On Fri, 13 Dec 2024, Rich wrote:

> rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 01:54:05 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>
>>> Ummmmm ... I just TRIED with the "Bit-Slice" topic.
>>> Jumped IMMEDIATELY back to 'non-OS/Computer stuff'
>>
>> How about that bubble memory?
>
> What I recall was all the hype about how bubble memory was going to
> surpass everything else and the shift was "just around the corner".
>
> Thirty years later and few even remember "bubble memoriess" were ever a
> thing.
>

Reminds me of HP:s "the machine" that imploded spectacularly! An amazing
example of what marketing can do, when disconnected from engineering! ;)

On 12/12/2024 20:42, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> 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").
>

Its not a vague idea, its a completely sound business model

Over 85% of the cots of a new conventional reactor is in getting it
certified to be safe at every single stage of the construction. Capital
lies idle ad does the workforce in half finished constructions waiting
to be signed off fort the next stage, and woe betide you if some trivial
aspect of it isn't to the specification - you need to re-certify it all
over again.
SMRs cut the Gordian knot, By making the reactors in a factory to
identical specifications and having them small enough to trailer them to
the site, 90% of the certification is only done once. For as many units
as you care to make.

Also, below a certain size, the scale effect swings towards you: the
reactor does not need active cooling to dissipate the decay heat after a
SCRAM shutdown. So no Fukushima or 3MI accident is possible. Convection
is enough to do the job.

The only downside to SMRs is that at smaller sizes they need more highly
enriched uranium (or Plutonium/Uranium mixes) to get to critical. The
supply chain for that is not yet established at scale.

Most of the designs that seem likely to reach production first are
simply scaled down pressurised water reactors, as used in nuclear
submarines etc. with probably extra shelding and safety to meet
commercial safety standards.

--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

On 13/12/2024 10:06, D wrote:
> Nope! Europe is too busy turning into the next soviet union to allow its
> citizens any form of fun, or to have opinions which deviate from what
> the politicians say.
>
+1
> Thankfully there is usenet which lives on, completely forgotten by the
> secret police. 😉

Sssh..

--
The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before
its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about.

Anon.

On 12/12/2024 20:59, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> 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/
>
I've always wondered if a nuclear fusion reciprocating engine would cut
the mustard.
Intake stroke accepts high pressure deuterium, compression stroke gets
it to to insane pressure levels and a laser pulse fires it.

--
The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before
its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about.

Anon.

On 13/12/2024 10:31, D wrote:
>>
>>  Good, large, diesel/oil engines are still the
>>  solution for large commercial carriers.
>
> Subtract taxes, and compare only the raw cost, and the economics look
> even better! On gasoline at least 50% is tax, so remove that, and we can
> happily continue for at least a generation or two. =)

The point is that the economics of small modular reactors plunked into a
ship and monitored more or less remotely by satellite link, with lots
of smart RCMs (reactor control modules) scattered around them now fall
in favour of nuclear.

Once everybody accepts the idea.
That is why a consortium of ship operators is looking very closely at it.

https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/new-study-considers-nuclear-powered-bulk-carriers

https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/regulatory-assessment-of-nuclear-powered-cargo-shi

and many more... https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/search?search=Ships

Now these bulk carriers have commercial clout. Enough to buy many many
politicians and dictators.

Nuclear ships will happen.

--
“People believe certain stories because everyone important tells them,
and people tell those stories because everyone important believes them.
Indeed, when a conventional wisdom is at its fullest strength, one’s
agreement with that conventional wisdom becomes almost a litmus test of
one’s suitability to be taken seriously.”

Paul Krugman

On 13/12/2024 10:08, D wrote:
>
>
> Are there any techniques to resupply a sub completely under water? Would
> be fascinating if it could be managed and resupplied kind of like a
> space station with rotating crews and all, being sent in smaller
> submarines docking at the big one.
>
Iyts technically totally feasible, but I cannot actually see what the
point would be.

> On the other hand, there's probably no use for that capability, but its
> an interesting thought experiment to see if it could then remain
> submerged for years at a time.

What is the current record?

"The Royal Navy's HMS Vengeance holds the record for the longest
deployment of a "doomsday" submarine, spending 201 days underwater. This
broke the previous record of 195 days set by HMS Vigilant."

The USA shuts its mouth...who knows?

--
The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before
its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about.

Anon.

On 13/12/2024 04:42, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
> Note the large uptick in seismic activity, esp along
>   the Pacific rim, the past couple of years. More and
>   more, and stronger and stronger, quakes. It is NOT
>   impossible to get a giant tsunami that washes away
>   the US west coast ... the geologists have seem signs
>   of those happening before.

It might be a lot worse. Previous eruptions have been massive tsunami
and climate changing events.

I read one paper with a massive but subtle error.

They calculated the effect that all that dust, aerosols and CO2 would
have on the climate *without positive feedback* and it matched the data,
so they then used that *with* positive feedback to predict alarmist
climate change!

--
The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before
its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about.

Anon.

On 13/12/2024 09:37, Mike Scott wrote:
> On 13/12/2024 04:42, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>    Note the large uptick in seismic activity, esp along
>>    the Pacific rim, the past couple of years. More and
>>    more, and stronger and stronger, quakes. It is NOT
>>    impossible to get a giant tsunami that washes away
>>    the US west coast ... the geologists have seem signs
>>    of those happening before.
>
> Something else to ascribe to man-made-climate-change :-}
>
> Or rather is something in the core changing and driving climate change?
> IIRC there's a growing magnetic anomaly in the Atlantic.
>
>
> But what's this do with bit-slice chips or c.o.l.m.?
>
>
How else are you going to produce alarming climate models?

--
“it should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalin’s Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.”

Vaclav Klaus

On 13/12/2024 10:09, D wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, Lars Poulsen wrote:
>
>> On 2024-12-12, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> That is sort of the model used on the submarines ... and on the NS
>> Savannah in the early 1960s. From what I have read, it could be
>> commercially viable today (with the improvements in relevant technology
>> in the last 60 years).
>>
>
> Thank you. Let's see... there is much interest in the SMR. Let's see who
> will be the first to take the step among the EU members.

Well UK isn't EU, but it is likely that RR who built reactors for
Britains nuclear submarines, will have something in production by 2030
or thereabouts. There is considerable interest from several EU nations-
the Czechs are in there too, as are the Poles, and Dutch.

France is solid EDF big scale and Germany is in a total mess at the
moment as their green policy collapses.

I think by 2030 at least three possibly four reactor designs will be
out there working commercially across Europe and SE aAsia and probably
Africa too.

--
“it should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalin’s Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.”

Vaclav Klaus

D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024, Rich wrote:
>
>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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.

Also forgot: And their respective parents would be charged with child
abuse, child endangerment, and whatever else the local DA wanted to
throw in, for allowing "Jonny" to roam free and play with such
"dangerous materials".

On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:29:51 +0100
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> 10x over todays figures? Nothing to scoff at, but I guess the
> question is, how long will it take us to get those 10x?

The bigger question - what happens when we decide we need 10x *more...?*

On 13/12/2024 16:32, John Ames wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:29:51 +0100
> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>> 10x over todays figures? Nothing to scoff at, but I guess the
>> question is, how long will it take us to get those 10x?
>
> The bigger question - what happens when we decide we need 10x *more...?*
>
A grown up will come along to tell you that you cant always get what you
want...
--
There’s a mighty big difference between good, sound reasons and reasons
that sound good.

Burton Hillis (William Vaughn, American columnist)

On 2024-12-13, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> The memory hole is deep and dark. I think I still have the preliminary
> datasheets for the iAPX 432 that was going to be Intel's real 32 bit
> processor. The iAPX 86 was a stop gap until they got the bugs worked out.

"It's a good thing the iAPX432 failed. Otherwise a truly horrible
Intel architecture might have taken over the world." -- unknown

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 04:20:04 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>> 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.

The AT&T PC clone (itself a rebranded Olivetti machine) was an 8086.
That was my first exposure to the IBM PC compatible world, an AT&T PC
clone running the 8086. While one /could/ measure the performance
difference in benchmarks, in real world usage it was not markedly
'faster' than an 8088 based system (i.e., the 20MB hard disk was the
same performance for both, and its sluggishness was what one spent most
of one's time waiting upon).

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 04:37:50 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:
>
>> rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 01:54:05 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ummmmm ... I just TRIED with the "Bit-Slice" topic.
>>>> Jumped IMMEDIATELY back to 'non-OS/Computer stuff'
>>>
>>> How about that bubble memory?
>>
>> What I recall was all the hype about how bubble memory was going to
>> surpass everything else and the shift was "just around the corner".
>>
>> Thirty years later and few even remember "bubble memoriess" were ever a
>> thing.
>
> The memory hole is deep and dark. I think I still have the preliminary
> datasheets for the iAPX 432 that was going to be Intel's real 32 bit
> processor. The iAPX 86 was a stop gap until they got the bugs worked out.

Yup, and then IBM picked the 8088 variant for their new IBM-PC in 1982,
and that moved the "profit" equation to favor the iAPX 86 line from
then onward.

However, I don't have any of the datasheets for the 432.....

On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:25:26 +0100, D wrote:

>
> On Fri, 13 Dec 2024, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 21:34:04 +0100, D wrote:
>>
>>> 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!
>>
>> My wife became more religious after the divorce. About 20 years after
>> the
>
> Strange! This is not the first time I have heard this. An acquaintance
> separated and after that, his ex became religious as well. Very strange.

She was raised as a Methodist but wasn't serious about it. It was a search
for something missing. Like many Protestants her church shopping was more
about emotion than doctrine. For a while she attended a Congregational
church that leaned toward pentacostalism. The people were nice enough had
provided support. I went to a couple of their services. I was raised
Catholic and the Mass did not include spontaneous outbursts or 'Praise
Jesus!' and the like. I think she's into the rapture thing too.

On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:44:20 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> On 2024-12-13, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>
>> The memory hole is deep and dark. I think I still have the preliminary
>> datasheets for the iAPX 432 that was going to be Intel's real 32 bit
>> processor. The iAPX 86 was a stop gap until they got the bugs worked
>> out.
>
> "It's a good thing the iAPX432 failed. Otherwise a truly horrible Intel
> architecture might have taken over the world." -- unknown

It did seem to incorporate every fad of the day. When Intel goes off the
rails they don't mess around. I hope they survive the foundry blues.

On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:02:47 +0100, D wrote:

> So you know the company president? You must indeed be a powerful man! Or
> the president must be a special president who actually talks to
> employees?
> Or a bit of both perhaps!

Small company, titles are cheap. When he retired my brother was a VP of
Morton Thiokol. He would point out that it was no big thing. Government
types like to think they're dealing with someone important so they made
him a VP.

I've always worked for small companies or for myself so there was never
the formal hierarchy. You tend to invent titles that fit the expectations
of whom you're dealing with. When asked what I do my answer is usually
'programmer'. Not very regal, particularly for those who remember when
'programmer' was the entry level position for people trying to work their
way up to the exalted 'programmer analyst' position.

He really was a good boss. I had a lot of latitude for skunk work projects
and he shielded his people from most of the political bullshit going on in
the front office.

On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:08:02 +0100, D wrote:

> Are there any techniques to resupply a sub completely under water? Would
> be fascinating if it could be managed and resupplied kind of like a
> space station with rotating crews and all, being sent in smaller
> submarines docking at the big one.

https://www.sandboxx.us/news/how-do-americas-nuclear-submarines-get-
resupplied-at-sea/

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/resupply-navy-nuclear-submarine

If there is some way to resupply while submerged they aren't talking about
it.

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 12/12/2024 20:42, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>> 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").
>>
>
> Its not a vague idea, its a completely sound business model
>
> Over 85% of the cots of a new conventional reactor is in getting it
> certified to be safe at every single stage of the construction. Capital
> lies idle ad does the workforce in half finished constructions waiting
> to be signed off fort the next stage, and woe betide you if some trivial
> aspect of it isn't to the specification - you need to re-certify it all
> over again.
> SMRs cut the Gordian knot, By making the reactors in a factory to
> identical specifications and having them small enough to trailer them to
> the site, 90% of the certification is only done once. For as many units
> as you care to make.

Hmm, but then earlier small reactor designs should have taken over
from large nuclear power plants already years ago. Unless there's
some new way to make them more cheaply now and therefore make the
cost per MW more competitive, which doesn't look to have been
proven.

> Also, below a certain size, the scale effect swings towards you: the
> reactor does not need active cooling to dissipate the decay heat after a
> SCRAM shutdown. So no Fukushima or 3MI accident is possible. Convection
> is enough to do the job.

Well the SL-1 reactor explosion happened to one of the USA's small
transportable nuclear power plant designs, before they were
rebranded SMRs. Granted that was probably due to operator error in
a way that a better design might have made impossible - withdrawing
a control rod too far causing power levels to instantly surge. On
the other hand it highlights that you do have to get as far as the
SCRAM shutdown state - SL-1 and Chernobyl blew up before that.

If fluid cooling is used during reactor operation then you still
have the potential for leaks, which has been a well documented
obstacle in old small reactor designs (eg. the Lenin Icebreaker,
and some of the US military's other portable reactor projects).

> The only downside to SMRs is that at smaller sizes they need more highly
> enriched uranium (or Plutonium/Uranium mixes) to get to critical. The
> supply chain for that is not yet established at scale.
>
> Most of the designs that seem likely to reach production first are
> simply scaled down pressurised water reactors, as used in nuclear
> submarines etc. with probably extra shelding and safety to meet
> commercial safety standards.

