD Guys to Fix Hubble Telescope - Broader Message ?

[25.BZ959]

https://www.dw.com/en/james-webb-space-telescope-just-a-huge-thermal-camera/a-62236601

(incidental)

Computer glitch solved

NASA's Hubble Space Telescope wasn't able to send images
between June 13 and July 15, 2021. A faulty computer memory
system halted the telescope's operations. Only retired NASA
experts managed to get it working again. For more than three
decades, Hubble has provided fascinating images of distant
stars and galaxies.

. . .

Gee ... had to bring in the OLD guys. Guess the new guys
with their "online gaming degrees" couldn't cope :-)

Actually though, this is not an uncommon phenom when it
comes to complex tech/systems. How and why it works is
just beyond description - too many little details, got
to know why tweaking 'x' does something to 'y' and 'z'.
You were either right in the middle of it and KNOW, or
you'll never know.

And the HST was made a LONG time ago. It is "simple" tech
by today's standards.

So what happens with all the tech/systems infrastructure
WE rely on for pretty much EVERYTHING these days ? The
"throw it away - start fresh" approach can work IF you
have the money and will to do that - but everybody is
short on both these days.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2022-06-28, 25.BZ959 <25B...@nada.net> wrote:

> https://www.dw.com/en/james-webb-space-telescope-just-a-huge-thermal-camera/a-62236601
>
> (incidental)
>
> Computer glitch solved
>
> NASA's Hubble Space Telescope wasn't able to send images
> between June 13 and July 15, 2021. A faulty computer memory
> system halted the telescope's operations. Only retired NASA
> experts managed to get it working again. For more than three
> decades, Hubble has provided fascinating images of distant
> stars and galaxies.
>
> . . .
>
> Gee ... had to bring in the OLD guys. Guess the new guys
> with their "online gaming degrees" couldn't cope :-)

Sounds like it's time to watch "Space Cowboys" again.

> Actually though, this is not an uncommon phenom when it
> comes to complex tech/systems. How and why it works is
> just beyond description - too many little details, got
> to know why tweaking 'x' does something to 'y' and 'z'.
> You were either right in the middle of it and KNOW, or
> you'll never know.
>
> And the HST was made a LONG time ago. It is "simple" tech
> by today's standards.
>
> So what happens with all the tech/systems infrastructure
> WE rely on for pretty much EVERYTHING these days ? The
> "throw it away - start fresh" approach can work IF you
> have the money and will to do that - but everybody is
> short on both these days.

Except for the Big Tech companies that created the mess.
But don't worry, they'll always be there to give you
the things that they think you should have.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

[25.BZ959]

On 6/28/22 1:57 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-06-28, 25.BZ959 <25B...@nada.net> wrote:
>
>> https://www.dw.com/en/james-webb-space-telescope-just-a-huge-thermal-camera/a-62236601
>>
>> (incidental)
>>
>> Computer glitch solved
>>
>> NASA's Hubble Space Telescope wasn't able to send images
>> between June 13 and July 15, 2021. A faulty computer memory
>> system halted the telescope's operations. Only retired NASA
>> experts managed to get it working again. For more than three
>> decades, Hubble has provided fascinating images of distant
>> stars and galaxies.
>>
>> . . .
>>
>> Gee ... had to bring in the OLD guys. Guess the new guys
>> with their "online gaming degrees" couldn't cope :-)
>
> Sounds like it's time to watch "Space Cowboys" again.

Well, nobody actually FLEW the designers out to the
telescope :-)

Kind of a pity, that computer board or at least the memory
really could use replacing. The Webb telescope is impressive
but it's for a whole other optical band. The Hubble keeps
working hard and so far as I know there's NO replacement
in the works. Maybe Musk could build a service ROBOT -
attach six arms to one of his Dragons ? Hubble IS close
enough for telepresence .....

I've yet to encounter anybody who actually DESIGNS the
computers used on space probes and things like Hubble/Webb.
There's a whole different set of concerns. On what kind
of "standard" computer can you remotely lock out banks
of memory and still load the system/software ? This is
a whole other universe of redundancy and tweakability.

>> Actually though, this is not an uncommon phenom when it
>> comes to complex tech/systems. How and why it works is
>> just beyond description - too many little details, got
>> to know why tweaking 'x' does something to 'y' and 'z'.
>> You were either right in the middle of it and KNOW, or
>> you'll never know.
>>
>> And the HST was made a LONG time ago. It is "simple" tech
>> by today's standards.
>>
>> So what happens with all the tech/systems infrastructure
>> WE rely on for pretty much EVERYTHING these days ? The
>> "throw it away - start fresh" approach can work IF you
>> have the money and will to do that - but everybody is
>> short on both these days.
>
> Except for the Big Tech companies that created the mess.
> But don't worry, they'll always be there to give you
> the things that they think you should have.

Well, they DO know best ... their commercials tell us so :-)

However it may be too much to blame "Big Tech" for creating
"the mess". There was never a "Big Tech" really ... lots and
lots of "Little Tech" instead. Each saw a niche they could
fill and profit from and Did It Their Way. Try to coordinate
with some others and they'd STEAL your ideas. So ... we got
hundreds of incompatible computers and tens of thousands of
IOT/embedded systems that operate and are operated rather
differently. This was bound to happen - unless you think
Digital Equipment should have become the One And Only tech
company and murdered all their rivals way back in the day.
The sad part is that many of the Better Ideas could never
gain enough market share and perished.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2022-06-29, 25.BZ959 <25B...@nada.net> wrote:

> On 6/28/22 1:57 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2022-06-28, 25.BZ959 <25B...@nada.net> wrote:
>>
>>> So what happens with all the tech/systems infrastructure
>>> WE rely on for pretty much EVERYTHING these days ? The
>>> "throw it away - start fresh" approach can work IF you
>>> have the money and will to do that - but everybody is
>>> short on both these days.
>>
>> Except for the Big Tech companies that created the mess.
>> But don't worry, they'll always be there to give you
>> the things that they think you should have.
>
> Well, they DO know best ... their commercials tell us so :-)

Thank God for the fast-forward button on my PVR.

> However it may be too much to blame "Big Tech" for creating
> "the mess".

You're right, the fact that J. Random Luser is a sucker who
will fall for anything shiny just encourages messes.

> There was never a "Big Tech" really ... lots and
> lots of "Little Tech" instead. Each saw a niche they could
> fill and profit from and Did It Their Way. Try to coordinate
> with some others and they'd STEAL your ideas. So ... we got
> hundreds of incompatible computers and tens of thousands of
> IOT/embedded systems that operate and are operated rather
> differently.

Some of that is the NIH syndrome, but I think a lot of it
was that many little isolated groups came up with their own
solutions to a problem. Standardization came later - although
the larger the company, the more standardization is viewed as
a threat.

> This was bound to happen - unless you think
> Digital Equipment should have become the One And Only tech
> company and murdered all their rivals way back in the day.

Well, Microsoft murdered a lot of their rivals - and became
the One and Only tech company in too many people's minds.

> The sad part is that many of the Better Ideas could never
> gain enough market share and perished.

Or were bought up by big companies and buried forever.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 29/06/2022 06:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> The sad part is that many of the Better Ideas could never
>> gain enough market share and perished.
> Or were bought up by big companies and buried forever.

An idea usually has to be so substantially better that it instantly
obsoletes the alternatives. A better mousetraps when most mousetraps
catch 99% of mice, is really not that interesting (athough I bought two,
last year). But a round log rolling versus a sled or travois is kinda
instant obsolescence really. See also transistors versus valves (tubes)
or jet engines versus big multicylinder IC engines in aircraft.

If it costs far less, needs far less maintenance and performs better,
its hard to hold it back.

Only e.g. the marginal difference between Betamax and VHS could be
overcome by marketing and commercial muscle.


--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

[25.BZ959]

On 6/29/22 1:30 AM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-06-29, 25.BZ959 <25B...@nada.net> wrote:
>
>> On 6/28/22 1:57 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-06-28, 25.BZ959 <25B...@nada.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So what happens with all the tech/systems infrastructure
>>>> WE rely on for pretty much EVERYTHING these days ? The
>>>> "throw it away - start fresh" approach can work IF you
>>>> have the money and will to do that - but everybody is
>>>> short on both these days.
>>>
>>> Except for the Big Tech companies that created the mess.
>>> But don't worry, they'll always be there to give you
>>> the things that they think you should have.
>>
>> Well, they DO know best ... their commercials tell us so :-)
>
> Thank God for the fast-forward button on my PVR.
>
>> However it may be too much to blame "Big Tech" for creating
>> "the mess".
>
> You're right, the fact that J. Random Luser is a sucker who
> will fall for anything shiny just encourages messes.

OOOOH ! SHINY !!!
(Buffy)

J Random tends to go for STATUS really. Why else would anybody
pay double for unextraordinary PCs/phones/etc from an anal
corporation just because there's a pic of a fruit on it ?

>> There was never a "Big Tech" really ... lots and
>> lots of "Little Tech" instead. Each saw a niche they could
>> fill and profit from and Did It Their Way. Try to coordinate
>> with some others and they'd STEAL your ideas. So ... we got
>> hundreds of incompatible computers and tens of thousands of
>> IOT/embedded systems that operate and are operated rather
>> differently.
>
> Some of that is the NIH syndrome, but I think a lot of it
> was that many little isolated groups came up with their own
> solutions to a problem. Standardization came later - although
> the larger the company, the more standardization is viewed as
> a threat.

Apple collectively soiled its undies a couple of weeks ago
when the EU mandated that all phones must use mini-USB for
charging/data. With "lightning" they had a captive audience :-)

>> This was bound to happen - unless you think
>> Digital Equipment should have become the One And Only tech
>> company and murdered all their rivals way back in the day.
>
> Well, Microsoft murdered a lot of their rivals - and became
> the One and Only tech company in too many people's minds.

And as soon as Gates understood that he should grease his
reps, all the "monopoly" talk went away ....

>> The sad part is that many of the Better Ideas could never
>> gain enough market share and perished.
>
> Or were bought up by big companies and buried forever.

A few cases of that too fer sure.

If you can't beat it, DESTROY it.

[25.BZ959]

On 6/29/22 7:53 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 29/06/2022 06:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>    The sad part is that many of the Better Ideas could never
>>>    gain enough market share and perished.
>> Or were bought up by big companies and buried forever.
>
> An idea usually has to be so substantially better that it instantly
> obsoletes the alternatives. A better mousetraps when most mousetraps
> catch 99% of mice, is really not that interesting (athough I bought two,
> last year). But a round log rolling versus a sled or travois is kinda
> instant obsolescence really. See also transistors versus valves (tubes)
> or jet engines versus big multicylinder IC engines in aircraft.

Valves still have certain niches. China and some
eastern European countries still make them and
there ARE markets. High-power radio transmitters,
broadcast-size, may still be using giant valves.

And MOST aircraft (lots and lots of smaller ones out there)
still use piston engines quite successfully. Cheap to make,
cheap to fix.

But for most electronics needs, transistors/FETs/etc are
the best choice. For BIG aircraft - turbines.

> If it costs far  less, needs far less maintenance and performs better,
> its hard to hold it back.

Transistors were one of those "transcendent" technologies.
Nothing could stop them.

Oddly, I read somewhere that the FET was at least proposed
WAY back in like the mid 1920s. Ah :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field-effect_transistor
Julius Lillenfield
But the manufacturing tech was not there ... kinda like
Babbage's Analytical Engine, in an age of gears and cogs.
He got it RIGHT, but .....

There ARE instances where "old tech" still outperforms.
A recent article about the Voyager probes ... the makers
say that its hand-wired/discrete-components design is
why the things STILL work. Nobody makes 'em that way
anymore. In one of our previous discussions/arguments
I said that I thought a particular photo film - Verichrome
Pan - still couldn't be beat (esp in medium format).
It's extended dynamic range, fine grain and unique tone
made for BEAUTIFUL landscapes if you actually used it in
a good camera with a good exposure meter. Todays electronics
can now come kinda close - but the "tone" just ain't right.

> Only e.g. the marginal difference between Betamax and VHS could be
> overcome by marketing and commercial muscle.

That WAS a "commercial/market muscle" thing. People still
say Beta was better ... but REALLY it wasn't THAT much
damned better - and the margin was mostly lost because
people were recording commercial 360i TV and replaying
on the same tech. It took a whole new gen of TVs to even
take proper advantage of DVDs. I bought one.

Hey, I still have one of those VideoDisk players - the
big record-sized disks. It works !

