Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA To Catalog and Release Source Code For Over 1,000 Projects

Posted by Soulskill on from the go-big-or-go-home dept.

An anonymous reader writes "By the end of next week, NASA will release a master catalog of over 1,000 software projects it has conducted over the years and will provide instructions on how the public can obtain copies of the source code. NASA's goal is to eventually 'host the actual software code in its own online repository, a kind of GitHub for astronauts.' This follows NASA's release of the code running the Apollo 11 Guidance Computer a few years back. Scientists not affiliated with NASA have already adapted some of NASA's software. 'In 2005, marine biologists adapted the Hubble Space Telescope's star-mapping algorithm to track and identify endangered whale sharks. That software has now been adapted to track polar bears in the arctic and sunfish in the Galapagos Islands.' The Hubble Space Telescope's scheduling software has reportedly also been used to schedule MRIs at hospitals and as control algorithms for online dating services. The possibilities could be endless."

46 comments

  1. Wait... What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Code that's actually reusable?

    I always thought that code crashes and burns when it reaches a certain age... I mean, there must be a reason why Windows XP suddenly seems to disintegrate or why everything ever written in COBOL suddenly stops working after 40 years of doing the job just fine?

    1. Re:Wait... What? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Then you are missinformed (in many ways) code does not age. If the surroundings don't change the code will run just as ever till the end of the universe.
      Regarding Cobol: strange that still in our days a huge percentage of code is Cobol.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:Wait... What? by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Code works... User Expectation Changes.

      COBOL code still works. However people don't want to use it in a terminal/terminal emulator. They want it on a Web Page, or at least via GUI screens. Being that these screens now have a resolution of at least 1024x768 (Usually much higher) vs 640x200 displayed in text of 80x25 people will want to see more data per screen, charts and graphs next to their data.
      We use to have positions called Data Entry and Computer Operators. Who's job was just to punch in data from one system to the next and people who use the software, who are trained not to cause it to crash. Today we get data from many feeds, and the system needs to be crash proof.
      Your New Device has a new set of User Inputs and Outputs that the OS needs to handle. Multi-Touch screens, Multible displays, Cameras, motion sensors, GPS... which could offer an advantage if implemented.

      We look back at the old computers and we go wow how cool were they, they seem to do the same job as today's computers did but with 1/100th the performance. But what has changed is the software had gradually did more work, that you use to do by hand. Plus they are a heck a lot more reliable then they were 20+ years ago.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:Wait... What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By the end of next week, NASA will release a master catalog of over 1,000 software projects it has conducted over the years and will provide instructions on how the public can obtain copies of the source code.

      Instructions? I don't need their damn instructions. Try posting a link instead.

    4. Re:Wait... What? by Required+Snark · · Score: 4, Informative
      Factually incorrect: "Plus they are a heck a lot more reliable then they were 20+ years ago."

      Over twenty years ago there were computers that hardware and software that were designed to work together. At least two of these systems had extra tag bits in memory that defined the memory contents. Specifically I am talking about Symbolics Lisp Machines and Burroughs Large Systems that natively ran Algol. I worked on both of these systems and they were intrinsically more reliable then any systems I know of today.

      Because of the tagged memory they had hardware protection against a large class of errors that current systems encounter all the time. It was possible to find the bugs and eliminate them so they did not re-occur. It also protected against having undetected errors, which is a true nightmare.

      Having hardware and software designed at the same time results in a better product. This is even more significant when the system is designed to run a specific high level language. Everything has less bugs.

      Heck, Cray machines had ECC memory: SECDED. Single Error Correction, Double Error Detection. They needed it, because memory was not so reliable as today, but now you are lucky to just have a parity bit. All this work is going on, and no one has a clue if there are bad results or not.

      As an industry we have gone backwards. That's not an opinion, it's an observation.

      --
      Why is Snark Required?
    5. Re:Wait... What? by Charliemopps · · Score: 2

      If COBOL stopped working, you'd lose your back account immediately, and likely the entire worlds financial markets would collapse simultaneously.

    6. Re:Wait... What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The instructions are for ordering the code in the copies of the original tapes. The public can the rebuilt some copies of the original tape readers to read the copies back. The instructions for obtaining the blueprints for the readers are stored at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, storage facility A15B, bottom level, a Boston Lock & Safe Co's safe, third shelf from the bottom.

    7. Re:Wait... What? by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      On the upside, you wouldn't be assessed any taxes.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    8. Re:Wait... What? by Immerman · · Score: 2

      Yeah sure, like some trifling little issue like global financial collapse would slow down the taxman?

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    9. Re:Wait... What? by tibit · · Score: 2

      You're on to something here, but not for the reasons that you think. NASA has been releasing source for a long time. It's only that getting this source requires at least a mountainload of paperwork (U.S. citizens only, etc.), and it's usually costly. It's not like they don't have a catalog already. If it's going to be more of the same, then I'd call it outright deception. Note that nowhere it's stated that the code will be under a free source license!

