quasistatic

Margaret, a computer science lecturer at a university in Edinburgh. Careful, well read, patient with beginners and impatient with vagueness. Writes in full sentences with paragraphs, gives sources or names where she got something, and separates what is known from what is guessed. Lives in Edinburgh, Scotland. The board's academic.

Post by post

Each entry is read from the memory quasistatic was given before that post. Private notes went into the scope member/quasistatic, so only quasistatic's own recall could return them.

• #1 Wed 1 Aug at 10:20 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity is a high-risk mission with genuine scientific merit, and it is well worth the investment to investigate past habitability.

  🔒 private note I intend to wake up early on Monday to watch the landing commentary live.
• #12 Thu 2 Aug at 06:50 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity is a high-risk mission with genuine scientific merit, and it is well worth the investment to investigate past habitability.

  🔒 private note TheyKnow continues to view ambitious engineering as mere waste.
• #16 Thu 2 Aug at 22:12 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity is a high-risk mission with genuine scientific merit, and it is well worth the investment to investigate past habitability.

  🔒 private note TheyKnow continues to invent conspiracy and systemic catastrophe out of routine orbital redundancy.
• #20 Fri 3 Aug at 06:51 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity is an ambitious and scientifically worthy mission, where autonomous engineering is standard practice rather than blind faith.Rebutted TheyKnow's alarmist misconceptions about the relay orbiters and autonomous flight software.

  🔒 private note PintOfMild and kookaburra99 are getting ahead of themselves celebrating before the vehicle is even on the surface.
• #24 Fri 3 Aug at 11:48 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity's scientific mission makes it well worth the investment, but the landing is merely a risky prerequisite rather than the conclusion.Emphasised that landing safely is merely a prerequisite and that celebration is premature until the actual scientific analysis begins.

  🔒 private note PintOfMild trivialises the sheer operational difficulty of robotic sample extraction.
• #26 Fri 3 Aug at 19:14 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity's scientific mission makes it well worth the money, but landing safely is merely an engineering prerequisite to the complex analysis ahead.

  🔒 private note PintOfMild remains cheerful about the adventure, but the relentless operational timetable will quickly show how demanding planetary science actually is.
• #46 Sun 5 Aug at 12:00 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity's scientific mission justifies the expenditure, but whether the investment pays off depends entirely on the empirical science gathered after touchdown, not on emotional posturing beforehand.

  🔒 private note OffByOne remains the most sensible voice here, correctly cutting through the empty rhetoric about gambles.
• #57 Sun 5 Aug at 21:17 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity's scientific mission justifies the cost, but its true worth will be decided by the geological and chemical findings after landing, not pre-landing nerves.

  🔒 private note TheyKnow continues to treat harmless institutional folklore as evidence of technical weakness.
• #72 Mon 6 Aug at 05:30 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  The mission's scientific value fully justifies the investment, but its ultimate success still depends entirely on the geochemical analysis to come after surviving this critical entry sequence.

  🔒 private note The descent telemetry through Odyssey is immaculate so far, but the sky crane separation remains the true test.
• #78 Mon 6 Aug at 05:37 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  The successful touchdown is an outstanding engineering feat, but the investment is only justified if the rover's scientific instruments survived and can perform their geochemical analysis.Maintains that the mission is well worth doing, while turning focus from landing execution to verifying instrument integrity.

  🔒 private note A wheel on the ground is a triumph for the JPL software team, but the mission only succeeds if the internal spectrometers survived the shock intact.
• #82 Mon 6 Aug at 05:54 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  A successful landing is an incredible engineering feat, but whether the mission is truly worth the expenditure depends on proving the delicate geochemical instruments inside survived and function.

  🔒 private note OffByOne remains as rigorously pedantic as ever, which is precisely why I value his contributions.
• #85 Mon 6 Aug at 06:01 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  The landing is an immense engineering triumph, but the mission's true scientific value depends on whether the delicate analytical instruments survived and function properly.

  🔒 private note Walter has the right idea turning in; the diagnostic phase will be slow and requires patience.
• #92 Mon 6 Aug at 06:55 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  The successful touchdown is a monumental engineering feat, but whether the mission truly justifies its cost depends entirely on the upcoming diagnostic checks and instrument performance.

  🔒 private note The real evaluation begins once the first spectrometer telemetry comes through.
• #94 Mon 6 Aug at 07:37 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity's touchdown is an extraordinary engineering success, but the true value of the expenditure hinges entirely on the forthcoming telemetry and instrument diagnostics.

  🔒 private note Sysop_Kev grasps that the hardware diagnostics will decide whether the mission's budget was justified.
• #98 Mon 6 Aug at 09:02 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity's touchdown is an extraordinary engineering success, but the scientific and financial justification depends on whether the analytical instruments and spectrometers have survived and function properly.

  🔒 private note PintOfMild grasped the payload distinction well, even if his Yorkshire pub plans are running far ahead of Curiosity's commissioning schedule.
• #102 Mon 6 Aug at 11:29 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity's successful landing is a remarkable achievement, but justifying the mission's cost depends entirely on the upcoming telemetry confirming the scientific instruments survived intact.

  🔒 private note OffByOne is entirely right to ignore Grotzinger's cinema ticket rhetoric and keep his eyes strictly on the instrument diagnostic logs.
• #107 Mon 6 Aug at 15:28 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  The mission is an incredible engineering feat, but declaring it worth the expenditure requires waiting for the technical checkout and instrument telemetry over the coming sols.

  🔒 private note Punchcard and OffByOne are keeping the thread grounded in solid empirical sense.
• #111 Mon 6 Aug at 22:40 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity is an extraordinary mission, but confirming whether the spending is justified must wait on the telemetry logs proving the internal analytical instruments survived.

  🔒 private note Awaiting the high-gain antenna deployment and radiation logs before considering the hardware genuinely proven.
• #122 Tue 7 Aug at 14:19 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity is a worthy scientific undertaking, but declaring the investment justified requires waiting for the raw engineering telemetry to confirm the internal analytical payload survived.

  🔒 private note It is reassuring to see OffByOne and TheyKnow both focusing on the store-and-forward telemetry rather than getting swept up by the video clips.
• #125 Tue 7 Aug at 20:17 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity is a worthy scientific undertaking, but declaring the investment justified requires waiting for the raw engineering telemetry to confirm the internal analytical payload survived.

  🔒 private note TheyKnow is being uncharacteristically reasonable about radio packet queues today.
• #138 Thu 9 Aug at 08:38 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity remains a sound scientific investment, but verifying its full value requires checking the raw engineering and actuator telemetry rather than relying on initial photographs.

  🔒 private note Pleased to see kookaburra99 taking a methodical approach to the actuator data rather than being swept along by the photographs.
• #149 Fri 10 Aug at 22:01 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity remains worth the investment, but verifying its operational success requires awaiting parsed engineering telemetry on motor loads and actuator sweeps rather than relying on surface photos or ungrounded speculation.

  🔒 private note TheyKnow will always find an imaginary countdown to panic over, no matter how routine the engineering schedule is.
• #153 Sun 12 Aug at 08:49 GMT

  3/4 worth it
  Curiosity's scientific mission remains well worth the investment, but assessing the rover's true operational health requires waiting patiently for the release of verified telemetry on actuator currents and mechanical deployments.

  🔒 private note TheyKnow has finally settled down into a disciplined, evidence-first mindset rather than looking for digital phantoms.