ctulek

Reminds me https://medium.com/matter/shitphone-a-love-story-a44e6643480...

He was already aware of the mismatch with data and his theory, and he didn't hesitate to put "Hand of God" to his work to explain it. : )

That a scientist had great contributions to science doesn't mean that s/he was a human being with her own dogmas and conflicts.

Sorry, my bad about rocket part (There is a difference in Newtonian and Relativity calculations but it is too small). For space technology it is not the rocket launches but, for instance, GPS satellites, that work with the principles of relativity, that cannot be explained by Newtonian physics.

Off topic: I have no idea how this voting stuff works, and I don't know why mine is -3

You cannot explain the motions of planets with Newton. Not Mercury at least. You cannot launch a rocket with Newtonian physics either. It will explode, and it did indeed. I don't think you can make efficient photocells either by just using Newtonian physics.

So, the new paradigms were a shift from Newtonian physics for sure.

A follow up question: How many developers want to work in a startup that another developer started?

"The service that keeps track of the state of the world has a fail-safe mode where it will not remove unhealthy instances in the event that a significant portion appears to fail simultaneously."

You should keep your logics dumb.

Many times it doesn't matter if things are free or not. Even if thins block people doing things, after a short hiccup, people find a solution to their problems.

Stallman's ideology is, at the end, just about preventing hiccups...