sweet wrote:
[...]

Yes it is a matter of some trust. But after meeting people like Feynman and
Weinberg et. al. of similar repute in the physics community I think I have a
better understanding of who is doing what and with what amount of talent
than just using my trust. (And yes, I have met some real weak links but
those people are in the minority.)

Very true. Not met Feynman but from what I have seen of him and his work/approach, he could not fail to impress.

I do realize that I am basing my judgement on my experience, but that has
been accumulated over 15 yrs. Scientists don't get to be directors of large
programs unless they have their head screwed on right. The often portrayed
"brainless director" is only a Hollywood director's axe grinding.

Very true on both counts. The successful directors also tend to be those that get the balance of true science and the associated evil politics about right...


[...]

... I know a tech who was told they had to make the shuttle engines
work at 110% efficiency, he bitterly griped to me.

I very much doubt that they are operating at anything above 50% efficiency. However, they do operate at >110% of their originally specified thrust due to various enhancements. (They can also be 'throttled back' to <100% thrust to minimise loadings during part of the launch flight.)

Or were you meaning to say "effectiveness". Don't see why there should be any bitter gripes about that. The only gripes should be about management schedules and costings compromising good engineering sense...

(Note also that "effect" and [to] "affect" are very different!)

So we can thank God that so far SETI is unpopular.          :)

Which God? (:-))

One advantage of 'Open' or 'Free' or low cost projects are that the associated political forces should not be too much of a problem.

However, we want it to be as popular as Hell!


Cheers,
Martin