Mark Rages wrote:

> http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=12613851
> 
> This makes me feel better about my mistakes.

If that switch was SOOOO important, why wasn't it protected against
inadvertent activation? At the very least there should have been
TWO buttons that had to be pressed simultaneously.

And since it's a 'safety' system, how would you test it regularly
to be sure it works when really needed.

Talk about having a BAD day...

R


-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist