A friend worked for DEC in the minicomputer era and told of receiving an order from his "device testing company" in Alamagordo NM. The order was an exact replacement for a much older system they already had. Curious, he did some asking and got the following story.
In an underground nuclear test, sensors are buried along with the device. A computer, located miles away, reads the sensors into core memory and then cuts its own power before the shockwave arrives. Later, technicians power-up the system and dump the data to tape for analysis. This works but has a high cost-per-test factor because of the long sensor cables running across the desert. Needless to say, between the nuclear explosion and the extreme shock suffered by much of the cable, the cables are pretty much "one use only."
An engineer decided they could save money by using much shorter cables, and mounting the computer trailers (think 18-wheelers) on telephone poles, steel cables and large springs near the blast site.
Unfortunately, when the "device" goes off, a wave-like effect ripples outward and the telephone poles were tilted away from each other, and then toward each other, and the trailer was first vaulted up 20' and then down 40' -- but was only 10' off the ground to begin with.
When they pried open the badly dented trailer, the computers inside were just so many "loose parts."
Our small programming group ordered the first minicomputers the company had ever purchased. When the systems arrived (in multiple 19-inch rack heavy-steel, wheeled cabinets), the truck driver announced he drove the truck but didn't load or unload. So, on a hot August afternoon in Memphis TN, we mustered the programming team and rolled the first cabinet to the truck's power lift gate, lowered it to street level, and then rolled it off the gate and onto the very hot asphalt where it immediately sank about 1" to the bottom of the cabinet. The unit weighed a couple of hundred pounds, had no lifting handles, and was slowly making its way deeper and deeper.
We hired an "unloading crew" and let them figure it out.
On a mainframe computer, a new "peripheral" arrived (measuring 8' x 6' x 3' and weighing about 1500 pounds). The delivery crew carefully checked the elevator's limits and seeing that the unit + one person would push it over the limit, they decided to push the unit onto the elevator all by itself, reach in an push the button for the 4th floor, and then meet it there and roll the unit back out. But when the 1500 pound cabinet was rolled in, the elevator suddenly dropped several feet (threatening to remove arms and hands) before realigning itself with the exterior floor. And, upon reaching the 4th floor, the opposite -- a sudden jump upwards -- again threatened but everyone escaped injury. The final obstacle to delivery was the ramp into the computer room. The delivery team opened the door, stood behind the unit and pushed, picking up speed as they approached the ramp and, with a shuddering boom and echoing rumble, the unit made it all the way in and rolled to a safe stop. Unfortunately, the office immediately beneath the computer room entrance was that of a dentist. We never heard exactly what happened but the rumor was that the settlement cost several thousand dollars.
I was in Wuhan China a few months ago (Oct/Nov 2003) and noticed this problem. See http://www.flat5.net/ for a link and more photographs in this, and other, regards.
Remove the obviously incorrect blank ("%2 0" should be "%20" but the message posting engine (here at slashdot) keeps re-inserting it so you'll have to cut, paste, and then hand-edit the URL: http://www.baystarcapital.com/public/pdf/Bay Star%2 0White%20Paper%20October%202002.pdf The link works just fine then and the Microsoft connection is certainly possible. The only issue is whether or not this *specific* investment in SCO came from them (whether directly or indirectly). Unless BayStar Capital (or someone else) divulges who gave them the money to invest in SCO, however, the question will remain, Is Microsoft behind this? Although it appears that *could* be the case, I don't think the existing evidence is conclusive, just very very suggestive.
Blame me. Protesting they had advertised an "unlimited" download service, I was nonetheless cancelled by emusic.com several months ago against my wishes. My fat Internet pipe (1 Mbit, each way) allowed me to download a lot of music. Had emusic.com advised me of a limit (such as the 2000 songs per month mentioned here), I would gladly have cut back my activities but, in their two emails to me before unilaterally terminating my subscription, they simply said I was downloading an "unreasonable" amount of music. Okay, so I like Jazz--a lot--and was building up a pretty good collection for my random MP3 selection player. Like many things in life, I guess I can only say, "It was good while it lasted."
