• 52
    this is why we don't test in prod
  • 5
    @taylorviktorya wonder how testing was in 1962
  • 35
    Hang on shit can blow up if you forget something so small?

    ... I was just about to compile this ... HEY DAVE, COME HERE AND CLICK THIS BUTTON FOR ME
  • 5
    @practiseSafeHex yeah you gotta practice safe bruh
  • 8
    If you look in to the Mariner 1, this is actually almost certainly not true, or at the least not as it's presented here.

    Apparently there were some problem with the rocket not responding properly to remote commands shortly after launch so it was donated on purpose. Whether that was due to some sort of software error or not isn't actually at all clear, even now.
  • 2
    Safe to say that guy lost his job
  • 16
    @erikdreyer11 the program spec for the guidance system was done by hand and someone missed an overline in a mathematical formulaic symbol, which threw the program off into making lots of unnecessary corrections. An overline looks like a hyphen and saying a hyphen was missed was easier to explain to the American public.
    Wikipedia is the way.
  • 0
    They didn't have SRE back then 😎
  • 2
    @jpichardo probably terrible. Or maybe better. Depends on how lazy people were back then...
  • 0
    Pretty crazy to think the type of computers that they was programming on to send a rocket to space
  • 4
    The recent typo goal belongs to Amazon AWS i guess :)
  • 2
    There's this video about Apollo14 debugging. Apparently, while orbiting the moon, they noticed they couldn't land as their abort function kept calling due to a short circuit. I mean think about it, the fate of a couple men flying around a huge heavenly body rests on your shoulder. Was certainly a close call.

    Link if you're interested: https://youtu.be/wSSmNUl9Snw
Add Comment