I think he's talking about NEMA L5-15 and L5-20 plugs, like we use on big mofo servers and UPSs in the datacenters and so forth. They're a twist lock setup.
Or, maybe not, the furniture delivery guy plugged in my appliances, and I never clean behind 'em.;)
Here's a page detailing a lot of the different NEMA plugs. 5-15 being common household and 5-20 sometimes found in the machine or wood shop in your basement. 6-15, I have inside Sun StorEDGE racks back in the A1000 days.
If you had been shopping for VoIP phones, you would have definately heard of either Cisco or Linksys. Probably both (unless you do all your shopping at Staples, in which case, just Linksys).
That's funny, I was writing AJAX-like stuff around the turn of the century, too... only my method for getting data updates from the server was to request JavaScript objects inside a scoopable, re-sourceable element. Actually, I remember working on this product in "proof of concept" around... 1998. It was shortly after I got my first ISDN line. Anyhow.
The biggest problem I found *wasn't* browser support. There was lots of great stuff to work with. Only, it was completely different from browser to browser.
Like, you could use IFRAMEs in IE to get Javascript objects. Or in Navigator, you used DIV with the src= attribute (man I miss that one) In IE, you could modify what was inside an element with "innerHTML". In Navigator, you could modify what was inside an element with element.write()
They both had lots of choices for how to do CSS (badly).
No, the problem wasn't browser support, at least not in my case.
My problem was filtering and rendering thousand-line tables.... I never could get that running fast enough to be useful. *sigh*
And, FWIW, the reason I was trying the AJAX-like approach was bandwidth and CPU. I wanted to use the browser as a remote caching + trivial computation engine.
And which character for delete? 127 or 8? Is backspace destructive? What happens when you hit backspace at 1,1? How about when you put the cursor at 25,80?
Try finding an 8" Shugart disk, the interface is pretty close to the PC interface, that you should be be able to get it working... provided your floppy controller can read the low (150kbps?) bit rate on those drives.
I recently pulled a 3.5" Shugart disk out of a MIDI sequencer because I could no longer source double-density disks. I installed a COTS (but very old) PC 3.5" 1.44MB drive. It writes 720K of data reliably onto HD media, and still reads the old disks.
Wow, you certainly have an interesting perspective on reality.
ZIP disks WERE poised to take over the floppy market, as an alternative to LS120 and Syquest cartridges.
CD burners DID come out at around the same time -- but back then, a Sony Spressa 2X read / 1X burn was worth $2500 and blank CD-Rs worth worth $20 each (figures in Canadian dollars). CDs were also quite finnicky back then, and SCSI controllers for the burners weren't exactly cheap, either (you needed something like an Adaptec 1542, worth about $250).
ZIP was -much- cheaper, and in fact, in much more widespread use where people needed to share large files (i.e. print media). The drive sold for about $250, required no special controller, and 100MB cartdiges were $20 each... about the price of two boxes of decent disks.
So, your first 600MB with a CD burner back then cost you roughly $3000, while your for 600MB with a ZIP cost you roughly $350. That's $2500 worth of media-savings -- and back then, a gig was a LOT of data -- you'd have to make before a CD-burner would pay for itself.
Finally, for some end-user perspective -- just before the ZIP drives came out, I bought a fast 1GB harddrive for $1350 (again, Canadian dollars.. ISTR thinking that was around $950 US at the time). I thought that disk was going to be big enough to store all the data I'd ever generate.
Personally, I just leave a sacrificial disk in the drive when I'm not using it.
I have 25+-year-old Commodore drives around here somewhere; I haven't looked at 'em in a decade, but I'll bet that they, too, have sacrificial disks in them at this very moment.
The nice thing about my scheme is that whatever dust would fall to the bottom of the drive falls on the disk; you spin the disk every now and then, the dust gets trapped inside the disk; you pop the disk out, boom, the drive is already clean and ready to go.
I don't know... if you can correctly identify persons about to become rapists in a park, would it be unethical to kill them (erase their brain, castrate them, whatever to make it not happen?).
A man-in-the-middle attack which changes https:/// URLs to http:/// and proxies them is only trivially different from one which proxies https on the inbound and outbound side.
That said, creating the key required to re-encrypt would be quite difficult, as it would
a) have to be signed by an appropriate CA
and
b) reference the proper domain
> Who else remembers when SCO was Microsoft's Santa Cruz Operation, > writing multi-user OSes for people?
Me! Me!
Of course, I never actually *used* XENIX until.. oh Christ, '92 or so. By then it was running 386s, and had TCP/IP. I remember this clearly, because my first task was to figure out how to upgrade the machine 16MB of RAM. It used 30-pin SIPs; we couldn't find any locally, so I had to solder some pins onto some SIMMs....
Just don't heat an *empty* cup of the water in the microwave.. stick something in it. Even salt. Otherwise, you might wind up with a face full of exploding water.
This is particularly dangerous if you've already microwave-boiled the water once.
I did a 28-minute Christmas album during the month of November last year, using nothing but 15+-year old keyboards and a thirty-day, fully-functional Adobe Audition demo (available from adobe.com).
> For all its flaws, the T is still one of the better mass-transit systems in America. > But I think that's saying more about how shitty other places are doing--it's still not that hot.
Glad it's still doing as well as it is. I remember about a billion years ago, I was able to sort out the T on my own.. at 16 years of age, and under a TIGHT schedule -- we were on a week-long school field trip to Boston, the dumb-ass teacher took us to a mall one afternoon for a few hours. So I snuck off to the Boston Computer Museum, and nobody was ever the wiser.
Man, I'm such a nerd.
Is that still there? I heard it was having difficulty. It was awesome.
So, those commuter trains, like the purple line north to Lowell are no longer in use?
Man, that's sad. I kinda liked that part of Boston. I thought it was great that I could take the train (or fly in), not rent a car, and not go broke getting around the area.
Your while loop is, indeed, superior in this example -- I was trying to find stuff in stdio -- which I seldom use -- for exemplar purposes... since the probability of you being familiar with the libs I *do* use verges on zero since they're closed and proprietary.:)
Okay, I suppose I could have dug through APR (which I use quite a lot) for an example. I guess that final one wasn't such a good example.:?
The point I'm trying to make, though -- is that people need to STOP thinking of the for-loop as a incrementer construct in C. It isn't. Its three contained expressions quite clearly expresses the key loop concepts -- initialization, check for invariant, propulsion step. An argument can easily be made that while is two special cases of for, but my last point and your response accidentally made that point. (Not that would advocate writing that -- but it is critical that a programmer be able to *READ* it without throwing an exception).
This thread isn't about syntax of system libraries; it's about _understanding_ loops. Simple concepts? Yes. But how many errors have you seen in the real world which are a direct result of erroneous flow control? I'll bet you've seen plenty. Getting programmers to think CLEARLY about the three steps of the loop is paramount. Not rote. Not "oh the numbers get bigger, just like FOR N...NEXT N".
This is undoubtedly why CS types teach inductive proofs. Wish I'd understood that 20 years ago, I might have been a happier student.
Your thinking around loops actually shows (to me, anyhow) why these Rosetta-stone-type projects are actually counter-productive in the long run. (I can also argue that using cross-language keywords is also poisonous).
Why?
Your C-language for-loop example uses the same crappy example as nearly every crappy text of the "learn C in 7 days [assuming you already know BASIC)" genre. Giving the first example this way --- as "a for-loop is something that counts, here's how you make it count" is... so... bogus. And serves to completely POISON programmers' minds. I can't BEGIN to count how many programmers I've met who are confused about basic for-loops in C because they think they have to count.
A for loop in C is simply the exact, beautiful, expression of the iteration concept:
for (LOOP_INITIALIZER; LOOP_INVARIANT; PROPELLER) {
EXPRESSION; }
See? Has nothing to do with numbers.
You're saying: execute LOOP_INITIALIZER, evaluate LOOP_INVARIANT, if it's true, perform EXPERSSION, evaluate PROPELLER and go back to the part of this sentence where we evaluated LOOP_INVARIANT.
Because of this craputidinous teaching, I am constantly faced with programmers who cannot understand a loops of these types:
for (a = arr; *a; a++)
do_shit();
or
for (a = db_get_stuff(); a; a = db_get_more_stuff())
do_shit();
or even
for (a = fgets(file, line, sizeof(line); a && !ferror(file); a = fgets(file, line, sizeof(line))
do_shit();
...and these people have freakin' degrees in computer science. That final (contrived) example, BTW, is a fine way to avoid doing stupid shit like
do {
a = fgets(file, line, sizeof(line);
if (a)
do_shit(); } while(a && !ferror(file));
.... So: Why is the for-loop superior in every way to this while loop example?
Look carefully.
Loop control in the for statement is on the same line of code as the loop-construct keyword. In the above while-statement, loop control is at the beginning, middle, and end of the block. That's just BEGGING for a maintainer error. Yet 99 out of 100 C programmers prefer the second form... because it looks more like BASIC... they don't understand the beauty of the for-loop... they simply think ("Oh, I don't have any numbers to count, so I'd better use a while-loop"). That's CRAP! It's broken thinking, and it encourages buggy programs.
It all comes down to people teaching to the lowest common example [denominator], rather than actually exploring the concepts behind the language.
8 years ago, Sun expected you to pick up the tab for the shipping (10 bucks IIRC). And they called it a "Developer License".
I still have a box running that was installed from that CD.
Damned if it has YET to require ANY maintenance... Mind you, all it does is provide a samba-to-nfs gateway, DNS (root of tree for entire enterprise) and DHCP.
The only problem I have with that box is that every now and then I have to push "y" during fsck boot -- logging is turned off by default in 7 (for good reason), and I've been meaning to put that machine on a UPS....
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't the correct conversion be sqrt(2)? That's more like 1.4142, so 98V RMS.
Of course, I am not an EE, and frankly, my AC theory sucks.
I think he's talking about NEMA L5-15 and L5-20 plugs, like we use on big mofo servers and UPSs in the datacenters and so forth. They're a twist lock setup.
;)
Or, maybe not, the furniture delivery guy plugged in my appliances, and I never clean behind 'em.
Here's a page detailing a lot of the different NEMA plugs. 5-15 being common household and 5-20 sometimes found in the machine or wood shop in your basement. 6-15, I have inside Sun StorEDGE racks back in the A1000 days.
Just put the source to DeCSS in there.
> how much is human waist?
Depending on the human, somewhere around around 32 inches.
If you had been shopping for VoIP phones, you would have definately heard of either Cisco or Linksys. Probably both (unless you do all your shopping at Staples, in which case, just Linksys).
That's funny, I was writing AJAX-like stuff around the turn of the century, too... only my method for getting data updates from the server was to request JavaScript objects inside a scoopable, re-sourceable element. Actually, I remember working on this product in "proof of concept" around... 1998. It was shortly after I got my first ISDN line. Anyhow.
The biggest problem I found *wasn't* browser support. There was lots of great stuff to work with. Only, it was completely different from browser to browser.
Like, you could use IFRAMEs in IE to get Javascript objects. Or in Navigator, you used DIV with the src= attribute (man I miss that one)
In IE, you could modify what was inside an element with "innerHTML".
In Navigator, you could modify what was inside an element with element.write()
They both had lots of choices for how to do CSS (badly).
No, the problem wasn't browser support, at least not in my case.
My problem was filtering and rendering thousand-line tables.... I never could get that running fast enough to be useful. *sigh*
And, FWIW, the reason I was trying the AJAX-like approach was bandwidth and CPU. I wanted to use the browser as a remote caching + trivial computation engine.
And which character for delete? 127 or 8? Is backspace destructive? What happens when you hit backspace at 1,1? How about when you put the cursor at 25,80?
(Thank God for curses and termcap)
Try finding an 8" Shugart disk, the interface is pretty close to the PC interface, that you should be be able to get it working... provided your floppy controller can read the low (150kbps?) bit rate on those drives.
4 4318/
I recently pulled a 3.5" Shugart disk out of a MIDI sequencer because I could no longer source double-density disks. I installed a COTS (but very old) PC 3.5" 1.44MB drive. It writes 720K of data reliably onto HD media, and still reads the old disks.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shellyandwes/sets/15
Wow, you certainly have an interesting perspective on reality.
ZIP disks WERE poised to take over the floppy market, as an alternative to LS120 and Syquest cartridges.
CD burners DID come out at around the same time -- but back then, a Sony Spressa 2X read / 1X burn was worth $2500 and blank CD-Rs worth worth $20 each (figures in Canadian dollars). CDs were also quite finnicky back then, and SCSI controllers for the burners weren't exactly cheap, either (you needed something like an Adaptec 1542, worth about $250).
ZIP was -much- cheaper, and in fact, in much more widespread use where people needed to share large files (i.e. print media). The drive sold for about $250, required no special controller, and 100MB cartdiges were $20 each... about the price of two boxes of decent disks.
So, your first 600MB with a CD burner back then cost you roughly $3000, while your for 600MB with a ZIP cost you roughly $350. That's $2500 worth of media-savings -- and back then, a gig was a LOT of data -- you'd have to make before a CD-burner would pay for itself.
Finally, for some end-user perspective -- just before the ZIP drives came out, I bought a fast 1GB harddrive for $1350 (again, Canadian dollars.. ISTR thinking that was around $950 US at the time). I thought that disk was going to be big enough to store all the data I'd ever generate.
Personally, I just leave a sacrificial disk in the drive when I'm not using it.
I have 25+-year-old Commodore drives around here somewhere; I haven't looked at 'em in a decade, but I'll bet that they, too, have sacrificial disks in them at this very moment.
The nice thing about my scheme is that whatever dust would fall to the bottom of the drive falls on the disk; you spin the disk every now and then, the dust gets trapped inside the disk; you pop the disk out, boom, the drive is already clean and ready to go.
Can I have $25,000?
I don't know... if you can correctly identify persons about to become rapists in a park, would it be unethical to kill them (erase their brain, castrate them, whatever to make it not happen?).
A man-in-the-middle attack which changes https:/// URLs to http:/// and proxies them is only trivially different from one which proxies https on the inbound and outbound side.
That said, creating the key required to re-encrypt would be quite difficult, as it would
a) have to be signed by an appropriate CA
and
b) reference the proper domain
> Who else remembers when SCO was Microsoft's Santa Cruz Operation,
.. oh Christ, '92 or so. By then it was running 386s, and had TCP/IP. I remember this clearly, because my first task was to figure out how to upgrade the machine 16MB of RAM. It used 30-pin SIPs; we couldn't find any locally, so I had to solder some pins onto some SIMMs....
> writing multi-user OSes for people?
Me! Me!
Of course, I never actually *used* XENIX until
Just don't heat an *empty* cup of the water in the microwave.. stick something in it. Even salt. Otherwise, you might wind up with a face full of exploding water.
This is particularly dangerous if you've already microwave-boiled the water once.
http://www.snopes.com/science/microwave.asp
You know, your post has SFA to do with TFA other than they are both about music.
/. needs new readers, instead of a wah-wah cry babies?
Maybe
The OP is right.
I've *never* gotten anything finished (muscically-speaking) without a deadline.
And the stuff that I've HAD a deadline for -- wow, some of it's not bad.
I did a 28-minute Christmas album during the month of November last year, using nothing but 15+-year old keyboards and a thirty-day, fully-functional Adobe Audition demo (available from adobe.com).
It's fun, you should try it.
It came out pretty good, too!
> For all its flaws, the T is still one of the better mass-transit systems in America.
> But I think that's saying more about how shitty other places are doing--it's still not that hot.
Glad it's still doing as well as it is. I remember about a billion years ago, I was able to sort out the T on my own.. at 16 years of age, and under a TIGHT schedule -- we were on a week-long school field trip to Boston, the dumb-ass teacher took us to a mall one afternoon for a few hours. So I snuck off to the Boston Computer Museum, and nobody was ever the wiser.
Man, I'm such a nerd.
Is that still there? I heard it was having difficulty. It was awesome.
What?
So, those commuter trains, like the purple line north to Lowell are no longer in use?
Man, that's sad. I kinda liked that part of Boston. I thought it was great that I could take the train (or fly in), not rent a car, and not go broke getting around the area.
How about the T?
Nope.
Your while loop is, indeed, superior in this example -- I was trying to find stuff in stdio -- which I seldom use -- for exemplar purposes... since the probability of you being familiar with the libs I *do* use verges on zero since they're closed and proprietary. :)
:?
Okay, I suppose I could have dug through APR (which I use quite a lot) for an example. I guess that final one wasn't such a good example.
The point I'm trying to make, though -- is that people need to STOP thinking of the for-loop as a incrementer construct in C. It isn't. Its three contained expressions quite clearly expresses the key loop concepts -- initialization, check for invariant, propulsion step. An argument can easily be made that while is two special cases of for, but my last point and your response accidentally made that point. (Not that would advocate writing that -- but it is critical that a programmer be able to *READ* it without throwing an exception).
This thread isn't about syntax of system libraries; it's about _understanding_ loops. Simple concepts? Yes. But how many errors have you seen in the real world which are a direct result of erroneous flow control? I'll bet you've seen plenty. Getting programmers to think CLEARLY about the three steps of the loop is paramount. Not rote. Not "oh the numbers get bigger, just like FOR N...NEXT N".
This is undoubtedly why CS types teach inductive proofs. Wish I'd understood that 20 years ago, I might have been a happier student.
Let's just hope they don't bring back SunView. What a POS, even in its day!
Why?
Your C-language for-loop example uses the same crappy example as nearly every crappy text of the "learn C in 7 days [assuming you already know BASIC)" genre. Giving the first example this way --- as "a for-loop is something that counts, here's how you make it count" is
A for loop in C is simply the exact, beautiful, expression of the iteration concept: See? Has nothing to do with numbers.
You're saying: execute LOOP_INITIALIZER, evaluate LOOP_INVARIANT, if it's true, perform EXPERSSION, evaluate PROPELLER and go back to the part of this sentence where we evaluated LOOP_INVARIANT.
Because of this craputidinous teaching, I am constantly faced with programmers who cannot understand a loops of these types: ...and these people have freakin' degrees in computer science. That final (contrived) example, BTW, is a fine way to avoid doing stupid shit like .... So: Why is the for-loop superior in every way to this while loop example?
Look carefully.
Loop control in the for statement is on the same line of code as the loop-construct keyword. In the above while-statement, loop control is at the beginning, middle, and end of the block. That's just BEGGING for a maintainer error. Yet 99 out of 100 C programmers prefer the second form... because it looks more like BASIC... they don't understand the beauty of the for-loop... they simply think ("Oh, I don't have any numbers to count, so I'd better use a while-loop"). That's CRAP! It's broken thinking, and it encourages buggy programs.
It all comes down to people teaching to the lowest common example [denominator], rather than actually exploring the concepts behind the language.
8 years ago, Sun expected you to pick up the tab for the shipping (10 bucks IIRC). And they called it a "Developer License".
I still have a box running that was installed from that CD.
Damned if it has YET to require ANY maintenance... Mind you, all it does is provide a samba-to-nfs gateway, DNS (root of tree for entire enterprise) and DHCP.
The only problem I have with that box is that every now and then I have to push "y" during fsck boot -- logging is turned off by default in 7 (for good reason), and I've been meaning to put that machine on a UPS....