![star wars revisited facebook star wars revisited facebook](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71tVNKUfGVL.jpg)
Star wars revisited facebook full#
For example, a structural engineer can be fairly confident that a model bridge which he has tested in a wind tunnel can represent a similar bridge scaled to full size. Conventional engineering deals with analogue phenomena whose infinite states form a continuum which can be reliably modeled and tested. A key element of Parnas’s discussion is that computer engineering deals with discrete, randomly discontinuous phenomena whose states are too numerous and variable to model mathematically, and whose outcomes can therefore not be precisely predicted. It is an odd fact of intellectual insight that sudden understanding can come from unexpected directions. was supposed to render obsolete are still there, and an invulnerable “space shield” is still a wet dream for the big spenders in Washington.Īs a linguist I have a special reason to remember this lecture by David Parnas. Oh, and those Russian missiles which the S.D.I. We see now that the hubris emanating from American “triumph” in the arms race has since also claimed America as a victim, an historical pattern familiar from almost every empire in history. It just happened that the United States of America at that time had deeper pockets than the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Whatever the technical infeasibility of the S.D.I., the misallocation of resources which it excited from technically illiterate politicians extracted its own consequences. The reasons for that collapse are complex, but military overspending certainly played a large part. We know now that the military superpower of the USSR, so fearful in his generation, did collapse politically. Of course, his technical discussion had, and has, intense ethical and political consequences. In his lecture, David Parnas was not mounting a political argument against the Strategic Defence Initiative, but illustrating why, technically, it was not feasible. Any errors of interpretation in this document are of course my own, and readers with a more substantial interest are advised to read David Parnas’s own collected essays on the topic, which are now available online. For that reason, it seems worthwhile to re-present them here, a generation later. At the time I found him highly persuasive, and nothing since, to my knowledge, has invalidated his technical arguments.
![star wars revisited facebook star wars revisited facebook](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BNzVlY2MwMjktM2E4OS00Y2Y3LWE3ZjctYzhkZGM3YzA1ZWM2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNzkwMjQ5NzM@._V1_UY1200_CR71,0,630,1200_AL_.jpg)
Parnas seemed uniquely qualified to report on the Strategic Defence Initiative (S.D.I.). The notes to follow are my best attempt in 1986 as a non-specialist to outline a lecture given by David Lorge Parnas, a Canadian computer engineer and professor who spent years working on American defense projects. Judge for yourself how relevant it is to Star Wars II, millennium edition. Below is a computer engineer's report on the technical viability of Star Wars I, circa 1986.
Star wars revisited facebook free#
Like Mordor's ninth ring of power*, hidden forever deep in a dark river beneath a mountain, some Gollum was sure to chance upon it, and once set free it would again corrupt all who carelessly picked it up ( *J.R. nightmares, we knew that no toy of destruction, once conceived of, has ever been left to rest. But in our heart of hearts, in our 3 a.m.
![star wars revisited facebook star wars revisited facebook](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/9_9Dmrbh1cE/maxresdefault.jpg)
We pretended that flower power was winning. We kidded ourselves for a while that Star Wars had gone away.