dCLCp
dCLCp t1_j8mzagt wrote
Reply to comment by C-D-W in NASA's "evolved structures" radically reduce weight – and waiting by Maxcactus
Mmm yes thank you this is the type of input I was hoping for.
dCLCp t1_j8mt1gq wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in NASA's "evolved structures" radically reduce weight – and waiting by Maxcactus
> If we didn’t know what we were doing this stuff wouldn’t work.
dCLCp t1_j8mr1nk wrote
Reply to comment by youarenotyourstuff in NASA's "evolved structures" radically reduce weight – and waiting by Maxcactus
What do you think are the downsides?
Someone else mentioned standards. It's impossible to standardize anything when everything is bespoke. What else?
dCLCp t1_j8mqus4 wrote
Reply to comment by t6jesse in NASA's "evolved structures" radically reduce weight – and waiting by Maxcactus
That's fine but the main thrust of my point (hence why I lead with it) is there ARE downsides. And they didn't discuss those which makes this article less good because I'd already heard about them doing this stuff. I knew it was being used, and while this article did elaborate more than some random scimag article I read 7 years ago that was talking in theoretical terms, it should have also elaborated more on the downsides because this type of writing is almost sensationalistic when that is the exact opposite that I want from science journalism. I want to know the whole truth.
dCLCp t1_j8mgiul wrote
I would have appreciated if they highlighted some of the downsides in this article. There is always a downside. Just off the top of my head, we know that these "thousands of bespoke parts" work, but we don't know how they work precisely. They can make predictions and hopefully nothing breaks in a way we don't understand (because it works in a way we don't understand) but as projects become increasingly sophisticated with more and more moving parts and separate contracts layers of siloed bureaucracy... eventually the people that designed part A will make something that interacts with part L in a way that they didn't predict because the parts weren't designed in concert from the ground up. They were designed separately and artificially. The parameters were known but parameters change. Mistakes also happen. How resilient will these parts be when suprises happen?
dCLCp t1_j8obwc2 wrote
Reply to comment by ____Theo____ in NASA's "evolved structures" radically reduce weight – and waiting by Maxcactus
I think you are missing my point entirely which is merely that we deserve to know more.
That's it. Everything else is just me speculating as an example and your own assumptions about ME based on those speculations while ignoring the only thing I cared about.