But your assertion that I'm personally responsible for every bad thing my government does is completely unfair. That's the same logic that Al-Qaida uses for attacking civilian targets.
You fail to differentiate between fault and responsibility. It is not our fault that the US does these things, but it is our responsibility, because only we can stop it. Also because it is done in our name, although usually to our detriment. Al Qaeda attacks us not because they think we caused our government to occupy the Arabian peninsula, but because only we can force them out (this was more clearly true of organizations like the PFLP, but still fundamentally holds for Al Qaeda et al).
Of course the Washington Naval Treaty was signed and ratified in 1922, so your assertion that the battleship race caused the UK to plan for war with the US in the 1930s makes about as much sense as your assertion that the US invading the Philipines and Cuba in 1898 is evidence of European bias against America.
I am not so sure that the Geneva Convention was the the limiting factor in gas warfare in WWII. I think the technical limitations were more important. Against modern mechanized armies, like the Americans and British, chemical weapons were of limited tactical value. In WWI they proved unpredictable, environmentally sensitive, and difficult to target. Granted, during the war the Germans developed far deadlier chemicals than WWI's phosgene and mustard gas, nonetheless defensive tactics developed in WWI were still deemed effective. The Germans and Soviets in particular were probably hesitant because of their own vulnerabilities. The prevalence of equine transport in those two armies rendered them more susceptible to chemical attack.
Likewise, technical problems precluded all but the Americans and British from strategic chemical attacks. Only those two nations fielded strategic bombing forces capable of effectively delivering the volume necessary for an effective attack on a major city. The Germans had the most advanced agents, but by the time they developed them the Luftwaffe was overwhelmed by allied forces.
Interestingly, the nation best positioned to use gas as a strategic weapon, the United States, did in fact plan to do so. The Army Air Force had an advanced plan for massive mustard gassing of Japanese cities. Japanese air defenses were much softer than the German's. Additionally 8th Air Force commander Curtis Le May had markedly less regard for Japanese civilian life than german. The AAF anticipated millions of Japanese civilian casualties. However, with the success of the Manhattan project, the chemical plan was dropped. After the war the plans were sanitized to look like a hypothetical study and the originals destroyed. However, one original copy, complete with complete hand written versions of the postwar changes, escaped destruction due to a clerical error. It surface in the National archives in the 1990s. There was a big article on it in Military History Quarterly. pabl
I brought up Raskin because he contributed a number of rather important ideas to how a user might interact with his Macintosh design, but many of those ideas were pretty abstract, and don't fit into the rather limited concept of "user interface" as understood by most slashdotters: the Mac's GUI was designed by Hertzfeld and Atkinson, not by Raskin.
Raskin is an egotist who feels the Mac team screwed up his vision. The Mac they released was more expensive, more complicated and less driven by the user experience than the machine he pitched to Markula. Hence he likes to distance himself from the final execution. But there is no disagreement about whether it was he who introduced pul down menus and click-drag. My point was that he is uniquely responsible for the core concepts which define the Macintosh, and that Hertzfeld's statement to the contrary is on the face of it nonsensical. To say that the Macintosh is defined by two pieces of hardware is to not understand the Macintosh. The idea was to make a user centric, rather than hardware centric computer.
Regarding the original point, kernel memory management is not an user interface issue, it is a user experience issue. However, the Macintosh was never designed to narrowly optimize the user interface. It was designed to optimize the user experience. That was Raskin, and later Apple's, goal. At the time, the UI was by far the greatest area of need in user experience, so that is where the bulk of the effort went. Arguably this is still true, but hardware advances has increased the importance better memory management as a component of the user experience. It has also made such management more feasible. You wouldn't believe some of the hoops the Mac team jumped through in order to get beast to run on 128k of RAM.
Your quote exactly support the first half of my position (it does not touch on the second half). Raskin was responsible for the user centric philosophy which is one of the two most defining characteristics of the Macintosh.
Raskin's design choices lost out to Atkinson's. Atkinson's quirky interface, and the consequent emphasis on the mouse, remains present in MacOSX. Raskin's own contribution is "dated and irrelevant", as he puts it.
The full quote reads, "My original vision is outdated and irrelevant. The principles of putting people first, and designing from the interface to the software and hardware, are as vital today as they were then." meaning the interface he envisioned at the time was constrained by the technologies and ideas of the era, notably application orientation, but that his major contribution, user centricity, is still valid. Hertzfeld and Atkinson's interface vision is equally dated and irrelevant.
As far as the mouse thing, there are reallty two issues: type of pointer device and requirement for pointing. I find the first point relatively trivial. The Mac has almost from jump accepted a variety of devices. Personally I am not a big fan of mice or trackballs, but I agree with Raskin about tablets. The second is more interesting. The original Mac did go to great lengths to deprecate the keyboard for system control. But over time that philosophy completely reversed itself. In OS X you can do practically everything from the keyboard.
Both these guys have crazy egos, but Raskin's arguments are always based on valid philosophical arguments. Hertzfeld is obviously a brilliant programmer, but I don't think he is the kind of intellectual or academic Tesler and Raskin are. Did you see the garbage Eazel produced?
I've never understood Hertzfeld's position on this. How can the man who wrote the System Resource Toolbox say that "the two most definitive aspects of Macintosh technology" were "the Motorola 68000 microprocessor and the mouse pointing device?" The two most defining characteristics of the Macintosh were the basic concept of an appliance like consumer computer designed entirely around the user experience, and the WSYWYG interface. Both were entirely due to Raskin's efforts (although the implementation of the interface was mostly Atkinson and Hertzfeld).
Raskin's 1967 Penn State PhD thesis, entitled A Hardware-Independent Computer Drawing System Using List-Structured Modeling: The Quick-Draw Graphics System argued character based interfaces should give way entirely to bitmapped interfaces with, "the ability to define arbitrary symbols and manipulate them into complex pictures. Such symbols could be representations of furniture and fixtures in floor plans, resistors, transistors, and the like in schematic diagrams, notes and clef signs in music, the individual shapes in flow charts, symbols for atoms and molecular structures, sentence structure diagrams, and so on without limit."
I don't see what difference it makes what type of pointing device Raskin favored. If anything, a pointer which doesn't require you entirely remove one hand from the keyboard has some apparent advantages. But for the record, once they settled on Englebart's brainchild, he was adamant that it not have more than one button (he invented click-drag). When Tesler came over from PARC they had a big debate about it. That actually was a defining characteristic of the computer, and one which differentiated it from all other mouse bearing systems before and after.
I know that I've seen a lot more public-office-holding militant fundamentalists of the atheist variety than the christian variety.
Can you name a few? I can't think of a single one. Even Bernie Sanders isn't an atheist. I can think of at least one Baptist minister in Congress (the great civil rights leader John Lewis), but no atheists.
Besides, I don't understand whaat you mean by "fundamentalist" atheist. Aethism has no mythical original principles to restore or basic text to literally interpret. There is only one principle, the nonexistence of god, and all atheists agree on it.
You can probably recover all or most of your deleted iPod files with Norton UnErase.
If you mount your iPod as a disk the files are visible from the command line. Just open Terminal.app and cd to/Volumes/$YOUR_IPOD"S_NAME/iPod_Control/Music. Inside will be a bunch of directories Named F*. They contain your audio files. I assume those are gone since you synced your iPod to an empty library. However, so long as you don't write anything else to your iPod in the meantime, Norton should have no trouble recovering them. Then you can just cd to where they are and cp them to someplace on your computer. Not sure what that will do to their DRM. But at least you then have both a record of your purchase and the actual files if you need to argue with Apple. Good luck.
Ironically, Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf's most famous alleged [self?] deceit was actually 100% true. When he claimed there were no American troops at Sadaam International Airport he was correct.
So al-Sahaf told the truth on camera at least once. I'm still investigating Rumsfeld.
If you're using hardware, I'd argue that it is native. Anyway, I find it far more impressive that debian runs on this machine, than OS X "runs" on this machine.
The machines in question had a software emulator, it just lived in ROM. Later on that ROM moved to a file loaded into RAM from disk (New World ROM). Seems to me emulation is by definition done in software. I'm not sure what would constitute a "hardware emulator." Sounds like a synonym for clone computer.
For example, women and people of lower classes were not allowed to vote in many early european democracies, and I am sure we could find groups that weren't in early american democracy too
Umh yeah... women and people of lower classes. Hell, the vast majority of black men couldn't vote until at least the late 1960's (when enforcment of the 15th Amendment kicked in via applicaion of the 1965 Voting Rights Act). Women didn't get the right to vote nationally until the 19th Amendment in 1920. Every original state had a property requirement for voting. And even if you were wealthy enough to vote, the only directly elected federal office was the House of Representatives. There was no popular vote for the Presidency until 1824 (and even then it was not binding) or for the Senate until 1917.
I agree, the Bank of Sweden Prize For Economics in Memory of Alfred Nobel is not really a Nobel prize. It also frequently goes to fringe cranks, more often from the right than the left but not exclusively so. Gunnar Myrdal, IIRC the first laureate and a member of the board of the Bank of Sweden, denounced the prize as hopelessly politicized. Myrdal is widely credited with dragging Sweden out of the great Depression.
That said, I think Samuelson is one of the more credible economists to receive the prize.
They allow all Amish people to experience technology every day, they just control what technology. Different groups allow different things, but technologies such as the wheel and woven textiles are pretty ubiquitous. Buttons (clothing fasteners) are not allowed in some communities, but others allow cell phones (at least in barns).
Anyway, the phenomenon you re referring to is called rumspringa.
I thought everyone knew the Pentagon was already doing this, to the tune of 18,000 privately contracted troops. Not all foreign of course. But many are.
The reason Mac's were in the schools in the first place was that Apple HEAVILY discounted them to get them into the schools, those days are past unfortunately.
Past? Right now I can get an iBook (combo drive) with Airport Extreme and iPod from Harvard for $1066. That is $411 under retail. Last week I bought a 17" Powerbook with Applecare for $2559. That is a $589 discount. Had I been buying it as personal, rather than departmental purchase, I could have thrown in an iPod for another $67 (after rebate).
Apple educational deals are still fantastic. And I'm not even talking about bulk purchases.
You do know that richer people pay more in taxes than others, right? Doesn't the richest 10% pay about 50% of the total annual tax revenue?
No, they pay about 50% of Federal income tax, which, IIRC, is now about half of Federal individual tax revenue. They pay a trivial percentage of payroll taxes, roughly the other half.
No, industry association sponsorship has nothing to do with it. In order to be proprietary a protocol would need to be held as a trade secret or patented. An implementation would need to be copyrighted and/or held as a trade secret, but it would be silly not to copyright it, since that is trivial.
Main Entry: 1proprietary
Pronunciation: pr&-'prI-&-"ter-E
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -taries
1 : one that possesses, owns, or holds exclusive right to something; specifically : PROPRIETOR 1
2 : something that is used, produced, or marketed under exclusive legal right of the inventor or maker; specifically : a drug (as a patent medicine) that is protected by secrecy, patent, or copyright against free competition as to name, product, composition, or process of manufacture
Clinton and Carter were quite anti-nuclear as far as their policies were concerned.
What were Carter's anti-nuclear policies? I mean, I know his administration halted reprocessing, but that was due to fear of Plutonium proliferation, not opposition to nuclear power. If Carter was opposed to nuclear power his logic begs investigation. After all, he is the only President who actually ran, maintained and helped design nuclear reactors (while in the Navy).
Chosen by Admiral Hyman Rickover for the nuclear submarine program, he was assigned to Schenectady, N.Y., where he took graduate work at Union College in reactor technology and nuclear physics, and served as senior officer of the pre-commissioning crew of the Seawolf.
16 OCT 1952 - 08 OCT 1953 -- Duty with US Atomic Energy Commission (Division of Reactor Development, Schenectady Operations Office) From 3 NOV 1953 to 1 MAR 1953 he served on temporary duty with Naval Reactors Branch, US Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. "assisting in the design and development of nuclear propulsion plants for naval vessels."
Actually, Apple uses AFP (Appleshare File Protocol), not AFS. Mac OS X ships with AFP, SMB and NFS. Turning on 'file sharing' turns on AFP, which is proprietary.
AFP is not proprietary. It is a published and documented standard. There are three free software implementations. Back when I used to subscribe to the Netatalk mailing list it was full of Apple employees providing gratis technical support to Netatalk developers.
It works a treat. If you're worried about running surface contamination it isn't a big problem, you just reduce the flow rate till there's no drips on the tyre and we're only talking 400ml every 5,000 miles.
I wasn't clear.
A) I don't like the idea of purposely dumping a (US) beer can of oil on the ground every 5,000 miles, even if I spread it out over all 5,000. Unless you use castor oil or corn oil or something.
B) I find total loss lubrication an extremely inelegant solution. It is something you finde in pre-1920 engines. Surely we can do better now. A kevlar belt for instance.
If you can use castor oil, I might be able to overcome objection B. After all, I am unlikely to convince the motorcycle oligopoly to move to a modern belt system anytime soon, Kawasaki GPz 305 notwithstanding. For now, I ride a shaftie anyway.
I love those little bikes. Although the RD was superior by all functional standards, the 400 Four was just magical. One of the bikes I regret never having owned. Too bad you had to lose it to a catastrophic failure.
I remember the old Aermacchi Harley-Davidson two strokes with some fondness. I believe H-D bought the motorcycle division of Aermacchi, the Italian aerospace firm, in the late fifties. IIRC, after they sold it it evolved into Cagiva, which is now the fifth largest motocycle manufacturer in the world, owning such prestigious brands as Ducati,MV Augusta and Husqvarna.
My RD is a bit of a mess. But it has Tomasselli clip ons, Raask rear sets, DG chambers and a ported Daytona head. Needs a complete rebuild though.
Slashdot Mirror
You fail to differentiate between fault and responsibility. It is not our fault that the US does these things, but it is our responsibility, because only we can stop it. Also because it is done in our name, although usually to our detriment. Al Qaeda attacks us not because they think we caused our government to occupy the Arabian peninsula, but because only we can force them out (this was more clearly true of organizations like the PFLP, but still fundamentally holds for Al Qaeda et al).
Of course the Washington Naval Treaty was signed and ratified in 1922, so your assertion that the battleship race caused the UK to plan for war with the US in the 1930s makes about as much sense as your assertion that the US invading the Philipines and Cuba in 1898 is evidence of European bias against America.
Hmm... replacements? Alex Hilton? Am I the only one reminded of The Replacements song Alex Chilton?
Gotta love the Box Tops. Not to mention Big Star.
I am not so sure that the Geneva Convention was the the limiting factor in gas warfare in WWII. I think the technical limitations were more important. Against modern mechanized armies, like the Americans and British, chemical weapons were of limited tactical value. In WWI they proved unpredictable, environmentally sensitive, and difficult to target. Granted, during the war the Germans developed far deadlier chemicals than WWI's phosgene and mustard gas, nonetheless defensive tactics developed in WWI were still deemed effective. The Germans and Soviets in particular were probably hesitant because of their own vulnerabilities. The prevalence of equine transport in those two armies rendered them more susceptible to chemical attack.
Likewise, technical problems precluded all but the Americans and British from strategic chemical attacks. Only those two nations fielded strategic bombing forces capable of effectively delivering the volume necessary for an effective attack on a major city. The Germans had the most advanced agents, but by the time they developed them the Luftwaffe was overwhelmed by allied forces.
Interestingly, the nation best positioned to use gas as a strategic weapon, the United States, did in fact plan to do so. The Army Air Force had an advanced plan for massive mustard gassing of Japanese cities. Japanese air defenses were much softer than the German's. Additionally 8th Air Force commander Curtis Le May had markedly less regard for Japanese civilian life than german. The AAF anticipated millions of Japanese civilian casualties. However, with the success of the Manhattan project, the chemical plan was dropped. After the war the plans were sanitized to look like a hypothetical study and the originals destroyed. However, one original copy, complete with complete hand written versions of the postwar changes, escaped destruction due to a clerical error. It surface in the National archives in the 1990s. There was a big article on it in Military History Quarterly. pabl
Regarding the original point, kernel memory management is not an user interface issue, it is a user experience issue. However, the Macintosh was never designed to narrowly optimize the user interface. It was designed to optimize the user experience. That was Raskin, and later Apple's, goal. At the time, the UI was by far the greatest area of need in user experience, so that is where the bulk of the effort went. Arguably this is still true, but hardware advances has increased the importance better memory management as a component of the user experience. It has also made such management more feasible. You wouldn't believe some of the hoops the Mac team jumped through in order to get beast to run on 128k of RAM.
The full quote reads, "My original vision is outdated and irrelevant. The principles of putting people first, and designing from the interface to the software and hardware, are as vital today as they were then." meaning the interface he envisioned at the time was constrained by the technologies and ideas of the era, notably application orientation, but that his major contribution, user centricity, is still valid. Hertzfeld and Atkinson's interface vision is equally dated and irrelevant.
