> such identical designators should be geographically widely spaced
Yes, though I wouldn't normally regard "4,000nm" (mentioned in the article) as widely spaced in geographical terms. Unless they meant nautical miles (which should be abbreviated as M, NM, Nm or nmi according to en.wiktionary.org) rather than nanometres.
OK, perhaps that comment wasn't really worth making ...
On the other hand, perhaps next year we'll read about some other system (aviation or silicon design) collapsing because the software mixed up nanometres and nautical miles.
I think in "approximately 4000 nautical miles apart", as I quoted above, the "nautical miles" means ... nautical miles? IDK what else to say to make it clearer.
Yes, though I wouldn't normally regard "4,000nm" (mentioned in the article) as widely spaced in geographical terms. Unless they meant nautical miles (which should be abbreviated as M, NM, Nm or nmi according to en.wiktionary.org) rather than nanometres.
OK, perhaps that comment wasn't really worth making ...
On the other hand, perhaps next year we'll read about some other system (aviation or silicon design) collapsing because the software mixed up nanometres and nautical miles.