[cctalk] Re: Knockoffs, was: Low cost logic analyzer

[Alexander Huemer via cctalk]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 09:25:31PM -0400, Ken Seefried wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 12:32 PM Alexander Huemer via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:05:41PM +0800, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote:
> > > FSF does not enforce anything.
> >
> > https://gpl-violations.org/
> > They do though.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> 
> Go to 'News' on that site and the last news about an enforcement action was
> from 2013.

True.
Though, Harald Welte, the person behind the project is still very active 
in the free software community and surely happy to help.

> If you actually want to pursue GPL violations, especially if it's related
> to a non-FSF sponsored project, you'll have better luck with the EFF or
> appealing to someone like Popehat/Ken White to help find some *pro bono *
> representation.

That might be the case, I don't know these people.
There is also the SFC[1] who are currently attacking John Deere for 
violating the GPL in their farm equipment[2], which is kind of a big 
deal.

-Alex

[1] https://sfconservancy.org/
[2] https://lwn.net/Articles/926330/

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[ben via cctalk]

On 2023-03-16 8:38 p.m., Ethan Dicks via cctalk wrote:

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 5:05 PM Cameron Kaiser via cctalk
 wrote:

This has been around the block:

You can lose a screw in a micro.
You can lose a screwdriver in a mini.
You can get lost in a mainframe.


We had an Amdahl in the middle of a multi-thousand-square-foot
computer room (one of several) at work 25 years ago.  I do not
know/remember the model number but it was made of up several cabinets
not in a line.  It had such a convoluted layout that you could
literally stand in the "middle" of it and not see outside.  If you
stood in exactly the right spot, the blank panels lined up and made
the visual appearance of a box with no exits.

You _could_ get lost in that one, as long as you didn't take half a step away.

-ethan


How did they upgrade the main frame after that?
Ben.

[cctalk] Re: PSU of a 11/23SD??

[Holm Tiffe via cctalk]

The PSU (and the PDP11/73 in a BA11) is working again.

After thorough cleaning of the PSU PCB (had to dismount the heatsink and
the 3 TO3's, loosen the TO220's) I'vew checked the semiconductors..ok so far. 
Fuse F2 was
blown.
Interestingly the electrolyte of that original Mallory cap seems to
have some oil based blackish contents, it was impossible to remove that
in a water/soap solution, even in a ultrasonic cleaner.
I've finally used "white spirit" (Terpentinersatz in german)to clean up
the things.
I've mounted new fans (230V~ Types from EBMPABST (230V~ here anyways))
and now the pdp is working again, at least with ODT, don't have that
RX02 from that machine here.

Regards,
Holm

Mattis Lind wrote:

> That is a BA11-M box with a H780 supply. The schematics can be found in the
> KC780 document since the front end processor of the 11/780 is a PDP-11/03
> with a RX01 drive.
> In the end of this document there is a schematic:
> 
> http://bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/vax/780/MP00534_KC780_Nov77.pdf
> 
> Good luck!
> 
> /Mattis
> 
> Den mån 13 mars 2023 kl 10:57 skrev Holm Tiffe via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>:
> 
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have to repair an PSU of a 11/23 n a BA11 Box with an H9720 Backplane
> > (with an KDJ-11A) that has run an CNC milling machine until 2 weeks
> > before now. :-) This is a Fidia machine..never heard about it before.
> >
> > The problem is that a big 19000µF 40V capacitor in the PSU has failed
> > and that I think because of that the 2nd of the two Nidec fans has
> > finally failed.
> > I'm in the process of cleaning the goo from the PSU-PCB, found a burnt
> > 5A fuse and now I'm checking the Semiconductors...
> >
> > The problem is here that the Transistors (and diodes) have uncommon
> > types printed on, an TO220 is named SJE2677, another one is labeled
> > 12652-00 RCA..and so on.
> > I've found a label with "0H780-B" on the PSU.. H780 PSU?
> > Where can I get some schematics from that beast? It is a secondary
> > switcher ist seems.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Holm
> > --
> >Technik Service u. Handel Tiffe, www.tsht.de, Holm Tiffe,
> >  Goethestrasse 15, 09569 Oederan, USt-Id: DE253710583
> > i...@tsht.de Fax +49 37292 709779 Tel +49 37292 709778 Mobil: 0172 8790
> > 741
> >
> >

-- 
   Technik Service u. Handel Tiffe, www.tsht.de, Holm Tiffe, 
 Goethestrasse 15, 09569 Oederan, USt-Id: DE253710583
i...@tsht.de Fax +49 37292 709779 Tel +49 37292 709778 Mobil: 0172 8790 741

[cctalk] domesticating the computer - call for last inputs

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Ok, I think we have a good narrated composition!  It is still
Unlisted since there are a few more things to finalize/decide.  But unless
we spot any major flaw in the rendering, this should be wrapped up over the
next day or so.   There are a few somewhat subtle easter eggs added.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPrHfUrhjQk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPrHfUrhjQk>>


One question is: should this be set to "Yes it is for kids"?  My
understanding is Enabling that prevents Comments being enabled, but I'm not
sure if there is any other benefit. But yes, this is NOT a documentary
and is intended more for a middle/high school audience.


Other decisions are things like final thumbnail and writing up the
Description, credits, etc.

And - recall - this wasn't intended as a "full history of computing", the
focus was on the 1970s.  But there is a brief segment towards the end that
honors some pre-1970s work.

Also, this may be the only "history of personal computer" related video
that doesn't mention the word Gates or Wozniak  [ that wasn't exactly
intentional! ;) actually the original intent was to avoid any names at all,
it wasn't a biography - but a few do end up mentioned ]

Thanks for all the feedback and criticism - it won't be perfect for
everyone, but I think it is far better than what we started with.   My
"technical review team" has included:

Dennis Roberson (SCAMP/IBM 5100 lead engineer)
Dan Bricklin (VisiCalc)
Scott Adams (Adventure and many other games)
Ken Williams (Sierra OnLine)




-Steve

[cctalk] VMS V4.2 MUP (Mandatory Update) wanted!

[Hans-Ulrich Hölscher via cctalk]

The mandatory update for VMS V4.2 is still missing in my collection.

Because of that, VMS V4.2 is not fully usable,
neither can layered software be installed nor can
it be upgraded to VMS V4.3.

Who can help???

[cctalk] Re: VMS V4.2 MUP (Mandatory Update) wanted!

[Plamen Mihaylov via cctalk]

I probably have microvms 4.2 mup

On Friday, March 17, 2023, Hans-Ulrich Hölscher via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> The mandatory update for VMS V4.2 is still missing in my collection.
>
> Because of that, VMS V4.2 is not fully usable,
> neither can layered software be installed nor can
> it be upgraded to VMS V4.3.
>
> Who can help???
>

[cctalk] Re: VMS V4.2 MUP (Mandatory Update) wanted!

[Hans-Ulrich Hölscher via cctalk]

Hi,
that's great news!
Could you please verify?
Is it on diskette (probably RX50), tape (TK50) or an image for simh?
Can I help you with other VMS software?

Thanks a lot!

Ulli

Am Fr., 17. März 2023 um 14:21 Uhr schrieb Plamen Mihaylov via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org>:

> I probably have microvms 4.2 mup
>
> On Friday, March 17, 2023, Hans-Ulrich Hölscher via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> > The mandatory update for VMS V4.2 is still missing in my collection.
> >
> > Because of that, VMS V4.2 is not fully usable,
> > neither can layered software be installed nor can
> > it be upgraded to VMS V4.3.
> >
> > Who can help???
> >
>

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Paul Koning via cctalk]

> On Mar 16, 2023, at 10:14 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> On 3/15/23 17:23, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote:
> 
>> Yes, the IBM 709x ran in single-job fashion.  I don't think it had
>> interrupts, so breaking off one program to schedule another was not
>> possible.  Also, it had no memory protection.  We had a 7094 at
>> Washington University in the late 1960s, and it was the main computer
>> resource on campus.  When the moved up to a 360/50, they were able to
>> benefit from multiprogramming, and got a boost in throughput, although
>> the 7094 was QUITE a bit faster than the 360/50.
> ...
> The CDC 1604 (1959 (certainly had interrupts, both internal and
> external, but I do not believe it had memory protection.  It did have a
> console loudspeaker driven by a 3-bit DAC, however.

I'm still trying to get a good answer to "when did the first commercial (as 
opposed to one-off lab) computer appear that had interrupts as a standard 
feature?"

It looks like there was the IBM 704, in 1958, with interrupts but some 
documentation made me think it was an optional feature.  The other machine from 
1958 I can think of is the Electrologica X1.  That is the machine that 
confronted Dijkstra with the need to develop new theory to deal with the 
non-sequential behavior of machines with interrupts, and his Ph.D. thesis was 
the result.  The X1 is also interesting in that it has what much later would be 
called a BIOS -- a ROM-resident software library that included I/O services 
including dealing with interrupts, an assembler/loader, and an operator 
interface.  Dijkstra wrote that, and the source code is in an appendix of his 
thesis.

paul

[cctalk] Re: VMS V4.2 MUP (Mandatory Update) wanted!

[Rob Jarratt via cctalk]

I wouldn't mind having a copy for completeness too...

> -Original Message-
> From: Hans-Ulrich Hölscher via cctalk 
> Sent: 17 March 2023 13:25
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts 
> Cc: Plamen Mihaylov ; Hans-Ulrich
> Hölscher 
> Subject: [cctalk] Re: VMS V4.2 MUP (Mandatory Update) wanted!
> 
> Hi,
> that's great news!
> Could you please verify?
> Is it on diskette (probably RX50), tape (TK50) or an image for simh?
> Can I help you with other VMS software?
> 
> Thanks a lot!
> 
> Ulli
> 
> Am Fr., 17. März 2023 um 14:21 Uhr schrieb Plamen Mihaylov via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>:
> 
> > I probably have microvms 4.2 mup
> >
> > On Friday, March 17, 2023, Hans-Ulrich Hölscher via cctalk <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The mandatory update for VMS V4.2 is still missing in my collection.
> > >
> > > Because of that, VMS V4.2 is not fully usable, neither can layered
> > > software be installed nor can it be upgraded to VMS V4.3.
> > >
> > > Who can help???
> > >
> >

[cctalk] Re: VMS V4.2 MUP (Mandatory Update) wanted!

[Glen Slick via cctalk]

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 6:11 AM Hans-Ulrich Hölscher via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> The mandatory update for VMS V4.2 is still missing in my collection.
>
> Because of that, VMS V4.2 is not fully usable,
> neither can layered software be installed nor can
> it be upgraded to VMS V4.3.
>
> Who can help???


http://www.bitsavers.org/bits/DEC/vax/vms/VMS_4.x/BB-BT05B-BE_VMS_4.2_85.tap.gz

http://www.bitsavers.org/bits/DEC/vax/vms/VMS_4.x/BB-FY83A-BE_VMS_4.2_mand_Ud_85.tap.gz

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 3/17/23 06:25, Paul Koning wrote:

> 
> I'm still trying to get a good answer to "when did the first commercial (as 
> opposed to one-off lab) computer appear that had interrupts as a standard 
> feature?"
> 
> It looks like there was the IBM 704, in 1958, with interrupts but some 
> documentation made me think it was an optional feature.  The other machine 
> from 1958 I can think of is the Electrologica X1.  That is the machine that 
> confronted Dijkstra with the need to develop new theory to deal with the 
> non-sequential behavior of machines with interrupts, and his Ph.D. thesis was 
> the result.  The X1 is also interesting in that it has what much later would 
> be called a BIOS -- a ROM-resident software library that included I/O 
> services including dealing with interrupts, an assembler/loader, and an 
> operator interface.  Dijkstra wrote that, and the source code is in an 
> appendix of his thesis.
> 

I assume that you've seen Mark Smotherman's paper on this.  UNIVAC seems
to hold the distinction.

https://people.computing.clemson.edu/~mark/interrupts.html

--Chuck

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

Anent the Smotherman paper.  Woefully incomplete and inaccurate, but
perhaps a starting point.


https://people.computing.clemson.edu/~mark/interrupts.html

For example, he  cites the CDC CYBER 200 as 1981.   Nope--CYBER was
mostly a relabeling effort.  For example, the 6600 became CYBER 74, the
7600 became CYBER 76.  The CYBER 200 was the relabeled STAR 100, which
had its origins ca. 1969.The "Invisible Package" was part of the
original design,  It was large, contained all 256 registers as well as a
potload of machine state data--and, as a consequence was very slow.  It
was very complete, so a job could be interrupted and restarted from the
"drop file" which contained an image of the job's memory as well as the
invisible package.

Very useful for debugging, as one could have several drop files, each
marking a point in a program's execution.   I've never satisfied myself
as to the actual reason behind it.   The STAR, being very large, was
prone to hardware failures and jobs were usually very long (hours).  The
whole scheme made it possible to resume a job after a system error had
occurred.

--Chuck

[cctalk] IBM RT PC Manuals free for shipping

[steve shumaker via cctalk]

Any interest here before I post them to EPay?

Available for shipping cost from 95549:


IBM RT PC AIX OS Communications Guide 59X7668

IBM RT PC AIX OS Messages Reference 59X9115

IBM RT PC INED 59X7643

These are the classic early slipcase style manuals.  They are in 
pristine condition.   All three are 1985 "First Editions" of the pub.


I received them in an auction lot of of documents and have no need. 
Combined weight is ~13lbs.


Steve

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Paul Koning via cctalk]

> On Mar 17, 2023, at 11:22 AM, Chuck Guzis  wrote:
> 
> Anent the Smotherman paper.  Woefully incomplete and inaccurate, but
> perhaps a starting point.
> 
> https://people.computing.clemson.edu/~mark/interrupts.html

I noticed the section on deferred interrupts, which mentions Cutler and "fork" 
on RSX.  It doesn't mention the similar mechanism, also called fork, in RT-11.  
I don't know if RT-11 was earlier or concurrent, nor whether the two came up 
with it independently.  

paul

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Gavin Scott via cctalk]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 9:38 PM Ethan Dicks via cctalk
 wrote:
>
> We had an Amdahl in the middle of a multi-thousand-square-foot
> computer room (one of several) at work 25 years ago.

Heh, of the limited number of big Mainframe data centers I got to
visit, every one had one big red Amdahl box among a vast field of IBM
hardware. Once you had enough IBM systems IBM just assumed you were
their bitch now and would pay whatever they asked for further systems.
The solution was to buy a single Amdahl system thus getting your IBM
sales rep summerily replaced with a much humbler one.

G.

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Lars Brinkhoff via cctalk]

Paul Koning wrote:
> I noticed the section on deferred interrupts, which mentions Cutler
> and "fork" on RSX.  It doesn't mention the similar mechanism, also
> called fork, in RT-11.

And, pray tell, what do these "fork" mean?

I'm curious since Unix has fork as a verb, whereas Tenex has it as a
noun.  Presumably they both got it from the Berkeley 930 timesharing
system, so maybe something got lost in translation on the way to the
East coast.  It would be intresting to compare against the meaning in
RSX (11 not 15, I guess) and RT-11.

