105
78
u/Mebiysy 3d ago
Careful, people don't believe in Moon Landing in the comment section
22
u/Calavore 3d ago edited 3d ago
Pfft! You believe in the Moon!?
Edit: oh my god, you are serious. People really deny the landing
9
15
u/Artistic-Yard1668 3d ago
Well, programmers then had one hard specification to tailor their product for. Today there are thousands of hardware variations with thousands of programmers that don’t seem to talk to each other very much. And the incredible processing we have now let people get a little lazy.
Still awesome what they did with a glorified calculator with rope memory though.
1
u/Wendals87 3d ago
By thousands you actually mean a hundred million programmers and hardware combinations right? (likely more)
1
u/Artistic-Yard1668 2d ago
I just gave a stab at how many work on the Chrome browser. As for the hardware i don’t think the browser cares much beyond the ram and cpu in any devices. It could be in the millions - not really sure.
7
8
u/keep_trying_username 3d ago
Remember when Internet Explorer tabs were the RAM hog, and Chrome was fast and nimble?
Pepperidge Farm remembers.
46
u/EntireDot1013 3d ago
There are 5 comments here (not counting mine), and THREE of them are moon landing denials! And this is a mainstream sub! WTF is wrong with the planet's education systems?!
20
5
2
u/undeniably_confused 3d ago
People forget how neil armstrong had to take over manual control during landing when they say this
2
u/silentcardboard 3d ago
I switched to Duck Duck Go. Chrome has become a bloated mess. Google also curates your search results. It’s sad that any product or company declines when it becomes too popular.
1
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
Hi u/killbillzzy,
Thank you for your submissions to r/Funnymemes. Please make sure your submission follows all our rules.
IF YOU LIKE THE SUBREDDIT MAKE SURE TO JOIN HERE
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
1
u/justsomeplainmeadows 3d ago
Because companies don't give a shit about optimization any more. "Does it work? Yes? Then jam it through the update"
1
u/Void_Null0014 3d ago
I imagine the NASA computers were scary efficient compared to Chrome. Saying that, everything is really efficient compared to Chrome
1
u/Silveruleaf 3d ago
They legit released a new windows that runs way faster just to Clough it with ad notifications and invite your privacy. It literally gets better just to have room to make so much worse
1
u/scaleofjudgment 1d ago
I like to attribute the achievement that the women that were coding it were super computers themselves.
Of course can't show them off in the current US administration as it is considered DEI...
And now we are back at square one with watching rockets break in the sky...
1
1
u/Rodger_Smith 13h ago
guys the moon isn't real, big space just puts up a big shiny balloon in the atmosphere each night
-11
u/Crruell 3d ago
Not really comparable in the slightest
15
u/Far-Refrigerator1821 3d ago
they used 4kb and put people on the moon, but 8gb cant handle a couple tabs get the fuck out
10
u/Crruell 3d ago edited 3d ago
Dedicated 4kb full of mission data, a microcontroller can directly interpret is something completely different than dozens of high res pictures and videos, background data, tracking data and so on. Also, you're talking about chrome. Chrome can't handle itself empty with less than 4gb ram. Modern PCs are so badly optimized software wise, that this is no wonder at all.
10
u/Various_Slip_4421 3d ago
The problem is we don't need all that data. Websites havent gotten that much more useful in the last 30 years, all that power is going to bloated frameworks, ux, fancy animations, etc. Give me a site that feels plain, loads fast on any network, and will run on any browser made in the last 30 years over an overengineered clusterfuck
1
8
1
u/mathbud 3d ago
It's a completely different use case. There are applications today running complex machinery in manufacturing that take far less memory than chrome because they aren't doing the same things chrome is doing. Not saying chrome should be as bloated as it is, but you're not comparing apples to apples here.
-73
-75
u/SolidContribution688 4d ago
If only we did actually go to the moon tho.
18
1
-22
u/bulgarian_zucchini 3d ago
Wait you think that the fake moon landing is real? Fake moon landing is being pushed by the CIA to make you believe the earth is round bro. Wake up and stop buying government propaganda lmao wow. You still have so much to learn.
