whartung
That said, moving some of this flat pack furniture has been a mixed bag. Some move well, some don't.
I did have a wall unit, a $99 hardware store particle board piece assembled with big screws and those interesting, round cam fasteners. It survived three separate moves, including one where it flew out the back of my pickup truck onto asphalt (thankfully in a gas station, vs the freeway I was about to get on). Corner got dinged, door flew off, but it survived!
But I've had other pieces that assemble and are rigid, when torqued around through the moving process start to come undone. The particle board and fasteners are designed for loads only in specific directions and tend to not do well, and fail, outside of those.
Keyboard interfaces can be, but not necessarily, quite opaque. There's a reason in the old days companies shipped keyboard overlays and function key templates to help users (or went all in with custom keyboards built for the application).
In contrast consider something like Wordstar where you pretty much just needed to memorize the three prefix keys, and if you pressed one and waiting, you'd get a menu describing all of the options.
Obviously, things like early Smalltalk and, probably, Xerox (having never used any of the early Xerox systems), relied heavily on the mouse, but even it had command accelerators.
The CUA standard was that crossover that Windows, and MOTIF, adopted. Much of that work is still with us today, and it worked well both on GUIs and TUIs (witness the old Turbo Pascal/C++ IDEs, and other applications). Those character based applications had to assume there was no mouse, but offer the flexibility of being good citizens should a mouse be present.
The primary value statement of TUIs is that they work over SSH with remote systems.
But now, we're hearing rumbles about the limitations of the "modern" terminals with regards to working well with a "rich" TUI. How a raw tty doesn't really cut it since it, at a minimum, can't detect key presses, only actual character/byte patterns. How there needs to be a new protocol, a "better" terminal client.
Of course when you go that route, then the current terminal emulators will need to be updated, or you'll be required to install a different terminal emulator that supports the new protocol. But that kind of defeats the theoretical, historical ubiquity of a TUI. It would not surprise me that many modern TUIs only work with an ANSI terminal.
Back in the day, we had systems like Visual Basic, Power Builder, SQLWindows. GUI/language systems particularly well suited for Client/Server DB development.
For a time, Firefox actually presented itself as a modern incarnation of these tools. Using XUL and JS for UI development, built in utilities to talk back to servers over HTTP. It was a platform for "Rich Internet Applications(tm)".
It didn't really take off, it wasn't documented very well, kind of buggy. It also required Firefox as a client. The potential was there, but not quite realized. Ajax hit the web browser in full force and that pretty much was the last nail. Now, you could use "any" browser for more interactive applications.
Of course, we advance to today, where many sites work in any browser as long as its Chrome. We have advanced applications that are no more than a Canvas element, with everything else being reinvented from scratch. "Have bitblt, will travel."
The browser is the closest thing we have to a universal remote GUI, but we all know the issues with it for many contexts. As an application platform, it may be ubiquitous, but that doesn't mean it's at all lightweight.
We used to have lightweight, remote GUI applications. Rootless X Window applications. Folk don't necessarily want the entire desktop, they just want an app, with some fields and buttons. You could slap them together with TCL/TK. Remember dtksh? We're not talking about trying to write Adobe Premiere or AutoCAD in these things. We just want some simple utilities, fields, icons, maybe a chart. Scrolling tables and a menu.
But we can't do that today, not readily, not easily.
So, we're kicked back to 1978 and the rise of the Smart Terminal, instead of 1984 and the rise of the X Terminal.
If folks are going to write out a custom client for a TUI, then may as well go the extra 10 feet and make it a remote GUI client. Reinvent all of the wheels as they go round, and round again.
He became a bit of a pop phenomenon, with stores dedicated to selling high quality prints of his works.
And one of the things, so I'm told, that could happen, was that you could buy one of his prints, but someone at the store, an artist, would dab some paint onto the print. Add some "light" to it.
Obviously this is a commercial endeavor, so I doubt the provenance of the rights holder was in doubt (such as through an employment agreement).
But it's, perhaps, an interesting case study about who owns what in a time of augmented and manipulated media.
And some of the fun of it is listening to just the "nature" sounds, mostly birds. But, specifically, the coyotes. We have a snippet of them going for I think 5-10 minutes, just non stop yipping and howling. A small pack of them out there, somewhere, in the forest. It's like a scene out of the movie "Zootopia".
It should not shock anyone that Amazon has an entire history of everything that you've ever bought. I would likely not surprise anyone here that they have a log of every item you've clicked on, or even moused over. The beauty of modern systems is that storing all of that data is very cheap.
The dark side is if the fellow queried McDonalds and found not just his McDonalds trends, but his shopping habits from, say, Target. Where McDs and Target perhaps had a data sharing agreement to correlate customers.
Or seeing a copy of his credit report in there buried underneath the stack of Diet Coke and Quarter Pounder receipts.
