News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on NASA Force. Parent comment

Re:NASA Force by nine_k on Friday April 17, 2026 @05:47PM (#47810978)
I don't see any big trouble with the quoted text. The language is a bit nerdy, and a bit bureaucratic, but that's exactly what I'd expect from NASA.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:NASA Force by archontes on Friday April 17, 2026 @07:59PM (#47811903)
This has got Russell Vought's fingerprints on it, mark my words.

There's some way this is enshittified.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:NASA Force by rdiddly on Friday April 17, 2026 @09:12PM (#47812327)
It's scattered and disorganized like this administration.

You work on real missions, alongside the teams building them

OK alongside, but not ON, the teams building them? So apparently not actually building them myself? And also, does anyone build missions, or do they perhaps build systems?

For a few days, access is granted to this work.

Access is granted to whom? And to what work, the work I'll supposedly be doing? Hopefully yeah I have access to my own work. Or do you mean the work of the people alongside whom I'll be working on missions (the builders of the missions that is)?

The number is extremely limited.

What number?

The window only lasts four days.

Oh now there's a window analogy too. And they already said "a few days" so one of the two is redundant.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:NASA Force by suttontom on Saturday April 18, 2026 @11:00AM (#47816447)
You would make a good technical writer!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:NASA Force by dartharva on Saturday April 18, 2026 @12:17AM (#47813098)
Are you serious? Those aren't even coherent sentences!?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:NASA Force by altmanaltman on Saturday April 18, 2026 @02:41AM (#47813671)
No, its literally written using ChatGPT
[ Parent | on HN ]