Early in my career I worked on military flight data recorders, including the development of the software for the F-22's "black box". Those systems have SBIT, IBIT, PBIT and MBIT sub-systems were BIT is "built in test" and S = startup, I = initiated, P = periodic and M = maintenance. I remember making the Star Trek diagnostic joke myself when I was assigned the SBIT work.
Each BIT does varying level of testing based on it's runtime budget but there are a lot of very basic tests that don't make much sense until you see your first field report of some register bit "sticking". Its much better to ground a plane that can't add 1+1 than to find that out in mid-flight.
This comment (one out of many comments about testing critical software) really hit home, especially given the testing currently going on here in the Ft. Lauderdale Office of The Corporation (with the Monopolistic Phone Company, who's mantra seems to be “it's your fault we're not ready for testing!”). While I would love to order a Level 3 Diagnostic, alas, our software is not written with such diagnostics in mind (and given the difficulty we've seen from the other side it's clear their software isn't either).
In fact, I'm having a hard time even figuring out what a “Level 3 Diagnostic” would even mean in the compoent I wrote, much less every other component involved with “Project: Sippy-Cup.”
Reading up on SBIT, IBIT, PBIT and MBIT sub-systems, it seems that it's really only applied to avionics and possibly automotive computer systems. The closest thing to it is the POST that most PCs do when powered on, which seems to be the functional equivelent of SBIT. The rest, IBIT, PBITand MBIT, not so much.
Out of all the components in “Project: Sippy-Cup,” only mine has an explicit “health-check” function built in (which just basically says, “Yes, I'm running” and that's it) which is close to PBIT(from my understanding); everything else is queried for known data at fixed intervals. But diagnostics seem to be “search the logs and/or configuration for for anomalous behavior.”
Leverage the synergy between my company and Google's social media empire and search engine with a side of mocha
That was weird.
Yeah. I didn't believe it was Google Plus either.
At first, it was a robot wanting to talk to the “business owner” of “a website” and to press one to talk with a “specialist” who could help “leverage the synergy between my company and Google's social media empire and search engine with a side of mocha” (or something to that effect, I wasn't really paying much attention frankly; I was just amused that “Google Plus” would even be calling me about “my domain”). Okay, I can play along.
I press “one.”
“Hello there! How can I help you?”
“You called me. I'm the ‘business owner.’”
“Okay! And your business is … ?”
“You tell me. Which business are you calling about?”
“So you are the business owner of the domain?”
“That is a possibility. I do own several domains. Which one are you calling about?”
“Well! Okay! Let me pull up the domains that are associated with your phone number. Um … you are in ‘Bokka Ratone?’”
“Yes, that is the zip code around these parts. So what domain are you calling about?”
“webboar. The domain “webboar.’ Double-you ee bee bee oh ay are.”
“No, I never had that domain.”
“Okay, what about flummux.org?”
“Yes, that's one of mine.”
“Nope. I don't have anything to do with that one.”
“Oh, my mistake, that's probably how we found you.”
“And who does your marketing?”
“Okay. Web site design?”
“Tha would be me.”
“Oh. So, are you intersted in leveraging the synergy between your company and Google Plus? We offer full search engine optimization and can help you market your site via social media.”
“No, I am not interested in that at this time.”
“Okay then.” <click>
- Fredrick Tamata <email@example.com>
- Wed, 3 Jun 2015 05:28:56 +1100
Let's split fifty percent each from a lucrative deal I will like to discus with you, please respond if you want to know more.
But in any case, no.