Apr. 29th, 2011

nancylebov: (green leaves)
At this point, I like to think the single point of failure (possibly multiple single points of failure) was put in by utilitarian (it's worthwhile for the few to die for the many) engineer-architects, possibly enslaved or at least trapped into their work.

These single points of failure were sold to their pointy-haired bosses as a way of saving money by not having redundancy and safety measures.

Hubris could also be involved-- a belief that the other side isn't able to get our blueprints and/or is too stupid to understand them.

And speaking of time and change and hubris.... what would war and diplomacy look like if keeping secrets were effectively impossible?
nancylebov: (green leaves)
In How to Suppress Women's Writing, she asked of "good literature"-- "good for who? good for what?"

This is from memory, but it's a bit of cognitive therapy that I only needed to read once for it to stay with me.

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11 121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 1st, 2025 11:23 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios