Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (883544)	8/30/2015 10:25:51 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 1577890

OMG... NASA has a mission called ‘OMG.’ Here’s how it got its name. By Andrea Peterson August 28 at 12:12 PM OMG isn't just popular shorthand for "Oh my God," it's also a NASA mission. Short for Oceans Melting Greenland, the research program is dedicated to looking at the loss of ice around the world's largest island — a rapidly changing part of the planet that likely has many climate scientists exclaiming, "Oh, my God!" But it's far from the only interesting or on-point acronym the space agency has used lately: Consider KaBOOM, or Ka-Band Objects Observation and Monitoring, which tracks things that could crash into the Earth. Or the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous, or NEAR, which researches — what else — an asteroid near our home planet. So how exactly does NASA come up with these names? A little history lesson can help us understand the process: At first, there was no single method for picking names, according to NASA chief historian Bill Barry. But in 1961, the agency issued a set of management instructions — what we'd now call a policy directive — that gave a few basic rules: Each project name will be a simple euphonic word that will not duplicate or be confused with other NASA or non-NASA project titles. When possible and if appropriate, names will be chosen to reflect NASA's mission. Project names will be serialized when appropriate, thus limiting the number of different names in use at any one time; however, serialization will be used only after successful flight or accomplishment has been achieved. The agency also set up the "Project Designation Committee," tasked with reviewing and recommending names. Although its influence waned after 1963 due to a lack of new things to name, the committee was revived in 1970 — but then only convened when there were specific naming requests, Barry said. Today, the agency still has pretty fixed guidance on how to name new projects, which is outlined in a policy directive. Among the rules? "Acronyms are to be avoided in selecting names except where the acronym is descriptive and easily pronounced." The general process for choosing them works like this: The "Official-in-Charge"— think the head of the agency's science mission directorate, for example — decides which projects need names and sets up a special committee to recommend monikers. Then that committee gets ideas from people involved in the project and elsewhere in the space community before making recommendations. Those recommendations get reviewed by the Office of Communications, and then the final selection moves to the NASA administrator for approval. But the process is a little more free-wheeling in practical terms, according to Barry. For instance, the agency sometimes runs contests to get ideas. The Space Shuttle Endeavor's name was chosen as part of a competition that solicited suggestions from elementary and secondary schools. Similarly, NASA used an essay contest to name the Mars Curiosity rover. But perhaps the most common naming technique is more straightforward: People leading individual research projects generally give them a name during the proposal process — and those often stick, said Barry. "Most of the names you see now attached to NASA projects probably came from principle investigators," he explained. That's what happened with OMG, says principal investigator Josh Willis. The project was chosen through a competitive grant process, and his team wanted a name that would both stand out and refer to Greenland's current situation, the NASA climate scientist said. Inside the agency, he said, the name sort of sold itself. "Here's this phrase that is so common in our modern lexicon, so to associate this really important and surprising science idea that the oceans are melting Greenland seemed like a no-brainer," Willis said. But he can't claim all the credit. "My wife is actually the one who first suggested it to me," Willis said. "Via text." washingtonpost.com