Hacker News Reader

Comment by y1n0 | Hacker News Reader

NASA didn't build this, Lockheed Martin and their subcontractors did. Articles and headlines like this make people think that NASA does a lot more than they actually do. This is like a CEO claiming credit for everything a company does.

View on HN

Nice “well, actually”. I’m sure Lockheed were building this quad-redundant, radiation-hardened PowerPC that costs millions of dollars and communicates via Time-Triggered Ethernet anyway, whether NASA needed one or not.

This is the equivalent of prompt engineering.

Probably, if it already wasn’t developed for DoD.

For example, the OS it seems to be running is integrity 178.

https://www.ghs.com/products/safety_critical/integrity_178_s...

Aerospace tech is not entirely bespoke anymore, plenty of the foundational tech is off the shelf.

Historically, the main difference between ICBM tech and human spaceflight tech is the payload and reentry system.

True, but BFS was mainly done in-house. Source: my best friend and I worked on some parts of it.

Lockheed Martin and their subcontractors did the implementation.

We do not know how much of the high-level architecture of the system has been specified by NASA and how much by Lockheed Martin.

I do.

Are you interested in sharing more details to make your claim more believable?

Eh, in these kinds of subcontractor relationships there is a lot of work and communication on both sides of the table.

will nobody think of the megacorps!!!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com