[dogleash]

> This is where it's actually interesting, it's not prototype -> live and boom.

> It's the fifth mission or something, and worked for two years.

Interesting how? I'm reminded of a quote from a famous failure analysis:

> We have also found that certification criteria used in [Mission] Readiness Reviews often develop a gradually decreasing strictness. The argument that the same risk was [deployed] before without failure is often accepted as an argument for the safety of accepting it again. Because of this, obvious weaknesses are accepted again and again, sometimes without a sufficiently serious attempt to remedy them, or to delay a [mission] because of their continued presence.