Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's not even clear if AI was used to find the bug It's not even clear you read the article
Even worse, the other child comments are speculating (and didn't RTFA either) when the answer is clear in the article. > We found this defect by distilling a behavioural specification of the IMU subsystem using Allium, an AI-native behavioural specification language.
We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code
111–120 of 213 posts
Re: We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not even clear if AI was used to find the bug: they mention modeling the software with an "ai native" language, whatever that means. What is not clear is how they found themselves modeling the gyros software of the apollo code to begin with. But, I do think their explanation of the lock acquisition and the failure scenario is quite clear and compelling.
> It's not even clear if AI was used to find the bug The intro says “We used Claude and Allium”. Allium looks like a tool they’ve built for Claude. So the article is about how they used their AI tooling and workflow to find the bug.
Re: We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code
#113Re: We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a miracle nobody died in flight during the program. Exploding oxygen tank, rockets shaking themselves to pieces during launch, getting hit by lightning on top of a flying skyscraper full of kerosene and liquid oxygen....
Starting from the first test pilots, a lot of people died for us to get to the point to launch that flight. So while no one died on the flight, lots of people died just getting us there. If I recall, in The Right Stuff, it's mentioned that those early test pilots had something like a 25% mortality rate.
Re: We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code
#115Re: We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code
#116Still my all time favorite snippet of code. TC BANKCALL # TEMPORARY, I HOPE HOPE HOPE CADR STOPRATE # TEMPORARY, I HOPE HOPE HOPE TC DOWNFLAG # PERMIT X-AXIS OVERRIDE https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/blob/master/Luminar...
Can you explain this to me?
Re: We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code
#117Still my all time favorite snippet of code. TC BANKCALL # TEMPORARY, I HOPE HOPE HOPE CADR STOPRATE # TEMPORARY, I HOPE HOPE HOPE TC DOWNFLAG # PERMIT X-AXIS OVERRIDE https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/blob/master/Luminar...
Can you explain this to me?
Re: We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hate that I can’t write em dashes freely anymore without people accusing the writing of being AI generated. Even though they are perfect for usage in writing down thoughts and notes.
One thing you can try⸺admittedly it's not quite correct⸺is replacing them with a two-em dash. I've never seen an AI use one, and it looks pretty funky.
Re: We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code
#119Re: We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the top reply on a substantial percentage of HN posts now and we should discourage it. It is: - sneering - a shallow dismissal (please address the content) - curmudgeonly - a tangential annoyance All things explicitly discouraged in the site guidelines. [1] Downvoting is the tool for items that you think don't belong on the front page. We don't need the same comment on every single article. [1] - https://news…
It's not a shallow dismissal; it's a dismissal for good reason. It's tangential to the topic, but not to HN overall. It's only curmudgeonly if you assume AI-written posts are the inevitable and good future (aka begging the question). I really don't know how it's "sneering", so I won't address that.