• 567PrimeMover@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Fun fact: It’s a much simpler job to guide a vehicle to a planetary body than it is to render a webpage with a flat theme.

    Source: It came to me in a dream

    • GuybrushThreepwo0d@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      9 months ago

      Well… You need like what, 3 floats for position and 4 more for orientation. Multiply that by 3 to get velocity and acceleration values. Then I don’t know a few more floats per sensor and you have your whole state space in a few bytes.

      Meanwhile a single image is like a megabyte so yeah.

      Source: it’s past midnight and I should have gone to sleep ages ago

      • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        9 months ago

        And don’t forget about redundancies

        The programming for the Apollo program was hand woven so comparing it to modern systems is kinda like comparing apples to oranges

        Honestly the computers for the Apollo program were amazing and I highly recommend looking into the whole thing more, it’s so incredibly cool

  • UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Chrome tabs are scary - unlike our sponsors:

    Firefox. Firefox is a free and open source web browser that is not just nice to your RAM, making it run smoothly alongside games or on older machines, but also respects your privacy.
    Unlike Chrome, it doesn’t track every move you make online and it’s not only more customizable, it also doesn’t threaten ad-blockers and the free web in general. Check out Firefox with the link below!

    https://www.mozilla.org/en/firefox/new/

  • kamen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Some people still don’t seem to comprehend the difference between an embedded system and a general purpose computer.

    • spiderplant@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      We’ve had general purpose computers for decades but every year the hardware requirements for general purpose operating systems keep increasing. I personally don’t think there has been a massive spike in productivity using a computer between when PCs usually had 256-512mb to now where you need at least 8gb to have a decent experience. What has changed are growing protocol specs that are now a bloated mess, poorly optimised programs and bad design decisions.

      • kamen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I personally don’t think there has been a massive spike in productivity using a computer between when PCs usually had 256-512mb to now

        For general use/day to day stuff like web browsing, sure, I agree, but what about things like productivity and content creation? Imagine throwing a 4K video at a machine with 512 MiB RAM - it would probably have troubles even playing it, let alone editing/processing.

        • spiderplant@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Your original comment mentioned general purpose computers. Video production definitely isn’t general purpose.

          What do you mean by productivity?

    • Quereller@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      These are multiple printouts of the code. The computer did not only execute precalculated instruction. (This would be a sequencer BTW.). Try it yourself AGC.

        • interolivary@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I’m not quite sure if even that is correct. The AGC, as far as I understand it, did do quite a bit of calculation on the fly and was essentially the first digital fly by wire system. It did rely on input from the crew and ground control for eg correcting its state vector etc etc, but it even has dedicated vector instructions if I recall correctly. Can’t really precompute all that much when you can’t be sure things will go to plan and you’re dealing with huge distances. It did have eg separate programs for different phases of the flight but they weren’t really precalculated as such, more like different modes that eg read input from different sensors etc etc.

          The US space program was pretty big on having a human in the loop though, much more so than the Soviet one which relied more on automation and the pilot was more of a passenger in a sense, sort of a failsafe for the automatic systems.

          The book Digital Apollo goes into all this this in more detail, I can highly recommend it if you’re a ginormous nerd like I am and think that computers we’ve shot into space are endlessly fascinating

    • DrQuint@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah, but they were reusing tilesets an-

      *looks at modern pokemon*

      Uh. You know what, you have a point.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      It took till Scarlet and Violet for us to get more than one region in a game

      Kitikami and Unova

      That’s parhetic

  • N00b22@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    9 months ago

    Meanwhile I have 16 GBs, and I feel that I should update to 32…

  • Chaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    9 months ago

    4kb plus literal rocket scientists. On the other side of it you have 8gbs and my dumb ass

  • TheControlled@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    9 months ago

    Isn’t there some computer science hypothesis (or whatever) about how the more complex computers get the more inefficient they must get as well?

    • SlopppyEngineer@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Computers haven’t become less efficient. They can still crunch numbers like crazy.

      It’s the software. Why spend a month making something when you can just download some framework that does what you want in one hour. Sure, it used 10 times as much memory and CPU, but that’s still only a 1 second delay with a modern computer and the deadline for release is approaching fast.

      Repeat that process often enough and you have a ridiculously bloated mess of layers upon layers of software. Just for fun you can start up some old software and play around with it in an emulator to be baffled how quick it all works on a modern system.

    • ℛ𝒶𝓋ℯ𝓃@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      No no no, you need to upload RAM. Just make more swap partitions with Google Drive and a gigabit internet connection… Totally will work…

  • Zerush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    16 GB RAM 8GB nVidia and you can play Immortals Of Aveum at 30 FPS, (maybe)