• FatVegan@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s one of these reddit phrases i’ll never understand. Things can work and be very stupid.

      • SippyCup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        2 days ago

        This is something tradesmen have said for a very long time. I think the original meaning has been lost online.

        “It’s not stupid if it works” is basically a tacit admission that something stupid is happening, we all agree that it’s stupid, and we also kind of all know that there is a better way, but for some reason we’re not doing that.

        Usually it feels like the stupid thing we’re about to do is the best option available to us.

          • marcos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Not at all. “The purpose of a system is what is does” is a phrase that makes it clear that in a system where a lot of people work in, “purpose” is a useless concept and should never be used to tell if it’s a good or a bad system.

            It’s an entirely political view of a system, and has no relation to the implementation being stupid or not.

  • trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    It’s not that the first one is completely impossible, but we’re not quite there yet technologically. And even if we could build the first one, the second one would probably be less than a 1000th of the price to make.

    • OwOarchist@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      Would you rather have 1 of option A or 1000 of option B?

      Kind of depends on what your specific goals are, but 1000 to 1 odds tend to tilt things in option B’s favor.

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Even if it’s not completely impossible, it would be completely useless. What would be the point of rotary chain guns on a drone? Assuming the thing had enough lifting capacity to carry the barrels, there isn’t enough space in that thing to carry enough ammo to fire for more than a second.

        • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          You’d kinda run into the same issue either way, you’d either have not enough ammo or not enough battery storage. Plus, there isn’t really a reason to have rotary barrels on something like a laser. They would theoretically be more of a sustained fire kind of weapon.

    • B-TR3E@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      WTF is option 1 even supposed to be? Looks like a device producing extremely much engine noise to me.