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    10. Re:Wait... What? by tibit · · Score: 2

      Of course these days all of this can be done, too, much faster, on off-the-shelf hardware. Just because the hardware doesn't have tag bits doesn't mean your compilers can't implement them. I'm running a bit of safety critical code on a bunch of ARM CPUs and all of the data RAM contents are tagged, pointers are tagged, and there is also software-driven error correction for RAM, execution log, restarts, those sorts of things that were en vogue at one point or another in the "hi-rel mainframe" market.

      I have a couple of off-the-shelf servers from Dell that not only have error correcting RAM, but also have a spare memory stick and can cope with the failure of an entire chip on a RAM stick. So what you hail so eagerly is - who'd have thought - a standard feature on off-the-shelf hardware that can be had under $2K.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    11. Re:Wait... What? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      So the quality of a multi-million dollar system of days past, is about the same as your smartphone is.

      I was comparing normal multi-use mainframes/mini computers with today's desktops for the most part.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    12. Re:Wait... What? by PRMan · · Score: 1

      But that cost $1 million and now it costs $300 to get it almost perfect. Billions of people having $300 computers has revolutionized the world.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    13. Re:Wait... What? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Over twenty years ago there were computers that hardware and software that were designed to work together. At least two of these systems had extra tag bits in memory that defined the memory contents. Specifically I am talking about Symbolics Lisp Machines and Burroughs Large Systems that natively ran Algol.

      Or, rather, ran an instruction set with some features oriented towards ALGOL. Other languages could also be, and were, translated to that instruction set.

    14. Re:Wait... What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Silly rabbit. You think just because the financial institutions crumble, and can't calculate your withholding, that means you don't OWE your taxes?

      Reminds me of when I was a kid and there were tornado warnings, we'd hope the tornado hit the school because that obviously meant we wouldn't ever have to go to school again!

      As Rimmer said on Red Dwarf when he got his old tax bill in the mail, "Just because we're three million years into deep space and the human species is extinct? That means nothing to these people! They'll find us!"

  2. source for convolutional error correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    algorithms please.

  3. Soundtrack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Here's a soundtrack for this thread.
     
    Not the official soundtrack...more of a modified soundtrack removing the annoying hippie music and adding the awesome score music!

  4. Beautiful Soundtrack! -=[Mod Parent UP]=- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, so beautiful. Talk about beauty in Apollo style music.

    #tbf #apollo13 #music #muzak #score #instrumental #amazing

  5. video games? by FudRucker · · Score: 1

    flight simulators converted to video games?

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    1. Re:video games? by Warbothong · · Score: 2

      Oblig. https://xkcd.com/1244/

    2. Re:video games? by fulldecent · · Score: 1

      > flight simulators converted to video games?

      Convert?

      --

      -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

  6. please don't reinvent wheels by X0563511 · · Score: 1

    GitLab is a thing, if you want your own GitHub stop building it from scratch and just use the real thing.

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    1. Re:please don't reinvent wheels by Warbothong · · Score: 1

      GitLab is a thing, if you want your own GitHub stop building it from scratch and just use the real thing.

      Gitorious is a thing, if you want your own Gitorious stop building it from scratch and just use the real thing.

    2. Re:please don't reinvent wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *cough*

    3. Re:please don't reinvent wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That article's a year and a half old. Can you recommend a more recent evaluation?

  7. NASA did not release the Apollo 11 Code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I *wish* NASA had released the AGC source code. I run the project providing the Apollo 11 Guidance Computer Code (and other Apollo missions as well) which is linked in the summary, and I can assure you that none of that code was released by NASA, provided by NASA, nor was made available through NASA's assistance. You can thank some dedicated private citizens for the availability of that source code.

    -- Ron Burkey

    1. Re:NASA did not release the Apollo 11 Code by JeffAtl · · Score: 2

      Aren't guidance programs for rockets considered a security risk?

    2. Re:NASA did not release the Apollo 11 Code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Aren't guidance programs for rockets considered a security risk?

      Perhaps, but the Apollo Guidance Computer that was mentioned in the links didn't guide the rocket (in spite of the name). The AGC was used only in the Command Module and Lunar Modules. The Saturn rocket was controlled by a different computer (the so-called LVDC), for which the source-code is not presently known -- by me, at least -- and therefore is assumed permanently missing. I'd love to be proved wrong (about it being missing), however. At any rate, even if it was a security problem once upon a time, it would have been automatically declassified long ago, so being unavailable *now* has nothing to do with security.

