Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #88473 > unrolled thread
| Started by | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-06-28 00:36 -0400 |
| Last post | 2026-07-07 07:51 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 107 — 11 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-28 00:36 -0400
[HK01]IBM研發首款0.7nm晶片 指甲大小塞滿1000億電晶體 效能飆升50% "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 00:01 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-28 18:09 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 13:11 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-29 01:39 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 19:20 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-29 12:57 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-30 05:14 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-30 21:51 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-30 12:06 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-30 18:51 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-06-30 17:58 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 01:15 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:15 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:51 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 03:16 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:05 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-01 17:43 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 20:23 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-02 01:57 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 16:48 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-02 21:32 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 18:15 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-03 11:03 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 09:32 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-04 17:06 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-04 19:24 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-04 18:20 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 23:37 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-04 19:20 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-07-04 20:28 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-04 20:47 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-05 00:33 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-04 20:42 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 23:51 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-05 06:57 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-05 13:38 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 23:45 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-05 10:49 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-06 00:33 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-06 13:19 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-06 12:39 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-08 07:49 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-08 12:04 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-08 11:10 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-08 17:43 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-08 19:02 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-08 20:37 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 01:16 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-08 17:41 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-08 17:53 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 01:21 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-08 19:02 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-08 20:41 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 01:24 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-09 09:16 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-09 07:35 +0000
[OT] NATO politics [Was: Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip] "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-09 09:52 +0200
Re: [OT] NATO politics [Was: Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip] Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-09 09:00 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 19:11 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-10 05:07 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-10 12:43 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-10 18:58 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-11 00:23 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-11 03:23 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-11 00:16 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-11 07:09 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-06 12:32 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 00:48 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:45 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer.... physics? "quantum"? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-01 12:24 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 03:13 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-01 15:29 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 04:22 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-01 23:41 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 01:56 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-02 14:04 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 16:50 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-02 21:26 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 18:11 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-06-30 22:09 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 03:29 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:11 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:08 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-08 07:46 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-08 12:05 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-08 11:13 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-08 23:15 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 01:20 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-09 11:52 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-30 16:27 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-30 12:18 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-30 17:32 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:40 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 02:53 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:01 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 00:17 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:37 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 02:33 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:28 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 02:04 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-07-01 04:33 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-29 01:34 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-07 01:21 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-07 04:14 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-07 08:31 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-07-07 07:51 -0700
Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 Next page →
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-10 05:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <112pr6a$ts6u$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88825 |
On 09/07/2026 20:11, rbowman wrote: > The rumor that Trump is dangling F-35s > in front of Erdogan has Israel's shorts in a bunch. Screw qualitative > military edge if there is money to be made. Is that to defend against the Islamic Republic of Japan? -- Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich people by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason they are poor. Peter Thompson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-10 12:43 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nbc0n2FfjcdU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88826 |
On 2026-07-10 06:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 09/07/2026 20:11, rbowman wrote:
>> The rumor that Trump is dangling F-35s
>> in front of Erdogan has Israel's shorts in a bunch. Screw qualitative
>> military edge if there is money to be made.
>
> Is that to defend against the Islamic Republic of Japan?
>
Did Trump also get a nice revolver from Erdogan?
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-10 18:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nbctm5FjngnU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88828 |
On Fri, 10 Jul 2026 12:43:46 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-07-10 06:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 09/07/2026 20:11, rbowman wrote: >>> The rumor that Trump is dangling F-35s in front of Erdogan has >>> Israel's shorts in a bunch. Screw qualitative military edge if there >>> is money to be made. >> >> Is that to defend against the Islamic Republic of Japan? >> >> > Did Trump also get a nice revolver from Erdogan? Possibly. For a while I was receiving 'Guns & Ammo' magazine. The subscription price is ridiculously low since it's a vehicle for advertising. Almost every month they would have gushing articles about one or two firearms produced in Turkey. https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/the-state-of-the-turkish- firearmsindustry-44822467 What's interesting is the selection of the revolver, which is no longer manufactured. It was Turkey's first shot at a civilian firearm. https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/2026/mke-gumusay-357- magnum-revolver-erdogan-nato-gift Spain tried the same strategy. Astra and Star produced firearms of mediocre quality that were 'inspired by' existing designs to put it politely. Both went bankrupt, combined to form ASTAR, which I think also went under. CETME has some nice products like the Model 58. That was designed by a Third Reich weapons designer CETME hired after the war. Going full circle the H&K G3 was based on the 58. The Brazilian firm Taurus followed a similar path although they've proved innovative in their own right.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-11 00:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <l2g4S.80607$5LBb.4303@fx34.iad> |
| In reply to | #88830 |
On 2026-07-10, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> What's interesting is the selection of the revolver, which is no longer
> manufactured. It was Turkey's first shot at a civilian firearm.
^^^^^^^^^^
<groan>
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | No artificial
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | intelligence was
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | used in the creation
/ \ if you read it the right way. | of this post.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-11 03:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nbdr8lFklo2U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88831 |
On Sat, 11 Jul 2026 00:23:45 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-07-10, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > >> What's interesting is the selection of the revolver, which is no >> longer manufactured. It was Turkey's first shot at a civilian firearm. > ^^^^^^^^^^ > <groan> Pun not intended... The reaction of the various dignitaries when they were gifted with a revolver was cute though. I don't think Turkey has become as creative as Brazil's Taurus that seems to have started a fad for .410 shotgun shell revolvers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-11 00:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <Kw2dnQdNspkSXsz3nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88831 |
On 7/10/26 20:23, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-07-10, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > >> What's interesting is the selection of the revolver, which is no longer >> manufactured. It was Turkey's first shot at a civilian firearm. > ^^^^^^^^^^ > <groan> > The Turks were making guns nearly from when gunpowder tech first arrived from China. MAYbe he means a 'cartridge pocket revolver' kinda specifically ? A lot of those - Europe and beyond - were based on the .38-S&W/200 cartridge. Adequate. You can barely GET those in the USA anymore - and the .38 Spl is a smaller bullet and, even if the ctg is shortened, not really compatible.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-11 07:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nbe8ggFklo2U9@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88834 |
On Sat, 11 Jul 2026 00:16:00 -0400, c186282 wrote: >> manufactured. It was Turkey's first shot at a civilian firearm. > MAYbe he means a 'cartridge pocket revolver' > kinda specifically ? https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/2026/mke-gumusay-357- magnum-revolver-erdogan-nato-gift "The Gümüşay .357 Magnum is a Turkish double-action/single-action, six- shot revolver developed during the early 1990s by MKE in cooperation with Küssan A.Ş., recognized as the first domestically designed and manufactured modern revolver produced in Türkiye." Specifically a revolver. I don't know what sort of civilian firearms Turkey may have manufactured prior to the '90s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ List_of_military_equipment_of_Turkey_during_World_War_II https://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/ww1-ottoman-empire-guns.php https://www.shootingtimes.com/editorial/turkish-k-kale-m1938-mauser-rifle- history/467075 They did make some Mauser clones at least most of the military weapons appear to have been sourced from Europe during the 20th century.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-06 12:32 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <112g3p2$1skbq$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88702 |
On 06/07/2026 05:33, c186282 wrote: > On 7/5/26 05:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 05/07/2026 04:45, c186282 wrote: >>> Putin, well, seems to think HE is the only one >>> privy to the Thoughts Of Gawd. We've seen people >>> like that before - but they didn't have a huge >>> army or nuclear arsenal. >>> >> >> Neither, it turns out, does Putin. > > Well, he DID have a huge army - now about > a million short. They're forcibly recruiting > prison inmates and teenagers now. > A drunk football crowd dith not an army nake > STILL has a massive nuclear arsenal - kinda > limits what outsiders can do. > So HE says. No one knows the truth. Fissionable nuclear materials decay until they wont fission any more >> Consider: >> You are a paranoid minority supported dictator on fear of your own >> minions and the West. >> If NATO decides to take you, it can. You don't realise that the last >> thing NATO wants is to have to run Russia. > > "NATO" can't take Russia, and won't even try. > NATO *could* take Russia, but what then would they do with it? Like Iraq and Afghanistan, you end up with a problem, not a solution > It is in pure, panic, 'defense', mode now and > due to a very long "Let America Deal With It" > attitude couldn't fight its way out of a wet > paper bag. Europe would be easier for Putin > to crack than Ukraine. The Euros would just > piss themselves, drop their pants and bend > over to Vlad. > You really have listened to Putin and Trump far too much. In fact you are describing Russia, and the USA. Both increasingly failed states. >> You cant do the all out war thing. But what you can do is spin a >> legend. The legend of the madness of dictators who will push the red >> button if threatened. You can fund every single radical left or right >> political group in your enemies ranks from Black lives matter to pro >> Lifers. >> >> You can fund any group spreading the pretended horror of nuclear war, >> weapons and power stations. > > Umm ... nothing really "pretended" about nuclear > war. Russia WOULD give it a shot, different sort > of mind-set. They're hard-asses in a sense most > of the 'west' can't even comprehend now. Russia > has always been a horrible place - and thus bred > stoics and fatalists. > I can't argue with pure Belief, >> Meanwhile you do a huge military on the cheap. A few nuclear tests >> show you have the Bomb, and a few missile runs show you have the >> delivery. >> >> The rest on parade in Red Square might as well be cardboard. They're >> not real. They are there to support the legend of a militarily >> powerful nation armed with nuclear weapons it is not afraid to use. > > Sounds like you're REALLY trying to fool yourself. > Don't project what you see in a mirror onto other people >>> "Quiet competence" doesn't get it DONE. Gotta >>> be Out Front - or ELSE. >>> >> Oh, but it does. You just don't notice it happening. > > We notice it NOT happening. > Well not right now, because you dont have any. > Bureaucratic functionaries as 'leaders' - every time > we get some the USA/west goes further down the drain. > >>> As for a "small state" - while I'd kinda LIKE that >>> I'm just not sure it's viable anymore - more an >>> 1800s agri-nation sentiment. >>> >> Of course it is possible. > > Um, no. That time has passed. The (slave-owning) > "gentleman farmers" are LONG dead and "over there" > is 25 ICBM minutes away from "right here". > Your brainwashing is superb in its completeness >> The incoherent parochialism, of the American Indoctrinated is not of >> particular concern to ROW... > > Ignorant, esp deliberately ignorant, populations > are a grave danger to themselves and others and > cannot do 'democracy' in any form. > We have wrt to the USA, noted this... -- No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-01 00:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <RdadnTx6Wu1kBtn3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88541 |
On 6/30/26 14:51, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-06-30, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > >> On 6/30/26 09:51, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote: >> >>> On 6/30/2026 5:14 PM, c186282 wrote: >>> >>>>> Can you fabricate 0.000000...0000000001 nm chips? >>>>> >>>>> Is zero the seal or wall? :) >>>> >>>> Um, pretty quick you get to ATOMS ... and, for any >>>> normal electronics, that's IT. >>> >>> You cannot have 0.000000....00 nm chip. >>> >>> That's a void, empty, nothing. :) > > I tried to think through the implications of this > but I got a divide error. > >> "Electronics" are now about literal atom-thick structures. >> Can't go any smaller. >> >> Any better future stuff will have to exploit quantum >> effects - get more bang for yer nanometer. Alas quantum >> stuff isn't as deterministic as bulk matter devices >> and suffer from the uncertainty principle. > > Omigod, we might have to revive the KISS principle > in order to get anything more done. The proponents > of complexity as a weapon will be so disappointed... I do understand ....... However more and more of our 'future' seems to - or we have been SOLD the idea that it seems to - rely on ever more complex 'systems', electronic and otherwise. This is why trillions are being poured into AI "data centers". Can't get there from here without Claude and Mr. Chat - and don't forget the gigantic authoritarian/Orwellian micro-managing neo-commie bureaucracy ! Does like Namibia offer 'golden visas' ? I'm getting too old to move now, but it's still a very tempting idea ... WAY 'off grid'. Computers - frankly the Core2-Quad is probably good enough for almost anything especially real. I do have a bunch of computers - but it's cheap laptops and mini-boxes based on cheap chips. More than good enough for anything I need. (shit, can't even get the mini-boxes for any sane price now - 'AI' has sucked up the entire global memory chip output. No, NOT the trade wars, it's the damned MEMORY CHIPS. Every device from yer Mr. Coffee on up need CPUs and *MEMORY CHIPS*)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-30 23:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <naj2pgFgpa7U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88537 |
On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 12:06:38 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Any better future stuff will have to exploit quantum effects - get > more bang for yer nanometer. Alas quantum stuff isn't as > deterministic as bulk matter devices and suffer from the uncertainty > principle. Physics was a 4 semester course and the 4th was quantum when it started to get weird. On one essay test I wrote about Heisenberg's uncertainty principle versus Heidegger's principle uncertainty. Fortunately the professor had a sense of humor or maybe he realized how far off the beaten path the original quantum guys got when you start thinking about the Being of beings.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-01 12:24 +0800 |
| Subject | Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer.... physics? "quantum"? |
| Message-ID | <11224qa$1k432$1@toylet.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #88551 |
On 7/1/2026 7:45 AM, rbowman wrote:
>
> Physics was a 4 semester course and the 4th was quantum when it started to
> get weird. On one essay test I wrote about Heisenberg's uncertainty
> principle versus Heidegger's principle uncertainty. Fortunately the
> professor had a sense of humor or maybe he realized how far off the beaten
> path the original quantum guys got when you start thinking about the Being
> of beings.
I was taught by a lecturer who claimed to have studied
quantum mechanics, when I was studying about a Computer
Studies degree in City Polytechnic/University of HK.
He taught us some stoachastic mathematics including
queuing theory. One my my classmate became his
"apprentice" and got a PhD under CityU.
LEGEND - Dr. S.L. Hung
<https://sites.google.com/site/bsccs1990/home/teascher1/h-l-hung>
Kam Yiu LAM - CityUHK Scholars
<https://scholars.cityu.edu.hk/en/persons/cskylam/>
--
@~@ Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
/ v \ May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
/( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
^ ^ https://github.com/changmw/changmw
The game is afoot... Meow...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-01 03:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <RdadnTt6Wu13INn3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88551 |
On 6/30/26 19:45, rbowman wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 12:06:38 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> Any better future stuff will have to exploit quantum effects - get >> more bang for yer nanometer. Alas quantum stuff isn't as >> deterministic as bulk matter devices and suffer from the uncertainty >> principle. > > Physics was a 4 semester course and the 4th was quantum when it started to > get weird. On one essay test I wrote about Heisenberg's uncertainty > principle versus Heidegger's principle uncertainty. Fortunately the > professor had a sense of humor or maybe he realized how far off the beaten > path the original quantum guys got when you start thinking about the Being > of beings. Hey, all we need is a "Heisenberg Compensator" :-) As for the old Quantum Guys (maybe a few gals) - they weren't really WRONG. The calx are the calx. Yea, it's a Weird Weird World - nothing sympathetic to the human nervous system - but then it's all NOT *ABOUT* US.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-01 15:29 +0800 |
| Subject | Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? |
| Message-ID | <1122flk$1mq79$1@toylet.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #88565 |
On 7/1/2026 3:13 PM, c186282 wrote:
> On 6/30/26 19:45, rbowman wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 12:06:38 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>>
>> Physics was a 4 semester course and the 4th was quantum when it started to
>> get weird. On one essay test I wrote about Heisenberg's uncertainty
>> principle versus Heidegger's principle uncertainty. Fortunately the
>> professor had a sense of humor or maybe he realized how far off the beaten
>> path the original quantum guys got when you start thinking about the Being
>> of beings.
>
> Hey, all we need is a "Heisenberg Compensator" :-)
>
> As for the old Quantum Guys (maybe a few gals)...
So quantum mechanics is just pig-cheat? ;)
It's just mathematical philosophy?
Quantitative Philiosphy? :)
--
@~@ Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
/ v \ May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
/( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
^ ^ https://github.com/changmw/changmw
The game is afoot... Meow...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-01 04:22 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? |
| Message-ID | <RdadnTF6Wu2rU9n3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88568 |
On 7/1/26 03:29, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote: > On 7/1/2026 3:13 PM, c186282 wrote: >> On 6/30/26 19:45, rbowman wrote: >>> On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 12:06:38 -0400, c186282 wrote: >>> >>> Physics was a 4 semester course and the 4th was quantum when it >>> started to >>> get weird. On one essay test I wrote about Heisenberg's uncertainty >>> principle versus Heidegger's principle uncertainty. Fortunately the >>> professor had a sense of humor or maybe he realized how far off the >>> beaten >>> path the original quantum guys got when you start thinking about the >>> Being >>> of beings. >> >> Hey, all we need is a "Heisenberg Compensator" :-) >> >> As for the old Quantum Guys (maybe a few gals)... > > So quantum mechanics is just pig-cheat? ;) > It's just mathematical philosophy? > Quantitative Philiosphy? :) No, VERY quantitative. Did you expect the universe to appeal to anthropomorphic ideals ? It's NOT *ABOUT* US.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-01 23:41 +0800 |
| Subject | Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? |
| Message-ID | <1123cej$1v2s1$4@toylet.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #88570 |
On 7/1/2026 4:22 PM, c186282 wrote:
> On 7/1/26 03:29, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
>>
>> So quantum mechanics is just pig-cheat? ;)
>> It's just mathematical philosophy?
>> Quantitative Philiosphy? :)
>
> No, VERY quantitative.
>
> Did you expect the universe to appeal
> to anthropomorphic ideals ?
>
> It's NOT *ABOUT* US.
I see the world with my naked eyes.
NOT wearing mathematical eyeglasse. :)
--
@~@ Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
/ v \ May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
/( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
^ ^ https://github.com/changmw/changmw
The game is afoot... Meow...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-02 01:56 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? |
| Message-ID | <NbGcndkBOdQYYNj3nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88583 |
On 7/1/26 11:41, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote: > On 7/1/2026 4:22 PM, c186282 wrote: >> On 7/1/26 03:29, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote: >>> >>> So quantum mechanics is just pig-cheat? ;) >>> It's just mathematical philosophy? >>> Quantitative Philiosphy? :) >> >> No, VERY quantitative. >> >> Did you expect the universe to appeal >> to anthropomorphic ideals ? >> >> It's NOT *ABOUT* US. > > I see the world with my naked eyes. > NOT wearing mathematical eyeglasse. :) Then you're only seeing half of it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-02 14:04 +0800 |
| Subject | Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? |
| Message-ID | <1124v1f$2cjha$1@toylet.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #88591 |
On 7/2/2026 1:56 PM, c186282 wrote:
> On 7/1/26 11:41, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
>>
>> I see the world with my naked eyes.
>> NOT wearing mathematical eyeglasse. :)
>
> Then you're only seeing half of it.
Okay, is the other half of it FLAT? ;)
--
@~@ Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
/ v \ May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
/( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
^ ^ https://github.com/changmw/changmw
The game is afoot... Meow...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-02 16:50 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? |
| Message-ID | <8wudnX6VBPKyUtv3nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88592 |
On 7/2/26 02:04, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote: > On 7/2/2026 1:56 PM, c186282 wrote: >> On 7/1/26 11:41, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote: >>> >>> I see the world with my naked eyes. >>> NOT wearing mathematical eyeglasse. :) >> >> Then you're only seeing half of it. > > > Okay, is the other half of it FLAT? ;) No, the most detailed tapestry ever. The Numbers can take you far beyond anything your senses can deliver,
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-02 21:26 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? |
| Message-ID | <nao3chFbr3tU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88596 |
On Thu, 2 Jul 2026 16:50:44 -0400, c186282 wrote: > On 7/2/26 02:04, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote: >> On 7/2/2026 1:56 PM, c186282 wrote: >>> On 7/1/26 11:41, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote: >>>> >>>> I see the world with my naked eyes. NOT wearing mathematical >>>> eyeglasse. :) >>> >>> Then you're only seeing half of it. >> >> >> Okay, is the other half of it FLAT? ;) > > > No, the most detailed tapestry ever. > > The Numbers can take you far beyond anything your senses can deliver, Spoken like a true Pythagorean. Their Numbers were as real as Plato's Forms. I've always thought it odd 'Platonic realism' refers to the unreal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-02 18:11 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? |
| Message-ID | <txSdncYfFfprfNv3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88598 |
On 7/2/26 17:26, rbowman wrote: > On Thu, 2 Jul 2026 16:50:44 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> On 7/2/26 02:04, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote: >>> On 7/2/2026 1:56 PM, c186282 wrote: >>>> On 7/1/26 11:41, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I see the world with my naked eyes. NOT wearing mathematical >>>>> eyeglasse. :) >>>> >>>> Then you're only seeing half of it. >>> >>> >>> Okay, is the other half of it FLAT? ;) >> >> >> No, the most detailed tapestry ever. >> >> The Numbers can take you far beyond anything your senses can deliver, > > Spoken like a true Pythagorean. Their Numbers were as real as Plato's > Forms. Well, they were kind of NEW at the numbers back then :-) Quantum mechanics came along a bit later. > I've always thought it odd 'Platonic realism' refers to the unreal. IS kinda odd. Anyway, The Numbers have improved, and improved our understanding, over time - 'philosophy', not so much. Same old bullshitting about bullshit under the delusion that Answers will arise. Or maybe just that if you confuse people enough they will drop coins on yer collection plate ? :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web