| ▲ | mattas 13 hours ago |
| Would be really curious to learn more about how rocket scientists are using (or not using) LLMs. |
|
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| This is a fair question on its own. It comes across as pretty disrespectful within the context of the thread. |
| |
| ▲ | riffic 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | no one died, relax OP, one must show respect to the scattered remnants of rocket debris. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | 0xffff2 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Honestly, why? I can't speak for BO, but at NASA, we're all learning what the technology can and can't do just like everyone else. You can bet your ass that no one is vibe-coding any part of the rocket without thorough review of every line of code and thorough testing at multiple levels though. |
| |
| ▲ | hparadiz 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | As long as the thorough reviews are done that is 100% reasonable. | | |
| ▲ | 0xffff2 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think it can be hard for anyone who hasn't done safety-critical software before to understand just how much testing goes into it. Even for non-human spaceflight, the stakes are so high, we have all of the testing you would expect as far as unit tests, system integration tests, end to end testing, but then we also have full human in the loop software sims, full hardware in the loop sims both at multiple levels of integration, and on and on. For every line of code I've written for a spacecraft, I'm 100% confident that if that line is responsible for a bug in flight, there are at least 10 other people who would share the blame with me. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | khazhoux 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| The suggestion being that some software here was vibe coded?? |
| |
| ▲ | decimalenough 13 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's how rocket science works right? Just vibe code the control systems over the weekend and YOLO the launches. |
|