Slashdot Mirror
In addition to learning C/C++/Obj-C, don't forget Mandarin. You'll need it to communicate with your fellow employees.
In an underground nuclear test, sensors are buried along with the device. A computer, located miles away, reads the sensors into core memory and then cuts its own power before the shockwave arrives. Later, technicians power-up the system and dump the data to tape for analysis. This works but has a high cost-per-test factor because of the long sensor cables running across the desert. Needless to say, between the nuclear explosion and the extreme shock suffered by much of the cable, the cables are pretty much "one use only."
An engineer decided they could save money by using much shorter cables, and mounting the computer trailers (think 18-wheelers) on telephone poles, steel cables and large springs near the blast site.
Unfortunately, when the "device" goes off, a wave-like effect ripples outward and the telephone poles were tilted away from each other, and then toward each other, and the trailer was first vaulted up 20' and then down 40' -- but was only 10' off the ground to begin with.
When they pried open the badly dented trailer, the computers inside were just so many "loose parts."
Our small programming group ordered the first minicomputers the company had ever purchased. When the systems arrived (in multiple 19-inch rack heavy-steel, wheeled cabinets), the truck driver announced he drove the truck but didn't load or unload. So, on a hot August afternoon in Memphis TN, we mustered the programming team and rolled the first cabinet to the truck's power lift gate, lowered it to street level, and then rolled it off the gate and onto the very hot asphalt where it immediately sank about 1" to the bottom of the cabinet. The unit weighed a couple of hundred pounds, had no lifting handles, and was slowly making its way deeper and deeper.
We hired an "unloading crew" and let them figure it out.
On a mainframe computer, a new "peripheral" arrived (measuring 8' x 6' x 3' and weighing about 1500 pounds). The delivery crew carefully checked the elevator's limits and seeing that the unit + one person would push it over the limit, they decided to push the unit onto the elevator all by itself, reach in an push the button for the 4th floor, and then meet it there and roll the unit back out. But when the 1500 pound cabinet was rolled in, the elevator suddenly dropped several feet (threatening to remove arms and hands) before realigning itself with the exterior floor. And, upon reaching the 4th floor, the opposite -- a sudden jump upwards -- again threatened but everyone escaped injury. The final obstacle to delivery was the ramp into the computer room. The delivery team opened the door, stood behind the unit and pushed, picking up speed as they approached the ramp and, with a shuddering boom and echoing rumble, the unit made it all the way in and rolled to a safe stop. Unfortunately, the office immediately beneath the computer room entrance was that of a dentist. We never heard exactly what happened but the rumor was that the settlement cost several thousand dollars.
I was in Wuhan China a few months ago (Oct/Nov 2003) and noticed this problem. See http://www.flat5.net/ for a link and more photographs in this, and other, regards.
Remove the obviously incorrect blank ("%2 0" should be "%20" but the message posting engine (here at slashdot) keeps re-inserting it so you'll have to cut, paste, and then hand-edit the URL:y Star%2 0White%20Paper%20October%202002.pdf
http://www.baystarcapital.com/public/pdf/Ba
The link works just fine then and the Microsoft connection is certainly possible. The only issue is whether or not this *specific* investment in SCO came from them (whether directly or indirectly). Unless BayStar Capital (or someone else) divulges who gave them the money to invest in SCO, however, the question will remain, Is Microsoft behind this? Although it appears that *could* be the case, I don't think the existing evidence is conclusive, just very very suggestive.
Blame me. Protesting they had advertised an "unlimited" download service, I was nonetheless cancelled by emusic.com several months ago against my wishes. My fat Internet pipe (1 Mbit, each way) allowed me to download a lot of music. Had emusic.com advised me of a limit (such as the 2000 songs per month mentioned here), I would gladly have cut back my activities but, in their two emails to me before unilaterally terminating my subscription, they simply said I was downloading an "unreasonable" amount of music. Okay, so I like Jazz--a lot--and was building up a pretty good collection for my random MP3 selection player. Like many things in life, I guess I can only say, "It was good while it lasted."