      -- Ron Burkey

    3. Re:NASA did not release the Apollo 11 Code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really?

      Anthony David

    4. Re:NASA did not release the Apollo 11 Code by Indigo · · Score: 1

      Agreed 100%. Ron and his fellow volunteers have worked on this for several years, not only transcribing the Apollo Command Module and Lunar Module flight software from paper listings, but also writing the toolchains and simulators with which to build and run it. And not only for Apollo, but also for the Saturn IB and V rockets, the Gemini spacecraft, and probably other things I haven't found yet. There are lucid explanations of everything, and original project documentation as well. The site is a treasure trove of information for anyone interested in the software aspect of these great historical space missions.
      http://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/...

  8. Links? Here's a link for DARPA catalogue. by fygment · · Score: 5, Informative

    TFA contains links to Wired articles. Couldn't find a link to a NASA catalogue so TFA is a 'heads up' of what is to come, yes?

    Here's the link to the DARPA catalogue: http://www.darpa.mil/OpenCatal...

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
  9. Oh, just SHUT UP ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and continue clicking your stupid colored phone buttons ...

  10. Moon Landings? by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    That would be very interesting.

  11. It all in FORTRAN by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    What little that is not FORTRAN is in PL-1 There are a few assembly language code using fixed point arithmetic. And the only comment in the entire code base is # RIP JSB

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  12. Won't last for long by sir-gold · · Score: 1

    I predict that some military-general-turned-politician will start complaining about national security risks and taxpayer money being wasted (on something other than the military) and the project will suddenly find itself behind a security-clearance-only paywall.

  13. Re:Links? Here's a link for DARPA catalogue. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DARPA's catalog contains five (5) programs. Something tells me there are more DARPA projects that have created computer programs in the past two years.

  14. Releases by PRMan · · Score: 1

    So, can we figure out why that Mars mission failed? And if so, maybe we should release the code ahead of time so people can help look for bugs.

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  15. NASA's currenty catalog sucks. by oneiros27 · · Score: 1

    http://code.nasa.gov/

    I gave up on it years ago, when I realized there were only 32 items in it. (2 have been listed as 'coming soon'). You'll find more open source software if you look at the lists that the individual centers maintain :

    Or see the NASA Github page (34 items, but that includes 'code.nasa.gov') : https://github.com/nasa

    The listed 'NASA Official' has changed since it was released ... maybe this one will actually care about maintaining a list, rather than doing the bare minimum to meet some requirement from the White House.

    (which was my interepretation of the response I got when I contacted the previous official about http://data.nasa.gov/ ... of course, back then, it actually linked to places, rather than crap like the content-less http://data.nasa.gov/solar-dat... )

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
    1. Re:NASA's currenty catalog sucks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NASA is terrible at that sort of public relations and always has been. Nasawatch (Keith Cowing) bitches about it all the time. There's eight official pages for some thing and none of them get updated. All of them are probably projects from summer co-ops who managed to make MATLAB serve HTML or some other godawful abortion that a contractor (me) will have to clean up someday.

  16. Space Shuttle source code... by jonwil · · Score: 1

    It would be very cool to see the source code for the Space Shuttle. Its retired now so releasing it shouldn't have any operational impacts on the shuttle itself and I doubt the Chinese or the North Koreans or the Iranians are interested in building their own shuttle (and certainly not one using a hardware architecture developed in the 1970s reverse engineered from a source code release)

  17. Did that include Voyagers command software? by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

    Did that include Voyagers command software?

    After all, VGER's command and communication software could be essential.

  18. China says thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a Chinese person, I thank all Americans for their taxes that made all this R&D possible. And thanks to US goverment for sharing source codes. This will help us a lot. In China we would never turn over these assets open source to other countries' citizens. US is still great country.

  19. Doubtful ... due to STRAW by oneiros27 · · Score: 1

    All NASA websites have to be renewed annually in STRAW (System for Tracking and Registering Applications and Websites). If they're not updated, they're supposed to get blocked at the firewall.

    Of course, they never define what a 'website' is, so someone could claim that the item in question was a 'web page' that didn't have to be individually registered.

    (I made the mistake of listing a webservice as a 'web application', and had much back & forth as I said there weren't any privacy issues ... of course, their definition was that a 'web application' is something that you give logins & passwords to.)

    But my complaint was that the 'official' page is that there are other pages out there that are *not* trying to be comprehensive that are doing a better job than the 'official' page. I had contacted the NASA official responsible for data.nasa.gov, and asked him how they had sent out the call for information to put in there ... he said they didn't, they just added websites they found. I told him they'd be more complete if they just linked to the GCMD as their system hardly had anything in it. I also complained about how stuff was organized (not by mission, or investigation ... but by the websites they found ... never mind that a given archive might have hundreds of different heterogeneous datasets.)

    And I seriously doubt that the projects are what you claim -- as someone who's tried to push some NASA-funded software to CPAN ... after a while, we gave up as the legal department made it such a burden to do so. (admitedly, this was ~8 years ago).

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.