191–200 of 213 posts
Earlier 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....
Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffee died on the Apollo program. I feel it's not polite to ignore that fact even if you add an 'in flight' qualifier.
Mike Stewart here! I led the restoration of the AGC documented on CuriousMarc's channel and co-administrate VirtualAGC. There is a lot to unpack here. First: this is indeed a real bug in the AGC software. However, it did not go unnoticed for the whole program. It was discovered during level 3 testing of SATANCHE, and late development branch of the Command Module software COMANCHE. It was assigned anomaly number L-1D-…
Mike Stewart here! I led the restoration of the AGC documented on CuriousMarc's channel and co-administrate VirtualAGC. There is a lot to unpack here. First: this is indeed a real bug in the AGC software. However, it did not go unnoticed for the whole program. It was discovered during level 3 testing of SATANCHE, and late development branch of the Command Module software COMANCHE. It was assigned anomaly number L-1D-…
Software that ran on 4KB of memory and got humans to the moon still has undiscovered bugs in it. That says something about the complexity hiding in even the smallest codebases.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree with the sentiment, using AI to write the final draft of the article isn’t cheating. People may not like it, but it’s more a stylistic preference.
Using AI and a human byline is 100% cheating.
I also hate this style of plastic, pre-digested prose. Its soulless and uninteresting. Maybe I've just read too much AI slop. I associate this writing style with low quality, uninteresting junk.
Super interesting. I wish this article wasn’t written by an LLM though. It feels soulless and plastic.
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…
> Don't post generated comments or AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans.
The same principle applies to submissions. If you couldn't be bothered to write it, don't ask me to read it. HN is for humans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're suggesting this is the complainant's fault?
Yes. These HN guidlines already basically cover it: > Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. > Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting.
Speaking of the HN guidelines, they also say this:
> Don't post generated comments or AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans.