Conscious Choice cover

From the press release: In this ground-breaking new history of early America, historian Robert Zimmerman not only exposes the lie behind The New York Times 1619 Project that falsely claims slavery is central to the history of the United States, he also provides profound lessons about the nature of human societies, lessons important for Americans today as well as for all future settlers on Mars and elsewhere in space.

 
Conscious Choice: The origins of slavery in America and why it matters today and for our future in outer space, is a riveting page-turning story that documents how slavery slowly became pervasive in the southern British colonies of North America, colonies founded by a people and culture that not only did not allow slavery but in every way were hostile to the practice.  
Conscious Choice does more however. In telling the tragic history of the Virginia colony and the rise of slavery there, Zimmerman lays out the proper path for creating healthy societies in places like the Moon and Mars.

 

“Zimmerman’s ground-breaking history provides every future generation the basic framework for establishing new societies on other worlds. We would be wise to heed what he says.” —Robert Zubrin, founder of founder of the Mars Society.

 

Available everywhere for $3.99 (before discount) at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and all ebook vendors, or direct from the ebook publisher, ebookit. And if you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and I get a bigger cut much sooner.


Curiosity has another computer crash

Since March 6 all activity from Curiosity seemed to stop, with no images and no science team updates. The reason? The rover had experienced another computer crash and reboot:

Curiosity experienced a computer reset on its Side-A computer on Wednesday, March 6, 2019 (Sol 2,339), that triggered the rover’s safe mode. This was the second computer reset in three weeks; both resets were related to the computer’s memory.

The mission team decided to switch from the Side-A computer back to the rover’s Side-B computer, which it operated on for most of the mission until November of 2018. Side-B recently experienced its own memory issue; the team has since further diagnosed the matter, reformatting the Side-B computer to isolate areas of “bad” memory. As of today, Curiosity is out of safe mode, and the team is configuring the rover for new science operations in the clay unit. Curiosity is expected to return to science operations as early as Wednesday.

This news is worrisome. The track record for spacecraft with increasing computer problems is that they never get better. Instead, the problem steadily worsens until operations become limited or even impossible. In the meantime engineers work wonders to extend the mission, but in the end this is a battle they appear to always lose.

We are beginning to see this pattern with Curiosity. Both of its computers have now experienced problems. It appears they have a better handle on the problems with the back-up computer (Side-B), so that is why they have switched back to it. Should its own memory issues continue to deteriorate however the rover will be in serious trouble, as the Side-A computer has proven to be very unreliable.

Readers!
 

I must unfortunately ask you for your financial support because I do not depend on ads and rely entirely on the generosity of readers to keep Behind the Black running. You can either make a one time donation for whatever amount you wish, or you sign up for a monthly subscription ranging from $2 to $15 through Paypal or $3 to $50 through Patreon.


Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.


Your support is even more essential to me because I not only keep this site free from advertisements, I do not use the corrupt social media companies like Google, Twitter, and Facebook to promote my work. I depend wholly on the direct support of my readers.


You can provide that support to Behind The Black with a contribution via Patreon or PayPal. To use Patreon, go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation. For PayPal click one of the following buttons:
 


 

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


 

If Patreon or Paypal don't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
 

Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
 

Or you can donate by using Zelle through your bank. You will need to give my name and email address (found at the bottom of the "About" page). The best part of this electronic option is that no fees will be deducted! What you donate will be what I receive.

7 comments

  • Col Beausabre

    Bob, Do we know why these memory problems continue across different spacecraft? Is exposure to cosmic radiation ? Just random quantum mechanical “flips” ? I don’t think there is anything mechanical involved in memory so there’s nothing to wear out…

  • TL

    Conventional computer memory does wear out and go bad over time. There is a finite number of times it can be accessed before it becomes unreliable. Mil-spec chips are much more robust than consumer grade parts, but eventually they too are going to go bad. What it sounds like the engineers are doing is to restrict the OS from using the specific memory registers which have been identified as bad. Cool trick to extend the life, but at that point the system is on life support.

  • Col Beausabre

    TL – Thank you. At what point (years) do you think a home computer or laptop might be facing problems ?

  • Edward_2

    Voyager 1 and 2 have been traveling through space since 1977, using “ancient” computer technology.

    How is it that Curiosity and Opportunity are having computer problems when they were only launched in 2011 and 2003?

  • Edward

    Edward_2 asked: “How is it that Curiosity and Opportunity are having computer problems when they were only launched in 2011 and 2003?

    When NASA stopped using core memory for the much lighter weight memories and computers that are used today, they understood that they were trading some amount of reliability and lifespan for more capability of their probes, including much more data collection.

    Limitations of the Deep Space Network for data download from our probes influences decisions on mission lifespans, but NASA will gladly extend a mission whenever and however it can. The Voyagers now collect a limited set of data and are only occasionally called for data download.

    The other day, Col Beausabre started a brief discussion of magnetic core memory:
    https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/nasa-considering-replacing-sls-with-commercial-rockets-for-first-orion-test-mission/#comment-1065090

    It is a mystery to me why Curiosity is having so much trouble with its computers when other probes are not. New Horizons uses modern computer technology, yet it is one of many probes that have been flying for much longer than Curiosity’s mission. Cassini flew for two decades with few problems.

  • Gealon

    There are quite a wide range of factors as to why New Horizons has had so little trouble with it’s computer while the Rovers have had considerably more. I would speculate though that the primary factors are; the manner in which the memory is used, the environment the spacecraft is subjected to, and the manufacturer of the memory.

    New Horizons spends much of it’s time in sleep or cruise mode, doing very little other than checking up on it’s system’s state of health. This means that very little is being written into flash memory over the life of the spacecraft. Yes it collects a boat load of data on a flyby, but considering the time between flybys, the memory sees very little use. The Rovers on the other hand spend almost all of their time awake, collecting data and sending it back. The ships undergo many more read/write cycles in comparison to New Horizons over the course of the spacecraft’s life, which would greatly increase the risk of eventual failure of a memory cluster from time to time.

    Second is environment, New Horizons is moving away from the sun, and if my memory on the math or it is correct, there is in inverse relationship between the amount of energy, or in this case, particle emissions, the spacecraft is subjected to and it’s distance from the sun. I believe it is a square of the distance or some such. The point being, as it moves away, it will be subjected to steadily lesser particle hits, reducing the risk of any of them effecting the computers. Conversely, the Rovers are going nowhere as far as the sun is concerned, so their risk remains the same.

    And lastly the manufacturer does play a large role in the quality of the memory used on the spacecraft. Without looking the information up myself, I would wager that neither of these craft use the same chips or even chip manufacturers. This could also contribute to the issues. I however am more of the mind that because of the shared computer issues between the Rovers and their relative ages to each other, that it is not so much a manufacturing issue, but more likely related to the first two factors, mode of usage and the environment the computers are operating in.

  • Edward

    Gealon wrote: “Second is environment, New Horizons is moving away from the sun, and if my memory on the math or it is correct, there is in inverse relationship between the amount of energy, or in this case, particle emissions, the spacecraft is subjected to and it’s distance from the sun. I believe it is a square of the distance or some such. The point being, as it moves away, it will be subjected to steadily lesser particle hits, reducing the risk of any of them effecting the computers.

    Excellent point. In fact, particle radiation may be further reduced, as not all the particles leave the sun at escape velocity, so those particles probably don’t reach New Horizon’s current position. Further, the relative speeds of the particles to the spacecraft may also be reduced, at this distance, meaning that the damaging affects would be reduced.

    On the other hand, this far out the cosmic rays may be more dense, as the sun’s magnetic field tends to divert many of them from getting close to the sun (e.g. near Earth or Mars).

    Chip design and manufacture would make quite a difference on reliability. Modern chip manufacturing can make amazingly small transistors. It has been a couple of decades since I worked on NASA space instruments, but I don’t think it is going on a limb to suggest that NASA insists on larger transistors in order to improve reliability. NASA has lists of already-approved vendors for many parts, because the manufacturer and design does play a large role in the quality of many things used on a spacecraft.

Readers: the rules for commenting!

 

No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.

 

However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.

 

Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *