Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam43
They had a priority to introduce something that solved a problem. They also introduced a deadline. To do this they have introduced this. You could argue they could have developed something else, but, at least at one point, it looks like it wouldn’t be ready for the deadline. Now they can hone this, and look at other solutions to improve on this.
Please understand I’m not saying anything is actually needed. However, rather than just be glib I am attempting to understand a situation.
I wanted a house with a garage. At first I couldn’t afford one, so I moved in somewhere without a garage. I did not chose to get cold and wet every night until I could afford a house with a garage.
I don’t agree with this, but I can see how we have got here.
|
This is pretty much it although it's more like -
I lived in a house without a garage. I wanted a garage so I bought a house with a shed because it kinda looks like a garage. Then one day I might buy a house with a garage.
What I don't get is why this problem needed to be solved by this deadline. It's been a "problem" for 100 years, but we HAVE to fix it by 2018, even if it means a bad solution is used.
Unless you're rushing things in to make sure you get credit for the safety innovation that is. Then it makes sense.