Re: UNIBUS powoer on/off spec
On 4/6/22 08:27, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: That's a classic example of a rule invented by people who can't think. In fact, HTTP is perfectly fine for sites that arenot conducting web-based business activity. Blogs are a good example, and I know at least one that runs HTTP for the simple reason that nothing else is needed. Bitsavers is another example; nothing would be gained by adding all the overhead inflicted by HTTPS. Yes, REALLY! For anything that serves up static pages, there's no need for the security layer, unless the user is worried that somebody would snoop on the browsing history. Jon
Re: UNIBUS powoer on/off spec
Noel Chiappa wrote: > I have been told that at one point Google was 'downgrading' results > that used plain HTTP, instead of HTTPS, because they were trying to > push people to switch to HTTPS (this was when everyone was > hyperventilating over the Snowden revelations). Given the > near-ubiquitous use of HTTPS these days, I'd have thought that piece > of 'information credit engineering' by our tech overlords was past its > 'sell by' date, and now serves primarily to block people from finding > the material they are looking for (as here). I often include the search term "site:bitsavers.org".
Re: UNIBUS powoer on/off spec
On 2022-04-06 9:27 a.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: On Apr 6, 2022, at 9:20 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote: ... I have been told that at one point Google was 'downgrading' results that used plain HTTP, instead of HTTPS, because they were trying to push people to switch to HTTPS (this was when everyone was hyperventilating over the Snowden revelations). Given the near-ubiquitous use of HTTPS these days, I'd have thought that piece of 'information credit engineering' by our tech overlords was past its 'sell by' date, and now serves primarily to block people from finding the material they are looking for (as here). That's a classic example of a rule invented by people who can't think. In fact, HTTP is perfectly fine for sites that arenot conducting web-based business activity. Blogs are a good example, and I know at least one that runs HTTP for the simple reason that nothing else is needed. Bitsavers is another example; nothing would be gained by adding all the overhead inflicted by HTTPS. That's true IF you don't care about malicious content being injected into the material you're loading over http. "Protecting credit card numbers" is not the only thing encryption is good for. Whsh and now watch this become the first 400 post off topic thread of 2022... paul
Re: UNIBUS powoer on/off spec
> On Apr 6, 2022, at 9:20 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > ... > I have been told that at one point Google was 'downgrading' results that used > plain HTTP, instead of HTTPS, because they were trying to push people to > switch to HTTPS (this was when everyone was hyperventilating over the Snowden > revelations). Given the near-ubiquitous use of HTTPS these days, I'd have > thought that piece of 'information credit engineering' by our tech overlords > was past its 'sell by' date, and now serves primarily to block people from > finding the material they are looking for (as here). That's a classic example of a rule invented by people who can't think. In fact, HTTP is perfectly fine for sites that arenot conducting web-based business activity. Blogs are a good example, and I know at least one that runs HTTP for the simple reason that nothing else is needed. Bitsavers is another example; nothing would be gained by adding all the overhead inflicted by HTTPS. paul
RE: UNIBUS powoer on/off spec
I like the fact that https://williambader.com/museum/vax/pdphistory.html
shows a cover image plus identifies the marking on the back cover
("EB-17525-20/79 070-14-55").
https://authors.library.caltech.edu/5363/1/MARprocieee06.pdf cites it in the
same manner. Apparently the editors at Proc IEEE thought that was
appropriate :->.
-Original Message-
From: cctalk On Behalf Of Noel Chiappa via
cctalk
Sent: Tuesday, April 5, 2022 5:49 PM
To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
Cc: j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Re: UNIBUS powoer on/off spec
> From: Paul Koning
> You might give a precise source citation on that page.
Done:
https://gunkies.org/w/index.php?title=UNIBUS_Initialization=6842=
25463=25451
Don't complain to me if the publication data is skimpy; that's all that's in
it! (I mean, we all know that DEC is in Maynard, but the book doesn't say
it...)
Noel
Re: UNIBUS powoer on/off spec
> the later "pdp11 bus hanbook" (which, as mentioned, does not seem to be > online yet, alas) Arck, I'm a moron; Paul has pointed out to me that this is, in fact, online at Bitsavers: http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp11/handbooks/PDP11_BusHandbook1979.pdf It didn't show up in a couple of pages of results in a Web search for it, though. I have noticed that things on Bitsavers often don't show up high up in Web search results, unless you add 'bitsavers' to the search term. I have been told that at one point Google was 'downgrading' results that used plain HTTP, instead of HTTPS, because they were trying to push people to switch to HTTPS (this was when everyone was hyperventilating over the Snowden revelations). Given the near-ubiquitous use of HTTPS these days, I'd have thought that piece of 'information credit engineering' by our tech overlords was past its 'sell by' date, and now serves primarily to block people from finding the material they are looking for (as here). Noel
Re: UNIBUS powoer on/off spec
> From: Paul Koning > You might give a precise source citation on that page. Done: https://gunkies.org/w/index.php?title=UNIBUS_Initialization=6842=25463=25451 Don't complain to me if the publication data is skimpy; that's all that's in it! (I mean, we all know that DEC is in Maynard, but the book doesn't say it...) Noel
Re: UNIBUS powoer on/off spec
Very impressive detail. You might give a precise source citation on that page. paul > On Apr 5, 2022, at 8:07 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > So, I looked at the early editions of the "pdp11 peripherals hanbook", which > have good, detailed discussions of UNIBUS operations (at the back; chapter 5, > "UNIBUS Theory and Operation", in the 1976 edition), but in contrast to the > level of detail given for master/slave operations, and bus requests and > interrupts, the level of detail on power up/down is very low, especially > compared to that in the later "pdp11 bus hanbook" (which, as mentioned, does > not seem to be online yet, alas). So, I have transcribed that section, and > posted it: > > https://gunkies.org/wiki/UNIBUS_Initialization > > I have yet to scan and post the associated timing diagrams (which are useful, > but not critical); the desktop that runs my scanner is down at the moment, > alas. (If anyone who has a copy would like to volunteer to scan them, that > would be great.) > > Noel
UNIBUS powoer on/off spec
So, I looked at the early editions of the "pdp11 peripherals hanbook", which have good, detailed discussions of UNIBUS operations (at the back; chapter 5, "UNIBUS Theory and Operation", in the 1976 edition), but in contrast to the level of detail given for master/slave operations, and bus requests and interrupts, the level of detail on power up/down is very low, especially compared to that in the later "pdp11 bus hanbook" (which, as mentioned, does not seem to be online yet, alas). So, I have transcribed that section, and posted it: https://gunkies.org/wiki/UNIBUS_Initialization I have yet to scan and post the associated timing diagrams (which are useful, but not critical); the desktop that runs my scanner is down at the moment, alas. (If anyone who has a copy would like to volunteer to scan them, that would be great.) Noel
