Your response relies on an appeal to emotion rather than logic, and doesn't seem particularly interested in engaging with the substance of the questions raised?
And to paraphrase Louis, since when the 25-years lasting mission that you've learnt it existed only recently owns you exactly seven days of function on the darn comet?
To be more serious: of course the scientists will learn a lot even from every thing that went wrong. That's exactly how science works. It still doesn't mean that the public attention should concentrate on that now. See also my comment response to the "mistake" claim.
Among other questions on that page are
"Why is it so important to study comets?"
"What is the difference between asteroids and comets?"
You don't bother public with engineering stuff like "we have 1000 Wh power budget from the primary batteries, which will last depending on what happens when, and the different devices have different energy needs and we aren't actually sure what can happen but we prepare for as much as possible with the hope of at least something giving us some good results." They just switch off. We at least know where justsee switched off in being interested in the details: the expression "during a week" he understood as somebody promised him "exactly at least a week of entertaining news from the lander."
This better get included in the next "fake HN frontpage" that gets posted :)
(In reality, as discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8611274
"Philae is controlled by 2 RTX2010 CPUs (hot red), further 8 control the Experiments. 13 CPUs (10* RTX2010, 1* ADSP-21020, 2* 80C3x) in total. © https://twitter.com/philae2014/status/427842417920712704 ")
