we saw how instrumental even "slow" electro-mechanical machines were [used for specific applications].
The "general purpose" thing didn't offer enough advantages to overcome hardware issues. Hardware was still such a strong factor that purpose-built machines were either more economical than a general purpose computer, or the difference was too small to make R&D on general purpose computers worth it.
Purpose-built machines are almost always more efficient at their intended task than general purpose computers. The advantages of general-purpose were slight compared to hardware issues.
As a thought experiment, suppose many at the time did understand the advantages of general-purpose computing. Would they have considered the advantages worthy enough to start building hundreds of mechanical GP computers?
I doubt so. Building something like the Internet with the hardware of the time would likely be a practical failure. It would be like Comcast snags x 1000.
Babbage, Grace Hopper (high-level programming languages), and the Xerox "labbers" were dreamers. Their visions were ahead of the hardware of the time.
Actually, the reason high-level programming language research initially got funding is that the military contractors couldn't transfer programs across brands and models of computers. The human-readability issue was not the main motivator. Grace initially mostly focused on the readability issue, not vendor-independence.
I suspect this is a mind-game gambit. The enemy now knows some of our planes MAY have a laser, but don't know which, when, or how many. Thus, they feel they have to spend money and weight to counter them. Even though the laser is probably not a significant threat at this time, the enemy is losing some resources and capabilities to counter them.
Also, Rupert Murdoch (of Fox News fame) purchased myspace.com, the forerunner of Facebook, in an effort to compete in the social media realm. But, it couldn't get traction.
It seems progressives fail in AM radio and conservatives fail in social media for some reason, despite repeated attempts.
Yep! Both parties are in the back pockets of special interests and big donors, and merely pay lip-service to real solutions or "core values".
When Party X is in power, Party Y bashes Party X for doing very same things Party Y did earlier, when they were in power, hoping voters don't remember, and half of them don't.
Look how shocked voters reacted to the Patriot Act's domestic snooping. Some warned of that kind of snooping when the bill as introduced, but almost nobody listened because they were more afraid of terrorists smashing planes into buildings at the time.
And having to kiss up to special interests is why ACA ("Obamacare") lets pharmaceuticals charge an arm and leg compared to costs in other countries, and why Israel can swipe land without getting its wrist slapped like Russia did.
I'd like for our system to explore ways to reduce the legalized bribery that's in place. But, I'm not such an idealist to believe all corruption can be cleared out. After all, humans run the system: cruft is inevitable.
Typically left-leaning people will notice more if left-leaning stories are rejected/suppressed and right-leaning people will notice more if right-leaning stories are rejected/suppressed. That's human nature: we naturally "protect our turf"; a tribal-like instinct.
Without some kind of objective statistical analysis, it's hard to know if there is really an aggregate bias, or if the complainers here are (perhaps subconsciously) cherry-picking rejection incidents. And, objective measurements of politics are hard to come by because classification of a topic or story tends to reflect ones viewpoint also.
They'll hold it until the slump is over or until they can invest in another country. The middle class and poor are much less likely to sit on it and wait.
All your side "evidence" is conspiratorial. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and shits like a duck, then it's probably a duck, you Quack!
As much as I hate MS would personally LOVE to see them die a miserable painful writhing frothy death, Google and Apple need competition to avoid yet more dickass monopolies and oligopolies.
The irony: a handful of script-kiddies using millions of zombified Windows machines to attack MS. They wouldn't be so easy to zombify if MS took security seriously.
Lack of discipline per voters and/or politicians is not something Keynes or non-Keynes will solve. If a group of people fail to plan out of sloth, shit will happen.
But I'm for some form of balanced budget amendment whereby the debt can't get too high during boom years, barring some big war or threat. Whether it will work is hard to say.
Slashdot Mirror
The "general purpose" thing didn't offer enough advantages to overcome hardware issues. Hardware was still such a strong factor that purpose-built machines were either more economical than a general purpose computer, or the difference was too small to make R&D on general purpose computers worth it.
Purpose-built machines are almost always more efficient at their intended task than general purpose computers. The advantages of general-purpose were slight compared to hardware issues.
As a thought experiment, suppose many at the time did understand the advantages of general-purpose computing. Would they have considered the advantages worthy enough to start building hundreds of mechanical GP computers?
I doubt so. Building something like the Internet with the hardware of the time would likely be a practical failure. It would be like Comcast snags x 1000.
Babbage, Grace Hopper (high-level programming languages), and the Xerox "labbers" were dreamers. Their visions were ahead of the hardware of the time.
Actually, the reason high-level programming language research initially got funding is that the military contractors couldn't transfer programs across brands and models of computers. The human-readability issue was not the main motivator. Grace initially mostly focused on the readability issue, not vendor-independence.
Just trying to clarify by asking questions; no offense meant. I probably should have asked it in a different way.
I suspect this is a mind-game gambit. The enemy now knows some of our planes MAY have a laser, but don't know which, when, or how many. Thus, they feel they have to spend money and weight to counter them. Even though the laser is probably not a significant threat at this time, the enemy is losing some resources and capabilities to counter them.
Also, Rupert Murdoch (of Fox News fame) purchased myspace.com, the forerunner of Facebook, in an effort to compete in the social media realm. But, it couldn't get traction.
It seems progressives fail in AM radio and conservatives fail in social media for some reason, despite repeated attempts.
Yep! Both parties are in the back pockets of special interests and big donors, and merely pay lip-service to real solutions or "core values".
When Party X is in power, Party Y bashes Party X for doing very same things Party Y did earlier, when they were in power, hoping voters don't remember, and half of them don't.
Look how shocked voters reacted to the Patriot Act's domestic snooping. Some warned of that kind of snooping when the bill as introduced, but almost nobody listened because they were more afraid of terrorists smashing planes into buildings at the time.
And having to kiss up to special interests is why ACA ("Obamacare") lets pharmaceuticals charge an arm and leg compared to costs in other countries, and why Israel can swipe land without getting its wrist slapped like Russia did.
I'd like for our system to explore ways to reduce the legalized bribery that's in place. But, I'm not such an idealist to believe all corruption can be cleared out. After all, humans run the system: cruft is inevitable.
Could be.
Typically left-leaning people will notice more if left-leaning stories are rejected/suppressed and right-leaning people will notice more if right-leaning stories are rejected/suppressed. That's human nature: we naturally "protect our turf"; a tribal-like instinct.
Without some kind of objective statistical analysis, it's hard to know if there is really an aggregate bias, or if the complainers here are (perhaps subconsciously) cherry-picking rejection incidents. And, objective measurements of politics are hard to come by because classification of a topic or story tends to reflect ones viewpoint also.
Probably to buy up real-estate, jacking up prices
So writing Arabic on a plane is grounds for questioning also?
It's Perl, run!!!
Use turtles, dummy
I believe the Treasury Dept. managed it then.
Critique of Chapwood:
http://cnafinance.com/beware-o...
Correction, the poster's side evidence, not necessarily your side evidence, since it's an anonymous coward.
of other countries
They'll hold it until the slump is over or until they can invest in another country. The middle class and poor are much less likely to sit on it and wait.
All your side "evidence" is conspiratorial. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and shits like a duck, then it's probably a duck, you Quack!
Correction: should be "and would personally"
TC is usually interpreted as "approaching" infinite storage, if given lots and lots of time.
Also note I should have said "could run" instead of "does run". One would need to code up some adapters/emulators first.
As much as I hate MS would personally LOVE to see them die a miserable painful writhing frothy death, Google and Apple need competition to avoid yet more dickass monopolies and oligopolies.
The irony: a handful of script-kiddies using millions of zombified Windows machines to attack MS. They wouldn't be so easy to zombify if MS took security seriously.
And it does run Linux, because it's Turing Complete. Just....very....slowly
They will be missing out on tourism and merchandising revenue that could help fund it.
Grammar McGramface!
How did your mom get all those dicks?
Lack of discipline per voters and/or politicians is not something Keynes or non-Keynes will solve. If a group of people fail to plan out of sloth, shit will happen.
But I'm for some form of balanced budget amendment whereby the debt can't get too high during boom years, barring some big war or threat. Whether it will work is hard to say.