Like the Americans already did in the 60s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_Nuclear_Power_Program

The Russians even put them in a vehicle and made nuclear power
plants you could drive down the road!
https://sovietologist.blogspot.com/2008/08/pamir-nuclear-power-goes-on-road.html
https://ofis-7sandotherthings.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-tes-3-nuclear-tank.html

So I have zero doubt that SMRs are possible. My question is how
they've suddenly jumped from having military grade price tags to
something that makes commercial sense. Until companies are actually
selling the things profitably, or explain exactly how they intend
to make them cheaply, I'm skeptical. There are about as many
companies promising to make commercial fusion reactors by around
2030 or earlier. Cheap SMR designs seem to be in the same category
of crossed-fingers investment. But still, I'm glad someone's
trying, even if I wouldn't bet on their success myself.

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

On 2024-12-13, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> I've always worked for small companies or for myself so there was never
> the formal hierarchy. You tend to invent titles that fit the expectations
> of whom you're dealing with. When asked what I do my answer is usually
> 'programmer'. Not very regal, particularly for those who remember when
> 'programmer' was the entry level position for people trying to work their
> way up to the exalted 'programmer analyst' position.

At a PPOE my job description was "programmer-analyst". However, the payroll
system's job description field was 15 characters long (and all upper case,
of course), so it would print out as PROGRAMMER-ANAL. I always thought that
was appropriate.

> He really was a good boss. I had a lot of latitude for skunk work projects
> and he shielded his people from most of the political bullshit going on in
> the front office.

I once had a boss like that. When dealing with users' unreasonable requests,
his vocabulary contained a word that is not often found: "No." He drove a
VW Beetle, rather than the obligatory management-style luxury car, which
raised him several notches in my estimation.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 23:17:36 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> I once had a boss like that. When dealing with users' unreasonable
> requests,
> his vocabulary contained a word that is not often found: "No." He drove
> a VW Beetle, rather than the obligatory management-style luxury car,
> which raised him several notches in my estimation.

In the first company I worked for the owner/president drove a Lincoln. The
rumor was the VP would have dearly loved a Cadillac but carefully stayed
one step downscale.

At a start up the president drove a Camaro. The first few years were lean
but when we finally started making money he bought a Cadillac Cimmarron,
which was their attempt to compete with the more compact European luxury
sedans. It had problems but the final straw was when his secretary bought
a Pontiac. It was pretty much the same J-body car GM used throughout its
product line.

Next up was a Mercedes, I forget which flavor. Keeping with the times it
was a diesel. For someone used to a Camaro the snail like acceleration
didn't cut it. He wasn't happy and when his son tried to fill it up with
gasoline that was it for the Merc.

Finally he bought a Lincoln Town Car. In his words, 'If I'm going to be
nigger rich I'm going to do it right!' That one was a keeper.

The owner of the company I currently work for drives some sort of
nondescript older Toyota SUV with rear quarter panel damage patched
together by the maintenance guy with duct tape.

On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 20:13:16 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:

> The AT&T PC clone (itself a rebranded Olivetti machine) was an 8086.
> That was my first exposure to the IBM PC compatible world, an AT&T PC
> clone running the 8086. While one /could/ measure the performance
> difference in benchmarks, in real world usage it was not markedly
> 'faster' than an 8088 based system (i.e., the 20MB hard disk was the
> same performance for both, and its sluggishness was what one spent most
> of one's time waiting upon).

Then there was the best of both worlds NEC V20.

https://hackaday.com/2020/07/10/an-nec-v20-for-two-processors-in-one-sbc/

That one must have really chafed Intel's butt, a pin compatible drop in a
little faster that the 8088 and, wait for it, we had a few transistors
left over so it emulates the 8080 too. No wonder Intel sued.

On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 20:16:21 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:

> However, I don't have any of the datasheets for the 432.....

Digging into the bottom shelf behind the 3 1/4" floppies I don't either. I
vaguely remembered a bunch of data books but they're all National
Semiconductor. Note to self: you really need to throw that crap out. This
ain't the Internet Archives.

I did have Intel data books and remembered the pages for the 432 with a
'Preliminary' stamp.

On 12/13/24 11:34 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 13/12/2024 16:32, John Ames wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:29:51 +0100
>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>> 10x over todays figures? Nothing to scoff at, but I guess the
>>> question is, how long will it take us to get those 10x?
>>
>> The bigger question - what happens when we decide we need 10x *more...?*
>>
> A grown up will come along to tell you that you cant always get what you
> want...

NOOOOOO !!! WAAAAAHH !!!

https://scitechdaily.com/light-speed-ai-mits-ultrafast-photonic-processor-delivers-extreme-efficiency/

Sounds great but I think it's just a lab-bench project
at this point, NOT a big powerful 'chip'.

There's also something about 92% accuracy. Eh ?
We want 100% accuracy 100% of the time. Wanna
fly on a plane structurally calculated with 92%
accuracy ?