826
Single point of failrule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 3 months ago by nicknonya to c/196
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Zron@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

The problem is that this strategy is becoming more popular in physical product development, for things that we’ve known how to make for decades.

You don’t need to move fast and break things when you’re making a car. We’ve been making cars on assembly lines for a hundred years, innovation is going to be small.

Same thing for rockets. We put men on the moon 50 years ago for fucks sake. Rocketry is a well understood engineering field at this point. We know exactly how much force needs to exerted, we know exactly the stresses involved. You don’t need to rapidly iterate anything. Sit down, do the math, build the thing to spec, and it fucking works: see ULA, ESA, and NASA who have, all in the past few years, built rockets and had them successfully complete missions on the first launch without blowing up a bunch to “gather data”

Move fast and break things is for companies that have crackhead leadership who can’t make up their mind about what a product should do. It should have no place in real world engineering, where you know what your product is going to be subject to.

this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2024
826 points (100.0% liked)

196

16501 readers
2766 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS