Margaret Hamilton, NASA’s lead developer for Apollo program, stands next to all the code she wrote by hand that took humanity to the moon in 1969

  • phareous@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    187
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    She didn’t write all of that, she had a team of programmers working under her

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      She was the first software engineer who was hired for the project and did write a good chunk of the code. She was more than someone who simply delegates and leads. Hell, she is the one who coined the term software engineer. She played a hell of a role in the history of software development. Let’s not try to diminish that.

      • Jee@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        He isn’t trying to diminish but these misleading exaggerated titles are pretty annoying and confusing at times.

        • SeaJ@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree that the title is misleading but simply saying she was the one directing the team without also mentioning that she absolutely did write a chunk of that is also misleading and diminishes her contribution to the code.

    • Akulagr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Similar to what happened with the first image of a black hole. The whole thing was somehow attributed to one lady in the press. Turns out, it was a whole team of scientists working together to achieve that.

      • Rachelhazideas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem isn’t that the whole thing was attributed to one lady. The problem was how quickly people were to discredit her and minimize her role, something that was guaranteed to never be a problem if she were a man.

        Funny how the credibility of male scientists and engineers are never questioned in posts like these, and yet becomes a hot topic when that person happens to be a woman.

        • tal@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Funny how the credibility of male scientists and engineers are never questioned in posts like these

          I haven’t seen a comparable image for a guy or a girl prior to this one presenting a person as having written code when they actually just led the team that wrote the code.

          I do recall Al Gore claiming that he “took the initiative in creating the Internet” when he was responsible for obtaining funding for Internet infrastructure and getting ripped pretty hard for that.

      • rambaroo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No it isn’t, unless you think PMs are programmers. She was the lead developer and created the foundation for the software, then drove the project home. She wasn’t a non-technical person writing requirements for engineers to work on.

        • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          But from that to the title statement of “she wrote ALL the code” is a long stretch, which is where my analogy is coming from

    • Anemervi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also the code is much shorter than that, the pile in this picture is just everything they had laying around at that time, so maybe different revisions or just copies. The code they used is like 1-2 of those in length.

      • phareous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        To be fair though, i don’t think she took sole credit nor did the blackhole researcher. Others in the media, etc. did that

  • Kinglink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Man, I thought when we left Reddit shit was going to change?

    First off, SHE didn’t write all the code, she led a team (And probably wrote a decent chunk herself). It wasn’t by hand it was on computers, no one writes computer code by hand, that’s just blatantly a myth, even punch cards were normally done BY the computer, not “by hand”.

    Also something I’ve questioned before is if that’s really “The source code” and not maybe 11 copies (There’s 11 binders there) Though most reports from reputable sources say that’s “Listings”. AKA that’s the logging, not the code itself. The code itself may be printed out but would be kept on Punch cards (Again printed by the computer, not by hand). And the final form was actually a rope. (no really)

    The thing is the story of Margaret Hamilton (And in fact most programmers of the time) is incredible enough. But when you blatantly lie like this it actually diminishes her accomplishment because it’s obviously false and people will tear it down or disbelieve it because it’s blatant misinformation.

    This is why I left Next Fucking Level, because it became misinformation and karma removed. It became about the “Story” rather than the actual person/skill/talent/figure. But on Reddit the reason was because people wanted Karma. Shouldn’t we have left the basement tier BS and lying behind as well?

    • SilentMobius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know how old you are but when I was first introduced to programming in the early 80s all “source code” (Mostly basic and thus interpreted where program is the source code) was referred to as “listings” (this was when the main source of games were monthly magazines where you typed in a listing from a magazine and saved it to tape E.G.. The “Program listings” (as the Smithsonian calls them) seem to be print outs of the programs for verification purposes.

      The process of entering was indeed handwritten, on specially printed sheets of paper that was then handed to a punchcard operator to create the cards (again according to the Smithsonian), But the stack of paper is clearly not those sheets as it is form-feed printer paper.

      It is completely accurate that Margaret Hamilton lead a team, so while there are inaccuracies I’d say this not as much of a lie as just a combination of confused concepts,

      • Kinglink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So I’m referring a number of articles that talk about it as “Listings” and “Log files”. They come from relatively good sources (Smithsonian magazine) who are interviewing curators of of the Smithsonian who claim to have “Those listings” in the picture. They do however refer to it as “program listings” and then just “Listings” in the article. So who knows.

        That being said I don’t agree with your saying “Well she led a team”… yeah she led a team, that’s like Elon Musk saying “I made a Tesla” when really he hired hundreds/thousands of people who made the Tesla. This is someone making an our right lie, there is no reason for it not to say “She and her team” or something along those lines.

        • SilentMobius@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So I’m referring a number of articles that talk about it as “Listings”

          So am I. I read that article as well and “Program listings” is IMHO definitive, a “program listing” is a list of the instructions in the program it is a term I used to use myself, it’s just fallen out of fashion. In addition this article shows form feed paper with a snippet of the actual code, one line per instruction.

          Also, it’s nothing like Musk, maybe you don’t work in the industry but a “Team lead” is a programmer, just with additional organisational responsibilities. If you read the rest of the article I linked there are those that consider her the first professional “Software Engineer”, and mistaking a team lead for the only member of the team is a common mistake, especially when they were the first programmer hired for the Apollo mission, It’s a mistake, I wouldn’t classify it as a lie.