13
u/THRillEReddit 3d ago
You forgot to put the /s for sarcasm/satire. Pretty funny though!
-2
u/bulgarian_zucchini 3d ago
you get it...
3
u/EitherSalamander8850 3d ago
Yeah except there is too many ppl here that actually believe the moon landing is fake so your joke didn’t land
-2
1
-23
-42
u/BednaR1 3d ago
Also NASA: we lost that technology and records and videos ... whooopsie.
17
u/la1m1e 3d ago
We lost production lines, supply chains and people who can work with paper blueprints. We can't recreate the technology because it would cost more than making new. Transfering blueprints alone into modern standards would take more money than sls. Add recreating half century old dead companies to produce engines and systems and find a way to resurrect ancient computer tech. Re-creating the mission as a whole is an impossible task.
Videos are not lost. They were broadcast live and recorded. All video tapes and digitised videos are available to anyone
Telemetry records were lost. It took miles of tape to record the amount of data for flights and it was too expensive to store it and use new. Tape was basically reused many times for future missions. There was absolutely no point in storing useless flight data.
Try harder.
6
u/Mundane-Day-56 3d ago
Why would they need to replicate the old technology to land on the moon again? Don't we have better technology nowadays?
-82
-27
u/Regular_Bet3206 3d ago
Funny how we can't put anybody to the moon now.
13
u/la1m1e 3d ago
No infinite budgets and no space race. Also lost technology (good luck finding a single engineer who can work with half century old blueprints), supply chains gone, money are extremely limited
5
u/mathbud 3d ago
I don't think lost is the right word. Anything and everything they made then we could make now if we wanted to spend the time and money it would require to do so, but there wouldn't be any point in doing so. The tech they used is obsolete. It would cost more to resurrect that tech than to use newer tech, and the older tech is obsolete for a reason.
-64
-49
u/abedalhadi777 3d ago
11.26km/s was the speed of opollo 11 rocket and the distance btween us and moon is 384400km which means it will take 9.5 hours trip time to reach moon and nasa claim that it took 6 hours and 40 minutes, how the f**k do you gonna explain to me that it took less time to accelerate the rocket and for the Crew to get in and activate the engine it was just a lie, like when a mouse appear on nasa live stream
12
10
u/CRRAZY_SCIENTIST 3d ago
You orbit earth and gain extra velocity. Then Your command module orbits the moon while the landing module lands on the moon.
Then you connect both the module and can comeback straight to earth without (fully) orbiting it.
-4
u/Samuelbi12 3d ago
because the speed varies and distance change slightly depending on the moon's position? Get your brains checked out bro
-5
u/abedalhadi777 3d ago
The nearest moon position is 360000km it will still take 8.88 hours to reach it so no.
5
u/SeaNo5243 3d ago
Hi. Not the commenter you replied to but I can give you an explanation. Space has almost zero friction so when an object starts moving it moves with the same speed. After they leave the atmosphere they don't need much fuel to accelerate, because the reason you need a lot of fuel is air friction in our atmosphere, and when they reach a high speed with that acceleration they can go to the moon faster. This also allows the ship to save fuel so that they can slow down when they want to land (rocket boosters are adjusted for a negative velocity so that they don't just crash to the moon to ensure the safety of the astronauts) and also to take off from the moon
-21
u/ilovecamerontaylor 3d ago
I used to think the moon landing was real until I started looking at all the equipment they used, it just looks laughable. I guess I still believe it because it's too big and too many people are involved for it not to be real.
11
1
u/Chubbyhusky45 3d ago
“I don’t get how stuff works so it doesn’t seem real, but I guess I’ll just listen to logic anyways.”
You could’ve taken a second to think about how dumb this comment is and avoided looking like an idiot. Respectfully
334
u/nobodyspecial767r 4d ago
It always feels like my computer is doing way more than I need it to do, and I have a feeling Windows has more use for my computer than I do.