Take the text and send it to ChatGPT. Then, use this self doubt prompt and you get some alarming results.
https://justin.searls.co/posts/sprinkling-self-doubt-on-chat...
The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)
71–80 of 185 posts
Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)
#72My dad headed up the redesign effort on the Lockheed Martin side to remove the foam PAL ramps (where the chunk of foam that broke off and hit the orbiter came from) from the external tank, as part of return-to-flight after the Columbia disaster. At the time he was the last one left at the company from when they had previously investigated removing those ramps from the design. He told me how he went from basically wor…
Well, I’m proud of him, too. Thank him for helping us return to the stars.
Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't remember the last time I saw a slide as mangled as the one in the article. It hurts my brain just reading it. But you are right, most engineers would consider that reasonable, while complaining about the "muggles" that just don't get it. As a Software Architect, one of my main responsibilities has been to take information presented like above and turn it into something that non-technical people can digest. Be…
We're talking about something a lot more technically sophisticated than a B2B SAAS CRUD web app. PhD level education is considered a prerequisite.
[deleted]
Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
But that's not how it works in most large organizations. The person who has the authority to make the decision is not necessarily an SME in all of the areas they have to make decisions. Rather, they rely on SMEs to do the investigation and then... communicate properly .
For reference, NASA asked the group of aerospace engineers ("rocket scientists") who designed the Space Shuttle to provide them with a technical analysis of the effects of foam impacts, and then subsequently lost the Columbia with all hands because they couldn't exercise more than a high school level of reading comprehension. The engineers presented the facts as they were understood, only stopping short of doing NASA…
It wasn't communicated properly as it says in the story. It is typical engineer reaction to question the reading comprehension ability of the readers.
Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
But that's not how it works in most large organizations. The person who has the authority to make the decision is not necessarily an SME in all of the areas they have to make decisions. Rather, they rely on SMEs to do the investigation and then... communicate properly .
For reference, NASA asked the group of aerospace engineers ("rocket scientists") who designed the Space Shuttle to provide them with a technical analysis of the effects of foam impacts, and then subsequently lost the Columbia with all hands because they couldn't exercise more than a high school level of reading comprehension. The engineers presented the facts as they were understood, only stopping short of doing NASA…
Why are you posting under three different accounts that you've made in the last 2 hours?
Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
For reference, NASA asked the group of aerospace engineers ("rocket scientists") who designed the Space Shuttle to provide them with a technical analysis of the effects of foam impacts, and then subsequently lost the Columbia with all hands because they couldn't exercise more than a high school level of reading comprehension. The engineers presented the facts as they were understood, only stopping short of doing NASA…
It wasn't communicated properly as it says in the story. It is typical engineer reaction to question the reading comprehension ability of the readers.
If you can't consume the PhD-level analysis that you requested because you only have a high school reading level, despite having been tasked with safely operating what was arguably the most technically complicated piece of technology in existence at the time, then there's really no other excuse for that level of incompetence.
Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
For reference, NASA asked the group of aerospace engineers ("rocket scientists") who designed the Space Shuttle to provide them with a technical analysis of the effects of foam impacts, and then subsequently lost the Columbia with all hands because they couldn't exercise more than a high school level of reading comprehension. The engineers presented the facts as they were understood, only stopping short of doing NASA…
Why are you posting under three different accounts that you've made in the last 2 hours?
[flagged]
Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)
#78falling nine times faster than a fired bullet
No, that's not how the physics works. The foam is moving at the same velocity as the shuttle when it breaks off, and had a short time to accelerate(decelerate) before hitting the shuttle.
Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wasn't communicated properly as it says in the story. It is typical engineer reaction to question the reading comprehension ability of the readers.
If you can't consume the PhD-level analysis that you requested because you only have a high school reading level, despite having been tasked with safely operating what was arguably the most technically complicated piece of technology in existence at the time, then there's really no other excuse for that level of incompetence.
Let's presume you are correct. The Boeing engineers who made this slide were geniuses. The NASA managers consuming it were dullards. If the Boeing engineers were so smart, why didn't they write for their audience?
I am consistently ranked as both one of the best engineers in my company and one of the best communicators. I would never make a slide like that for any audience. It's shit writing for non-engineers and it's shit writing for engineers, too.
You have got to get over whatever this hangup is about "PhD level analysis". That phrase doesn't mean anything.
Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can't consume the PhD-level analysis that you requested because you only have a high school reading level, despite having been tasked with safely operating what was arguably the most technically complicated piece of technology in existence at the time, then there's really no other excuse for that level of incompetence.
Let's presume you are correct. The Boeing engineers who made this slide were geniuses. The NASA managers consuming it were dullards. If the Boeing engineers were so smart, why didn't they write for their audience? I am consistently ranked as both one of the best engineers in my company and one of the best communicators. I would never make a slide like that for any audience. It's shit writing for non-engineers and it'…
I'm not arguing that it was a good slide: just extremely average in the context that it was created. If there was a problem with communication, then it was solely on the reader for not being fluent in their own field. The engineers were presenting a nuanced view of their data, which went above the heads of the NASA personnel who were evidently only capable of interpreting a simple "yes or no" answer.