As far as the mouse thing, there are reallty two issues: type of pointer device and requirement for pointing. I find the first point relatively trivial. The Mac has almost from jump accepted a variety of devices. Personally I am not a big fan of mice or trackballs, but I agree with Raskin about tablets. The second is more interesting. The original Mac did go to great lengths to deprecate the keyboard for system control. But over time that philosophy completely reversed itself. In OS X you can do practically everything from the keyboard.
Both these guys have crazy egos, but Raskin's arguments are always based on valid philosophical arguments. Hertzfeld is obviously a brilliant programmer, but I don't think he is the kind of intellectual or academic Tesler and Raskin are. Did you see the garbage Eazel produced?
I've never understood Hertzfeld's position on this. How can the man who wrote the System Resource Toolbox say that "the two most definitive aspects of Macintosh technology" were "the Motorola 68000 microprocessor and the mouse pointing device?" The two most defining characteristics of the Macintosh were the basic concept of an appliance like consumer computer designed entirely around the user experience, and the WSYWYG interface. Both were entirely due to Raskin's efforts (although the implementation of the interface was mostly Atkinson and Hertzfeld).
Raskin's 1967 Penn State PhD thesis, entitled A Hardware-Independent Computer Drawing System Using List-Structured Modeling: The Quick-Draw Graphics System argued character based interfaces should give way entirely to bitmapped interfaces with, "the ability to define arbitrary symbols and manipulate them into complex pictures. Such symbols could be representations of furniture and fixtures in floor plans, resistors, transistors, and the like in schematic diagrams, notes and clef signs in music, the individual shapes in flow charts, symbols for atoms and molecular structures, sentence structure diagrams, and so on without limit."
I don't see what difference it makes what type of pointing device Raskin favored. If anything, a pointer which doesn't require you entirely remove one hand from the keyboard has some apparent advantages. But for the record, once they settled on Englebart's brainchild, he was adamant that it not have more than one button (he invented click-drag). When Tesler came over from PARC they had a big debate about it. That actually was a defining characteristic of the computer, and one which differentiated it from all other mouse bearing systems before and after.
Can you name a few? I can't think of a single one. Even Bernie Sanders isn't an atheist. I can think of at least one Baptist minister in Congress (the great civil rights leader John Lewis), but no atheists.
Besides, I don't understand whaat you mean by "fundamentalist" atheist. Aethism has no mythical original principles to restore or basic text to literally interpret. There is only one principle, the nonexistence of god, and all atheists agree on it.
You can probably recover all or most of your deleted iPod files with Norton UnErase.
/Volumes/$YOUR_IPOD"S_NAME/iPod_Control/Music. Inside will be a bunch of directories Named F*. They contain your audio files. I assume those are gone since you synced your iPod to an empty library. However, so long as you don't write anything else to your iPod in the meantime, Norton should have no trouble recovering them. Then you can just cd to where they are and cp them to someplace on your computer. Not sure what that will do to their DRM. But at least you then have both a record of your purchase and the actual files if you need to argue with Apple. Good luck.
If you mount your iPod as a disk the files are visible from the command line. Just open Terminal.app and cd to
Ironically, Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf's most famous alleged [self?] deceit was actually 100% true. When he claimed there were no American troops at Sadaam International Airport he was correct.
So al-Sahaf told the truth on camera at least once. I'm still investigating Rumsfeld.
I was going to say that I thought that was translation, not emulation, but it turns out I was precisely incorrect.
The machines in question had a software emulator, it just lived in ROM. Later on that ROM moved to a file loaded into RAM from disk (New World ROM). Seems to me emulation is by definition done in software. I'm not sure what would constitute a "hardware emulator." Sounds like a synonym for clone computer.
Hey look, we have the same sig.
Umh yeah... women and people of lower classes. Hell, the vast majority of black men couldn't vote until at least the late 1960's (when enforcment of the 15th Amendment kicked in via applicaion of the 1965 Voting Rights Act). Women didn't get the right to vote nationally until the 19th Amendment in 1920. Every original state had a property requirement for voting. And even if you were wealthy enough to vote, the only directly elected federal office was the House of Representatives. There was no popular vote for the Presidency until 1824 (and even then it was not binding) or for the Senate until 1917.
I recommend you read some Howard Zinn.
I agree, the Bank of Sweden Prize For Economics in Memory of Alfred Nobel is not really a Nobel prize. It also frequently goes to fringe cranks, more often from the right than the left but not exclusively so. Gunnar Myrdal, IIRC the first laureate and a member of the board of the Bank of Sweden, denounced the prize as hopelessly politicized. Myrdal is widely credited with dragging Sweden out of the great Depression.
That said, I think Samuelson is one of the more credible economists to receive the prize.
They allow all Amish people to experience technology every day, they just control what technology. Different groups allow different things, but technologies such as the wheel and woven textiles are pretty ubiquitous. Buttons (clothing fasteners) are not allowed in some communities, but others allow cell phones (at least in barns).
Anyway, the phenomenon you re referring to is called rumspringa.
I thought everyone knew the Pentagon was already doing this, to the tune of 18,000 privately contracted troops. Not all foreign of course. But many are.
Past? Right now I can get an iBook (combo drive) with Airport Extreme and iPod from Harvard for $1066. That is $411 under retail. Last week I bought a 17" Powerbook with Applecare for $2559. That is a $589 discount. Had I been buying it as personal, rather than departmental purchase, I could have thrown in an iPod for another $67 (after rebate).
Apple educational deals are still fantastic. And I'm not even talking about bulk purchases.
Or phosphor coat it for that matter? Tritium is a Hydrogen isotope.
I suspect you are thinking of Radium.
No, they pay about 50% of Federal income tax, which, IIRC, is now about half of Federal individual tax revenue. They pay a trivial percentage of payroll taxes, roughly the other half.
No, industry association sponsorship has nothing to do with it. In order to be proprietary a protocol would need to be held as a trade secret or patented. An implementation would need to be copyrighted and/or held as a trade secret, but it would be silly not to copyright it, since that is trivial.
Main Entry: 1proprietary
Pronunciation: pr&-'prI-&-"ter-E
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -taries
1 : one that possesses, owns, or holds exclusive right to something; specifically : PROPRIETOR 1
2 : something that is used, produced, or marketed under exclusive legal right of the inventor or maker; specifically : a drug (as a patent medicine) that is protected by secrecy, patent, or copyright against free competition as to name, product, composition, or process of manufacture
What were Carter's anti-nuclear policies? I mean, I know his administration halted reprocessing, but that was due to fear of Plutonium proliferation, not opposition to nuclear power. If Carter was opposed to nuclear power his logic begs investigation. After all, he is the only President who actually ran, maintained and helped design nuclear reactors (while in the Navy).
Chosen by Admiral Hyman Rickover for the nuclear submarine program, he was assigned to Schenectady, N.Y., where he took graduate work at Union College in reactor technology and nuclear physics, and served as senior officer of the pre-commissioning crew of the Seawolf.
16 OCT 1952 - 08 OCT 1953 -- Duty with US Atomic Energy Commission (Division of Reactor Development, Schenectady Operations Office) From 3 NOV 1953 to 1 MAR 1953 he served on temporary duty with Naval Reactors Branch, US Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. "assisting in the design and development of nuclear propulsion plants for naval vessels."
A) I don't like the idea of purposely dumping a (US) beer can of oil on the ground every 5,000 miles, even if I spread it out over all 5,000. Unless you use castor oil or corn oil or something.
B) I find total loss lubrication an extremely inelegant solution. It is something you finde in pre-1920 engines. Surely we can do better now. A kevlar belt for instance.
If you can use castor oil, I might be able to overcome objection B. After all, I am unlikely to convince the motorcycle oligopoly to move to a modern belt system anytime soon, Kawasaki GPz 305 notwithstanding. For now, I ride a shaftie anyway.
I love those little bikes. Although the RD was superior by all functional standards, the 400 Four was just magical. One of the bikes I regret never having owned. Too bad you had to lose it to a catastrophic failure.
I remember the old Aermacchi Harley-Davidson two strokes with some fondness. I believe H-D bought the motorcycle division of Aermacchi, the Italian aerospace firm, in the late fifties. IIRC, after they sold it it evolved into Cagiva, which is now the fifth largest motocycle manufacturer in the world, owning such prestigious brands as Ducati, MV Augusta and Husqvarna.
My RD is a bit of a mess. But it has Tomasselli clip ons, Raask rear sets, DG chambers and a ported Daytona head. Needs a complete rebuild though.