Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #33436 > unrolled thread
| Started by | 1p166 <z24ba6.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-10-21 00:06 -0400 |
| Last post | 2021-10-31 22:46 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 108 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-21 00:06 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-10-21 08:27 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-10-21 08:04 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-28 02:08 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-28 09:41 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-10-29 16:39 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 07:39 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-29 01:14 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-10-29 16:52 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-10-29 13:08 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-10-29 22:43 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-10-30 04:32 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 08:21 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-01 18:50 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2021-10-30 13:45 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-10-30 14:54 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2021-10-30 21:47 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 23:14 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-31 01:25 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2021-10-31 04:12 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-31 00:57 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-31 13:35 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-10-31 15:47 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-01 04:44 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-11-01 13:52 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-02 00:13 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-01 22:05 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-03 01:26 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-03 07:02 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-05 00:54 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-02 00:11 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-02 06:17 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-03 00:27 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-02 21:46 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-11-03 07:26 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-03 17:18 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-11-03 19:58 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-03 21:34 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-04 11:05 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-04 17:19 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-11-04 20:13 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2021-11-04 16:11 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-04 23:27 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-11-05 11:40 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-05 14:09 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2021-11-05 15:53 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-05 09:26 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-05 17:40 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-03 21:02 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2021-11-04 00:01 -0500
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-04 11:09 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> - 2021-11-04 13:49 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-11-04 05:01 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> - 2021-11-04 13:48 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-11-04 15:46 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2021-11-04 15:26 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-04 23:51 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2021-11-05 07:37 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> - 2021-11-05 08:54 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-11-05 13:49 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-04 11:08 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-03 17:18 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-10-31 01:52 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2021-10-31 10:26 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-31 22:52 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-01 18:50 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 08:00 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-01 18:50 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Peter 'Shaggy' Haywood <phaywood@alphalink.com.au> - 2021-11-05 17:58 +1100
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-05 17:40 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-28 01:11 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-28 09:39 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-10-28 14:25 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-28 14:49 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-29 01:07 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-10-29 08:13 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-31 00:28 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-31 13:24 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-10-28 08:15 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-29 01:36 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-29 09:59 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-10-29 16:52 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-30 01:49 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 07:59 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-10-30 07:53 +0100
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-01 18:50 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-02 01:04 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-02 08:34 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-02 19:09 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-02 23:58 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-02 21:39 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-03 08:36 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-03 11:23 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-03 08:31 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2021-11-03 17:18 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2021-11-06 19:07 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-07 12:15 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2021-11-07 13:55 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-07 07:59 -0800
Smallpox vaccine date(s) (Was: Who Knew ?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2021-11-11 20:12 +0000
Re: Smallpox vaccine date(s) (Was: Who Knew ?) Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> - 2021-11-11 20:21 +0000
Re: Smallpox vaccine date(s) (Was: Who Knew ?) "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2021-11-11 15:52 -0500
Re: Smallpox vaccine date(s) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-11 21:19 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-02 08:31 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2021-10-31 00:18 +0000
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-31 00:06 -0400
Re: Who Knew ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-10-31 07:55 -0700
Re: Who Knew ? 1p166 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-10-31 22:46 -0400
Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | 1p166 <z24ba6.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-21 00:06 -0400 |
| Subject | Who Knew ? |
| Message-ID | <y6GdnVXcEu3Jeu38nZ2dnUU7-VfNnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
Ah ... a Dr. Who #3 ... computers with lots of big spinney tape drives and circuits big enough to fix with solder and jumper-wires :-)
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-21 08:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <skr4o5$jru$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #33436 |
On 21/10/2021 05:06, 1p166 wrote: > Ah ... a Dr. Who #3 ... computers with lots of big > spinney tape drives and circuits big enough to fix > with solder and jumper-wires :-) I learnt, circa #3, that a computer with computational intelligence comparable to a human brain would be the size of London. An older me would figure they would have had a serious problem with communication between the widely separated parallel computational units, but what do I know compared to the Doctor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-21 08:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <skrvie$evk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #33437 |
On 10/21/21 00:27, Pancho wrote: > On 21/10/2021 05:06, 1p166 wrote: >> Ah ... a Dr. Who #3 ... computers with lots of big >> spinney tape drives and circuits big enough to fix >> with solder and jumper-wires :-) > > I learnt, circa #3, that a computer with computational intelligence > comparable to a human brain would be the size of London. > > An older me would figure they would have had a serious problem with > communication between the widely separated parallel computational units, > but what do I know compared to the Doctor. The Time Lords conceal there most advanced technology behind a screen of obsolescence. But they also know what impresses humans in the era they recruit from. "Human brain computational power" is used to impress us with our brain power. And a Tardis has the equivalent of a erratic Time Lord's brain plus more storage. This is an entertainment series not a factual presentation. "Gordian Protocol" by Weber and Holo is a rip-roaring fantasy based on the idea the human race last to the 30th Century and masters time travel based on an incorrect TOE. Because of the errors in their TOE they are splitting the timeline which gets all messed up. Hitler Must be saved from a 1940 assassination attempt which succeeded and led to the Great Eastern War destroying the USSR. But they had back accidents with AI now restricted and with nano-machines used as deadly weapons. Oh and it is a book. bliss - lost in spacetime and quantal interactions on a macroscopic scale. -- bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | 1p166 <z24ba6.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-28 02:08 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <Zdadnai0Bf_Ko-f8nZ2dnUU7-YvNnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #33438 |
On 10/21/21 11:04 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote: > On 10/21/21 00:27, Pancho wrote: >> On 21/10/2021 05:06, 1p166 wrote: >>> Ah ... a Dr. Who #3 ... computers with lots of big >>> spinney tape drives and circuits big enough to fix >>> with solder and jumper-wires :-) >> >> I learnt, circa #3, that a computer with computational intelligence >> comparable to a human brain would be the size of London. >> >> An older me would figure they would have had a serious problem with >> communication between the widely separated parallel computational >> units, but what do I know compared to the Doctor. > > The Time Lords conceal there most advanced technology behind a > screen of obsolescence. But they also know what impresses humans in > the era they recruit from. > > "Human brain computational power" is used to impress us with our > brain power. And a Tardis has the equivalent of a erratic Time Lord's > brain plus more storage. This is an entertainment series not a factual > presentation. > > "Gordian Protocol" by Weber and Holo is a rip-roaring fantasy > based on the idea the human race last to the 30th Century and masters > time travel based on an incorrect TOE. Because of the errors in their > TOE they are splitting the timeline which gets all messed up. Hitler > Must be saved from a 1940 assassination attempt which succeeded and > led to the Great Eastern War destroying the USSR. But they had > back accidents with AI now restricted and with nano-machines used > as deadly weapons. Oh and it is a book. > > > bliss - lost in spacetime and quantal interactions on a macroscopic > scale. > "Dr. Who" was and is pure fiction ... albeit usually contaminated with the latest science facts. I came in on the back edge of those big boxes and spinney tape drives. Ever had to thread one of those tape drives, punched/fed a paper tape, dropped your wunnerful FORTRAN programs punch-cards, actually used a TTY terminal ? I have. I'm getting near retirement. For "fun" I've migrated a few indespensible utility programs to COBOL and FORTRAN and PASCAL and K&R 'c'. I do like Pascal ... and it lives on in Delphi and Lazarus/FPC. If it needs a nice GUI like right now, it's Delphi/Lazarus. If it needs to be portable, Lazarus absolutely. GTK and such, HORRIBLE by comparison - ten times the work and much more version-hostage. The newbies will just have to suck up a dose of The Past :-) As for the premise of "Dr. Who" ... it's rather interesting really. Paradox resolution was really not dealt with because it'd usually ruin the stories. In any case, those old old series bring back some memories about Tech. Now if you want really CRAP science, view the MARVEL action movies. Newton is spinning in his grave. Sorry, but if you're in a suit of armor and slammed up against a wall at hundreds of feet per second you're SPAM IN THE CAN laddies ... oh, and super-beings CANNOT lift a tank .. the leverage equation does NOT work. :-) One of my favorite, abeit obscure, movies is "Colossus, The Forbin Project". It's about two military supercomputers that force everyone to provide interconnection - and the result is enough IQ to take over the world Big Time. Not sure how 70's tech would create AI, but ... Anyway, it was the Clarke/Minsky vision at the time. Minsky, BTW, USED to post to Usenet, back when it was respectable. Lots of Top People did. And then ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-28 09:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sldnns$o7a$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #33444 |
On 28/10/2021 07:08, 1p166 wrote: > Minsky, BTW, USED to post to Usenet, back when > it was respectable. Lots of Top People did. > And then ... ...they all moved to facebook... -- You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone. Al Capone
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-29 16:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ntVeJ.230$g81.59@fx19.iad> |
| In reply to | #33447 |
On 2021-10-28, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 28/10/2021 07:08, 1p166 wrote: > >> Minsky, BTW, USED to post to Usenet, back when >> it was respectable. Lots of Top People did. >> And then ... > > ...they all moved to facebook... I was trying to think of a clever comeback but you beat me to it. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Life is perverse. \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | It can be beautiful - X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | but it won't. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lily Tomlin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-30 07:39 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <slipa7$dac$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #33458 |
On 29/10/2021 17:39, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2021-10-28, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> On 28/10/2021 07:08, 1p166 wrote: >> >>> Minsky, BTW, USED to post to Usenet, back when >>> it was respectable. Lots of Top People did. >>> And then ... >> >> ...they all moved to facebook... > > I was trying to think of a clever comeback but you > beat me to it. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. > Try both. Old age is the time of final disillusionment, when all your idols have feet of clay, and you aren't really sure what the point of worshipping them in the first place was. -- How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think. Adolf Hitler
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | 1p166 <z24ba6.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-29 01:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <rNGdnWdoV6nSHub8nZ2dnUU7-K-dnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #33438 |
On 10/21/21 11:04 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote: > On 10/21/21 00:27, Pancho wrote: >> On 21/10/2021 05:06, 1p166 wrote: >>> Ah ... a Dr. Who #3 ... computers with lots of big >>> spinney tape drives and circuits big enough to fix >>> with solder and jumper-wires :-) >> >> I learnt, circa #3, that a computer with computational intelligence >> comparable to a human brain would be the size of London. >> >> An older me would figure they would have had a serious problem with >> communication between the widely separated parallel computational >> units, but what do I know compared to the Doctor. > > The Time Lords conceal there most advanced technology behind a > screen of obsolescence. But they also know what impresses humans in > the era they recruit from. > > "Human brain computational power" is used to impress us with our > brain power. And a Tardis has the equivalent of a erratic Time Lord's > brain plus more storage. This is an entertainment series not a factual > presentation. Duh .... > "Gordian Protocol" by Weber and Holo is a rip-roaring fantasy > based on the idea the human race last to the 30th Century and masters > time travel based on an incorrect TOE. Because of the errors in their > TOE they are splitting the timeline which gets all messed up. Hitler > Must be saved from a 1940 assassination attempt which succeeded and > led to the Great Eastern War destroying the USSR. But they had > back accidents with AI now restricted and with nano-machines used > as deadly weapons. Oh and it is a book. > > > bliss - lost in spacetime and quantal interactions on a macroscopic > scale. > Even time-travel fiction reveals serious problems. Time-travel FACT would be much worse. Fortunately, it doesn't look like time travel can be realized in the real world.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-29 16:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qFVeJ.5859$QB1.2132@fx42.iad> |
| In reply to | #33454 |
On 2021-10-29, 1p166 <z24ba6.net> wrote: > Fortunately, it doesn't look like time travel can > be realized in the real world. Too bad. I'd love go to back and see to it that Bill Gates' parents never met. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Life is perverse. \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | It can be beautiful - X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | but it won't. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lily Tomlin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-29 13:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <slhkbf$6dj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #33460 |
On 10/29/21 09:52, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2021-10-29, 1p166 <z24ba6.net> wrote: > >> Fortunately, it doesn't look like time travel can >> be realized in the real world. > > Too bad. I'd love go to back and see to it that > Bill Gates' parents never met. Without MS-DOS and Windows we might not have the x86 line with all its advances and multiple cores to play with as well as all its sneaky Minux implementation. Time Travel by any means in the 21st century is merely entertainment but by the 30th century it may be dangerous reality. I am not going to worry about it but The Gordian Protocol was too good a story to miss. bliss -- bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-29 22:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jO_eJ.230$Gco3.110@fx01.iad> |
| In reply to | #33461 |
On 2021-10-29, Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> wrote: > On 10/29/21 09:52, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> On 2021-10-29, 1p166 <z24ba6.net> wrote: >> >>> Fortunately, it doesn't look like time travel can >>> be realized in the real world. >> >> Too bad. I'd love go to back and see to it that >> Bill Gates' parents never met. > > Without MS-DOS and Windows we might not have > the x86 line with all its advances and multiple cores > to play with as well as all its sneaky Minux > implementation. Yeah, we'd probably have had to put up with the 68000 line. <crocodile tears> And without MS-DOS and Windows we might have gotten some real work done rather than spending our time working around all their warts. > Time Travel by any means in the 21st century is > merely entertainment but by the 30th century it may be > dangerous reality. I am not going to worry about it but > The Gordian Protocol was too good a story to miss. My favourite time-travel warning story is _The Brooklyn Project_ by William Tenn. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Life is perverse. \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | It can be beautiful - X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | but it won't. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lily Tomlin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-30 04:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <87o8769ali.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> |
| In reply to | #33462 |
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 22:43:27 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > > On 2021-10-29, Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> wrote: > >> Without MS-DOS and Windows we might not have >> the x86 line with all its advances and multiple cores >> to play with as well as all its sneaky Minux >> implementation. > > Yeah, we'd probably have had to put up with the 68000 line. > <crocodile tears> May be the Z8000 and Z80000 hadn't failed either. -- Andreas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-30 08:21 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <slirq4$qsh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #33461 |
On 29/10/2021 21:08, Bobbie Sellers wrote: > On 10/29/21 09:52, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> On 2021-10-29, 1p166 <z24ba6.net> wrote: >> >>> Fortunately, it doesn't look like time travel can >>> be realized in the real world. >> >> Too bad. I'd love go to back and see to it that >> Bill Gates' parents never met. > > > > Without MS-DOS and Windows we might not have > the x86 line with all its advances and multiple cores > to play with as well as all its sneaky Minux > implementation. > > Time Travel by any means in the 21st century is > merely entertainment but by the 30th century it may be > dangerous reality. I am not going to worry about it but > The Gordian Protocol was too good a story to miss. > You can't solve the inherent paradox. Ability to change the past would always result in a paradox. There are no paradoxes in nature. Only in the imperfect human mind. It wasn't about time travel, but it was about personality travel - Mindswap, by Robert Sheckley, in which the hapless protagonist keeps swapping bodies in an vain attempt to get back to the one he started with - ends thus.... "He changed his mind, however, realizing that there was no sense in spending his life trying to discover if he had a life to spend. "Besides, there was a possibility that even if the Earth were changed, his memory and perceptions might also be changed, rendering discovery impossible. "He lay beneath Stanhope's familiar green sky, and considered the possibility. It seemed unlikely: for did not the giant oak trees still migrate each year to the south? Did not the huge red sun move across the sky pursued by its dark companion? Did not the triple moons return each month with their new accumulation of comets? "These familiar sights reassured him. Everything seemed to be as it always had been. And so , willingly and with a good grace, Marvin accepted his world at face value, married Marsha Baker, and lived forever after." In short, if time travel existed, we would travel in time, change the past, and instantly be in a present descended from the changed past with no knowledge of ever having changed it. In fact I do this a thousand times a second :-) -- "Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) " Alan Sokal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-11-01 18:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <EFWfJ.129564$Tr6.107838@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #33468 |
On 2021-10-30, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > In short, if time travel existed, we would travel in time, change the > past, and instantly be in a present descended from the changed past with > no knowledge of ever having changed it. My favourite argument against time travel is that if it were possible, someone would go back and change something such that it was never invented. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Life is perverse. \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | It can be beautiful - X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | but it won't. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lily Tomlin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-30 13:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnsnqj3i.1a7.sc@scarpet42p.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #33461 |
Le 29-10-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> a écrit : > > Without MS-DOS and Windows we might not have > the x86 line with all its advances and multiple cores > to play with as well as all its sneaky Minux > implementation. Can you show me references about Bill Gates explaining how to create microprocessors? And once you provide this, if it's not in your references, you have to explain why nobody outside Bill Gates would have been able to find it out. If you can't, you are just a daydreamer. -- Si vous avez du temps à perdre : https://scarpet42.gitlab.io
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-30 14:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <87k0hu8hsx.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> |
| In reply to | #33471 |
On 30 Oct 2021 13:45:22 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote: > > Le 29-10-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> a écrit : >> >> Without MS-DOS and Windows we might not have >> the x86 line with all its advances and multiple cores >> to play with as well as all its sneaky Minux >> implementation. > > Can you show me references about Bill Gates explaining how to create > microprocessors? And once you provide this, if it's not in your > references, you have to explain why nobody outside Bill Gates would have > been able to find it out. Where did he state that? Suppose meant was that without the IBM PC (and thus MS-DOS) the x86 might just had been a footnote in today's computer history. We might all use the Motorola M70000 or the Zilog 64-bit line of microprocessors today. Anyway, Gates said it the same day he invented the internet and mentioned, that no one would ever need more than 640 KB of computer memory. -- Andreas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-30 21:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnsnrfal.1a7.sc@scarpet42p.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #33472 |
