HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Subject: Re: Apple IIGS being discontinued Dec 1992
Reply-To: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 05:43:49 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.234439.28001@datamark.co.nz> thomas@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Beagle) writes:
>>nweaver@soda.berkeley.edu (Nicholas C. Weaver) writes:
>>>	The reason for a command line interface is simple, there are certain
>>>things that you can do in a CLI that you can't do in a GUI.  For example,
>>>try moving all files starting with Let to the directory Letters.  How do you
>>>do this easily in a GUI?
>
>Bring up a list of the files. Sort by name. Select the range you want
>and drag them to the destination.
>
>I promise not to snigger while watching you copy 50 of 100 files out
>of one directory into another where there is no easily expressed
>pattern as to the names of the files you want moved.

That's why an adjunct to a CLI is a utility like XTREE where you merely tag all the relevant files you want to do something with, and then just do it.  They could be moved, deleted, copied, backed up, restored, whatever, but the
"interface" is merely a text screen.  The usual stuff is to allow mouse clicks
or arrow keys interchangeably, and highlight the current candidate.  Selected
choices wind up with check marks in front of the names or other clear indicator
of selection.  GUI is unnecessary towards this end.

Of course GUI could do this also, but would likely be counter to the general
"philosophy" of most systems.

In any case, CLI including all reasonable things you can do with a text
interface gets the job done.  GUI can't be easier than that for the examples
given.  (Why do you need graphics if all you are doing is displaying the
textual names of files, and the rest are frills and/or crutches for the
computer-intimidated?)

Isn't there some GUI program with the ultimate in laziness: it can display
a keyboard and have you click the appropriate picture of a key instead of
actually pressing a *real* one on a *real* keyboard?  (GUI=serial while
two-hands keyboard=10 fingers parallel.)

cjl (gui for games only)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology,alt.fan.warlord
From: kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry)
Subject: Re: Proper pronounciation of 'Kibo' (BAIT) in bed
Organization: Two rooms filled with typography, in downtown Boston
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 23:28:42 GMT

In article <1hhbjtINN4a8@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> carolo@cse.ucsc.edu (Carol Osterbrock) writes:
>    Is this bait or something?

Ladies and gentlemen, I propose this as the official 
alt.fan.warlord-alt.religion.kibology cross-posting motto for 1993!

						-- K.
From: narxtc@navier.math.uh.edu (Noah Ramon)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: WANTED: Ted Nelson's "Computer Lib / Dream Machines"
Date: 29 Dec 1992 00:09:15 GMT
Organization: UH Dept of Math
NNTP-Posting-Host: navier.math.uh.edu

If you wanted "Computer Lib", it is still in print from Tempus Books, an imprint of Microsoft. Just call them at 1-800-MSPRESS. Sorry, I can't remember the ISBN, but just mention name and author and they should be able to lacate it for you.
--
*******************************************************************           
* Noah Ramon - The Bi-Bulb     * Your only limitation is your own *
* Mail to : narxtc@math.uh.edu * imagination - Beans Barton       *
*******************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: alderson@cisco.com (Rich Alderson)
Subject: Re: What is so greate about the PDP 10?
Originator: alderson@leland.Stanford.EDU
Keywords: PDP 10, gods gift to hackers, TOPS, ITS
Reply-To: alderson@cisco.com (Rich Alderson)
Organization: Cisco Systems (MIS)
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 21:17:01 GMT

In article <1gu1tcINNgiu@gap.caltech.edu>, kby@cco (Kimo B. Yap) writes:
>Oh, come on.  For the full KL architecture spec, the address space is approx.
>equiv. to 2^34 - 2^35 "bytes" (using 8 bit byte terminology).  That's more
>than the vax.  Half of that is user space, same as the VAX.-kby

Perhaps on Bottoms-10 half is taken away by the operating-system stuff, but on
Tops-20 a user program is unrestricted in its address-space usage.

However, in any production system, the limit on addresses on the KL was 24 bits
(microcode--23 bits hardware).  Times 5 bytes/word, and you get about 26.4 bits
equivalent bytespace.  Still less than the user-address space on a VAX, unfor-
tunately.

