zlacker

>>dang+yy1
> In short, it was remote bricked, by giving it commands to rotate a bit. > But luckily it automatically readjust itself to earth automatically every half year exactly for these events.

I remember when bricking something meant it was totally unrecoverable. Now it means "temporarily not working but will automatically heal".

>>burnte+AB
A device that is acting as a brick cannot receive commands and is not useful at all. That is the current status of voyager 2.

"Unbricking" will hopefully work automatically, because there is no other option. But that can also fail and there is no way to know, or influence it.

I use bricking in the definition of mobile phone tinkerers .. there are many results for unbricking btw, but I just checked and with the first result it seems that Apple now uses unbricking for activating a new device. Because technically before, it is also just a brick - but here I would agree, that it is not a appropriate term, but rather should be for somehow broken devices.

>>hutzli+zE
It’s not bricked, it’s operating autonomously for some time. They’re incredibly different modes of operation.

>>nomel+c51
I think it's reasonable to say that it is operating autonomously and is currently "bricked" as a colloquialism. There's a certain helplessness for NASA in this case, which is similar to bricking one's device. Instead of hoping that the repair shop can fix it, they have to hope that their engineering foresight was adequate.

>>belter+(OP)
Stub for arguing about what "bricked" means. These comments were originally replies to >>36941191 , but we moved them because the offtopic discussion was choking the thread.

Normally I'd have marked the entire subthread offtopic, but hutzlibu's comment deserves to be at the top, even if it does use the word "bricked" wrong.