Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #93793 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-10-16 03:26 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-10-18 10:59 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 271 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 03:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 00:00 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 04:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-15 21:53 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 01:31 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 06:08 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 04:39 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 08:49 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 08:53 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 05:26 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:29 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:31 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:16 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:42 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:44 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:55 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:20 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:20 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:09 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 12:54 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:15 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 15:05 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 14:54 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 16:46 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 16:57 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 19:01 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:11 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 14:48 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Harold Stevens <wookie@bookworm.localdomain> - 2026-10-17 08:26 -0500
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 15:01 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 22:11 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 08:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:30 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:17 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 02:30 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:54 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:56 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 04:32 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:30 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:13 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 14:19 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:38 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 15:10 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:58 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 16:04 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 15:33 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 14:23 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:37 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:11 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:53 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 13:00 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 15:12 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 13:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 15:35 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 14:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 16:24 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:50 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:39 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:58 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:55 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:43 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 03:48 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 02:20 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-17 06:37 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:59 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:20 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:50 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:48 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:25 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:15 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:36 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 14:57 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-15 23:16 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 07:45 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-16 08:41 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 18:27 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 21:55 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 23:43 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:31 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:00 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 03:56 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:09 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:58 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 13:33 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:08 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:11 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-18 18:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:58 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 20:07 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:41 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 13:13 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:27 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 14:50 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 04:15 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 04:41 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:00 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:57 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:42 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 10:56 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:14 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 13:07 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:20 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 15:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:32 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:21 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 04:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:24 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:27 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:20 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 01:13 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 02:32 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 03:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:41 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:45 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:24 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:16 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:53 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 06:02 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-15 23:26 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 06:42 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 07:41 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 06:39 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 04:22 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 10:54 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:19 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 08:40 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:52 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:47 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-17 23:29 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 05:29 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 10:07 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:28 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 10:56 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 12:40 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:46 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 13:39 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:48 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:16 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 08:51 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:04 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:13 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 13:03 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 15:21 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 15:07 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 21:26 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 01:55 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-17 01:07 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:28 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:35 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:09 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-10-16 16:37 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:51 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 11:44 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 16:14 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-16 17:10 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 17:56 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-16 18:10 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 18:32 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 21:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 02:28 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-17 01:52 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:11 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 21:50 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:39 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 09:43 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 15:02 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 15:06 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:15 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 19:55 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:38 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:08 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 19:51 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 17:36 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:12 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:05 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 22:35 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 09:12 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 16:46 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 19:01 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 19:08 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:07 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:22 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:29 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:59 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:09 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:42 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 01:54 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:11 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:38 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:01 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 22:25 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 19:42 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:36 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-17 15:47 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 23:11 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-17 18:07 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 03:05 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 11:31 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:40 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 16:09 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:57 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:05 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 14:38 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:38 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 16:07 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> - 2026-10-18 23:44 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 22:09 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:36 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 02:49 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:14 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-17 07:20 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 07:43 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-17 12:17 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:18 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 08:16 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:18 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 04:47 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 17:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 19:47 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 07:25 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:45 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:50 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:51 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 04:58 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 07:43 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:15 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 22:03 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 07:13 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:14 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 08:01 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:55 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:09 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:28 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:12 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 02:42 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 08:53 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:06 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:32 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:20 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:22 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:36 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:35 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:18 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-17 06:32 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:55 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 12:12 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 13:43 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:37 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 09:07 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 13:30 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:08 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:04 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nick Charles <none@none.none> - 2026-10-16 23:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 02:29 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-17 01:54 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 08:58 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:25 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "De ongekruisigde ds." <ongekruisigde-ds@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 10:59 +0000
Page 13 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 Next page →
| From | Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 07:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11b1rit$u11e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94040 |
>Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net>wrote:
>>On Sat, 17 Oct 2026 07:20:49 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>
>>
>> Most code I write is in C or in asm for Microchips.
>> asm is extremely powerful
>> understand the hardware!!!
>>
>
>It is good to hear someone actually standing up for
>C and assembly.
>
>These Linux groups seem to be packed only with Python/C++
>jockeys. The poor dupes don't know what they're missing.
>
>Assembly is the most fun of any programming language.
>There is none of the uncertainty that slows one down
>when using a higher level language. The instructions
>just flow effortlessly.
>
>However, I do still have trouble with the shuffle operations
>on the SIMD registers. I need to always check the manuals
>to see what goes where.
>
>Intel and GCC provide support for so-called "intrinsics" that
>allow assembly code to be directly incorporated into C code,
>but these, for me, are tedious and not much fun to use.
>
>You are also correct in stating that a thorough knowledge
>of hardware is a requisite for assembly programming. After
>all, one is dealing directly with digital registers with no
>cozy compiler or interpreter in between.
>
>
>>
>> These days giggle bytes seem to be needed to just say: 'Hello world'.
>> Too many layers of crap.
>>
>
>GNU has published the definitive version of Hello World:
>
><https://www.gnu.org/software/hello/>
OK, just for fun, I downloaded
hello-2.12.tar.gz 2022-01-31 13:58 1.0M
Imakefile etc etc
xmkmf
make
mkdir hello
mv hello-2.12.tar.gz hello/
cd hello
tar -zxvf hello-2.12.tar.gz
l
cd */
l
./configure
l
make
l
./hello
cd src
l
joe hello.c
l
cd ..
l
./hello
'l' in zsh that I use as shell stands for 'ls -rtl'
saves typing and always show recent
raspberrypi: ~/hello/hello-2.12 # l
total 1940
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 15756 Aug 12 2017 INSTALL
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 93787 Aug 12 2017 ABOUT-NLS
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 208 Feb 8 2018 TODO
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 35149 Feb 8 2018 COPYING
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 891 Mar 7 2020 THANKS
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1509 Mar 7 2020 README-dev
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3499 Mar 7 2020 README
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 30559 Mar 7 2020 ChangeLog.O
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 580 Mar 7 2020 AUTHORS
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2342 Mar 7 2021 configure.ac
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4577 Mar 7 2021 GNUmakefile
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 66373 Mar 7 2021 maint.mk
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3646 Jan 31 2022 Makefile.am
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 45039 Jan 31 2022 aclocal.m4
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 39766 Jan 31 2022 config.in
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 204406 Jan 31 2022 Makefile.in
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4607 Jan 31 2022 NEWS
-rwxr-xr-- 1 root root 663695 Jan 31 2022 configure*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1550 Jan 31 2022 hello.1
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jan 31 2022 tests/
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jan 31 2022 man/
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jan 31 2022 m4/
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jan 31 2022 contrib/
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jan 31 2022 doc/
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 21682 Jan 31 2022 ChangeLog
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jan 31 2022 build-aux/
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 68284 Oct 18 09:02 config.status*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 183752 Oct 18 09:02 Makefile
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 40885 Oct 18 09:02 config.h
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 23 Oct 18 09:02 stamp-h1
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Oct 18 09:02 po/
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 179003 Oct 18 09:02 config.log
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Oct 18 09:02 src/
drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 12288 Oct 18 09:03 lib/
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 177276 Oct 18 09:03 hello*
raspberrypi: ~/hello/hello-2.12 # ./hello
Hello, world!
Oh well...
LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-17 20:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nji397Fei39U15@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #93973 |
On Sat, 17 Oct 2026 07:20:49 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote: > OK I never got much into Python Never needed it for the things I do. > Also it seems to be changing all the time? Except for the transition from 2 to 3 Python has been quite good at maintaining backward compatibility. It changes as PEPs are implemented but seldom do the changes break things. > But I come from a hardware background, in the sixties there were no > 'computers' I was under the impression the System 360/30 that ate my FORTRAN IV cards was a computer of sorts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 08:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11b1uc4$uskq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94074 |
>rbowman <bowman@montana.com>wrote: >>On Sat, 17 Oct 2026 07:20:49 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote: > > >> OK I never got much into Python Never needed it for the things I do. >> Also it seems to be changing all the time? > >Except for the transition from 2 to 3 Python has been quite good at >maintaining backward compatibility. It changes as PEPs are implemented but >seldom do the changes break things. > >> But I come from a hardware background, in the sixties there were no >> 'computers' > >I was under the impression the System 360/30 that ate my FORTRAN IV cards >was a computer of sorts. > Yea I dunno, my first computer was a Sinclair ZX80 At work we had a PDP10? Worked a while at a large accelerator back then, made me buy a book on Unix. A bit later I had my own TV repair shop in Amsterdam and that is when I bought that Z80. Added some printer driver in Z80 asm to print receipts and stuff on a thermal printer. But then ..expanded that ZX80 with more memory, several I/O cards even added an IBM PC keyboard and ran the C80 C compiler on it I wanted to run software from the CPM user group but no CPM for that ZX80. So wrote my own CP/M clone and it worked: https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/z80/index.html Here what I added to that Sinclair Z80: https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/z80/system14/diagrams/index.html By that time I was working in a company designing a.o. PCI cards for in IBM PCs My computer used a ramdisk and was faster than the IBM PC, no harddisc seek times.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 05:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MpGcnSAZ_-8GCkn3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94109 |
On 10/18/26 04:01, Jan Panteltje wrote: >> rbowman <bowman@montana.com>wrote: >>> On Sat, 17 Oct 2026 07:20:49 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote: >> >> >>> OK I never got much into Python Never needed it for the things I do. >>> Also it seems to be changing all the time? >> >> Except for the transition from 2 to 3 Python has been quite good at >> maintaining backward compatibility. It changes as PEPs are implemented but >> seldom do the changes break things. >> >>> But I come from a hardware background, in the sixties there were no >>> 'computers' >> >> I was under the impression the System 360/30 that ate my FORTRAN IV cards >> was a computer of sorts. >> > > > Yea I dunno, my first computer was a Sinclair ZX80 HAD one ! May STILL have it - in The Heap somewhere. Hey, don't cuss the Z-80 ! Damned good chip ! > At work we had a PDP10? Got started, officially, on the PDP-11. And there was that neat-o newfangled 'C' language .... :-) > Worked a while at a large accelerator back then, made me buy a book on Unix. > A bit later I had my own TV repair shop in Amsterdam > and that is when I bought that Z80. > Added some printer driver in Z80 asm to print receipts and stuff on a thermal > printer. Well, the math of particle accelerators is well beyond my hard-wiring. I'm best as a 'generalist', bringing a bunch of dis-related threads together, seeing how disparate 'A' 'B' and 'C' relate. Had a good 40+ year career with that. Sometimes knowing a little about a LOT of things pays off as well as knowing a LOT about ONE thing. Somebody has to tie it all together. > But then ..expanded that ZX80 with more memory, several I/O cards > even added an IBM PC keyboard and ran the C80 C compiler on it > I wanted to run software from the CPM user group but no CPM for that ZX80. > So wrote my own CP/M clone and it worked: > https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/z80/index.html > Here what I added to that Sinclair Z80: > https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/z80/system14/diagrams/index.html > > By that time I was working in a company designing a.o. PCI cards for in IBM PCs > My computer used a ramdisk and was faster than the IBM PC, > no harddisc seek times. Remember 'PCI' cards, 'ISA' too, S-100 were pretty good as well. Only designed ONE kinda simple PCI card. Sounds like you went further. I fell in love with "embedded" - low-powered chips and minimal hardware. Seemed just 'art' to do useful things with that. Lots of 'C' and ASM shit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 14:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11b2jv7$16n5g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94125 |
>c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote: >>On 10/18/26 04:01, Jan Panteltje wrote: >>> rbowman <bowman@montana.com>wrote: >>>> On Sat, 17 Oct 2026 07:20:49 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote: >>> >>> >>>> OK I never got much into Python Never needed it for the things I do. >>>> Also it seems to be changing all the time? >>> >>> Except for the transition from 2 to 3 Python has been quite good at >>> maintaining backward compatibility. It changes as PEPs are implemented but >>> seldom do the changes break things. >>> >>>> But I come from a hardware background, in the sixties there were no >>>> 'computers' >>> >>> I was under the impression the System 360/30 that ate my FORTRAN IV cards >>> was a computer of sorts. >>> >> >> >> Yea I dunno, my first computer was a Sinclair ZX80 > > HAD one ! May STILL have it - in The Heap somewhere. > > Hey, don't cuss the Z-80 ! Damned good chip ! > > >> At work we had a PDP10? > > Got started, officially, on the PDP-11. > > And there was that neat-o newfangled > 'C' language .... :-) > > >> Worked a while at a large accelerator back then, made me buy a book on Unix. >> A bit later I had my own TV repair shop in Amsterdam >> and that is when I bought that Z80. >> Added some printer driver in Z80 asm to print receipts and stuff on a thermal >> printer. > > Well, the math of particle accelerators is well > beyond my hard-wiring. I'm best as a 'generalist', > bringing a bunch of dis-related threads together, > seeing how disparate 'A' 'B' and 'C' relate. Had > a good 40+ year career with that. > > Sometimes knowing a little about a LOT of things > pays off as well as knowing a LOT about ONE thing. > Somebody has to tie it all together. I started travelling the world, doing work in electronics wherever I could find, sometimes via agencies. I have this thing called 'curiosity' that drives me. Worked for army, navy, power stations, space, broadcasting, had a TV and radio repair shop, car electronics, art, medical in a big university hospital here, in an airport, in satellite communication, in Europe, in the US, and in the UK. Been almost everywhere from many European countries to down-under. Languages, Dutch, English, German, French, little bit Italian (pizza I know what it is just had one ;-0), bit of Spanish.. Will be eighty years old in a few month, still learning. >> But then ..expanded that ZX80 with more memory, several I/O cards >> even added an IBM PC keyboard and ran the C80 C compiler on it >> I wanted to run software from the CPM user group but no CPM for that ZX80. >> So wrote my own CP/M clone and it worked: >> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/z80/index.html >> Here what I added to that Sinclair Z80: >> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/z80/system14/diagrams/index.html >> >> By that time I was working in a company designing a.o. PCI cards for in IBM PCs >> My computer used a ramdisk and was faster than the IBM PC, >> no harddisc seek times. > > Remember 'PCI' cards, 'ISA' too, S-100 were > pretty good as well. > > Only designed ONE kinda simple PCI card. Sounds > like you went further. > > I fell in love with "embedded" - low-powered > chips and minimal hardware. Seemed just 'art' > to do useful things with that. Lots of 'C' > and ASM shit. Yes, keep it simple. Simple things sometimes just keep working for ages: https://panteltje.nl/pub/8052AH_BASIC_computer/8052AH_BASIC_computer_inside_img_1727.jpg https://panteltje.nl/pub/8052AH_BASIC_computer/8052AH_BASIC_computer_inside2_img_1757.jpg https://panteltje.nl/pub/8052AH_BASIC_computer/8052AH_BASIC_computer_wiring_img_1756.jpg 1985 or so? Had it powered on last year, worked OK after giving it some time to re-charge the battery that keeps the BASIC program in static RAM. Was used to drive all sort of stuff around the house via simple i2c.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 19:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <njkkv7Fei39U32@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94109 |
On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 08:01:05 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote: > Yea I dunno, my first computer was a Sinclair ZX80 At work we had a > PDP10? > Worked a while at a large accelerator back then, made me buy a book on > Unix. I bought the ZX81 kit to see what you got for $80 US, but that was about 15 years after my first FORTRAN IV program. I wasn't interested in programming until the microcontrollers appeared so the early part of my career was hardware control circuits. Logic is logic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 12:12 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11b29j0$11pis$13@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94074 |
On 17/10/2026 21:14, rbowman wrote: > On Sat, 17 Oct 2026 07:20:49 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote: > > >> OK I never got much into Python Never needed it for the things I do. >> Also it seems to be changing all the time? > > Except for the transition from 2 to 3 Python has been quite good at > maintaining backward compatibility. It changes as PEPs are implemented but > seldom do the changes break things. > >> But I come from a hardware background, in the sixties there were no >> 'computers' > > I was under the impression the System 360/30 that ate my FORTRAN IV cards > was a computer of sorts. > Mine was. I think. an Elliott. I never saw it. -- Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 02:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <CDednSghKvTT90n3nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #93973 |
On 10/17/26 03:20, Jan Panteltje wrote: >> Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid>wrote: >>> On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 17:10:18 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote: >> >>> Well C++ is a crime against humanity >>> 'operator overloading...' crap bloated crap. >> >> Operator overloading is a very handy feature. Yes, C++ is overly >> complicated. Java left out that feature of C++, and it, too, still >> manages to be excessively complicated. >> >> Python, on the other hand, includes operator overloading, yet is still >> only a small fraction of the complexity of either Java or C++. Such a >> feature is useful, for example, in letting you express operations on >> mathematical objects (like vectors and matrices) using something close >> to the original mathematical notation. > > OK > I never got much into Python DO check it out. It can now do basically EVERYTHING and is faster than it used to be. P4 is promised to be even faster and more efficient without changing the syntax. I did not use Python2 because I heard that P3 was coming ... why learn an obsolete dialect ? Took 'em a little while to port everything over to the new version, but it got done and then went over and above. CAN be 'compiled' in a few ways. A couple options translate to 'C' and then compile that. IS much faster, though not quite as fast as writing a native 'C' pgm. However the EASE of writing and great string-slice functions (stolen from FORTRAN) make Python really nice. Oh, 95% of the time you don't NEED top speed for applications. That's old thinking - EASE/comprehensibility can be far more important. Oh, the DOCUMENTATION/How-To stuff for Python is everywhere and detailed. A zillion solutions for YOUR particular problem. Since forever I wrote in 'C' or Pascal. I even did stuff in "B". However I rarely use 'C' anymore. Might still rec writing 'servers' in 'C' ... esp if high-volume ... but that sentiment is half 'tradition'. Anyway, learn before 'AI' tries to steal it all away. CHAT can find/write low/medium complexity Python code ... but sometimes it seems more complex/verbose/obscure than a human would write it. Mostly it just steals human-writ examples it finds. DID ask CHAT to write me a basic b-tree database pgm in FORTRAN the other day. Kinda/sorta did so ... but didn't include any load/save code (though DID warn about that prob). Next - same thing, but in Modula2 - we'll see what its limits are :-) Pref M3 ... but almost no Linux/anything compilers for that - esp that actually install correctly. Some ancient DOS stuff. Do have a paper manual for "Turbo Modula-2" but it's all 8/16 bit and won't run on a lot of chips these days. Would have to use DOSBox or something - inefficient. > Never needed it for the things I do. > Also it seems to be changing all the time? Ummm ... not really. The only "big" - ok not SO big - change was P2 to P3. Most P2 programs can be tweaked for P3 pretty quick. Think there's even a converter app. Now if by "changing" you mean new functions, yep, people keep writing them for obvious reasons. The good bit is it means there are several paths to whatever you're trying to do - pick the best for your need. I did a bunch of video security cam apps. Sometimes "OpenCV2" will do it all, sometimes "Pillow" lib is just fine. Can even combine in some cases. > Most code I write is in C or in asm for Microchips. > asm is extremely powerful Well aware. When CP/M and even DOS were around had to write ASM bits, or full apps, because there just wasn't anything better. PICs and similar microcontrollers - ASM is still the best way to the finer chip tricks. > understand the hardware!!! The weaker the hardware the more you have to understand it. Most modern big chips, so much overkill that you really don't need to know every little nuance. Sorry, 1% better performance isn't worth learning 99% more tiny-tweak shit that'll probably be obsolete in the very next point-revision of the CPU. > https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/newsflex/download.html > https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/quadcopter/index.html > https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/pic/index.html > These days giggle bytes seem to be needed to just say: 'Hello world'. > Too many layers of crap. > > But I come from a hardware background, in the sixties there were no 'computers' > yet they did a manned Moon landing and return. Some of that shit was just bizarre ! Loved hand-knitted "rope memory", what the LEM computer used :-) > Now they have nothing to show but driving around the block (earth orbit) with > all that computing power. All the computing power in the Apollo ... yer base iWatch has a good 1000x that, maybe 10000x. BUT, they had to make do with what they had ... and most of that was govt-specced in '64. At least Apollo wasn't all vacuum tubes :-) Now space probes - I really admire the people who design the hardware/software. Insane levels of redundancy/work-arounds, almost a black art. It's why the Voyagers are still working out beyond the edge of our solar system all this time later. Kinda hoping aliens will find one and upgrade/repair :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 08:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11b21f2$vsud$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94105 |
