4 ms·

I was once tasked with deploying a piece of software on a closed network (military), to run on a old custom OS - it wasn't a huge program, around 50k lines of c

I was once tasked with deploying a piece of software on a closed network (military), to run on a old custom OS - it wasn't a huge program, around 50k lines of code. I did encounter a bunch of bugs and problems underway, and wanted to reach out to the devs that wrote it - as it was customer made for my employer. Welp, turns out it was written by one guy/contractor, and that he had passed away a couple of years earlier. At least in the defense industry you'll find these sort of things all the time. Lots of custom/one-off stuff, made for very specific systems. Especially on the hardware side it is not uncommon that the engineers that made the equipment are either long gone or retired.

keepamovin 3y ago
Welp, you might have needed to consult a seance for that one. Interesting point about the "author expiry" window. I was thinking about that today regarding something else: Let's say in 20 years time, no database code has been updated for the last 20 years. And all the people who worked on it, can't remember anything about it. Yet, it still works. That means that everyone who uses that database everyday, doesn't know how it works. They believe that it works, this belief is widespread. And the database providing results to queries, is a real thing. And it does work -- but nobody knows how. This is common. I don't know in any detail how the MacBook I use works. But it does. I don't know how many things I use actually work. But they do work. It seems the only difference, in the world of things that "work", and which most people who use them do not understand how they work, is that there are two classes of things: those things for which there is a widespread belief that they do work; and those things for which the belief that they work, is not widespread. But in either case, they work.
- TrackerFF 3y ago
  Even more common in the world of industrial automation. Lots of old early-gen PLCs from the 70s/80s still ticking, with no documentation and the techs/engineers/companies long gone. We worked on one such PLC, around 3 decades old at the point, and it came down to probing I/O, reverse engineering the functionality. But at some point, if there hasn't been enough legacy support, there comes a time where people just have to bite the bullet and re-build a system from the ground up - and integrate it in parallel with the old system running, until it can be removed completely. Too bad many of the old and forgotten systems are still running and integral, so they get put inside a glass cage with "DON'T TOUCH!" warning sticker.

keepamovin 3y ago

Welp, you might have needed to consult a seance for that one. Interesting point about the "author expiry" window. I was thinking about that today regarding something else: Let's say in 20 years time, no database code has been updated for the last 20 years. And all the people who worked on it, can't remember anything about it. Yet, it still works. That means that everyone who uses that database everyday, doesn't know how it works. They believe that it works, this belief is widespread. And the database providing results to queries, is a real thing. And it does work -- but nobody knows how. This is common. I don't know in any detail how the MacBook I use works. But it does. I don't know how many things I use actually work. But they do work. It seems the only difference, in the world of things that "work", and which most people who use them do not understand how they work, is that there are two classes of things: those things for which there is a widespread belief that they do work; and those things for which the belief that they work, is not widespread. But in either case, they work.

TrackerFF 3y ago
Even more common in the world of industrial automation. Lots of old early-gen PLCs from the 70s/80s still ticking, with no documentation and the techs/engineers/companies long gone. We worked on one such PLC, around 3 decades old at the point, and it came down to probing I/O, reverse engineering the functionality. But at some point, if there hasn't been enough legacy support, there comes a time where people just have to bite the bullet and re-build a system from the ground up - and integrate it in parallel with the old system running, until it can be removed completely. Too bad many of the old and forgotten systems are still running and integral, so they get put inside a glass cage with "DON'T TOUCH!" warning sticker.