I was approached to work with Systems Concepts on expanding their architecture
all the way out to 30 bit addressing, but about the time they wanted to do it
Stanford was getting out of the Tops-20 business.  Mostly because SC was too
late with the production hardware.
-- 
Rich Alderson   'I wish life was not so short,' he thought.  'Languages take
                such a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about.'
                                                        --J. R. R. Tolkien,
alderson@leland.stanford.edu                              _The Lost Road_
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: mnelson@balin.cis.udel.edu (Mark Nelson)
Subject: GNU on Macs (Was: Apple IIGS being discontinued Dec 1992)
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 00:35:09 GMT

In article <Bznr36.CqB@NeoSoft.com> peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <1992Dec22.102829.26242@u.washington.edu> whit@carson.u.washington.edu (John Whitmore) writes:
>
>> 	And most Macintosh users don't see any great merit in the
>> command line idea, anyway.  Why should they?
>
>Well, they seem to like bitching that this or that PD program (usually
>Ghostscript) hasn't been ported to the Mac yet. There's a clue out there
>for the folks willing to get it.

Don't forget that the FSF won't help people trying to port FSF software
to Macintoshes, due to Apple's extreme legal posturing on "look and
feel".  (I remember reading this while looking at the instructions for
porting some FSF product, but a cursory grep for "Apple" in our
/usr/gnu/src tree only turned up an encouragement not to by Apple,
Xerox, or Lotus products.)  So I'm not sure how much the lack of a
CLI has to do with the absence of Ghostscript on Macs.  On the other
hand, I stay as far away from Macs as possible, so I know nothing
about programming on them.

-- 
This function is occasionally useful as an argument to other functions
which require functions as arguments.-- Guy Steele Jr. CLTL

Mark Nelson                                       mnelson@cis.udel.edu
From: uzun@crash.cts.com (Roger Uzun)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Number of numbers (Was Re: PI)
Date: 31 Dec 92 22:18:34 GMT
Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA

In <1992Dec31.143152.3181@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de> schoenfr@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (Erik Schoenfelder) writes:

>Inspired by all these postings i tred it with the multiple
>precision un*x library. The formula i found (and use) is

>	pi = 16 * atan (1/5) - 4 * atan (1/239)		(???)
>with
>	atan(x) = x - x^3/3 + x^5/5 - x^7/7 + ...	(Taylor)

>on a sparc 2 computing 3000 digits took between 6 seconds (GNU mp
>package) and 20 seconds (sun mp package) spending most of the time
>in the divisions.
I will try the above formula, must be more efficient than the one
I was using.  A 486/33 using my method takes 56 seconds, A4000 46 secs,
Can the above formula compute pi to arbitrary digits just by extending
the formula for atan(x)?.  Hmmm....I guess it could. 
My method was purely integer, I can post the pgm if anyone would be
interested, it is quite short.  Please post your pgm if you can,
I will run it on my system to compare.  I would expect that using
inline 040 fp instructions, that the A4000 could do pi to 3000 digits
in about 12-18 secs, based on Sparc 2 vs 040 performance.

Did you print out the digits as well?  that takes considerable time
in this benchmark.

-Roger
--------------------------------------------------------------
bix: ruzun
NET: uzun@crash.cts.com
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: What is so greate about the PDP 10?
From: don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (Don Stokes)
Date: 23 Dec 92 23:06:49 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Wolery

lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:
> Well, not the largest, but certainly the fastest from DEC.

That's what I meant.
 
> Anyone got any ideas as to how to build a faster one, and what kind of logic
> to use today to accomplish it?  (PAL's, GA's, bit-slice, etc.?)

Software emulation on an Alpha?

--
Don Stokes, ZL2TNM (DS555)                        don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (home)
Network Manager, Computing Services Centre            don@vuw.ac.nz (work)
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand              +64-4-495-5052
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: entropy@gnu.ai.mit.edu (maximum entropy)
Subject: Re: PI
Organization: Not Proud Programmers
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 22:27:42 GMT

In article <NP4XVB4w165w@mertwig.uucp> daniel@mertwig.uucp (Daniel Drucker) writes:
>Actually, the program I wrote got as far as 1048577 digits before dying.
>I just didn't think it would be a good idea to start mailing people millions
>of digits.

So why didn't you just mail out the program instead of the data?

