It depends on the confinement, the overcrowding of industrial production may be unadaptable. There are still enough instincts programmed that unfamiliar males would rather avoid each other.
I do not beleive that industrial breeding is selecting for anything that makes such prison life tolerable. Birds in production generally aren't reproducing, so nothing in the henhouse is affecting evolution.
In these places, this is a great thing to avoid. Old software is well known. You do not want to be the one to be affected by a bug that stops production or changes data.
> mainframes have remained stagnant in features
Having a well known universe without any beta software, and not being disrupted by new stuff that you don't need anyway, is a damn good feature.
Meanwhile, some small startup is using newer technology that makes them many times more efficient. And allows them to utilize their IT as a core part of their product, instead of an internal utility service. And stealing all your customers.
Of course, there are industries that are immune to startup competition due to the high barrier of entry (banks, insurance, governments). I don't think it is a coincidence that these are about the only environments where mainframes are still dominant.
Writing off all the big computer shop stuff as irrelevant means you throw away all the experience and best practices and will be repeating the mistakes people made 50 years ago. And maybe reinvent some wheels too.
A computer center is your best resource for observing and learning how to build computer services, deploy them, and keep them available. And for knowing what experienced computing people and their customers expect.
And some of the stuff you do today is descended from here:
You probably wrote this comment in a program that displays forms, and allows you to fill in forms and call up other forms. This is how the 3270 terminal worked.
Maybe you have some hypervisor running somewhere. Welcome to 1970s IBM. We don't want to rewrite our 360 stuff so we will emulate the 360 in its own sandbox.
Saddest part of these things, when they come into general awareness one way or another, they are so out of tune with the universe that the public hail them as new "technology." The ideas are old, it's only some new implementation or circumstance that's novel.
It’s not completely irrelevant. Like I said, if you know you need big iron you use big iron (I dealt with as400s and cobol for years).
But it’s not a commonly taught tech anymore. I look at it like a lot of niche languages. Erlang has a lot of great advantages but if it costs several multiples more budget to hire for I’m going with python if I can get away with it.
I will always use the most boring possible tool to solve a problem because I don’t want to get stuck as the “that thing” guy. And because I’d rather spend my “effort” bucks on stuff that directly makes me money.
Edit: I’ve seen zseries feature set and it’s impressive. Still not going to use it over AWS if I can get away with it.
> It seems Tesla is deliberately ignoring or trying to squash the aftermarket/custom-car culture
This culture ("F your emissions controls," "I the lay blue collar know better than the committes of degreed engineers who designed the thing") has never cared about safety, nor has the aftermarket ("fitness for purpose, engineering, warranty... to hell with all that, the only requirement for our product is that some idiot should buy it")
Improperly repaired and modified cars are a detriment to the safety of others on the road, but wishing the problem away like Tesla is doing is not going to help anything, they need to publish and make accessible the documentation like the real car makers do.
>Improperly repaired and modified cars are a detriment to the safety of others on the road
Mechanical failure is a fart in a hurricane compared to human factors (distraction, alcohol, run of the mill stupidity) when it comes to dangerous things on the road. Regulating mechanical condition is exponentially less effective once you start caring about more than the most basic things (e.g. heavy trucks with bald tires). That's why a handful of states have created then scrapped vehicle inspection programs. I get that it bothers people but mechanical failure is a tiny edge case compared to everything else. Why bother, there's other better things to spend our resources regulating if road safety is the goal. If mechanical condition mattered more than trivially this would be reflected in insurance rated between states with/without regulation covering this (inspection programs).
In my experience shitboxes with mufflers falling off and rust holes are more likely to damage community image than anything else.
In the US, yea, inspections aren't universal, but the only inspection program I know of that has been scrapped was Florida's. I think there are more operating inspection regimes than defunct ones, even if you can cheat some of them. This also seems to be an anomaly among developed countries.
Rust that's more than superficial can lead to structural failure, and improper crash repairs can cause this. These are definitely situations that leave the vehicle in a lesser state of crashworthiness.
A compromised exhaust frequently leads to more exhaust entering the cabin.
This gets into the roots of my socialist beliefs as caring for our injured comrades brings us all down. There are always better things to send effort and resources to than dealing with the loss of productivity, the costs to deal with whatever damage, and misery of loved ones.
Indiana used to have safety inspections, scrapped several decades ago.
Part of the reason is probably that cars (even in rust prone areas) don't rust nearly as quickly as they used to, and everything else on the vehicle, e.g. tires, brakes, suspension are much better and (in the case of suspension components at least) require much less regular maintenance. There's just no low-hanging fruit any more. GP is right, resources are better spent elsewhere.
When did California have a safety inspection program? I only know of the emissions inspection program, which still exists, but for most vehicles is simply does OBD-II say everything is fine, and is it not making visible smoke.
"This gets into the roots of my socialist beliefs"
Regulation is not socialism. And being in favor of regulation or socialism shouldn't mean that you are against intelligent regulations that take into account costs and benefits.
> Improperly repaired and modified cars are a detriment to the safety of others on the road
I'll take streets full of gearheads tinkering with their cars over soccer moms ignoring grinding brakes until the rotor disc completely separates from the hat/hub anyday.
It frustrates me too that for every tuner that gets too excited with their camber there are a hundred shitboxes with bald tires and janky emission systems that stopped being effective sometime in the Clinton administration, yet for some reason the tuners are the ones commonly vilified.
With ICEs it's somewhat necessary to become more obnoxious in pursuit of greater performance. Faster ICE-powered cars tend to be noisier and stinkier, it's somewhat inherent.
Gearheads in the EV-era will be a lot less visible. You won't know who has upgraded their batteries, controllers, and motors. I wish Tesla would take a different stance on this and instead embrace and support the grassroots motorsports scene. GM Performance has already announced an EV crate motor, so it looks like GM might be taking the lead here.
The gearheads just have their cars sitting there in non-running condition while they tinker. The soccer moms are driving around with noisy distractions in the back seat.
If those states were measurably less safe wouldn't that be reflected in insurance premiums? Mechanical failure is inconsequential compared to boring old human factors (distractions, alcohol, bad decisions) when it comes to dangers on the road.
The problem is that there are confounding factors.
States with regular inspections tend to have more expensive cars, higher wealth, higher traffic density and so on. Those factors are going to drive insurance rates up as well.
I feel like I am the only person around me who maintains (changes oil, rebuilt carb etc.) equipment and people seem to treat lawnmowers the worst. I swear I think people throw them away because they're out of fuel sometimes.
Ford has been doing this for decades (I think I saw it mentioned in the docs for EEC IV.) It turns off fuel for a cylinder here and there intending to pump heat out of the engine (a cylinder with no fuel is an air pump.)
It doesn't really let you operate with no coolant. Might get you farther before you die if you push it.
You are correct, that the manual doesn't specifically say it can operate without coolant (now that I re-read it). What it does is active fail safe mode, then will shut the engine off once the temperature goes above another (higher) threshold. So I guess if coolant is completely gone (instead of just low), you may be able to drive for a few minutes then be shut down for a while before driving again (the main purpose is to give you enough time to find a safe spot to stop).
When I lived in Russia (2000s) it was quite abundant and seemed to be cheap, it was part of nearly every breakfast that I didn't prepare for myself whether or not there was anything luxurious about the situation.
The foie gras that GP mentioned, is inherently labor intensive to produce and not abundant anywhere.
Think back to the state of the art in the 70s when these were thought up. You can cite SIGSALY[1] but it took a really long time for these concepts to be flyable. AT&T was doing digital telephony terrestrially in the 60s [2] but radio links make this more difficult. Of course things are different today.
I do not beleive that industrial breeding is selecting for anything that makes such prison life tolerable. Birds in production generally aren't reproducing, so nothing in the henhouse is affecting evolution.