>c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote: >>On 10/17/26 03:20, Jan Panteltje wrote: >>> Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid>wrote: >>>> On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 17:10:18 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote: >>> >>>> Well C++ is a crime against humanity >>>> 'operator overloading...' crap bloated crap. >>> >>> Operator overloading is a very handy feature. Yes, C++ is overly >>> complicated. Java left out that feature of C++, and it, too, still >>> manages to be excessively complicated. >>> >>> Python, on the other hand, includes operator overloading, yet is still >>> only a small fraction of the complexity of either Java or C++. Such a >>> feature is useful, for example, in letting you express operations on >>> mathematical objects (like vectors and matrices) using something close >>> to the original mathematical notation. >> >> OK >> I never got much into Python > > DO check it out. It can now do basically EVERYTHING > and is faster than it used to be. P4 is promised to > be even faster and more efficient without changing > the syntax. > > I did not use Python2 because I heard that P3 was coming ... > why learn an obsolete dialect ? Took 'em a little while > to port everything over to the new version, but it got > done and then went over and above. > > CAN be 'compiled' in a few ways. A couple options > translate to 'C' and then compile that. IS much > faster, though not quite as fast as writing a > native 'C' pgm. However the EASE of writing and > great string-slice functions (stolen from FORTRAN) > make Python really nice. Oh, 95% of the time you > don't NEED top speed for applications. That's old > thinking - EASE/comprehensibility can be far > more important. > > Oh, the DOCUMENTATION/How-To stuff for Python > is everywhere and detailed. A zillion solutions > for YOUR particular problem. > > Since forever I wrote in 'C' or Pascal. I even > did stuff in "B". However I rarely use 'C' > anymore. Might still rec writing 'servers' in 'C' ... > esp if high-volume ... but that sentiment is > half 'tradition'. > > Anyway, learn before 'AI' tries to steal it > all away. CHAT can find/write low/medium > complexity Python code ... but sometimes > it seems more complex/verbose/obscure than > a human would write it. Mostly it just > steals human-writ examples it finds. > > DID ask CHAT to write me a basic b-tree > database pgm in FORTRAN the other day. > Kinda/sorta did so ... but didn't include > any load/save code (though DID warn about > that prob). Next - same thing, but in > Modula2 - we'll see what its limits are :-) > > Pref M3 ... but almost no Linux/anything > compilers for that - esp that actually > install correctly. Some ancient DOS stuff. > Do have a paper manual for "Turbo Modula-2" > but it's all 8/16 bit and won't run on a lot > of chips these days. Would have to use > DOSBox or something - inefficient. > >> Never needed it for the things I do. >> Also it seems to be changing all the time? > > Ummm ... not really. The only "big" - ok > not SO big - change was P2 to P3. Most > P2 programs can be tweaked for P3 pretty > quick. Think there's even a converter app. > > Now if by "changing" you mean new functions, > yep, people keep writing them for obvious > reasons. The good bit is it means there are > several paths to whatever you're trying to > do - pick the best for your need. > > I did a bunch of video security cam apps. > Sometimes "OpenCV2" will do it all, sometimes > "Pillow" lib is just fine. Can even combine > in some cases. > >> Most code I write is in C or in asm for Microchips. >> asm is extremely powerful > > Well aware. When CP/M and even DOS were around > had to write ASM bits, or full apps, because > there just wasn't anything better. PICs and > similar microcontrollers - ASM is still the > best way to the finer chip tricks. > >> understand the hardware!!! > > The weaker the hardware the more you have to > understand it. Most modern big chips, so much > overkill that you really don't need to know > every little nuance. Sorry, 1% better performance > isn't worth learning 99% more tiny-tweak shit > that'll probably be obsolete in the very next > point-revision of the CPU. > >> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/newsflex/download.html >> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/quadcopter/index.html >> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/pic/index.html >> These days giggle bytes seem to be needed to just say: 'Hello world'. >> Too many layers of crap. >> >> But I come from a hardware background, in the sixties there were no 'computers' >> yet they did a manned Moon landing and return. > > Some of that shit was just bizarre ! > > Loved hand-knitted "rope memory", what > the LEM computer used :-) > >> Now they have nothing to show but driving around the block (earth orbit) with >> all that computing power. > > All the computing power in the Apollo ... yer > base iWatch has a good 1000x that, maybe 10000x. > BUT, they had to make do with what they had ... > and most of that was govt-specced in '64. At > least Apollo wasn't all vacuum tubes :-) > > Now space probes - I really admire the people > who design the hardware/software. Insane levels > of redundancy/work-arounds, almost a black art. > It's why the Voyagers are still working out > beyond the edge of our solar system all this > time later. Kinda hoping aliens will find one > and upgrade/repair :-) Yes and the new telescopes https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/10/261016070630.htm NASA’s Roman Space Telescope exceeds expectations by nearly 30% I think, our current understanding of 'the Universe' and 'big bang' is at some point completely wrong, as is our 'understanding' of fusion (why ITER and other experiments like it will never work). I look at normal radioactivity as you having a lot of springs each compressed and hold together by a little metal clamp. Every now and then a clamp breaks an the spring jumps, 'radioactivity' 'radiation'. Put enough springs like that together and if one goes and hits a few other ones like it then you get a chain reaction, all clamps break, all springs jump. But 'fusion' they try, is nothing but pushing the springs together without even using clamps.. Costs all of energy to keep those together and no more energy will ever come out than you put in. The springs with clamps are just parts of the expanding universe that had not expanded yet. Dark matter, so much bullshit, so many einStone parrots, so many mamaticians doing a divide by zero and then use 'renormalisation' all parrots, too much senseless math, NO understanding. It is a bit like Ohm's law, but then the radio tube was invented, a current in a vacuum ! Ohms law broken? Electrons moving turned out to be what electric current was! You need a _mechanism_ to understand the universe, else the babble about infinities will go on and no end and the understanding will remain zero. CERN did recently find signs that space is filled with some fluid... From: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/10/261004002556.htm Physicists just saw quarks make waves in the Big Bang’s primordial soup Scientists have watched speeding quarks create ripples in primordial matter, revealing just how liquid-like the early universe really was. Date: October 6, 2026 Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Summary: Physicists at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider have captured the clearest evidence yet that quark-gluon plasma, the scorching-hot matter that filled the newborn universe, behaves like a true liquid. By tracking individual quarks as they blasted through the plasma, researchers saw them leave behind ripples, splashes, and swirling wakes much like a duck moving through water. The finding suggests this primordial “soup” is so dense that it can slow speeding quarks and respond collectively as a fluid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 05:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MpGcnSYZ_--CEUn3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94116 |
On 10/18/26 04:53, Jan Panteltje wrote: >> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote: >>> On 10/17/26 03:20, Jan Panteltje wrote: >>>> Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid>wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 17:10:18 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote: >>>> >>>>> Well C++ is a crime against humanity >>>>> 'operator overloading...' crap bloated crap. >>>> >>>> Operator overloading is a very handy feature. Yes, C++ is overly >>>> complicated. Java left out that feature of C++, and it, too, still >>>> manages to be excessively complicated. >>>> >>>> Python, on the other hand, includes operator overloading, yet is still >>>> only a small fraction of the complexity of either Java or C++. Such a >>>> feature is useful, for example, in letting you express operations on >>>> mathematical objects (like vectors and matrices) using something close >>>> to the original mathematical notation. >>> >>> OK >>> I never got much into Python >> >> DO check it out. It can now do basically EVERYTHING >> and is faster than it used to be. P4 is promised to >> be even faster and more efficient without changing >> the syntax. >> >> I did not use Python2 because I heard that P3 was coming ... >> why learn an obsolete dialect ? Took 'em a little while >> to port everything over to the new version, but it got >> done and then went over and above. >> >> CAN be 'compiled' in a few ways. A couple options >> translate to 'C' and then compile that. IS much >> faster, though not quite as fast as writing a >> native 'C' pgm. However the EASE of writing and >> great string-slice functions (stolen from FORTRAN) >> make Python really nice. Oh, 95% of the time you >> don't NEED top speed for applications. That's old >> thinking - EASE/comprehensibility can be far >> more important. >> >> Oh, the DOCUMENTATION/How-To stuff for Python >> is everywhere and detailed. A zillion solutions >> for YOUR particular problem. >> >> Since forever I wrote in 'C' or Pascal. I even >> did stuff in "B". However I rarely use 'C' >> anymore. Might still rec writing 'servers' in 'C' ... >> esp if high-volume ... but that sentiment is >> half 'tradition'. >> >> Anyway, learn before 'AI' tries to steal it >> all away. CHAT can find/write low/medium >> complexity Python code ... but sometimes >> it seems more complex/verbose/obscure than >> a human would write it. Mostly it just >> steals human-writ examples it finds. >> >> DID ask CHAT to write me a basic b-tree >> database pgm in FORTRAN the other day. >> Kinda/sorta did so ... but didn't include >> any load/save code (though DID warn about >> that prob). Next - same thing, but in >> Modula2 - we'll see what its limits are :-) >> >> Pref M3 ... but almost no Linux/anything >> compilers for that - esp that actually >> install correctly. Some ancient DOS stuff. >> Do have a paper manual for "Turbo Modula-2" >> but it's all 8/16 bit and won't run on a lot >> of chips these days. Would have to use >> DOSBox or something - inefficient. >> >>> Never needed it for the things I do. >>> Also it seems to be changing all the time? >> >> Ummm ... not really. The only "big" - ok >> not SO big - change was P2 to P3. Most >> P2 programs can be tweaked for P3 pretty >> quick. Think there's even a converter app. >> >> Now if by "changing" you mean new functions, >> yep, people keep writing them for obvious >> reasons. The good bit is it means there are >> several paths to whatever you're trying to >> do - pick the best for your need. >> >> I did a bunch of video security cam apps. >> Sometimes "OpenCV2" will do it all, sometimes >> "Pillow" lib is just fine. Can even combine >> in some cases. >> >>> Most code I write is in C or in asm for Microchips. >>> asm is extremely powerful >> >> Well aware. When CP/M and even DOS were around >> had to write ASM bits, or full apps, because >> there just wasn't anything better. PICs and >> similar microcontrollers - ASM is still the >> best way to the finer chip tricks. >> >>> understand the hardware!!! >> >> The weaker the hardware the more you have to >> understand it. Most modern big chips, so much >> overkill that you really don't need to know >> every little nuance. Sorry, 1% better performance >> isn't worth learning 99% more tiny-tweak shit >> that'll probably be obsolete in the very next >> point-revision of the CPU. >> >>> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/newsflex/download.html >>> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/quadcopter/index.html >>> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/pic/index.html >>> These days giggle bytes seem to be needed to just say: 'Hello world'. >>> Too many layers of crap. >>> >>> But I come from a hardware background, in the sixties there were no 'computers' >>> yet they did a manned Moon landing and return. >> >> Some of that shit was just bizarre ! >> >> Loved hand-knitted "rope memory", what >> the LEM computer used :-) >> >>> Now they have nothing to show but driving around the block (earth orbit) with >>> all that computing power. >> >> All the computing power in the Apollo ... yer >> base iWatch has a good 1000x that, maybe 10000x. >> BUT, they had to make do with what they had ... >> and most of that was govt-specced in '64. At >> least Apollo wasn't all vacuum tubes :-) >> >> Now space probes - I really admire the people >> who design the hardware/software. Insane levels >> of redundancy/work-arounds, almost a black art. >> It's why the Voyagers are still working out >> beyond the edge of our solar system all this >> time later. Kinda hoping aliens will find one >> and upgrade/repair :-) > > Yes and the new telescopes > https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/10/261016070630.htm > NASA’s Roman Space Telescope exceeds expectations by nearly 30% > > I think, our current understanding of 'the Universe' and 'big bang' is at some > point completely wrong, Likely. > as is our 'understanding' of fusion (why ITER and other experiments like it > will never work). Current approaches ... won't work worth damn. Gotta find some 'quantum tricks'. SOME way to, even for a sub-nanosecond, to screw with the physics. > I look at normal radioactivity as you having a lot of springs each compressed > and hold together by a little metal clamp. > Every now and then a clamp breaks an the spring jumps, 'radioactivity' > 'radiation'. > Put enough springs like that together and if one goes and hits a few other ones > like it then you get a chain reaction, all clamps break, all springs jump. > > But 'fusion' they try, is nothing but pushing the springs together without even > using clamps.. > Costs all of energy to keep those together and no more energy will ever come > out than you put in. > The springs with clamps are just parts of the expanding universe that had not > expanded yet. > > Dark matter, so much bullshit, so many einStone parrots, > so many mamaticians doing a divide by zero and then use 'renormalisation' > all parrots, too much senseless math, NO understanding. > It is a bit like Ohm's law, but then the radio tube was invented, a current in > a vacuum ! Ohms law broken? > Electrons moving turned out to be what electric current was! > You need a _mechanism_ to understand the universe, else the babble about > infinities will go on and no end and the understanding will remain zero. > CERN did recently find signs that space is filled with some fluid... > From: > https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/10/261004002556.htm > > Physicists just saw quarks make waves in the Big Bang’s primordial soup > Scientists have watched speeding quarks create ripples in primordial matter, > revealing just how liquid-like the early universe really was. > Date: > October 6, 2026 > Source: > Massachusetts Institute of Technology > Summary: > Physicists at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider have captured the clearest evidence > yet that quark-gluon plasma, the scorching-hot matter that filled the newborn > universe, behaves like a true liquid. > By tracking individual quarks as they blasted through the plasma, researchers > saw them leave behind ripples, splashes, and swirling wakes much like a duck > moving through water. > The finding suggests this primordial “soup” is so dense that it can slow > speeding quarks and respond collectively as a fluid. Still think "dark matter" is an hallucination. "Invisible Stuff" ??? Luminiferous Aether ??? Something ELSE going on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 13:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11b2hp7$15stb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94119 |
>c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote: >>On 10/18/26 04:53, Jan Panteltje wrote: >>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote: >>>> On 10/17/26 03:20, Jan Panteltje wrote: >>>>> Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid>wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 17:10:18 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Well C++ is a crime against humanity >>>>>> 'operator overloading...' crap bloated crap. >>>>> >>>>> Operator overloading is a very handy feature. Yes, C++ is overly >>>>> complicated. Java left out that feature of C++, and it, too, still >>>>> manages to be excessively complicated. >>>>> >>>>> Python, on the other hand, includes operator overloading, yet is still >>>>> only a small fraction of the complexity of either Java or C++. Such a >>>>> feature is useful, for example, in letting you express operations on >>>>> mathematical objects (like vectors and matrices) using something close >>>>> to the original mathematical notation. >>>> >>>> OK >>>> I never got much into Python >>> >>> DO check it out. It can now do basically EVERYTHING >>> and is faster than it used to be. P4 is promised to >>> be even faster and more efficient without changing >>> the syntax. >>> >>> I did not use Python2 because I heard that P3 was coming ... >>> why learn an obsolete dialect ? Took 'em a little while >>> to port everything over to the new version, but it got >>> done and then went over and above. >>> >>> CAN be 'compiled' in a few ways. A couple options >>> translate to 'C' and then compile that. IS much >>> faster, though not quite as fast as writing a >>> native 'C' pgm. However the EASE of writing and >>> great string-slice functions (stolen from FORTRAN) >>> make Python really nice. Oh, 95% of the time you >>> don't NEED top speed for applications. That's old >>> thinking - EASE/comprehensibility can be far >>> more important. >>> >>> Oh, the DOCUMENTATION/How-To stuff for Python >>> is everywhere and detailed. A zillion solutions >>> for YOUR particular problem. >>> >>> Since forever I wrote in 'C' or Pascal. I even >>> did stuff in "B". However I rarely use 'C' >>> anymore. Might still rec writing 'servers' in 'C' ... >>> esp if high-volume ... but that sentiment is >>> half 'tradition'. >>> >>> Anyway, learn before 'AI' tries to steal it >>> all away. CHAT can find/write low/medium >>> complexity Python code ... but sometimes >>> it seems more complex/verbose/obscure than >>> a human would write it. Mostly it just >>> steals human-writ examples it finds. >>> >>> DID ask CHAT to write me a basic b-tree >>> database pgm in FORTRAN the other day. >>> Kinda/sorta did so ... but didn't include >>> any load/save code (though DID warn about >>> that prob). Next - same thing, but in >>> Modula2 - we'll see what its limits are :-) >>> >>> Pref M3 ... but almost no Linux/anything >>> compilers for that - esp that actually >>> install correctly. Some ancient DOS stuff. >>> Do have a paper manual for "Turbo Modula-2" >>> but it's all 8/16 bit and won't run on a lot >>> of chips these days. Would have to use >>> DOSBox or something - inefficient. >>> >>>> Never needed it for the things I do. >>>> Also it seems to be changing all the time? >>> >>> Ummm ... not really. The only "big" - ok >>> not SO big - change was P2 to P3. Most >>> P2 programs can be tweaked for P3 pretty >>> quick. Think there's even a converter app. >>> >>> Now if by "changing" you mean new functions, >>> yep, people keep writing them for obvious >>> reasons. The good bit is it means there are >>> several paths to whatever you're trying to >>> do - pick the best for your need. >>> >>> I did a bunch of video security cam apps. >>> Sometimes "OpenCV2" will do it all, sometimes >>> "Pillow" lib is just fine. Can even combine >>> in some cases. >>> >>>> Most code I write is in C or in asm for Microchips. >>>> asm is extremely powerful >>> >>> Well aware. When CP/M and even DOS were around >>> had to write ASM bits, or full apps, because >>> there just wasn't anything better. PICs and >>> similar microcontrollers - ASM is still the >>> best way to the finer chip tricks. >>> >>>> understand the hardware!!! >>> >>> The weaker the hardware the more you have to >>> understand it. Most modern big chips, so much >>> overkill that you really don't need to know >>> every little nuance. Sorry, 1% better performance >>> isn't worth learning 99% more tiny-tweak shit >>> that'll probably be obsolete in the very next >>> point-revision of the CPU. >>> >>>> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/newsflex/download.html >>>> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/quadcopter/index.html >>>> https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/pic/index.html >>>> These days giggle bytes seem to be needed to just say: 'Hello world'. >>>> Too many layers of crap. >>>> >>>> But I come from a hardware background, in the sixties there were no 'computers' >>>> yet they did a manned Moon landing and return. >>> >>> Some of that shit was just bizarre ! >>> >>> Loved hand-knitted "rope memory", what >>> the LEM computer used :-) >>> >>>> Now they have nothing to show but driving around the block (earth orbit) with >>>> all that computing power. >>> >>> All the computing power in the Apollo ... yer >>> base iWatch has a good 1000x that, maybe 10000x. >>> BUT, they had to make do with what they had ... >>> and most of that was govt-specced in '64. At >>> least Apollo wasn't all vacuum tubes :-) >>> >>> Now space probes - I really admire the people >>> who design the hardware/software. Insane levels >>> of redundancy/work-arounds, almost a black art. >>> It's why the Voyagers are still working out >>> beyond the edge of our solar system all this >>> time later. Kinda hoping aliens will find one >>> and upgrade/repair :-) >> >> Yes and the new telescopes >> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/10/261016070630.htm >> NASA’s Roman Space Telescope exceeds expectations by nearly 30% >> >> I think, our current understanding of 'the Universe' and 'big bang' is at some >> point completely wrong, > > Likely. > >> as is our 'understanding' of fusion (why ITER and other experiments like it >> will never work). > > Current approaches ... won't work worth damn. > Gotta find some 'quantum tricks'. SOME way > to, even for a sub-nanosecond, to screw with > the physics. > >> I look at normal radioactivity as you having a lot of springs each compressed >> and hold together by a little metal clamp. >> Every now and then a clamp breaks an the spring jumps, 'radioactivity' >> 'radiation'. >> Put enough springs like that together and if one goes and hits a few other ones >> like it then you get a chain reaction, all clamps break, all springs jump. >> >> But 'fusion' they try, is nothing but pushing the springs together without even >> using clamps.. >> Costs all of energy to keep those together and no more energy will ever come >> out than you put in. >> The springs with clamps are just parts of the expanding universe that had not >> expanded yet. >> >> Dark matter, so much bullshit, so many einStone parrots, >> so many mamaticians doing a divide by zero and then use 'renormalisation' >> all parrots, too much senseless math, NO understanding. >> It is a bit like Ohm's law, but then the radio tube was invented, a current in >> a vacuum ! Ohms law broken? >> Electrons moving turned out to be what electric current was! >> You need a _mechanism_ to understand the universe, else the babble about >> infinities will go on and no end and the understanding will remain zero. >> CERN did recently find signs that space is filled with some fluid... >> From: >> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/10/261004002556.htm >> >> Physicists just saw quarks make waves in the Big Bang’s primordial soup >> Scientists have watched speeding quarks create ripples in primordial matter, >> revealing just how liquid-like the early universe really was. >> Date: >> October 6, 2026 >> Source: >> Massachusetts Institute of Technology >> Summary: >> Physicists at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider have captured the clearest evidence >> yet that quark-gluon plasma, the scorching-hot matter that filled the newborn >> universe, behaves like a true liquid. >> By tracking individual quarks as they blasted through the plasma, researchers >> saw them leave behind ripples, splashes, and swirling wakes much like a duck >> moving through water. >> The finding suggests this primordial “soup” is so dense that it can slow >> speeding quarks and respond collectively as a fluid. > > Still think "dark matter" is an hallucination. > > "Invisible Stuff" ??? Luminiferous Aether ??? > > Something ELSE going on. One theory I like is Le Sage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Sage%27s_theory_of_gravitation I like it because it gives a mechanical explanation to gravity, Also it explains why clocks move slower near a heavy object (say planet) as there more Le Sage particles are intercepted, matter gets less compressed, pendulum gets longer, clocks slow down. It also explains the mysterious heating of some heavenly bodies, and it puts an end the the black-hole infinities babble as there is a point where all Le Sage particles are intercepted. There are NO infinities in nature!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 12:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11b2a2h$11pis$15@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94116 |
On 18/10/2026 09:53, Jan Panteltje wrote: > Put enough springs like that together and if one goes and hits a few other ones > like it then you get a chain reaction, all clamps break, all springs jump. > > But 'fusion' they try, is nothing but pushing the springs together without even > using clamps.. > Costs all of energy to keep those together and no more energy will ever come > out than you put in. Not really. Push enough together hard enough and lots of pieces fly out. Like trying to assemble a motorbike gearbox with C clips In the UK we call these 'pingfuckits' Fusion is just trying to hold it together and not let the pingfuckits escape... -- It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 13:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11b2h78$15m2c$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94151 |
>The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote: >>On 18/10/2026 09:53, Jan Panteltje wrote: >> Put enough springs like that together and if one goes and hits a few other ones >> like it then you get a chain reaction, all clamps break, all springs jump. >> >> But 'fusion' they try, is nothing but pushing the springs together without even >> using clamps.. >> Costs all of energy to keep those together and no more energy will ever come >> out than you put in. > >Not really. Push enough together hard enough and lots of pieces fly out. >Like trying to assemble a motorbike gearbox with C clips > >In the UK we call these 'pingfuckits' Yes, motorbikes, I had 2, one Matchless bought from the army surplus, took it apart.. I stopped with motorbikes after some near accident Then later got a Ford Mustang V8 Now THAT was a nice car! But I do not expect crushing a gearbox to cause more energy then you put into it crushing it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-16 19:36 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11aucd4$3o8ih$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #93893 |
Jan Panteltje wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): >>Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net>wrote: >>>On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 11:44:54 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> >>> For C++, Boost.Decimal. >> >>Some people don't use C++. I would hope that most would not. >> >>It is recommended, and even required in some countries, that all >>financial software be written using decimal FP. >> >>But once libdfp drops out then GNU/Linux C programmers will be >>stuck. > > Well C++ is a crime against humanity > 'operator overloading...' crap bloated crap. :-D It's my favorite language, by far. -- "MacDonald has the gift on compressing the largest amount of words into the smallest amount of thoughts." -- Winston Churchill
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-16 19:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11aucb9$3o8ih$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #93887 |
Leroy H wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): > On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 11:44:54 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >> For C++, Boost.Decimal. > > Some people don't use C++. I would hope that most would not. :-D It is a fine language, capable of the basic operations supported by C and a vast compendium of object-oriented and template features, and a standard library rivaling Python. > It is recommended, and even required in some countries, that all > financial software be written using decimal FP. > > But once libdfp drops out then GNU/Linux C programmers will be > stuck. > >> By the way, are you AI? > > Human beings have always been AI in that they can only parrot > news reports and their old school textbooks. This has been true > since pre-historic times. They had news reports and textbooks in prehistory? > Occasionally, however, some misaligned freak will rise above > it all and then we have a burst of progress. -- WARNING: Overconsumption of this product can lead to anal leakage.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-17 09:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11avb0l$59n$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #93946 |
On 17/10/2026 00:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Leroy H wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): >> Human beings have always been AI in that they can only parrot >> news reports and their old school textbooks. This has been true >> since pre-historic times. > > They had news reports and textbooks in prehistory? > Yes. And they were carried by bards As songs and sagas and myths The Bible was a written down record of some of them Lights in the sky, great floods, cities gone in a flash. Tsunamis causing the sea to retreat. Evidence exists for all of these. Just not the god Yahweh. HE stared out as a minor war god. Somewhere along the line monotheism looked to be advisable, and he got the job The sling is well known to be a devastating range weapon when faced with an opponent whose armour is not 100%, For example. A fact worth passing along in a neat little morality tale -- All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is fully understood.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-17 06:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11avirt$39m8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #93977 |
The Natural Philosopher wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): > On 17/10/2026 00:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> Leroy H wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): > >>> Human beings have always been AI in that they can only parrot >>> news reports and their old school textbooks. This has been true >>> since pre-historic times. >> >> They had news reports and textbooks in prehistory? >> > Yes. And they were carried by bards I thought it was promulgated by voice and memory.... > As songs and sagas and myths > > The Bible was a written down record of some of them That's not prehistory, is it? > Lights in the sky, great floods, cities gone in a flash. Tsunamis > causing the sea to retreat. Evidence exists for all of these. Just not > the god Yahweh. HE stared out as a minor war god. Somewhere along the > line monotheism looked to be advisable, and he got the job > > The sling is well known to be a devastating range weapon when faced with > an opponent whose armour is not 100%, For example. A fact worth passing > along in a neat little morality tale I remember being amazed at how far a slingshot could sling a marble. (I would also shoot a BB straight up to see how close to me I could get it to land. A couple of times me and a friend had BB duels.) -- Beauty seldom recommends one woman to another.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-17 11:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11avk7g$3m0b$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #93994 |
On 17/10/2026 11:32, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > The Natural Philosopher wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): > >> On 17/10/2026 00:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> Leroy H wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): >> >>>> Human beings have always been AI in that they can only parrot >>>> news reports and their old school textbooks. This has been true >>>> since pre-historic times. >>> >>> They had news reports and textbooks in prehistory? >>> >> Yes. And they were carried by bards > > I thought it was promulgated by voice and memory.... > That's what bards were. Voices with memory. and mobility >> As songs and sagas and myths >> >> The Bible was a written down record of some of them > > That's not prehistory, is it? > Depends on your definition, But the oral tradition - stories round the fire at night - probably goes back to the dawn of man >> Lights in the sky, great floods, cities gone in a flash. Tsunamis >> causing the sea to retreat. Evidence exists for all of these. Just not >> the god Yahweh. HE stared out as a minor war god. Somewhere along the >> line monotheism looked to be advisable, and he got the job >> >> The sling is well known to be a devastating range weapon when faced with >> an opponent whose armour is not 100%, For example. A fact worth passing >> along in a neat little morality tale > > I remember being amazed at how far a slingshot could sling a > marble. > We reinvented the woomera. To sling stones at the bull's testicles Horrid little kids we were really. But we did know what bullshit was allright > (I would also shoot a BB straight up to see how close to me I > could get it to land. A couple of times me and a friend had > BB duels.) > Hmmm -- “Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” ― Groucho Marx
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-17 12:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <6ad36634$0$11450$426a74cc@news.free.fr> |
| In reply to | #93994 |
Le 17-10-2026, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> a écrit : > The Natural Philosopher wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): > >> On 17/10/2026 00:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> Leroy H wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): >> >>>> Human beings have always been AI in that they can only parrot >>>> news reports and their old school textbooks. This has been true >>>> since pre-historic times. >>> >>> They had news reports and textbooks in prehistory? >>> >> Yes. No. >> And they were carried by bards Bards carried stories. It was important and it reminds people of what was done long time ago. It wasn't news report. But I'm not surprised you can't differentiate between what happened yesterday and what people did a long time ago. It wasn't textbooks. But I'm not surprised you can't differentiate between the things you need to learn to work everyday and the things you need to remember from past action which can explain why things are what they are today. > I thought it was promulgated by voice and memory.... Ultimately, it was promulgated by people. But what your mother was teaching you is different to what professors were teaching you, which is different to what reporters are telling you. I know you can tell the difference but you are answering a message written by someone who can't. >> As songs and sagas and myths >> >> The Bible was a written down record of some of them > > That's not prehistory, is it? Of course it's not. It's the definition of history. But you are answering The Natural Philosopher who can only close his eyes to what goes beyond his preconceived expectations. -- Si vous avez du temps à perdre : https://scarpet42.gitlab.io
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-17 13:43 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11avqgo$6fk8$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94016 |
On 17/10/2026 13:12, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote: > But you are > answering The Natural Philosopher who can only close his eyes to what > goes beyond his preconceived expectations. Ah. Another one who spends his time staring into a mirror and thinking he is seeing other people -- WOKE is an acronym... Without Originality, Knowledge or Education.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 13 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web