Cheers,
entropy
--
entropy@gnu.ai.mit.edu
entropy. . .it's not just a good idea, it's the second law.
Boycott AT&T, Lotus, Apple, Ashton-Tate and Xerox.  Join the League for
Programming Freedom!  Write to lpf@uunet.uu.net for more information.
From: Geoff@equinox.gen.nz (Geoff Mccaughan)
Subject: Re: New "Hello" program
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: 25 Dec 92 10:17:30 +1200
Organization: Equinox Networks

Seth "the Lesser (slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu) wrote:
>>
>>No, make that alt.fan.dannie-drucker.weenie.weenie.weenie. :-)
>>(alternatively, use the word 'whacker', whic the Jargon file says, is
>>one who calls himself a wizard despite the opinions of everyone else...)

>Or we could resurrect a bit of dying slang that originated right here at
>Columbia U. and refer to him as a "wank" (see Jargon File at least since
>2.9.6).  I think calling him a "wanker" would be giving him too much
credit.

>So.  alt.fan.dannie-drucker.wank.wank.wank it is, then?

In the English [as opposed to American] speaking world, this word has a
rather different meaning, which is still appropriate however.

Your assertion that the word originated "right here" is nothing short of
laughable.

--
Geoff, Sysop Equinox (equinox.gen.nz) +64 (3) 3854406 [4 Lines]
                               Voice: +64 (3) 3852101
        "Hi. You have just entered the fourth dimension. Small isn't it?"
Xref: sparky alt.folklore.computers:18381 sci.math:17450 comp.compression:4254
From: magnus@thep.lu.se (Magnus Olsson)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,sci.math,comp.compression
Subject: Re: Compressing decimal expansion of pi (was Re: PI)
Date: 28 Dec 92 10:02:14 GMT
Organization: Theoretical Physics, Lund University, Sweden

In article <1992Dec27.150934.24664@ultb.isc.rit.edu> bmb1021@ultb.isc.rit.edu (B.M. Buck) writes:
>In article <1992Dec27.133611.3281@pollux.lu.se> magnus@thep.lu.se (Magnus Olsson) writes:
>>
>>This thread started out in alt.folklore.computers, so I was perhaps
>>not 100% serious, but - seriously speaking - "compressing" the decimal
>>expansion of pi by replacing it with an algorithm for generating N
>>digits of pi is of course a very good method for compressing pi, but
>>it's a lousy method for compressing a random sequence of digits. 
>>
>It's a very good method of compressing a random sequence of digits. All
>you need for the compressor is a program to examine the sequence of
>digits, and devise an algorithm that will produce that sequence (that is
>shorter than the original sequence, that is...).  That is the tricky
>part :-).  For pi, it's easy only because we already know many
>algorithms that will compute pi to N digits.  For arandom string of
>1,000,000 digits, it'll be more difficult.

Yeah, just a Trivial Matter Of Programming (tm), isn't it? :-)

Actually, it's impossible, at least if you want to get a better result
than you get by simply expressing the number in binary.

Suppose, for simplicity, that we're looking at N-bit binary numbers
(rather than ceil(log10(2)*N)-digit decimal numbers). There are 2^N
different such numbers. To express them all as algorithms, we
obviously need 2^N different algorithms (counting even trivially
changed algorithms as different). Now, how many bits do you need to
be able to code 2^N different algorithms?

For the case of arbitrary *real* numbers it's even worse: there's an
uncountable infinity of reals, but only a countable infinity of
possible algorithms (because an algorithm has by definition to be
possible to write as a finite string). This means that almost all (in
the precise, mathematical sense) real numbers are not computable.
Another way of expressing it is that the set of real numbers such that
we can even define them has the size zero compared to the set of all
real numbers. Kind of makes you think the constructivists aren't that
far out after all...


(Of course, the above arguments apply equally well to traditional
compressors: it's impossible to write a program that compresses *all*
possible input strings, and for almost all strings of digits the
binary representation is indeed optimal in space usage. But
traditional compressors are slightly simpler to write than your proposed
algorithm finder...)

              Magnus Olsson                | \e+      /_
    Department of Theoretical Physics      |  \  Z   / q
        University of Lund, Sweden         |   >----<           
 magnus@thep.lu.se, thepmo@seldc52.bitnet  |  /      \===== g
PGP key available via finger or on request | /e-      \q
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: bmarcum@world.std.com (Bill Marcum)
Subject: Re: PDP-11: A Physical Threat :)
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 22:58:11 GMT

In article <Bzq2Az.n55@brunel.ac.uk> Brian.Milner@brunel.ac.uk (Brian D Milner) writes:
>
>A computerphobe of my aquaintence was told by a Mac salesman that the 
>difference between hardware and software was that, if dropped on your
>foot: hardware hurts, software doesn't.
>
>He evidently hasn't seen some of the manuals on my shelves!
>
>I wonder if that's why a PC Support Officer sitting not a million miles
>from where I'm sitting dropped 5 386s on the floor? 
>
Were they 386 chips or whole machines?  A chip dropped on your foot
wouldn't hurt; is it software?  :-)

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: murraya@ecf.toronto.edu (MURRAY ALEXANDER W)
Subject: Foobar (was Re: Proper pronunciation of 'Kibo' IN BED)
Followup-To: alt.folklore.computers, misc.test
Keywords: foo bar fnord
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 04:36:13 GMT

In article <Bzn4JM.Etx@world.std.com> kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry) writes:
[...snip...]
>Don't tell Noah Friedman this, but I know where "foo" (as opposed to
>"fubar") came from.
>					-- K.

The first two Words, "foo" and "bar", were revealed to me through divine
intervention of the Hydro gods.  Two letters in a Food Barn grocery store's
sign were burned out.  Or perhaps this belongs in alt.shenanigans?  Or
alt.religion?  Or alt.kibo.enough.gack.gack.gack? ;-)

Regards,
Alex

-- 
 __   __ __   __ ______  ______   _____  __    __  _____
 ___ ___ __   __ __   __ __   __ __   __  __  __  __   __           Alex Murray
 __ _ __ __   __ ______  ______  _______    __    _______     Comp Eng 9T3-not!
 __   __  _____  __  ___ __  ___ __   __    __    __   _murraya@ecf.toronto.edu
From: ivie@cc.usu.edu (CP/M lives!)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: What is so greate about the PDP 10?
Date: 28 Dec 92 11:54:56 MDT
Distribution: world
Organization: Utah State University

In article <9699354@zl2tnm.gen.nz>, don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (Don Stokes) writes:
> 
> DEC should have put RSX on these boxes, not a crippled version.  The pdp11
> hackers who tried to use them got quickly frustrated by the nearly-RSX-but-
> not-quite-ness of P/OS.  RSX is good enough that you don't need to program
> on the bare metal to get anything done.  Serious pdp11 hackers ran RT11 on
> them.  Later came the Pro/325, which was only good for running RT11.

My big difficulty with the DEC PCs is that none of them have any sort of
standard console (well, OK, the Robin and the VT103 do; although running
WordStar on a VT100 is a bit of a pain). Yes, I can run RT-11 on my Pro350,
but there's a big chunk of slow VT emulator sitting between me and the OS.
Can't punch BREAK and bring up MicroODT. Can't run RT-11SJ. And the VT
emulators are usually slow; only the DECmates feel as fast as a real
terminal.
-- 

Roger Ivie                      "My God! That computer is full of Pentium!
ivie@cc.usu.edu                  It's a wonder that you haven't been turned
                                 into mutants!"
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: andy@research.canon.oz.au (Andy Newman)
Subject: Re: Apple IIGS being discontinued Dec 1992
Organization: Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 14:58:52 GMT

peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <1992Dec22.104251.26368@u.washington.edu> whit@carson.u.washington.edu (John Whitmore) writes:
>> 	Select 'by name' ordering of the files, select the
>> block of files in the window for the source folder with your mouse,
>> and drag them to the 'Letters' folder.  One menu selection and
>> two swipes with the pointing device.
>
>> 	Is a CLI version going to be simpler?
>
>mv Let* Letters
>
>> Quicker?
>
>Yep, especially if you have more letters than fit into a page.

Or if the files are in different directories.

>Now do the same with "move all files containing the string '1992' into the
>directory 'Tax,92'.

And then do it again.

The thing to remember is to pick the best tool for the job ... if the only
tool you have is a hammer...etc. CLIs are useful, GUIs are useful.
-- 
Andy Newman (andy@research.canon.oz.au)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Is 4004 the first microprocessor ?
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 08:36:58 GMT

In article <C08HAH.5LB@unix.portal.com> cpc@shell.portal.com (Chris Cebelenski) writes:
>In article <BzrJtM.703@NeoSoft.com> peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>>In article <BzqwGy.6AC@apollo.hp.com> gardner_c@apollo.hp.com (Cal Gardner) writes:
>>> Seems to me that they went as follows:
>>
>>>   4004 ==> 8008 ==> 8080 but why do I
>>
>>> have '4040' in my mind?
>>  [...]
>
> As a semi related thread, does anyone know what processors were used
> in home video game systems? (Atari VCS, Magnavox Odysessy, Intelevision,
> etc.)  Past and presen
And does anyone remember the rumors during the early 80's about different
video game systems that were supposedly upgradeable into actual personal
computers?

