Thats real motivation!!!!😅😅😅😅

If u are using a shitty machine 💩💩

  • 25
    Yeah, but Apollo didn't run on JS.
  • 3
    @metamourge I wonder if there is some connection between those facts.
  • 1
    @metamourge exactly my thought but too late.
  • 6
    There's a sliiiiight difference between purpose-built computers and multi-purpose ones.
  • 20
    I don't recall Apollo having Chrome with 60 tabs open
  • 6
    if(nearMoon === true){
    } else {
  • 7

    while (!nearTheMoon()) {

    // I think this one has a better chance to make it all the way to the moon :)
  • 2
    Fun fact
    JIT compiling JavaScript is a waaay more intensive thing than running a control system
    You don't need (nor can you afford) much for a control system
    Problem complexities have blown up enormously in consumer computing
  • 1
    @FrodoSwaggins not going to disagree, JS has some truly horrible stuff from a language design and implementation PoV.

    Still doesn't make the moon landing vs modern stuff argument any better though

    Modern things just have to do a lot more.
  • 1
    @RememberMe not really. You only see general purpose computers, but there are still a ton of embedded systems in our lives that measure capacities in the kilos. I have keyboards with AVR chips that have 32k ROM and 2k RAM.
  • 1
    I like how it says: NASA landed on "a" moon ...
  • 0
    @hoch10 yeh its because probably the never landed!! 🤣
  • 2
    @Jainal it surely wasn't our moon, maybe one of Saturn's 🤔
  • 0
    @hoch10 probably 😂😂😂😂
  • 2
    @tokumei @FrodoSwaggins I agree with you guys, really (I'm an embedded systems person myself). And bloat definitely is a thing and I hate it too.

    My point was just that the scope of what the average person expects computing to be able to do has increased enormously and while landing on the Moon was a bloody impressive feat, it wasn't something that needed a ton of computation to do (I'm definitely oversimplifying here but running even fancy variants of Kalman filters for example needs very little compute power by modern standards). They could do it at that time because it was a rather simple problem, *computationally*.

    Hence the post doesn't make much sense because eg. if my Ryzen 2400g or something is too weak for my work, knowing that NASA landed a craft on the moon with 4kb of ram doesn't help me at all because that was a specialized, simple problem (again, *computationally*).
  • 0
    @FrodoSwaggins ahhhh... Its actually a theory and many people claim that US never send Apollo 11 and was hoax and there are many proof u can find online which seems legit to me
Add Comment