Did Men Really Walk On The Moon?

[Jipsah]

While I'm not totally into the it was fake camp. It's still rather strange to me that landing on the Moon is considered a monumental feat these days, with today's technology, whereas multiple back to back moonwalks took place in the early 70s?

This is a state of the art hard drive from the early 70's. It weighed about 550 lbs (249 kg).

We had multi-platter removeable HDs in common use as early as 1973. Don't know how far back the monster in the picture went. We also had dinosaurs like magnetic drums and data cells. The drum was fast for the times, but didn't hold enough. The data cell was fun to watch, but not real good for much else. There were still TOS (tape operating system) machines in use then as well.

Yeah, I'm old.

 

[The Liturgist]

Obviously impossible.

Indeed, everyone knows you need a nuclear powered submarine to sail across the ocean so that in the event of a Kraken attack, one can fire torpedos at its inksacks, since the only way to escape the dreaded Kraken is to explosively rupture an ink sack and then escape in a cloud of blackness from the ever-watchful eye of the giant cephalopods whose tentacles hold the continents in their correct position, when they are not feeding.

Indeed the earthquake we have last night has already been determined, by top scientists at Miskatonic University, of having been due to a minor movement in the tentacles of the kraken known for luxuriating in the Marianas Trench.

Indeed as we all know, the real reason why James Cameron descended into the trench recently was to offer a fresh round of sacrifical human victims to appease the monstrous ink-spewing, continent destroying cephalopod.

 

[The Liturgist]

We had multi-platter removeable HDs in common use as early as 1973. Don't know how far back the monster in the picture went. We also had dinosaurs like magnetic drums and data cells. The drum was fast for the times, but didn't hold enough. The data cell was fun to watch, but not real good for much else. There were still TOS (tape operating system) machines in use then as well.

Yeah, I'm old.

We still had massive HDs using the giant “washing machine” chassis on the first systems I had access to, decades ago. There is a rumor that one computer programmer was able to get one of the old IBM DASD units (or it may have been a similarly sized Digital / DEC hard drive) to actually move across the raised floor of an early datacenter by aggressively reversing the spinning platters.

TOS/360 was quite rare by the 1980s (the iBM Tape Operating System) but some closed shop mainframe sites still used it, I think. But DOS/360, the cheaper, nastier alternative to OS/360 (and its successor, MVS, from System/370; OS/360 is also known as MVT), survived and is still around today as z/VSE.

I myself have something of a love/hate relationship with the old mainframe OSes. On the one hand, without them, we would not have had UNIX, or VAX, or any of the other nicer OSes, or other useful concepts like virtualization and virtual machines (well, actually I should note that the Apollo Guidance Computer had virtualization and was certainly not a mainframe, but its OS a literal work of art). But on the other hand, it is the case that compared with UNIX, even VAX and TOPS/10 and TOPS/20 were a pain to use (I also greatly dislike the MS-DOS CLI in part because of its gross, half-baked implementation of UNIX-like functionality in a manner that doesn’t actually work, for example, output redirection in DOS is limited to a very small amount of data, relatively speaking, based on the status of DOS as a non-multitasking operating system running in environments with limited memory; the whole point of output redirection is that one uses it with multitasking so that the program writing to standard output becomes the source of the standard input for a second program, operated concurrently with the first program, either via timesharing or concurrent execution, so that the first program can write to the second program’s standard input without having to use up precious resources like main memory or without hitting the performance penalty of the disk drive.

 

[Jipsah]

-​

You left off stationary

Unless the turtles get restless.

 

[d taylor]

Well its probably for the best he left that off, since a flat and stationary Earth is even more spectacularly implausible than a flat earth. The only way to get the gravitational effects like what a spherical earth provides over the entire surface of a flat Earth would be to have it accelerate through space like a constant-burn spacecraft at 1G.

By the way I would note that general relativity would still apply, and could still be independently verified, in the hypothetical flat earth topology.

-​

That may be true horizontally, as it is not know how far beyond Antarctica space goes. But that would not work vertically, as up above there is water being held back by a raqia. So there is a definite limit to the space (vertically) above our heads.

 

[partinobodycular]

The government has a long and disturbing history of lying to the public over major and minor things across the board. The "well-documented" moon landings were not even well-staged.

And once again hypocrisy raises its ugly head. Deny the veracity of events supported by video evidence and living eyewitness testimony, yet accept the claims for which the only surviving evidence is manuscripts of which the earliest copies date to centuries after the supposed events.

Trustful Christians have likewise been deluded by the government.

Now I can't fault you for not trusting the government, but trusting religion in its stead, that's simply naive. At least be consistent, otherwise your testimony as a Christian is rendered completely useless. Unfortunately this is a case in which the most ardent Christians are also the ones that can be trusted the least, and the most dispassionate of them are often the ones that can be trusted the most. Fervency in defense of one's religious views isn't necessarily a good thing, it's far more likely to be a prideful thing.

 

[The Liturgist]

We had multi-platter removeable HDs in common use as early as 1973. Don't know how far back the monster in the picture went. We also had dinosaurs like magnetic drums and data cells. The drum was fast for the times, but didn't hold enough. The data cell was fun to watch, but not real good for much else. There were still TOS (tape operating system) machines in use then as well.

Yeah, I'm old.

By the way, I myself never had to deal with drum memory, so that is one example of a technology that was before my time, sadly, as I would have enjoyed having a giant spinning drum in my garage.

The Apollo guidance computer of course used core memory, which was still around, albeit very rare, when I started; the core memory on the AGC was hand-woven.

After the end of the Apollo program, one of the spare AGC units was installed on a Vought V8 and used to demonstrate the feasibility of digital Fly By Wire, which in turn enabled the implementation of aircraft which are not aerodynamically stable, such as the Senior Trend / Have Blue / Stealth Fighter, the Space Shuttle and the delightfully unstable Tacit Blue, also known as the Flying Bathtub or the Alien Schoolbus, by having a computer take inputs from the pilot and then translate these according to the unique aerodynamic requirements of each vehicle.

 

[The Liturgist]

And once again hypocrisy raises its ugly head. Deny the veracity of events supported by video evidence and living eyewitness testimony, yet accept the claims for which the only surviving evidence is manuscripts of which the earliest copies date to centuries after the supposed events.



Now I can't fault you for not trusting the government, but trusting religion in its stead, that's simply naive. At least be consistent, otherwise your testimony as a Christian is rendered completely useless. Unfortunately this is a case in which the most ardent Christians are also the ones that can be trusted the least, and the most dispassionate of them are often the ones that can be trusted the most. Fervency in defense of one's religious views isn't necessarily a good thing, it's far more likely to be a prideful thing.

I believe this forum is a Christian-only area, but even if I am mistaken, kindly avoid generalizing about Christianity since the majority of us do not adhere to the Flat Earth or Space Is A Lie conspiracy theory.

 

[returntosender]

Me too. It sounds like we were both fortunate enough to have access to computers thorughout our career. Indeed I never even had to deal with closed shop computing. That said, I have some minimal contact with Fortran, which is not as bad as some people say; I am thankful I never had to touch COBOL, and I am also very proud of the fact that I never learned BASIC, as I am inclined to believe the arguments of some that it confuses programmers and inculcates bad habits; the only case where I might conceivably have wanted to use BASIC would be if I had a Commodore or Apple system or another 8 bit system, and my grandfather did have a Commodore C64 which I liked, however, I am glad that he steered me away from 8 bit hardware.

I was blessed with access at a relatively young age to UNIX systems and I would say that UNIX has been one of the great loves of my life; not Linux, which has often come across as a cheap imitation of classical UNIX, but UNIX itself in all of its splendor. Even now I use the BSD operating systems (primarily FreeBSD and OpenBSD) and Illumos as much as possible, and avoid systemd based Linux distros like the plague. Linux was briefly fun before systemd, because of the choice of filesystems on offer and the fact that it resembled SysV UNIX (except on Slackware, which uses BSD style init), but systemd, wayland and so on are part of a nightmarish new reality in which concepts I was taught by programmers such as Eric S. Raymond are antithetical to UNIX are embraced

I liked hearing that jargon again, thanks!

 

[partinobodycular]

I am thankful I never had to touch COBOL, and I am also very proud of the fact that I never learned BASIC, as I am inclined to believe the arguments of some that it confuses programmers and inculcates bad habits; the only case where I might conceivably have wanted to use BASIC would be if I had a Commodore or Apple system or another 8 bit system, and my grandfather did have a Commodore C64 which I liked, however, I am glad that he steered me away from 8 bit hardware.

My first introduction to writing software was on a C64 using BASIC. Quickly switched to Machine language which was cumbersome, but gave a far greater insight into what the programing was actually doing.

 

[The Liturgist]

-​

That may be true horizontally, as it is not know how far beyond Antarctica space goes. But that would not work vertically, as up above there is water being held back by a raqia. So there is a definite limit to the space (vertically) above our heads.

Well in that caae not only is your model violated by the numerous aircraft that actually do operate routes around the South Pole with a flight time predicted by the Great Circle Route model, but it also fails to explain gravity for a reason which makes no sense, since the fictional Raqia you refer to could literally be carried with the rest of the world and your giant disk model could thus be described as moving through a bulk.

Of course even doing that still leaves a massive problem, in the form of cosmic rays, for if the Earth actually existed beneath a giant watery body as you propose, that body would absorb the various particles and gamma radiation we are continually being bombarded with. Indeed water in large quantities is known for being one of the most effective shielding techniques and as a means for slowing and capturing various particles and facilitating the observation of neutrinos.

I would imagine that most Flat Earth models must of necessity set aside not only commercial aviation and space travel but also relativity and quantum mechanics in order to support what remains an innovative and incorrect understanding of Genesis.

My chief objection is the manner in which this focus on Genesis distracts from the Holy Gospel which Genesis is nothing other than a prophecy thereof, according to the very words of Christ our True God, as opposed to being some sort of ancient cosmological treatise.

 

[returntosender]

Most of you replying here missed a very important point. Asking a question does not imply their answer to it. Does not give you the opportunity to judge.

 

[partinobodycular]

I believe this forum is a Christian-only area, but even if I am mistaken, kindly avoid generalizing about Christianity since the majority of us do not adhere to the Flat Earth or Space Is A Lie conspiracy theory.

Fair enough, and I generally refrain from such things, but sometimes, to not point things out, is to be just as culpable as the person making the claim. Silence isn't always the correct choice, even when it's the least disruptive one. Of course I've been at this a long time, so I know that candor can come at a cost, but such things are as they are. But I've had my say, and I feel no need to belabor the point. So have a nice day, and forgive the rude old man who disrupted your morning. (Or afternoon, or whatever the case may be)

 

[The Liturgist]

My first introduction to writing software was on a C64 using BASIC. Quickly switched to Machine language which was cumbersome, but gave a far greater insight into what the programing was actually doing.

Very nice. The c64 would have been great for learning machine language since it is known that this can become trickier as word length increases, and it was also a CISC machine, which would help. And CISC front ends can be put on otherwise RISC cpus such as on modern AMD and Intel x64, and also interestingly on the IBM system Z mainframes, which have incredibly fast CPUs with CISC front ends, to retain compatibility with legacy software and mainframes.

Now, out of curioisity, I thought there was an assembler available for the c64? Although if I recall most programmers did just deal with writing machine bytecode.

One thing I love about the Commodores, which makes me regret not having had one, was the hobbyist developer community, which also spanned the later Amiga machines with their spectacularly innovative video editing capabilities, and communicated with similiar communities in the IBM OS/2 and Be/OS community, both of which I loved as operating systems (fortunately we have ecomstation and Haiku keeping the torch of OS/2 and BeOS, respectively, in a semi-alive condition, as well as several niche OSes based on the Amiga, and some developers target 8 bit platforms like the c64 for retro game releases, which thanks to excellent emulators are now more accessible than they were in the 1980s).

 

[partinobodycular]

Now, out of curioisity, I thought there was an assembler available for the c64? Although if I recall most programmers did just deal with writing machine bytecode.

Indeed there was, but I never touched it. I had a particular task in mind and needed as much speed as I could get, so machine language it was.

 

[The Liturgist]

Fair enough, and I generally refrain from such things, but sometimes, to not point things out, is to be just as culpable as the person making the claim. Silence isn't always the correct choice, even when it's the least disruptive one. Of course I've been at this a long time, so I know that candor can come at a cost, but such things are as they are. But I've had my say, and I feel no need to belabor the point. So have a nice day, and forgive the rude old man who disrupted your morning. (Or afternoon, or whatever the case may be)

Thank you for that, I do understand where you are coming from. I have actually enjoyed fellowship with you, as sadly I am unable to celebrate the liturgy this morning as the arthritis resulting from a chronic hereditary illness flared up yesterday making walking different, and tomorrow I have it in mind to visit an Orthodox convent whose nuns I have known for years, but I have never had the chance to liturgize with them.

I would note most Christians who believe in the flat Earth model tend to regard my church as idolatrous and heretical.

I do hope you and I might develop a warm relationship, as I always like discussing computers, and anyone who can write machine language is someone I want to know.

One of my best friends and mentors in the area of computer science in general and operating system style in particular is Eric S Raymond, who obviously does not agree with me on religion, being a practitioner of the Wicca faith, but I greatly appreciate his book The Art of UNIX Computer Programming. I also have built some software using utilities he originally wrote as a base.

 

[The Liturgist]

Indeed there was, but I never touched it. I had a particular task in mind and needed as much speed as I could get, so machine language it was.

So the assembler caused that much of a hit? I occasionally deal with systems where using C is undesirable for performance reasons (my speciality is embedded systems and also systems software development for operating systems), but usually I have been able to trust the assembler, but we do hear with awe stories of early computers where a need to hand code optimizations existed due to rudimentary assemblers or the need to resort to tricks like self modifying code which in some cases would require hand crafted byte code.

 

[partinobodycular]

I would note most Christians who believe in the flat Earth model tend to regard my church as idolatrous and heretical.

Mine too... unfortunately my 'church' consists of just me. (Or at least everyone else in it doesn't realize that they're in it) I don't take things personally though. I expect people to be people. That's what they're supposed to be. And any insults aimed my way probably aren't the result of any malice toward me personally. So in my eyes we're all good, even if collectively we aren't that impressive... but we're working on it.

 

[partinobodycular]

So the assembler caused that much of a hit?

My father actually bought me the C64, because for some reason he thought a ninth grade dropout would be able to program it for him.

He used to enter these monthly contests in which you started with a grid, and then every month they'd send you a different set of values for the letters in the alphabet. Then whoever could fill in the grid like a crossword puzzle, and get the highest score for the letters used, would win. So he thought that a computer should be the perfect tool for the task. And I was the one for the job. I quickly learned that Basic wasn't gonna be fast enough.

I eventually got the program written and it would do exactly what it was supposed to do, but there were two problems. One was that even given a whole month to run it couldn't calculate every possible variation. So no guarantee that you'd end up with the highest possible score. And two, I couldn't find a dictionary database, so somebody was going to have to type in every word in the dictionary. Long story short, I ended up with a C64 and he never did win that contest. But I learned something, so it was all good.

 

[Jipsah]

Me too. It sounds like we were both fortunate enough to have access to computers thorughout our career. Indeed I never even had to deal with closed shop computing.

Hey, I started out writing code on a coding form, submitting it to keypunch where it was punched into cards, then handing it to a clerk who would give it to the operators who would run the compile then return me a listing and my cards to correct compile errors. Ah, for the Good Old Days!

That said, I have some minimal contact with Fortran, which is not as bad as some people say; I am thankful I never had to touch COBOL

COBOL was/is the most intuitive language ever, by design. Also verbose by design, since it's the nearest thing to self documenting code there is. (I've often heard of programmers actually putting useful comments in their code, but I've seldom ever seen it.) With a decent compiler it produces as efficient an executable as any other langauage these days. Fortran is good for what it's good for. C, with all its descendants, is an abomination for applications work, but it became "the best language" back in the 90s, and its ghastly unmaintainability has cost industry millions of bucks in development costs. It was akin to declaring a screwdrive "the best tool" and using it for everything; hang the expense.

, and I am also very proud of the fact that I never learned BASIC, as I am inclined to believe the arguments of some that it confuses programmers and inculcates bad habits; the only case where I might conceivably have wanted to use BASIC would be if I had a Commodore or Apple system or another 8 bit system, and my grandfather did have a Commodore C64 which I liked, however, I am glad that he steered me away from 8 bit hardware.

I've writtern BASIC, but I don't think any of it ever went to a customer.

I was blessed with access at a relatively young age to UNIX systems and I would say that UNIX has been one of the great loves of my life; not Linux, which has often come across as a cheap imitation of classical UNIX, but UNIX itself in all of its splendor.

I never worked with Unix because you had to pay for it, but most of the stuff I made my living on ended up running on Linux. We could pare it down to just what we wanted it to do, which freed up bandwidth for our applications, which translated to lower hardware costs,.

Probably my (ok, mine and my "driver/firmware/metal scratching" amigo Tom's) greatest tech triumph was his idea. Our voice systems were all running on Windows NT or 9X platforms, which were bug ridden and cost money. Over beers one evening, we went off on the tangent of porting everything over to Linux. So we set about to do it, and over about 6 months of on the sly work from home and late evenings when we needed the test lab, got it to a point where we could do a show-and-tell. Our next monthly meeting with the engineers from our Massive Japanese Electronics Company customers, one of them asked out of the blue if we'd every thought of porting our stuff to Linux. I gave Tommy a discrete thumbs up, and he said "Would you like to see it?" Our company prez was no less shocked to hear that than were our customers, but he covered it well. His reaction afterwards was "you sneaky SOBs", but our street cred with the guys ar MJEC went through the roof.

Even now I use the BSD operating systems (primarily FreeBSD and OpenBSD) and Illumos as much as possible, and avoid systemd based Linux distros like the plague.

I can't remember what the last distro I worked with was. We were running Red Hat on the stuff we sold, but I had Debian with a KDE desktop on my office rig. I don't recall what file system were were using because I didn't really care much. Our "databases" were of our own design, and were what we referred to as an "abnormalized data base". We kept our own indexes with pointers to offsets within flat files. Weird but fast. It was stuff we screwed together to make file io as fast as possible back in the days of same-day IO times and <5 mHz processors. IO discipline was critical, especially when we were feeding real time voice to multiple phone lines.

Linux was briefly fun before systemd, because of the choice of filesystems on offer and the fact that it resembled SysV UNIX (except on Slackware, which uses BSD style init), but systemd, wayland and so on are part of a nightmarish new reality in which concepts I was taught by programmers such as Eric S. Raymond are antithetical to UNIX are embraced

I have a Linux laptop with Umbwebwe or some such distro on it that I've never developed enough ambition to do anything with. It's too much like work to get it up and doing the stuff I want. I have a Chromebook and a Fire tablet for travel, and a Windows whatever desktop at the house. The kids at my retirement job smile sagely because the old boomer doesn't know anything about computers. Sic transit gloria mundi.