On 10/21/22 6:50 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
Ok, I don’t normally like celebrity stories, but that is neat.

Then you had to have *hated* my riff on Glenn Reid and Mikhail Kalishnikov!

On another irritating tangent:

If Mikhail Kalishnakov, Sam Colt, and John Browning can flood the world with "peacemakers" and "equalizers" so amazing that one man in a Vegas Strip Hotel <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting>could take out 60 people and wound over 400 in just a few minutes, surely something "better" (more humane?) can be done with this kind of proto-self-replicating tech?

   
https://www.academia.edu/88948574/Open_source_decarbonization_for_a_sustainable_world?email_work_card=view-paper

This Pearce (not *the* Pearce) is a fan of RepRap self-replicating printers among other things...

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source#Society

Some here may have noted, of course, that the most "humane" thing humanity can do for/to itself is get a good collapse going ASAP while others (Musk) consider it antithetical to their personal vision of a vibrant future of humanity (without regard to the rest of life in the Solar System?).

I think ?Glen? has referenced the Effective Altruist <https://www.effectivealtruism.org/> movement before... I find them paradoxically well-intentioned and at-risk of helping us optimize exactly the wrong thing(s)...  one of the (many?) risks of technophilic/hyper-intellectual approaches to life, the universe and everything...   Where is Douglas Adams when we need him (RIP 2001)?  We will have to settle for the reflective insights of Russel Munroe <https://xkcd.com/2688/>, I suppose (tribute to Lee Smolin?)


On Oct 21, 2022, at 4:03 PM, Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> wrote:


As for "NeXT machine's software RIP", Rick Rashid, who was central in the development of that software, was my office neighbor.  He left to take a position at Microsoft as VP of Research.  I wonder if the software is RIPing.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Fri, Oct 21, 2022, 3:08 PM Steve Smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote:

    FWIW,  I dipped into the higher levels of real-time-systems
    development
    several times in my career.  The earliest being a control system
    (circa
    1981) for the LANL Proton Storage Ring where one naturally can't
    afford
    anything *but* failsafe implementations, etc. The stakes are just
    too
    'ffing high and the coupling to electrooptomechanical systems quite
    intimate.

    The "digital" components of such systems might have had the
    opportunity
    to ignore timing issues and simply "execute the same steps"
    regardless
    of timing.  But in fact many software-driven (sub)systems
    represented
    time-critical processes and sometimes were up agains the timing
    limits
    of the analog components which had no leeway in their "execution".

    There are all kinds of analogies in federated (distributed)
    simulation
    environments which Glen (and others here) probably know much
    better than
    I, where different "clocks" matter, and different levels of
    synchronization and reproducibility are in play.   The Postscript
    interpreters, printers, and film recorders were also pseudo
    real-time
    systems since some of the timing components were in fact software
    controlled (for example, the film recorders were "stroke" devices
    with
    software driving D-A converters to "sweep" out vectors and "clip"
    the
    on/off of the beam with appropriate analog component
    delays/biases/gains
    needing to be calibrated for.   Fortunately failures in this step
    did
    not (usually) damage anyone or risk anyone's health and safety
    (like the
    beam in the PSR did).

    Regarding identity and equivalence, I prefer the phrase: "close
    enough
    for who it's for"...


    On 10/21/22 11:18 AM, glen wrote:
    > Ha! If we're going to argue about words, then let's stick with the
    > word "identity" and skip the "metaphor" nonsense. You and Frank
    seem
    > to be using the word in a weird way. Identity means "the exact
    same
    > particular thing over any differencing available" or somesuch.
    I mean,
    > it's used that way in phrases like "identity theft" as well as
    > mathematical identity. It's equivalence sets all the way down.
    I just
    > can't imagine any working computationalist would ever say anything
    > like "executed identically" unless ... well ... the exact same
    > process, with the exact same steps, happened.
    >
    > I suppose there are deep philosophical intuitions pried at by the
    > words "emulation" versus "simulation". And one can argue (again
    with
    > help from Christian List) about whether there exist fully closed
    > ontological walls like we try to create with things like Jails,
    > HyperV, Docker, VM's like Java's, etc. But "execute
    identically" is a
    > phrase that would only be used by someone who worked *way*
    above such
    > levels (assuming levels even exist at all). It's a bit like
    talking to
    > the kids programming websites these days, with access to
    infinite disk
    > space, infinite memory, steeped in continuous delivery, etc. [⛧]
    >
    > Layers of abstraction are fine. Use 'em when you need 'em. But we
    > shouldn't posture by invoking things like "instruction sets" and
    > "execute identically" in the same breath. (Not that you did
    that ...
    > just sayin'.)
    >
    >
    > [⛧] Rant: This is a good talk
    > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ab3ArE8W3s>. But I get super
    > irritated when people use *toy* code in their rhetoric and
    leave large
    > scale deployment as an exercise for the reader. Yeah, fine. The
    REPL
    > is cool and all. But when my simulation takes a fvcking WEEK to
    > execute, it's difficult to sympathize. I've recently been playing
    > around with VSCodium, which is pretty cool. But whatever, man.
    I still
    > have to upload the code somewhere and execute it. Get off my lawn!
    >
    > On 10/21/22 09:24, Steve Smith wrote:
    >>
    >> As a counter-example,  we ran film recorders whose "guts" were
    built
    >> by Ed Fredkin's Information International company and were
    built to
    >> the spec of Dec PDP-11 (I think 11?) and it was anecdotally
    agreed
    >> among the user community (of a few thousand delivered units in
    the
    >> world?) that these PDP-clones *never* failed to execute the code
    >> identically to the machines they were patterned after.   I don't
    >> remember the details of implementation of these 70's era hardware
    >> designs, but I understood that they III designed their own
    PCBs but
    >> (obviously?) used the same CPU chips... I don't know about all
    the
    >> other support components... A likely answer to this pondering
    is that
    >> these machines did not run a general purpose OS and the III
    >> software/system people probably made up for any differences in
    >> Software/Timing/Error Handling?
    >>
    >> If Owen is listening in here, I think he was there for more
    than a
    >> little of this from inside Apple/Sun?
    >>
    >> - Steve
    >>
    >> PS.   To concede/confront glen's sentiment that: " 'Metaphor'
    is an
    >> evil word, used only by manipulators and gaslighters",   I would
    >> offer that the use of *conceptual metaphor*  is to thinking as
    noise
    >> is to simulated annealing, and his point about "tighter or looser
    >> equivalence" might well be the best argument *for* the use of
    >> metaphorical thinking?  I can't believe I'm stirring/kicking
    this can
    >> of worm-hornets down the street again...
    >>
    >

    -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
    FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
    Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
    https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
    to (un)subscribe
    http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
    FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
    archives:  5/2017 thru present
    https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
      1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p 
Zoomhttps://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribehttp://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIChttp://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru presenthttps://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
   1/2003 thru 6/2021http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to