Le 30-10-2021, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> a écrit : > On 30 Oct 2021 13:45:22 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote: >> >> Le 29-10-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> a écrit : >>> >>> Without MS-DOS and Windows we might not have >>> the x86 line with all its advances and multiple cores >>> to play with as well as all its sneaky Minux >>> implementation. >> >> Can you show me references about Bill Gates explaining how to create >> microprocessors? And once you provide this, if it's not in your >> references, you have to explain why nobody outside Bill Gates would have >> been able to find it out. > > Where did he state that? He doesn't, that's why he's wrong. It's the only way to say that without Microsoft the processors would lag behind what we have today. I don't know why He me answered on my email instead of here, but he gave no more reason. Just his history with OSes but it's irrelevant. > Suppose meant was that without the IBM PC (and thus MS-DOS) the x86 might > just had been a footnote in today's computer history. We might all use > the Motorola M70000 or the Zilog 64-bit line of microprocessors today. Maybe we would have something else, the point is not to know which processor we would use, but to know if the processors would be as powerful as what we have today. And the answer is: yes, of course. > Anyway, Gates said it the same day he invented the internet and By the guy who invented the internet, you are speaking of Bill Gates, not someone else? Since when does he invent internet? > mentioned, that no one would ever need more than 640 KB of computer > memory. Making this mistake didn't change history, it only render the use of DOS more difficult. -- Si vous avez du temps à perdre : https://scarpet42.gitlab.io
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-30 23:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87bl369n3h.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #33473 |
Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> writes: > Le 30-10-2021, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> a écrit : >> Suppose meant was that without the IBM PC (and thus MS-DOS) the x86 >> might just had been a footnote in today's computer history. We might >> all use the Motorola M70000 or the Zilog 64-bit line of >> microprocessors today. > > Maybe we would have something else, the point is not to know which > processor we would use, but to know if the processors would be as > powerful as what we have today. > > And the answer is: yes, of course. Agreed. But I think there’s a good chance that even without the IBM PC and MSDOS, x86 would have become as dominant as it is today. The factors that made IBM choose the 8088 (price, availability, sympathy to existing components) were relevant to everyone else too. -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-31 01:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slkraj$7bj$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #33474 |
On 30/10/2021 23:14, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> writes: >> Le 30-10-2021, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> a écrit : >>> Suppose meant was that without the IBM PC (and thus MS-DOS) the x86 >>> might just had been a footnote in today's computer history. We might >>> all use the Motorola M70000 or the Zilog 64-bit line of >>> microprocessors today. >> >> Maybe we would have something else, the point is not to know which >> processor we would use, but to know if the processors would be as >> powerful as what we have today. >> >> And the answer is: yes, of course. > > Agreed. > > But I think there’s a good chance that even without the IBM PC and > MSDOS, x86 would have become as dominant as it is today. The factors > that made IBM choose the 8088 (price, availability, sympathy to existing > components) were relevant to everyone else too. > I thought they chose the 8086? -- In todays liberal progressive conflict-free education system, everyone gets full Marx.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-10-31 04:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnsns5td.br1.spamtrap42@one.localnet> |
| In reply to | #33476 |
On 2021-10-31, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 30/10/2021 23:14, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >> Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> writes: >>> Le 30-10-2021, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> a écrit : >>>> Suppose meant was that without the IBM PC (and thus MS-DOS) the x86 >>>> might just had been a footnote in today's computer history. We might >>>> all use the Motorola M70000 or the Zilog 64-bit line of >>>> microprocessors today. >>> >>> Maybe we would have something else, the point is not to know which >>> processor we would use, but to know if the processors would be as >>> powerful as what we have today. >>> >>> And the answer is: yes, of course. >> >> Agreed. >> >> But I think there’s a good chance that even without the IBM PC and >> MSDOS, x86 would have become as dominant as it is today. The factors >> that made IBM choose the 8088 (price, availability, sympathy to existing >> components) were relevant to everyone else too. >> > I thought they chose the 8086? Not for the original IBM PC. The original IBM PC and the XT each had a 8-bit data bus. The AT had a 16-bit data bus. For a while, there were two kinds of PeeCee hardware: 1) 8088 with 8-bit data bus; 2) 80286 with 16-bit data bus. More than a couple of decades ago, I observed an interesting "competition" architected by manager who was a solid Macintosh fan. The secretaries (now administrative assistants) got to try out a PeeCee-type machine (most likely a PeeCee clone) and a Mac to decided which was better for their work. Somewhere, he had found a PeeCee with unconventional hardware. I think it was an 8086 machine (same interface to software as 8088 but 16-bit bus), but it might have been a 286-based machine with an 8-bit data bus. Either way, when they tried to find an extended or expanded memory card, they had major problems, because the only types of cards were for 1) 8088 interface to software and 8-bit bus; or 2) 286 interface to software with 16-bit bus. Because of all of the difficulties caused by that choice of non-standard hardware, the PeeCee lost the competition. -- Robert Riches spamtrap42@jacob21819.net (Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web