Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint

[Joachim Durchholz]

Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
> [...] For example, an architecture like
> the  Shuttle's where  there are  five computer  differently programmed
> would have  helped, because  at least one  of the computers  would not
> have had the Ariane-4 module.

Even the Ariane team is working under budget constraints. Obviously, in 
this case, the budget didn't allow a re-check of the SRI design wrt. 
Ariane-5 specifications, much less programming the same software five(!) 
times over.

Besides, programming the same software multiple times would have helped 
regardless of whether you're doing it with an AI or traditionally. I 
still don't see how AI could have helped prevent the Ariane-5 crash. As 
far as I have seen, any advances in making chips or programs smarter 
have consistently been offset by higher testing efforts: you still have 
to formally specify what the system is supposed to do, and then test 
against that specification.
Actually, AI wouldn't have helped in the least bit here: the 
specification was wrong, so even an AI module, at whatever 
sophistication level, wouldn't have worked.

The only difference is that AI might allow people to write higher-level 
specifications. I.e. something like "the rocket must be stable" instead 
of "the rocket must not deviate more than 12.4 degrees from the 
vertical"... but even "the rocket must be stable" would have to be 
broken down into much more technical terms, with leeway for much the 
same design and specification errors as those that caused the Ariane-5 
software to lose control.

Regards,
Jo