Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code • Hacker News Board

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code

#121

Post by greenyoda » Fri, Jul 08, 2016, 3:31 AM UTC

HillaryBriss wrote: post #110

ceocoder wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish we can do an AMA with these two, > # THE MASTER IGNITION ROUTINE WAS CONCEIVED AND EXECUTED, AND (NOTA BENE) IS MAINTAINED BY ADLER AND EYLES. I had to look this up, NOTA BENE is latin for, observe carefully or take special notice

Maybe you will find this article interesting: Don Eyles Walks Us Through the Lunar Module Source Code http://hackaday.com/2016/07/05/don-eyles-walks-us-through-th...

... and the HN discussion of this article 2 days ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12036864

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code

#122

Post by nitrogen » Fri, Jul 08, 2016, 5:35 AM UTC

DavidWanjiru wrote: post #99

jsingleton wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The high quality originals were taped over by NASA. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2009/jul/16/moon-landing...

See? These are the types of reasons why the-moon-landing-was-staged conspiracy theories keep cropping up.

I have one word for those: retroreflectors.

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code

#123

Post by pests » Fri, Jul 08, 2016, 5:58 AM UTC

thevibesman wrote: post #89

ianbertolacci wrote: post #32

Have they considered rewriting it in rust?

hehe (A friend of mine, who when in search of a new go-to-programming language instead of Python, was more interested in Swift vs Rust because of this attitude).

Remind your friend these comments are only left by a small vocal minority and is not representative of the project or its maintainers.

This is akin to not liking something because you don't like the people who already like it, despite how much you'd like it otherwise.

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code

#124

Post by cyphar » Fri, Jul 08, 2016, 7:16 AM UTC

j1vms wrote: post #106

A less important aside: what license is this available under? Or what's the history behind this source release? Edit: .s files indicate: # Copyright: Public domain.

Since NASA is a US government agency, they don't have any copyright over any software they write.

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code

#125

Post by bitfox » Fri, Jul 08, 2016, 7:44 AM UTC

What if you'll receive a pull request?

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code

#126

Post by Bromskloss » Fri, Jul 08, 2016, 8:02 AM UTC

strudey wrote: post #78

ceocoder wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish we can do an AMA with these two, > # THE MASTER IGNITION ROUTINE WAS CONCEIVED AND EXECUTED, AND (NOTA BENE) IS MAINTAINED BY ADLER AND EYLES. I had to look this up, NOTA BENE is latin for, observe carefully or take special notice

"Note well"

… lest you fall into it.

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code

#127

Post by Bromskloss » Fri, Jul 08, 2016, 8:06 AM UTC

pests wrote: post #123

thevibesman wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

hehe (A friend of mine, who when in search of a new go-to-programming language instead of Python, was more interested in Swift vs Rust because of this attitude).

Remind your friend these comments are only left by a small vocal minority and is not representative of the project or its maintainers. This is akin to not liking something because you don't like the people who already like it, despite how much you'd like it otherwise.

Clue me in! What kind of comments are we talking about? Anything inappropriate here must have gone over my head.

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code

#128

Post by KineticLensman » Fri, Jul 08, 2016, 10:41 AM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #122

DavidWanjiru wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See? These are the types of reasons why the-moon-landing-was-staged conspiracy theories keep cropping up.

I have one word for those: retroreflectors.

And another- telemetry

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code

#129

Post by Razengan » Fri, Jul 08, 2016, 12:17 PM UTC

js2 wrote: post #21

Watch the landing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_OD2V6fMLQ During the landing, you'll here mention of 1201 and 1202 alarms. Here's what that's about: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/a11.1201-... Here's 1201 being called: https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/blob/dc4ea6735c4646... And 1202: https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/blob/dc4ea6735c4646...

I wonder, could this put those moon landing denial conspiracies to rest?

Re: Apollo 11 Guidance Computer source code

#130

Post by 0xcde4c3db » Fri, Jul 08, 2016, 12:43 PM UTC

Razengan wrote: post #129

js2 wrote: post #21

Watch the landing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_OD2V6fMLQ During the landing, you'll here mention of 1201 and 1202 alarms. Here's what that's about: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/a11.1201-... Here's 1201 being called: https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/blob/dc4ea6735c4646... And 1202: https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/blob/dc4ea6735c4646...

I wonder, could this put those moon landing denial conspiracies to rest?

Conspiracy theorists typically suffer from enormous confirmation bias, so it's far more likely that this will lead to new claims about how the code couldn't possibly have worked on a real mission. I wouldn't even be surprised if someone found a transcription error, claimed it was an error in the original code, and then accused the maintainers of a cover-up for fixing it.