A while back I took a look at an old Atari VCS, and figured out how one
could have been made into a (primitive by today's standards) home computer.

Here's how it might have worked:

Internal electronics already had the CPU, so:

a serial card in the game slot connected via a cable to a unit containing
memory and a disk drive.

connect the keyboard via one of the joystick connectors.
This unit could also be where any peripherals are connected or installed,
keeping extra cables and connections to a minimum.

Now, I'm not a technical expert, so don't flame me for any inaccuracies in
this.  But it at least is an interesting thought experiment.

Simon


Xref: sparky alt.folklore.computers:18369 sci.math:17433 comp.compression:4247
From: bmb1021@ultb.isc.rit.edu (B.M. Buck)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,sci.math,comp.compression
Subject: Re: Compressing decimal expansion of pi (was Re: PI)
Date: 27 Dec 92 15:09:34 GMT
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Originator: bmb1021@ultb

In article <1992Dec27.133611.3281@pollux.lu.se> magnus@thep.lu.se (Magnus Olsson) writes:
>
>This thread started out in alt.folklore.computers, so I was perhaps
>not 100% serious, but - seriously speaking - "compressing" the decimal
>expansion of pi by replacing it with an algorithm for generating N
>digits of pi is of course a very good method for compressing pi, but
>it's a lousy method for compressing a random sequence of digits. 
>
It's a very good method of compressing a random sequence of digits.  All
you need for the compressor is a program to examine the sequence of
digits, and devise an algorithm that will produce that sequence (that is
shorter than the original sequence, that is...).  That is the tricky
part :-).  For pi, it's easy only because we already know many
algorithms that will compute pi to N digits.  For arandom string of
1,000,000 digits, it'll be more difficult.
>
>If one's task is to distribute a million digits of pi to a lot of
>users, who can't be expected to write their own pi computation
>programs, then it clearly saves a lot of bandwidth to give them each a
>copy of a short program to generate those digits. I was looking at it
>from a different angle, however: given the first million digits of pi,
>how well can we expect a *general-purpose* compression algorithm to
>compress it? 
>
Assuming one has a compressor as described above, the problems are the
same.  Since I don't know of such a compressor, I know of no way, short
of actually testing known general-purpose compression algorithms.

>
>              Magnus Olsson                | \e+      /_
>    Department of Theoretical Physics      |  \  Z   / q
>        University of Lund, Sweden         |   >----<           
> magnus@thep.lu.se, thepmo@seldc52.bitnet  |  /      \===== g
>PGP key available via finger or on request | /e-      \q

-- 
-----
Buddha Buck            bmb1021@ultb.isc.rit.edu
(insert-file ".disclaimer")
(insert-file ".quote")
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Is 4004 the first microprocessor ?
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 12:24:56 GMT

In article <BzqwGy.6AC@apollo.hp.com> gardner_c@apollo.hp.com (Cal Gardner) writes:
> Seems to me that they went as follows:

>   4004 ==> 8008 ==> 8080 but why do I

> have '4040' in my mind?

I have the 4004 and 8008 manuals here, and the 8008 was pretty much unlike the
4004. There were followups to both, the 4040 and 8080, which were each like
their respective predecessor. The 4040 was the end of the line in the 40xx
series, but the 80xx is still going strong.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   Oletko halannut suttasi tnn?
  'U`    
Tarjoilija, tm ateria el viel.
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Subject: Re: Game machine processors (was Re: Is 4004 the first microprocessor ?)
Reply-To: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 02:10:47 GMT

In article <C0Aq5H.4K0@panix.com> pw@panix.com (Paul Wallich) writes:

>>>  As a semi related thread, does anyone know what processors were used
>>>  in home video game systems? (Atari VCS, Magnavox Odysessy, Intelevision,
>>>  etc.)  Past and present?
>

>The Odyssey may have used an F-8 at one point (earliest ones were
>hardwired) but the VCS CPU was a 6502 variant, with 128 bytes of

The Odyssey was *not* a digital device, much less a processor.  It is a
non-extensible analog hack that plays rounds of ping-pong; it even lacked
the concept of keeping score, much less displaying it.

cjl
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers