Ah, what was that show, "Red Dwarf", where the spaceship
computer lamented that he'd tried to date a Zed-X 80 but
she just didn't get him :-)

On Wed, 11 Dec 2024, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> On 12/11/24 5:08 AM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 11 Dec 2024, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/10/24 8:38 AM, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/9/24 8:25 PM, rbowman wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 13:58:47 -0800, John Ames wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any chance of this conversation returning to anything even *slightly*
>>>>>>> more relevant to *nix, computers in general, or, like, *anything*
>>>>>>> else?
>>>>>>> Maybe I should dig up some old Francis E. Dec rant for a more
>>>>>>> coherent/
>>>>>>> relevant refresher course...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Feel free to start a thread.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  Ummmmm ... I just TRIED with the "Bit-Slice" topic.
>>>>>  Jumped IMMEDIATELY back to 'non-OS/Computer stuff'  :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>  Was HOPING for discussion/insight into 'alternative'
>>>>>  schemes for 'CPU's and such derived from older solutions.
>>>>>
>>>>>  Houston, we have a problem .............
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your thread was perhaps not interesting enough? Try again! ;)
>>>
>>>
>>>  Awwww .... OUGHT to be an interesting topic, especially
>>>  as we're bumping up against Moore's end-point. One or
>>>  two more gens and we're literally at the atomic scale ;
>>>  where to go from there ?
>>
>> Quantum computing of course! Otherwise, we'll just continue to scale out I
>> assume.
>
> "Quantum" has NOT been going well. People are finding
> ways to REDUCE the error rate, but it's still too much.
> Cyro is also kinda required.

The thing that puts me off quantum is that media loves to hype it. That to
me, is a sign that it is nowhere near being ready for anything productive.
But I am not a physicist! But based on this group it does seem I am more
right than wrong.

>> Is there an established Moores end point?
>
> I'm gonna say it's "at the few atoms" zone. However
> you still need to make room for the connecting leads.
> Gotta be able to FAB such things too ... and you're
> well into the X-ray zone there.
>
> So ... I think we're approaching A Problem here.
>
> The kind/meaning of 'computing' has kinda shifted
> recently due to 'AI' - Nvidia rules there - but
> the chips are faster at "AI" sorts of stuff, not
> general/all-purpose.
>
>
>> I would imagine once we hit that end point in terms of regular cpus, the
>> only direction left would be purpose built cpus on other technologies for
>> niche use cases such as biological computing, quantum computing, optical
>> etc.
>
> Bio is gonna be too SLOW. Quantum, we've discussed that.

Isn't the idea behind bio massiev parallelism? So yes, the computation
might be slow, but if you have millions of molecules performing it in
parallel you do get fantastic results if the problem you are trying to
solve fits the nature of bio computing?

> Pure photonic - including some rough analog of photonic
> transistors ... MAYbe. I keep hearing bits of news which
> suggest those MIGHT be practical someday. Still, don't
> see them being THAT much faster - the S-o-L in crystals
> and fiber and such is a limiting factor. Who'd have ever
> imagined the S-o-L would be TOO SLOW eh ? Indeed it's
> already a communications pain in the ass.
>
> Photonic switching elements don't switch instantly
> either ... MAYbe some different def/tech that's not
> really so much 'switching' per-se ? Interference
> patterns ?
>
> Now something that will properly support, say, deca-state
> logic ... ? Transistors don't do that well, but smart
> photonic design, perhaps. A lot more 'getting it done'
> per gigahertz :-)

Seems like photonic is the winner for the moment.

>
>> Could regular cpu:s get some extended life by a change of materials or some
>> other tweaks to the current design?
>
> Could ... but instead they'll make new chips.
>
> Oh, news today ... if you have an AMD box DO look into
> the "BadRAM" exploit - a sneaky back-door way for Vlad
> to spy on your 'protected' data.
>
>>>  Better innovate SOMETHING, otherwise we're gonna see
>>>  'peak computing' when it's become clear we need thousands
>>>  of times that for the Really Cool Stuff.
>>>
>
>

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> On 12/10/24 3:19 PM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/12/2024 20:51, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 9 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If they had simply taxed carbon fuels  we would be all nuclear by
>>>>> now...and be making synthetic diesel
>>>>
>>>> Is electricity the primary cost driver of synthetic diesel?
>>>>
>>> I think it would be, yes.
>>>
>>>
>>> Lets say you can get to a 30% conversion ration of whatever energy drives
>>> the synthesis, to the final diesl.
>>>
>>> Diesel and natural gas is around (UK money) 50p a litre or 5p /kWh
>>>
>>> Expected renewable electricity is 3-4 times that
>>> Historic nuclear is a bit less - say 4p /kWh
>>>
>>> That puts synthetic diesel at a minimum of around 12p/kWh Which is what we
>>> pay at the pumps but that is all tax.
>>
>> Ahh, yet another thing we don't have to worry about then. =)
>>
>>>> Germany managed to help the extreme left and the extreme right with their
>>>> ridiculous nuclear policy. Given their history, I'm surprised they didn't
>>>> see it coming. ;)
>>>
>>> The trouble with Germany is that the Greens got into coalition, and the
>>> price of that was Germany's energy policy.
>>> The problem seems to be that the broad political choice is between neo
>>> Marxists and pro Russian  Neo Nazis.
>>
>> Yes!
>
> Germany seems SCREWED - all ideology, no common sense.
>
> Alas it's a HUGE economy .....
>
> For now.

Massive organizations can do a lot wrong, and still survive a long time.
My fear is that they are repeating the errors that led up to ww2. They are
crushing the middle class with taxes and eco-fascist policies and
inflation.

A far-right agitator will popup (hello AfD!) and say, vote for me and all
will be well. Since there's literally no other alternative, the middle
class will do it, and then it could become dangerous.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On 12 Dec 2024 04:06:10 GMT, Robert Riches wrote:
>
>> Suggested edit: "west of it many/most brains turn to mush."
>> There are a few right-minded thinkers west of the Cascades.
>
> Sure. My ex is somewhat to the right of me and lives in New York City.
> It's a lonely life and she has alienated more than one 'friend'.

Oh well, then they weren't friends in the first place. A friend can
tolerate differences of opinion. If they cannot, they are not worth having
around.

I have a friend who is socialist. Yes, the discussion can be heated at
times (but less often than you would think) and we are perfectly fineto
agree to disagree and change the topic.

> There was a far right author who wrote a few novels about a Northwest
> Territorial Imperative. He realized that a landlocked area of Montana,
> Idaho, Nevada, and a few other states wasn't feasible and worked in ways
> to capture the seaboard. They all seemed very optimistic.
>

On 11/12/2024 20:56, D wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> There is an international group of shipping people looking into what
>> stands in the way. Regulations mostly...
>>
>> The economics are somewhat unclear.  The rising cost of bunker oil has
>> made cruising at lower speeds the optimal balance. With nuclear,
>> uranium costs are negligible so full speed at whatever the weather
>> will allow may be optimal leading to less ships being needed overall.
>>
>> Probably a large container or cruise ship could top out at 50mph
>> (80kph) or so. So something like a 3 day  transatlantic crossing time.
>>
>> I think that is very acceptable as part of a holiday package.
>
> It is fascinating how ancient these ideas really are. By pure chance, I
> once found an old family history in my fathers apartment typed up by my
> grandmother.
>
> Apparently, together with those papers, where some old notes from her
> job. She used to be the secretary to some scientist at swedens first
> nuclear research program around 1954.
>
> In those notes, I read speculations about nuclear powered ships and I
> think they mentioned aircraft, but ships for sure.
>
Yes. Back in the day scientists had some sway and engineers post WWII
were gods.

But then Nuclear power wasn't needed, and fossil fuel companies had huge
and deep pockets.

And Russia was attempting with remarkable success to finance any and
every organisation that made nuclear power (as well as nuclear war) more
scary than it was.

Nuclear ships were in fact tried, but the economics and regulations made
them not cost effective. At the time. The rather larger number of
expensive 'nuclear engineers' required was a dominant factor.

But by the mid 1970s they had become competitive with the rise in fuel
prices, and today's level of computer systems and long range networking
would probably result in just a couple of people to manage any routine
issues on the power plant and satellite comms back to the nuclear power
plant builder to tell them what to do if anything went outside
operational norms

--
Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich
people by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason
they are poor.

Peter Thompson

On 12/12/2024 01:32, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 10:35:59 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> How long have Intel been struggling with 7nm?
>
> It would be wonderful if '7nm' referred to some real dimension.
>
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/16823/intel-accelerated-offensive-process-
> roadmap-updates-to-10nm-7nm-4nm-3nm-20a-18a-packaging-foundry-emib-foveros
>
> "It is no secret that having "Intel 10nm" being equivalent to "TSMC 7nm",
> even though the numbers actually have nothing to do with the physical
> implementation, has ground at Intel for a while. A lot of the industry,
> for whatever reason, hasn’t learned that these numbers aren’t actually a
> physical measurement. They used to be, but when we moved from 2D planar
> transistors to 3D FinFET transistors, the numbers became nothing more than
> a marketing tool. Despite this, every time there’s an article about the
> technology, people get confused. We’ve been talking about it for half a
> decade, but the confusion still remains."
>
> The full article is worth reading.

True, but in the end it is no secret that the need for the best
power/speed drives the technology to reduce in size to the level where
the graininess of the atomic structure and quantum effects start to
impact on its performance...

Which is why the tendency today is to stick to around 3-4GHz clocks but
add more cores and local cache RAM , and security risk style predictive
branches.

What may happen is that some new way of coding that demands a massively
parallel architecture, rather than the existing one optimised for 'C' -
emerges.

So E.g. when searching a data structure, every core gets a little slice
of it and gets an overall reduction in search times.

--
"If you don’t read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

On 12/12/2024 02:17, rbowman wrote:
> Like the rest of the US the large urban centers are Democratic. Go global
> warming. Say a 30' rise in the sea level and the people of Portland,
> Seattle, NYC, Boston, Philadelphia, LA, and so forth will be too busy
> swimming to vote.

Sadly it ain't gonna happen.

Sea level rise is steady and constant and shows no acceleration

--
Any fool can believe in principles - and most of them do!

On 12/12/2024 09:52, D wrote:
> Massive organizations can do a lot wrong, and still survive a long time.
> My fear is that they are repeating the errors that led up to ww2. They
> are crushing the middle class with taxes and eco-fascist policies and
> inflation.

There is an aphorism that a large company only has to get one chance in
twenty right to survive, but a small company cannot afford to get more
than one in twenty chances wrong or it goes under.

>
> A far-right agitator will popup (hello AfD!) and say, vote for me and
> all will be well. Since there's literally no other alternative, the
> middle class will do it, and then it could become dangerous.

Yes. It's alarming to think that at the time Adolf was seen as the best
of a bad lot.

But once they let him in, they were stuck with him.

--
How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.

Adolf Hitler

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> But by the mid 1970s they had become competitive with the rise in fuel
> prices, and today's level of computer systems and long range networking would
> probably result in just a couple of people to manage any routine issues on
> the power plant and satellite comms back to the nuclear power plant builder
> to tell them what to do if anything went outside operational norms

I wonder if they could use the model from some SMR startup for ships? A reactor
that is preloaded and welded shut. Then it operates for its entire lifetime
until the fuel is used up, and then you change to a new reactor.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 12/12/2024 09:52, D wrote:
>> Massive organizations can do a lot wrong, and still survive a long time. My
>> fear is that they are repeating the errors that led up to ww2. They are
>> crushing the middle class with taxes and eco-fascist policies and
>> inflation.
>
> There is an aphorism that a large company only has to get one chance in
> twenty right to survive, but a small company cannot afford to get more than
> one in twenty chances wrong or it goes under.

As a small business owner, I say... this is the truth! It is absolutely
incredible the shit big companies can do, and still survive and thrive!

>> A far-right agitator will popup (hello AfD!) and say, vote for me and all
>> will be well. Since there's literally no other alternative, the middle
>> class will do it, and then it could become dangerous.
>
> Yes. It's alarming to think that at the time Adolf was seen as the best of a
> bad lot.
>
> But once they let him in, they were stuck with him.

True.

On 12/12/2024 15:13, D wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> But by the mid 1970s they had become competitive with the rise in fuel
>> prices, and today's level of computer systems and long range
>> networking would probably result in just a couple of people to manage
>> any routine issues on the power plant and satellite comms back to the
>> nuclear power plant builder to tell them what to do if anything went
>> outside operational norms
>
> I wonder if they could use the model from some SMR startup for ships? A
> reactor
> that is preloaded and welded shut. Then it operates for its entire lifetime
> until the fuel is used up, and then you change to a new reactor.

They could use a multitude of things and probably will.

Currently what you suggest is probably what they would have - a sealed
PWR with a throttle on the side and two pipes for primary circuit water.

And an OBDC port :-)

Currently big ships would expect to use 50-70MW. That isn't big, but
it's not small either.

--
"In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is
true: it is true because it is powerful."

Lucas Bergkamp

D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 17:20:37 +0100, D wrote:
>>
>>> What I did not test was to buy some alcohol to purify the gun powder. I
>>> also had bad quality coal as well, so that's something I would change
>>> til next time.
>>
>> Sourcing the potassium nitrate and sulfur was no problem in the '50s but
>> trying to grind down charcoal was a miserable task. During one of the
>> times in grade school chemistry class when I wasn't daydreaming I learned
>> the formula for sucrose was C12H22O11. Hmmm, that looks like a lot of
>> carbon and stuff that should turn into water vapor. Rocket candy was born!
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_candy
>>
>> It was many years later I found out about it. It wasn't much of an
>> explosive but back then dry gas came in about a 12 ounce can with a
>> conical top that necked down to a screw cap. Filling one of those and
>> lighting it lead to a very satisfactory fountain of flame. I never thought
>> to try launching a rocket with it.
>
> Ah... childhood memories! This was the easiest thing in the world to
> produce! Once I managed to stop a subway line with it. I think I was
> around 12 or 13, and we were playing with this stuff under a bridge that
> had a subway line.
>
> The subway came, created a draft that sucked all the smoke into the
> tunnel, and they thought there was a fire and stopped the subway. 10
> minutes later the police arrived, discovered us (we didn't run) and said
> "boys will be boys" and let us go.
>
> I thought the police actually thought it was funny and were reminded of
> their own childhood (although of course they didn't show any of this).
>
> Ahh, those were better, more innocent times!

Yes indeed. Today some kids doing the identical activity would pull in
the local police, the FBI, the TSA, and likely several other
three-letter-agencies and the kids would be put on several terrorist in
the making watchlists and be haunted by that label for the rest of
their lives.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 10:53:56 +0100, D wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On 12 Dec 2024 04:06:10 GMT, Robert Riches wrote:
>>
>>> Suggested edit: "west of it many/most brains turn to mush."
>>> There are a few right-minded thinkers west of the Cascades.
>>
>> Sure. My ex is somewhat to the right of me and lives in New York City.
>> It's a lonely life and she has alienated more than one 'friend'.
>
> Oh well, then they weren't friends in the first place. A friend can
> tolerate differences of opinion. If they cannot, they are not worth
> having around.

She is a Christian of some sort and I tread carefully when she veers in
that direction. Considering I've known her for about 60 years I know the
pitfalls.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 10:51:47 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Which is why the tendency today is to stick to around 3-4GHz clocks but
> add more cores and local cache RAM , and security risk style predictive
> branches.

That gets a little spooky. When I was doing Z80 stuff at 4 to 6 MHz you
could get away with a lot.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 12/12/2024 15:13, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> But by the mid 1970s they had become competitive with the rise in fuel
>>> prices, and today's level of computer systems and long range networking
>>> would probably result in just a couple of people to manage any routine
>>> issues on the power plant and satellite comms back to the nuclear power
>>> plant builder to tell them what to do if anything went outside operational
>>> norms
>>
>> I wonder if they could use the model from some SMR startup for ships? A
>> reactor
>> that is preloaded and welded shut. Then it operates for its entire lifetime
>> until the fuel is used up, and then you change to a new reactor.
>
> They could use a multitude of things and probably will.
>
> Currently what you suggest is probably what they would have - a sealed PWR
> with a throttle on the side and two pipes for primary circuit water.
>
> And an OBDC port :-)
>
> Currently big ships would expect to use 50-70MW. That isn't big, but it's not
> small either.

Yes. Freight boats are probably the ideal platform.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, Rich wrote:

> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 17:20:37 +0100, D wrote:
>>>
>>>> What I did not test was to buy some alcohol to purify the gun powder. I
>>>> also had bad quality coal as well, so that's something I would change
>>>> til next time.
>>>
>>> Sourcing the potassium nitrate and sulfur was no problem in the '50s but
>>> trying to grind down charcoal was a miserable task. During one of the
>>> times in grade school chemistry class when I wasn't daydreaming I learned
>>> the formula for sucrose was C12H22O11. Hmmm, that looks like a lot of
>>> carbon and stuff that should turn into water vapor. Rocket candy was born!
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_candy
>>>
>>> It was many years later I found out about it. It wasn't much of an
>>> explosive but back then dry gas came in about a 12 ounce can with a
>>> conical top that necked down to a screw cap. Filling one of those and
>>> lighting it lead to a very satisfactory fountain of flame. I never thought
>>> to try launching a rocket with it.
>>
>> Ah... childhood memories! This was the easiest thing in the world to
>> produce! Once I managed to stop a subway line with it. I think I was
>> around 12 or 13, and we were playing with this stuff under a bridge that
>> had a subway line.
>>
>> The subway came, created a draft that sucked all the smoke into the
>> tunnel, and they thought there was a fire and stopped the subway. 10
>> minutes later the police arrived, discovered us (we didn't run) and said
>> "boys will be boys" and let us go.
>>
>> I thought the police actually thought it was funny and were reminded of
>> their own childhood (although of course they didn't show any of this).
>>
>> Ahh, those were better, more innocent times!
>
> Yes indeed. Today some kids doing the identical activity would pull in
> the local police, the FBI, the TSA, and likely several other
> three-letter-agencies and the kids would be put on several terrorist in
> the making watchlists and be haunted by that label for the rest of
> their lives.

Sadly I believe you are correct. =( And that attitude is killing freedom
and society.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 10:53:56 +0100, D wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> On 12 Dec 2024 04:06:10 GMT, Robert Riches wrote:
>>>
>>>> Suggested edit: "west of it many/most brains turn to mush."
>>>> There are a few right-minded thinkers west of the Cascades.
>>>
>>> Sure. My ex is somewhat to the right of me and lives in New York City.
>>> It's a lonely life and she has alienated more than one 'friend'.
>>
>> Oh well, then they weren't friends in the first place. A friend can
>> tolerate differences of opinion. If they cannot, they are not worth
>> having around.
>
> She is a Christian of some sort and I tread carefully when she veers in
> that direction. Considering I've known her for about 60 years I know the
> pitfalls.

True. My jokes about feminism and the unequality of men and women
sometimes lands me in dangerous territory with my wife. She is a lawyer!
=O

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 04:20:04 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> I think the "formalized" bit - plus the IBM name - kinda sealed it
> for the Z80s. Bank-switching on Z80's was kinda too clunky - and all
> the banks were 64k.

The IBM seal of approval did a lot. It killed the Z8000 entirely and set
back the 68000 designs.

> Anyway, won't really diss the 8088 ... had it's good time and place
> and uses and paved the way to Better.

It was a smart decision. All the 8-bit peripherals were cheap by then and
could be used.

> EVER see an actual 8086 system ? I never did. Kinda had to wait for
> the 286/386 era to see the promised perks. I think Compaq had an
> 8086.

The early PS/2s used the 8086. I've seen them but never worked on one. I
did a project for GE Ft. Wayne that bracketed it. The interfaces to the
environmental test chambers was handled by 12 PC/Xts, while the
supervisory role and data collection was a PC/At. The PS/2 was sort of
between the two. The 8086 models weren't appreciably better than the XT
and the later 286s weren't as good as an AT.

D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> But by the mid 1970s they had become competitive with the rise in fuel
>> prices, and today's level of computer systems and long range networking would
>> probably result in just a couple of people to manage any routine issues on
>> the power plant and satellite comms back to the nuclear power plant builder
>> to tell them what to do if anything went outside operational norms
>
> I wonder if they could use the model from some SMR startup for ships? A reactor
> that is preloaded and welded shut.

Yes, and the reactor model for ships is basically the model for SMR
start-ups, except with the vague idea that they're suddenly going
to be much cheaper somehow (I'll believe it when they "hit the
shelves").

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 16:14:48 +0100, D wrote:

> As a small business owner, I say... this is the truth! It is absolutely
> incredible the shit big companies can do, and still survive and thrive!

That's a discussion I had with the company president several times. One of
the VPs was always chasing the big sales. My argument was a company like
Lockheed Martin could win the bid, fuck it up completely, get sued, and
shrug it off; we couldn't.

That came to realization when Lockheed won the bid for an emergency
dispatch system for the City of London. They failed to deliver, were sued
for breach of contract and non-performance, and went on to their next
scam.

On 2024-12-12, 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
> Wonder how fast, with modern techniques, you could
> REALLY make a Z80 ? Could prob fit a bunch on a
> single die ....

There must be a bunch of people that have written a Z80 for an FPGA.
Though I think it is more common to do an 8086 as a debug/configuration
tool for an FPGA based special purpose data mangler.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 10:27:58 +0100, D wrote:

> I thought the police actually thought it was funny and were reminded of
> their own childhood (although of course they didn't show any of this).
>
> Ahh, those were better, more innocent times!

It didn't come to fruition but I hatched a plan to brew up a batch of
thermite and weld a draw bridge closed. I doubt anyone would have found it
funny.

Being the '60s there was a radiation monitor on the roof od the high
school. The scheme was to somehow acquire some radioactive material from
the college lab and seed it. We got as far as acquiring the keys necessary
for roof access but grabbing a hot sample didn't work out.

It was only three stories but there was an elevator with keyed access for
the faculty and handicapped students. The idea was to get the key, hit the
emergency stop at a location when we could manually open the door and
slither out from the partial opening. That one worked.

On 12 Dec 2024 20:37:32 GMT
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> The early PS/2s used the 8086. I've seen them but never worked on
> one.

Some of the later Tandy 1000 series did as well, before they eventually
pivoted from being a vastly improved PCjr to being Yet Another VGA 386.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 10:32:11 +0100, D wrote:

> Sulfur is a bit more difficult to get though. I think it is on some kind
> of "watch list" where you need a license or a specific reason to buy it.
> =(

Amazon to the rescue, at least in the US. 5 pounds for USD 25.65. However
if I use the Tor exit point in the Netherlands it says it can't be shipped
to my address.

Europeans can't have any fun at all, can they?

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 10/12/2024 20:17, D wrote:
>> But it won't be a big bang, plenty of technologies exist to bridge the gap.
>>
>> Would be cool if I could finally have a nuclear powered car that I
>> bought full, and would never have to refuel. ;)
>
> Its almost possible. The problem is all that lead makes it even heaver
> than a BEV and you have to stop to fill up the water just as often.
> There is no device that turns heat into electricity better than a steam
> turbine, sadly.

The Helion fusion reactor design for directly generating
electricity from the electromagnetic pulse generated by colliding
plasma in a tube is interesting. I think you'd still need the lead,
but maybe not the water. Call it a "plasma piston". Of course it's
less than clear if it'll ever work at their current power-station
scale let alone scaled down. Bigger always seems to be better with
fusion research.

https://www.helionenergy.com/

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#