That's where the concern shows up. Not the raw data, but the cross cutting concerns as the data is potentially more centralized. Perhaps into a company that you don't even know is collecting info on you. Some corp that McDs is sharing with. You request your dossier from McDs because you know they're collecting your data. But you don't request it from Company X, because you don't know they're doing so.
Then there's the issue of handing the data over to the authorities without so much as a warrant -- different problem.
The generated C is reasonably portable, so you can run Scheme programs on systems that “don’t run Scheme”.
(Crudely) mmap the ST image to a 100GB file and just change pages. Let the OS flush the pages back and forth.
Maybe full boat, heap sweeping GCs would be Bad as it pages the entirety of the heap in and out. But we have (had) lots of RAM these days. We have generational GCs that leave idle stuff alone. Its no doubt impractical, but I think it would be neat to have the entirety of my historical email in the global "mailbox" array, and I can build indexes off it as I wished. But the mail isn't "on disk", it's all marshalled up as first class objects.
I don't know enough about it, no doubt it "won't work", but the idea of simply mapping the entire, large, ST VM heap to a persistent backing store, just be interesting I would think.
Dangerous too, as there is a demarcation between "running image" and "saved image". But, still think it could be interesting.
Yet, I still stare and wonder. Despite people having been here for thousands of years, I look at a ridge, or a spot on the mountain, and just wonder "has anyone been there before".
There are all sorts of reasons to not "go" there. There's "nothing there" to go to. It's hard to get to. There may not even be an animal trail up there. Even the sheep are smart enough to leave it be.
But I wonder.
I look at the ridge few miles north of my house, and, in the back of my head, I have a Plan to hike it someday. Just walk the ridge. It doesn't seem arduous, it's not Everest. Seems like only ("only") 15 miles.
But I do wonder, if anyone has done it before, and were they thinking about it like I was.
Curious if most of the architecture was visible to the actual operators, but the developers themselves were, perhaps, a bit isolated from it all.
Because, I don't think HN is a site for "Unix/NT" enthusiasts, but more so high level "computerists" in general. And I don't think that AS/400 application developers would be any less interested in computing than other developers.
Yet, anecdotally, over the years, as much as I've heard bits and pieces about how interesting the AS/400 system is, I've heard anyone talking it up. How they're able to do Cool Computing Thing because of the OS or architecture that can't readily be done on other systems at the time. How the unique features of the AS/400 solved their application and systems problems.
At my office, long ago, we were looking to replace our entire system, and we actually went to an AS/400 demo. But it was very expensive, and whatever they were selling wasn't really resonating with me as a developer, or my boss as a manager. Always wondered "what if" had we got such a system and had to use it in anger what it would have been like.
Anyone have any war stories to share?
Instead of hitting the call button, you started the request with your floor. Then the system would assign you an elevator (there were 6 cars as I recall).
I assume this gave the system more accurate routing data to make it more efficient for everyone.
And 2400 baud was quite useful for a personal NNTP feed.
When you see a photo of them, you almost always see the right side of the locomotive, as that's where the pistons and the drive train are. You almost never see the left side of it. The left side is much more uninteresting.
However, having seen them and been somewhat fascinated in them for years and years, when I finally saw one live, it never occurred to me that the cylinders were only on the right side. I simply projected that the other side has a similar set, just like every other locomotive.
Not only that, but the boilers tend to be a bit off center on the chassis also.
Just funny when all you have is one perspective, how someone can incorrectly fill in the rest from other knowledge that seems coherent, but it completely wrong.
While it's been 20+ years since I dealt with either, you can create table, get a navigable (and perhaps other features), and a CRUD detail screen in just a few minutes of drag and drop.
And it's right there, on your machine, no cognitive load about, well, anything, and ready to go. Another 10 minutes and you have a printable report spewing out on your laser printer.
It's quite a first step to go beyond the wizard based stuff into BASIC and such, but the fundamentals are there. And the fundamentals are useful out of the box.
You can set up a usable Access DB and MS Word Mail Merge in probably 1/2 hour of reading some tutorials.
Finally, out of the box, the screens look "ok". Your collection of fields conveniently fill the window nicely. You don't have a 21" x 12" white, barren canvas with Name, Address, C/S/Z and two buttons crammed up in the upper left corner. "Gee why is the font so small?" So now you don't have to fall down the rabbit hole to try and make your simple form even baseline "presentable".
It is curious that MS (afaik) does not have a way to drag and drop an Access application and have it "deploy" to the web, and (afaik), Access isn't part of Office 365 either.
They were working on a debugger for OS/2, which was quite notable at the time for being multitasking.
And at one point they got to enough of a base feature set that they could use the debugger on itself. Debugging the debugger.
While debugging the debugger, they would inevitably encounter other bugs in the debugging debugger.
So, with OS/2, they had a bit of an epiphany when they were able to debug the debugger debugging the debugger.
Back in the day, it was The Book for computer graphics.
I don't know of the computer aircraft were able to fly beyond human limits (i.e. they don't black out) or not. If the computers can actually fly to what the airframe is capable of, they would have a distinct advantage over the human pilots.
I already have one of these (I'm sure I'm not alone). It's about 500 lines.
I found I'm not a huge fan of the JAX-B-ish style serialization of Java objects for JSON. I don't want to really downplay them, they certainly have their uses, they're very popular, I just don't like fighting them. Hand writing JSON marshaling code has not been arduous for me (notably with my utility layer). (I also, philosophically, strive to avoid "magic" in my code as much as practical.)
Of course, I still need a parser, I'm using GSONs parser, which means I'm still dragging in the whole bean level serialization infrastructure. I just don't use it. And while I've done JSON parsers before, I felt it was something better to import than maintain myself. So, in that sense, it's a mixed bag.
But, I do enjoy using it.
This will be a worthwhile JDK capability. Ideally it can replace mine.
I also saw him when he toured with Roger Waters for “Radio KAOS”. “Good night Jim.” “Good night, Billy.”
I really enjoyed him when he was at KMPC/KEDG with JJ Jackson. That station struggled to find its way, starting early on with Pat “Paraquat” Kelly and Cynthia Fox, along with Guy Kemp at night (kind of a comedy/zoo shtick — I found his show really funny). I remember calling in once when Joe Satriani was just getting airplay, and the guy who answered was yelling “Are you hearing this? Are you HEARING THIS!?”.
Live radio.
It was nice with Ladd because he had his freedom, but a wider playlist.
MARS-FM, KROQ, KNAC, Pirate Radio, 91X (from Mexico, when you can get it, but they had some power).
But, a notable memory was 1989. Tiananmen Square.
Geno Michelini, KLOS, Five o’clock funnies fame, announced the breaking news of what was happening in China, and followed it up with Rush’s “Red Sector A” from “Grace Under Pressure”. I still get a little choked up thinking about.
Live radio.
First, my Father wanted to try to add some peripherals to the original TRS-80 Model 1. So, what he was interested in doing was asserting the BUSREQ pin to tell the Z80 to get ready so that he could have the bus, ideally waiting for the BUSACK signal to know when it was his.
Unfortunately, on the Model 1, when you assert the BUSREQ pin, it is tied directly to the tri-state buffers that handle the address and data bus. So, as soon as you make the request, the Z80 loses all access to its memory and data -- mid cycle. Which, you know, can be Bad. Radio Shack labels this pin TEST and uses it for internal testing. But it was definitely a bit of a disappointment to my Fathers efforts.
The second one is when I learned that the Game Boy Advance has a Z80 built into its chip. The designers drag and dropped a Z80 core (tweaked for GB) just so they could run legacy GB games on it. It just kind of bends your view of the computing world when something as significant as a Z80 can just be shoved into the corner of a die for "just in case" functionality.
Just shows how far we had come at the time.
God help me if I fell down a hole like that.
I must say, however, that e.g. code like (compile-compound) is something only an AI can love!
Then do that.
There's nothing stopping you from using pretty much any style of programming that you like. Or mix and match. Or evolve over time.
Loops, lists, arrays, structures. Simple iteration: dotimes, dolist, loop. If those are your bread and butter, then feast! CL will happily do that. That's what I do. I just don't think "functionally" when I do CL code, I'm just not there yet, so its unnatural for me, and not what comes spewing out of my fingers when I write code.
And it's "OK".
You don't have to use the other features of the language, but they're there if you want to dip your toe into it.
With CL, also, I tend to be really wordy on variable and function names. I'm really fond of kabob-case-for-identifers.
Mind, I don't know, but normally you put in a business, or factory, etc. the state can tax the economic output of the factory.
The factory builds things, sells things, they tax the sales of those things. Local employees get salaries that can be taxed, etc. Of course, property taxes on the land and improvements.
But how does that work with a datacenter?
If I pay $5 for an EC2 instance that happens to be hosted in, say, Virginia, is that a "sale" from the "Virginia Data Center", or is that sale realized somewhere else?
Of course I don't know how that works with, say, a Ford assembly line in Tennessee, with the car sold in California. Does Tennessee get a piece of that Bronco when it leaves the factory, or is it all just internal, corporate money shifting?
As I understand it, the people -> systems ratio is really low. Large datacenter managed by, perhaps, a 1 or 2 dozen people. Most of the "work" is remote, but there needs some hands on to dust the hardware off once a week. But, it's not your typical ratio of people per sq ft of space as other industries.
Just seeing that if you have this datacenter thats "bringing in" lots and lots of dollars, how does the state and local community get their take of that economic activity?
Perhaps it’s generational. It clearly did well in the box office, so somebody went out and saw it. But nobody I know directly, indirectly, or remotely has seen it.
It got zero chatter in any of the places that I frequent, and that includes some SF themed communities.
Big picture. Lots of tech, very expensive, Cameron, the whole kit. But whatever impact it had, clearly I was out of its blast radius.