Don't forget the incident on the first moon landing where the computer
was overwhelmed with data coming in faster than they simulated in the
earth-based tests. I forget what the error was, but they made the
decision to ignore the error.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 11/4/2025 11:29 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
https://www1.udel.edu/CIS/106h/16F/resources/theyWriteTheRightStuffNasa.html
I forget where, maybe a software class or something, but I was told
NASA wrote the closest to error free code anywhere. Because it had to
be. And that one of the techniques was not to fix every bug, because
there was such a thing as a bugs created per bugs fixed ratio. If a
minor bug was fully understood and documented, it might be better to
live with it, rather than risk creating a new bug.
*From:*AF <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Tuesday, November 4, 2025 1:12 PM
*To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT AI
Let's stop using the buzzword AI and just use computer or system.
What's the accuracy of traffic lights? Are you concerned about that
system?
On Tue, Nov 4, 2025 at 2:05 PM Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote:
How many 9s of reliability are you willing to accept?
99%? That means 1 out of 100.
99.9%? That means 1 out of 1000.
99.99%? That means 1 out of 10,000.
AI is mostly operating in the 50-60% reliability range, which
means it's more-or-less a coin toss.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 11/4/2025 10:35 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
It's exactly this short sighted mind set that prevents
anything from moving forward.
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