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2022-06-30, 25.BZ959 <25B...@nada.net> wrote:

> On 6/29/22 1:30 AM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2022-06-29, 25.BZ959 <25B...@nada.net> wrote:
>>
>>> However it may be too much to blame "Big Tech" for creating
>>> "the mess".
>>
>> You're right, the fact that J. Random Luser is a sucker who
>> will fall for anything shiny just encourages messes.
>
> OOOOH ! SHINY !!!
> (Buffy)

I've heard this referred to as "trout management": dangle something
shiny with a hook in it in front of them and they'll strike every time.
It's probably just an update of that famous quote that's commonly (and
possibly mistakenly) attributed to P.T. Barnum: "There's a sucker born
every minute."

> J Random tends to go for STATUS really. Why else would anybody
> pay double for unextraordinary PCs/phones/etc from an anal
> corporation just because there's a pic of a fruit on it ?

Lieutenant Dan got me invested in some kind of fruit company.
So then I got a call from him, saying we don't have to worry
about money no more.
-- Forrest Gump

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 30/06/2022 05:02, 25.BZ959 wrote:
> On 6/29/22 7:53 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 29/06/2022 06:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>    The sad part is that many of the Better Ideas could never
>>>>    gain enough market share and perished.
>>> Or were bought up by big companies and buried forever.
>>
>> An idea usually has to be so substantially better that it instantly
>> obsoletes the alternatives. A better mousetraps when most mousetraps
>> catch 99% of mice, is really not that interesting (athough I bought
>> two, last year). But a round log rolling versus a sled or travois is
>> kinda instant obsolescence really. See also transistors versus valves
>> (tubes) or jet engines versus big multicylinder IC engines in aircraft.
>
>   Valves still have certain niches. China and some
>   eastern European countries still make them and
>   there ARE markets. High-power radio transmitters,
>   broadcast-size, may still be using giant valves.

People round here ride horses, too.

--
Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
gospel of envy.

Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

[25.BZ959]

On 6/30/22 2:14 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 30/06/2022 05:02, 25.BZ959 wrote:
>> On 6/29/22 7:53 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 29/06/2022 06:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>>    The sad part is that many of the Better Ideas could never
>>>>>    gain enough market share and perished.
>>>> Or were bought up by big companies and buried forever.
>>>
>>> An idea usually has to be so substantially better that it instantly
>>> obsoletes the alternatives. A better mousetraps when most mousetraps
>>> catch 99% of mice, is really not that interesting (athough I bought
>>> two, last year). But a round log rolling versus a sled or travois is
>>> kinda instant obsolescence really. See also transistors versus valves
>>> (tubes) or jet engines versus big multicylinder IC engines in aircraft.
>>
>>    Valves still have certain niches. China and some
>>    eastern European countries still make them and
>>    there ARE markets. High-power radio transmitters,
>>    broadcast-size, may still be using giant valves.

> People round here ride horses, too.

They work .... just don't stand right behind them :-)

Minimal fuel bills too.

As for big radio towers, esp AM - they use very high
voltage and are exposed to lightning. Valves/tubes
ARE better for that niche.

[25.BZ959]

On 6/30/22 12:15 AM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-06-30, 25.BZ959 <25B...@nada.net> wrote:
>
>> On 6/29/22 1:30 AM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-06-29, 25.BZ959 <25B...@nada.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> However it may be too much to blame "Big Tech" for creating
>>>> "the mess".
>>>
>>> You're right, the fact that J. Random Luser is a sucker who
>>> will fall for anything shiny just encourages messes.
>>
>> OOOOH ! SHINY !!!
>> (Buffy)
>
> I've heard this referred to as "trout management": dangle something
> shiny with a hook in it in front of them and they'll strike every time.
> It's probably just an update of that famous quote that's commonly (and
> possibly mistakenly) attributed to P.T. Barnum: "There's a sucker born
> every minute."

I'd suggest :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kQMDSw3Aqo

As for Buffy, I think she was referring to a pretty
red and silver combat axe - just before she split
Nathan Fillon in half, bottom to top :-)

>> J Random tends to go for STATUS really. Why else would anybody
>> pay double for unextraordinary PCs/phones/etc from an anal
>> corporation just because there's a pic of a fruit on it ?
>
> Lieutenant Dan got me invested in some kind of fruit company.
> So then I got a call from him, saying we don't have to worry
> about money no more.
> -- Forrest Gump
>

I *almost* invested in some tech upstart called "MicroSoft",
and RedHat too ....... almost .......... :-)