261–270 of 333 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like the battle between Sherlock and Moriarty in Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows?
Yes. A lot of Western action movies owe their inspiration to Chinese movies (and I suppose, viceversa). In this case Hero (2002) -- or a similar movie, since I doubt it invented this trope -- is likely an inspiration for A Game of Shadows (2011).
Programmer/analyst here and ready to help you NASA, just ask me and I'll clear a few hours of my agenda for you. I know people say this a lot, but in this case I really think a (at least partial) rewrite in Rust of the Hubble software would be very beneficial. We could gather some of the most distinguished coders here in hacker-news and create a task force to show them the benefits of rust's memory safety.
Then maybe lookup "stack overflow" in rust, and you will be delighted. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Ao... 583 closed, 156 open. That much to "memory safety" in rust.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the point is to instead of using the keyboard, use the mouse to click the up arrow, and leave it at that. (I know how tempting it is to reply quickly to something, I have the urge to just post whats going on my mind right away unfiltered. So I am very forgiving, but not everyone is)
That only tells the person who owns the comment that you appreciate it, with comment scores you're correct that almost all "I like this" comments are wrong, without comment scores then they become useful again.
Anyone else look at the headline and feel this is one of the dumbest headlines ever. It makes it sound like NASA's incompetent. 'Why haven't you fixed Hubble yet?'. There doesn't seem to be any nuance or respect that they're trying to repair an orbiting telescope that was launched 30 years ago and designed 40 years ago - and that people are patiently trying to sort through a fully autonomous system 400 miles above th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the people in that movie were WAY more loud and emotional than the real NASA engineers and operators. There are plenty of NASA engineers and leaders who lose their cool. I’m only saying that so people don’t overly lionize them in a way that prevents them from pursuing a similar job because they feel they are somehow cut from a different cloth.
Everybody knows that when presented with the irrefutable evidence that the Challenger o-rings would fail, they more or less just let the astronauts die. Definitely cut from same cloth as any other org.
“The O-rings were never tested in extreme cold.”[1]
There wasn’t data which led to discussions about uncertainty, but that shouldn’t be conflated with irrefutable evidence of failure.
The obviousness of it (like many engineering failures) was only apparent in hindsight.
“Evidence, in retrospect, points to a long period of time, especially based on post-flight inspections when the joint design weakness was ‘sending a message’ and the true potential of this message was not perceived and reacted to.”[2]
“Not perceived” isn’t compatible with “irrefutable evidence that it would fail”.
[1] https://www.space.com/31732-space-shuttle-challenger-disaste...
[2]https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CRPT-99hrpt1016/pdf/...
Anyone else look at the headline and feel this is one of the dumbest headlines ever. It makes it sound like NASA's incompetent. 'Why haven't you fixed Hubble yet?'. There doesn't seem to be any nuance or respect that they're trying to repair an orbiting telescope that was launched 30 years ago and designed 40 years ago - and that people are patiently trying to sort through a fully autonomous system 400 miles above th…
Yeah, I hear you on that. Another possibility is that NPR is trying to manufacture a sense of mystery or surprise as journalists often do with science stories. A bit less nefarious but also sort of annoying in its own way.
Anyone else look at the headline and feel this is one of the dumbest headlines ever. It makes it sound like NASA's incompetent. 'Why haven't you fixed Hubble yet?'. There doesn't seem to be any nuance or respect that they're trying to repair an orbiting telescope that was launched 30 years ago and designed 40 years ago - and that people are patiently trying to sort through a fully autonomous system 400 miles above th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lesson not taught to any modern software developer. Instead they change things all the time for no real reason other than that they want to change things.
This is not true. If something's working, you don't change it for no reason. Business requirements and requests change all the time . 90% of our work is done in response to that. The other 10% is fixing up technical problems due to increased scaling or bugs found, and then basically never do we upgrade a system to keep up with security updates or change to a more modern tech.
Sure, there's often a reason like "we wanted to write it in a different language" or "we've overhauled the UI to be slower and more cumbersome".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the people downvoting this comment is why I will stop reading HN.
What did that comment actually bring to the conversation?
So no, it's probably not as useful as the comment it was referring too, but it was useful (to some of us) as it pertains to the community as a whole.
No part of that effort has actually repaired anything in space.