Comment by foldr
3 hours ago
The link hasn't been removed; the comment is just flagged and dead. If you have showdead enabled on your account, you can see it here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50000624
AFAICT the comment is spreading false claims about Margaret Hamilton at about the worst possible moment, so no surprises that it's been flagged.
So it is false that she married the manager? Is it false that she entered the role after the moon landing project was mostly finished?
> at about the worst possible moment,
The tweet was made in 2023
I was talking about timing of the HN comment, not the tweet.
As you can easily see from the HN thread, yes, it is false that she was (as claimed in the tweet) hired for an entry level role in 1968. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50002873
Who she was married to is neither here nor there, and you are doing your case no favors by fixating on that.
Can you explain what is false?
The NYT obituary, for instance, notes that she married her boss. That lines up with many of the complaints in the twitter feed.
There’s already several comments in that thread explaining that the linked X post makes some glaring factual errors.
There is exactly one comment about the post and it only disputes her title at a date. It does not address any of the other information.
1 reply →