New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: xray on 8 Aug 2006 05:38 On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 09:54:07 +0100, John Woodgate <jmw(a)jmwa.demon.co.uk> wrote: >Somehow, the connection between one and the other escapes me. But then, >I'm not a homicidal maniac, so it wouldn't. John, it's good to see you back! I view your well informed but basically neutral postings in threads like this as similar to control rods in a nuclear pile. (Or a nucular pile for those who relate to our US fearless leader.) P.S. Shouldn't someone in the primo position in a country be capable of correcting his error once it has been pointed out. I mean, if only just to not implant this mistake in multiple young minds? I actually inherited this same pronunciation problem myself. Someone pointed it out to me about 1971 and I have made every effort to say it correctly since. I might screw up occasionally, but at least I try, which is more than I can say for the Bushmeister.
From: xray on 8 Aug 2006 05:57 On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 10:31:53 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Woodgate wrote: > >> In message <44D8505F.BE0DFA9B(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com>, dated Tue, 8 Aug >> 2006, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> writes >> >> >The first really useful general purpose computer was designed at the >> >University of Manchester UK and had zero or minimal military input. >> >> General purpose, yes. But the very useful dedicated computers designed >> and built for Bletchley Park were funded by the UK government, of >> course. > >Not exactly the kind of computer you could use for commercial work ( as was the >point about having one on the desktop ) and indeed of very different technology. >It's all interesting stuff though. > Bits is bits. A one or zero doesn't know who it is working for. I don't know the early details, but the first big computer I heard about was to compute firing tables for artillery guns in WWII. I think the first "bug" story occured with that project and captain Grace Hopper. When did the these other things happen, earlier or concurrently?
From: Eeyore on 8 Aug 2006 06:04 xray wrote: > On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 10:31:53 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Woodgate wrote: > > > >> In message <44D8505F.BE0DFA9B(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com>, dated Tue, 8 Aug > >> 2006, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> writes > >> > >> >The first really useful general purpose computer was designed at the > >> >University of Manchester UK and had zero or minimal military input. > >> > >> General purpose, yes. But the very useful dedicated computers designed > >> and built for Bletchley Park were funded by the UK government, of > >> course. > > > >Not exactly the kind of computer you could use for commercial work ( as was the > >point about having one on the desktop ) and indeed of very different technology. > >It's all interesting stuff though. > > Bits is bits. A one or zero doesn't know who it is working for. Look at the *architecture* not at the bits. Although the Manchester machine did use the radically new storage tube which was very high speed for its day. > I don't know the early details, but the first big computer I heard about > was to compute firing tables for artillery guns in WWII. I think the > first "bug" story occured with that project and captain Grace Hopper. See the film 'Brazil' for an interesting context. Worth seeing anyway as it happens. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bug > When did the these other things happen, earlier or concurrently? Pretty much concurrently. Graham
From: xray on 8 Aug 2006 06:25 On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:04:06 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >> I don't know the early details, but the first big computer I heard about >> was to compute firing tables for artillery guns in WWII. I think the >> first "bug" story occured with that project and captain Grace Hopper. > >See the film 'Brazil' for an interesting context. Worth seeing anyway as it happens. >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bug > > I do know about the bug, I've got a better picture of that notebook page hanging on my wall. Brazil? I've seen the strange movie but it's been a while and I'm not sure where exactly is the relevance to these early computers. P.S. Grace used to hand out nanoseconds. Do you know about that?
From: Eeyore on 8 Aug 2006 06:21
John Woodgate wrote: > In message <44D84FC3.CEC75BF5(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com>, dated Tue, 8 Aug > 2006, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> writes > >John Woodgate wrote: > > > >> In message <4jqtm0F9b7r6U1(a)individual.net>, dated Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Dirk > >> Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> writes > >> >Why not take Bin Laden at his word, and read *why* he attacked the US? > >> Citation? > > > >And that day, it was confirmed to me that oppression and the > >intentional killing of innocent women and children is a deliberate > >American policy. Destruction is freedom and democracy, while resistance > >is terrorism and intolerance. > >http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/79C6AF22-98FB-4A1C-B21F-2BC36E87F > >61F.htm > > > >More ? > > Who can stop you? > > >Graham > > > >this should frankly be compulsory reading for Americans > > If only to confirm that they are opposed by a mad man. It's ludicrous to > claim that US policy is to kill innocents. It is ? Killing by proxy doesn't count ? Never mind the actual US massacres ( and proxy masacres ) of civilians in recent times. > Some Americans, it is true, have less compunction than many of us would > like about 'collateral damage', but they are not unique in this respect, > nor is it *because* they are Americans; consider UK bombing of German > towns in WWII. I'm aware of what you mean and it's very silly of you ( mainly ) to bring it up in this context. During WW2 the RAF attempted precision bombing on industrial war-related targets but was defeated by navigational problems, yet persisted and developed Gee, OBOE and H2S , led by the Pathfinder squadrons which radically improved their targeting. As did the USA with their Norden bombsight that didn't actually deliver the goods in practice. There were of course less pleasant examples but bear in mind what the Luftwaffe had done to London ! Graham |