    • gedhrel
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know where you get “listing” = “logging”. It’s a term (apparently archaic, today I learnt I’m old) for the text of a program.

      • Kinglink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Going off a few sources, but the easiest is this which includes the curator of the collection which those listening are claimed to be under, and shows some of them.

      • Kinglink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        So random guy on Stack overflow, or the Smithsonian Magazine, interviewing the guy who handles those listings… but hey, maybe he’s never looked at them because he’s probably not a good curator.

        Even your link mentions “All files”. Ever think logs could be included in those files? Even Wikipedia mentions that “data” in a human readable form can be called a “listing”.

        So maybe chill out next time instead of jumping on your high horse to prove someone wrong. Words can mean more than one thing, and I’d say my source is probably a little better than Stack overflow.

        • tobier@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sorry I am just a programmer and have no idea what I am talking about, obviously. /s

      • Beardsley@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If I was an Astronaut, I think I’d reconsider going up if someone told me there was even one “I Hope” in the math.

        “Are you sure about that Margaret?”
        “Who the fuck knows, Buzz, I’m doing my fucking best, okay?!”

    • Troy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s probably written in Fortran66 or similar. No semicolons, but so many line numbers…

        • Hypersapien@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          For people unfamiliar with assembly, it’s one step up from raw 1s and 0s. Just vaguely human readable abbreviations for given sets of 1s and 0s. There are no built in loops or if statements, you have to build all that shit yourself from scratch every time you want to use one. And there’s exactly one built in variable you can use called the register

            • Hypersapien@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Admittedly, the last time I touched real Assembly was 20 years ago.

              There’s a couple Zachtronics games, TIS-100 and Shenzhen I/O, both that use a limited form of Assembly, that are probably filling in the gaps in my memory.

            • Hector_McG@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              with the hell that is x86 assembly

              I soooo wish IBM had gone with the Motorola 68000 family instead of the Intel 8086 family of chips for the PC. It had a far, far nicer instruction set.

        • Troy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Oh that’s so hardcore

          edit: looking at the git repo, it looks like it was a team of seven, and she was the lead. So it isn’t all her code. Still super impressive :)

          • Revan343@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            The other big notable thing for assembly is that it isn’t portable. Assembly is very different for every processor architecture, unlike something like C where you may have to make some adjustments between an x86 vs ARM proc, in assembly you’re basically rewriting it from scratch

            • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Also, this is an obscure assembly variant specifically for the computers in the Apollo mission. Not sure about the specifications on that, maybe there is a handbook, but I doubt it.

              Rewriting the code to x86 or anything seems improbable since you’d pretty much have to guess what the instructions are actually doing.

      • Kinglink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Assembly. Like most embedded systems (at least up until we had enough power to waste on higher languages)

    • CitizenKong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The title is a bit misleading, this is a printout of the code that she indeed wrote into the computer first.

      • Underwaterbob@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        She also had a team of engineers who I’m sure deserve at least some of the credit. This title is bunk.

      • Eheran@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        If it was printed later or written on punch cards… how much code are we actually looking at?

        • Blamemeta@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Each punch card/ has 80 characters.

          So way less than you’d imagine, but this is also late 60s machine code (even lower than assembly), and it was mathematically proven to be correct.

          • dustyData@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Still assembly. Nasa’s Apollo Guidance Computer Assembly specifically. A punch card is to translate the code into 1s and 0s that, each line of which, constitutes an instruction that is fed to a punch card reader. However, that is not what this was made for. This code didn’t went on to a punch card, it went to an instruction loom. The system’s read-only memory consisted of a weave of ferromagnetic rings and copper wire that is called rope core memory. As in, Nasa paid people to carefully physically weave by hand the individual 1s and 0s.

            • Blamemeta@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Afaik, the loom thing was just for the computer on the Apollo itself, but I could be wrong.

        • Blamemeta@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Each punch card/ has 80 characters.

          So way less than you’d imagine, but this is also late 60s machine code (even lower than assembly), and it was mathematically proven to be correct.

    • Matthew@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I know you’re likely joking, but for those who don’t know: back then, code was written onto and stored in paper punch cards.

  • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    She wrote code without stack overflow for her job, and the code worked as intended. That alone is worthy of respect.

    • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t want to diminish her awesome in any way at all because she’s a superstar.

      However, while she didn’t have stack overflow she did have direct access to the people that built the hardware and the interpreter.

      I think the “by hand” part would be the biggest disadvantage - you can’t just re-run something n times while inserting console.log(‘here’) at different places to figure out what’s going on.

      • Kinglink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The code is also remarkably far simpler than people expected. It’s mostly pointing, timing and adjusting. User interaction was minimal and they weren’t using unknown or hard to memorize apis from multiple different people and groups (All of which would be decided on long before this point. NASA doesn’t fuck around with documentation. Look up their practices).

        The feat of getting to the moon is incredible, the feat only 8 people wrote the code is amazing, the fact the computer would be unusable in the modern world and was outdated by the 80s really shows.

        But the actual code isn’t that complex (mostly because it couldn’t be, and shouldn’t be) and was written in assembly.

        But it’s still damn awesome, I wish they focused on that instead of the misinformation in the title.

  • 𝐘Ⓞz҉@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    These people should have millions of followers instead we follow kardashians. No wonder the world is going to end😥