Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #160550

Re: The True Aficionado?

Show all headers | View raw

Morten Reistad wrote:
> In article <PM00052D2521DCF4E4@aca40c8f.ipt.aol.com>,
> jmfbahciv  <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>Rod Speed wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Every machine had its own "personality".
>>>
>>> They still do. BUT that has nothing to do with
>>> stuff like the machines used to make the machine.
>>> And so when we had humans who were JUST doing
>>> what machines did later, the wire wrapping, THOSE
>>> people contributed nothing to the personality.
>>
>>Of course they did.  Every wire-wrapped machine had it
>>quirks.  Fixing hardware bugs could cause more quirks.
>
> Yes, I have accounts on around 200 machines around the
> world. Most are just another collection of computing
> power, like the SIP and web farms we load balance calls
> to.
>
> But then we have machines like kirov. The original kirov
> was a sun/330 and got it's name because the colour was
> exactly like the USSR cruiser by the same name. Named
> by the guy who had the previous job of moving the markers
> on the screen in the NATO HQ showing where the USSR cruisers were
> at all times. (As far as they knew, anyway. Sometimes they
> just had circles for possible whereabouts that increased
> hour by hour).
>
> Kirov held our personal files, and all server-based employee
> stuff happened there. It was the machine with a rigorous
> backup scheme, and it NFS-exported a number of disks. Files
> left there was safe. Almost all other machines were provisioned
> by checking out configs etc from there. It was behind firewalls,
> but secure logins were allowed from the outside. And pings.
>
> When at a customer site we always did a "ping kirov" to
> see that we could reach home. The POE was an ISP, and we
> always were rearranging the network when we were out at
> customer sites. That ping also opened the firewall for a login
> for ~5 minutes.
>
> It had a distinct feel when logged on. It rearely had loads
> of below 6, but were always quite responsive, but "micro-
> sluggish" if that is a word.
>
> After it was assassinated[1] it rearose as "new kirov" as another sun,
> a 4/something. Not the correct colour, though.  I still have a kirov
> in my POE, the reflex of "ping kirov" over the morning coffee is still
> there. The original kirov even got official uniform insigia from the
> real kirov, bought by me from a russian sailor at the tall ships race,
> where he was a crew on Sedov. (Cedob in cyrillian)
>
> It has a different personality, though.

Oh, good. You understand what I'm trying to describe.
I know anthromorphizing a system isn't accurate but I could never
figure out a qualitative description.  You can feel when something
is going wrong, too.

>
>>>> I have never figured out how to describe this other
>>>> than using human attributes.  Merging two machines
>>>> together created a different personality.
>>>
>>> Using a machine to do part of the manufacture of
>>> a machine like with wire wrapping does not create
>>> a different machine and doing it with robot humans
>>> doesn’t either.
>>
>>When I talked about merging two machines, I meant going
>>from a single-CPU system to a dual-CPU or triple-CPU
>>system.
>>
>>>
>>>> When they were split into two systems,
>>>> they reverted back to their old personality.
>>>
>>> Not when one of them is used for manufacture.
>>>
>>>> Each customer's machine was also different.
>>>
>>> That mangles the real story too, particularly
>>> when the customer has lots of the one machine.
>>
>>
>>Not really.  Each machine had its own user population.  Those
>>users did different things at different times.
>
> servers still have this "look and feel" thing to them if they
> have unique roles. But most servers today are just farms that
> provide standard services.

I've never worked on a pure server.  I suspect that single
user single owner systems may not have a feel either.  The
systems I've used do have their quirks but it seems to be
mostly software-based, not hardware.

>
>>>> Some of that had to do with the kind of
>>>> care of the center and usage of the users.
>>>
>>>> When one was sent to work on site, one of the first
>>>> things a person did was learn about that personality.
>>>
>>> BULLSHIT. In spades with modern smartphones.
>>
>>I'm NOT talking about todays machines.  They have the
>>personalities of a slug after it's been run over by
>>a steam roller.
>
> Not all of them. Some still have unique roles and have
> distinct user populations.
>
>>> And that is all completely irrelevant to your original
>>> silly claim that the machine used in the manufacture
>>> of the machine is part of the personality of the
>>> machine that it is used in the manufacture of.
>>>
>>Boy, when you go off the deep end of misreading what I wrote,
>>you create a Grand Canyon.
>
> I understand what Barb wrote, perfectly.
>
> Wide multiprocessor machines have especially distinct feels.
> Like the ones with 8 or more cores, and 3 or more spindles.

Kewl.  that's nice.  Automobiles used to have similar
personalities but I don't experience that anymore either.  I
wonder if it's because most of the mechanisms are now
controlled by computers.
>
> -- mrr
>
> [1] historical reference. The building did assassinate the
> machine by letting a steel pipe come loose and dissect it.
>

<grin>  Yesterday, I recalled the time a pail of water crashed
through the ceiling behind KL1026.  Apparently, that was
maintenance's "fix" for a leak.  Our operations supervisor
was 2 feet away when it fell.

/BAH

Back to alt.folklore.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-21 15:48 +0000
  Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-21 13:43 -0800
    Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-23 13:13 +0000
      Re: The True Aficionado? mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-02-23 06:06 -0800
      Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 04:40 +1100
        Re: The True Aficionado? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-23 09:50 -0800
        Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-24 13:40 +0000
          Re: The True Aficionado? "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 03:14 +1100
            Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-01 13:55 +0000
              Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 01:30 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-02 14:19 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 03:51 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-03 13:39 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-03 16:18 +0100
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:52 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-04 13:22 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-04 16:33 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-04 15:47 -0600
                Re: The True Aficionado? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-05 01:04 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-05 13:57 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:40 -0800
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-06 23:18 -0600
                Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-04 17:18 +0100
                Re: The True Aficionado? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-04 22:09 -0500
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-05 13:57 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-03-05 14:36 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-06 14:08 +0000
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 02:03 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-06 17:28 +0100
                Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:54 -0800
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 07:39 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-06 17:24 -0700
                Re: The True Aficionado? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-05 18:43 +0100
                Re: The True Aficionado? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:34 -0800
                Re: The True Aficionado? Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-07 16:24 -0600
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:45 +1100
                Re: The True Aficionado? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-03 16:01 -0600

csiph-web