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Paul Koning via cctalk]

> On Mar 17, 2023, at 12:24 PM, Lars Brinkhoff  wrote:
> 
> Paul Koning wrote:
>> I noticed the section on deferred interrupts, which mentions Cutler
>> and "fork" on RSX.  It doesn't mention the similar mechanism, also
>> called fork, in RT-11.
> 
> And, pray tell, what do these "fork" mean?
> 
> I'm curious since Unix has fork as a verb, whereas Tenex has it as a
> noun.  Presumably they both got it from the Berkeley 930 timesharing
> system, so maybe something got lost in translation on the way to the
> East coast.  It would be intresting to compare against the meaning in
> RSX (11 not 15, I guess) and RT-11.

The paper mentions it: "fork routines" which I think Linux calls "bottom half". 
 These are functions executed as a consequence of an interrupt, but from a 
queue and not with interrupts masked off.  The idea is that an RTOS doesn't 
want to block interrupts more than the minimum necessary, so operating systems 
like RT11 and RSX in their interrupt handler capture the necessary hardware 
state in memory, then queue a fork routine to do the real work later after 
interrupts have once again been enabled.  This goes by way of what RT11 
originally called a "fork queue" but was told to rename to "fork list" :-)

Some other operating systems, like RSTS, have some amount of deferred 
processing but tend to do a lot, often all, the interrupt handling work at 
interrupt level.  That's ok for a timesharing system, but you wouldn't want to 
run time critical stuff on it.  And this is why RSTS does a comparatively poor 
job of supporting DDCMP over async lines.

"Fork" in the Unix sense is something different and unrelated.

paul

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Paul Koning via cctalk]

> On Mar 17, 2023, at 11:22 AM, Chuck Guzis  wrote:
> 
> Anent the Smotherman paper.  Woefully incomplete and inaccurate, but
> perhaps a starting point.
> 
> https://people.computing.clemson.edu/~mark/interrupts.html

On interrupt coalescing (mentioned under "performance techniques"), an early -- 
perhaps first -- implementation is in the Electrologica X8.  It uses queues 
guarded by semaphores to communicate with the I/O coprocessor CHARON, and the 
interrupts delivered in response are also controlled by a semaphore.  The 
initial count of that semaphore specifies how many I/O operations to complete 
before an interrupt is done.  Its semaphores are constructed around a hardware 
primitive that adds a register to memory and delivers the result both to that 
memory location and to the register, interlocked via a read/modify/write core 
memory cycle.

paul

[cctalk] Re: VMS V4.2 MUP (Mandatory Update) wanted!

[Plamen Mihaylov via cctalk]

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 3:50 PM Rob Jarratt 
wrote:

> I wouldn't mind having a copy for completeness too...
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Hans-Ulrich Hölscher via cctalk 
> > Sent: 17 March 2023 13:25
> > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> > Cc: Plamen Mihaylov ; Hans-Ulrich
> > Hölscher 
> > Subject: [cctalk] Re: VMS V4.2 MUP (Mandatory Update) wanted!
> >
> > Hi,
> > that's great news!
> > Could you please verify?
> > Is it on diskette (probably RX50), tape (TK50) or an image for simh?
> > Can I help you with other VMS software?
> >
> > Thanks a lot!
> >
> > Ulli
> >
> > Am Fr., 17. März 2023 um 14:21 Uhr schrieb Plamen Mihaylov via cctalk <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org>:
> >
> > > I probably have microvms 4.2 mup
> > >
> > > On Friday, March 17, 2023, Hans-Ulrich Hölscher via cctalk <
> > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The mandatory update for VMS V4.2 is still missing in my collection.
> > > >
> > > > Because of that, VMS V4.2 is not fully usable, neither can layered
> > > > software be installed nor can it be upgraded to VMS V4.3.
> > > >
> > > > Who can help???
> > > >
> > >
>
>

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Antonio Carlini via cctalk]

On 17/03/2023 16:34, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:

This goes by way of what RT11 originally called a "fork queue" but was told to rename to 
"fork list" :-)


The story was that Dave Cutler had a T-shirt made with "fork queue" on 
it, but I don't know if that's actually true.



Antonio


--
Antonio Carlini
anto...@acarlini.com

[cctalk] Re: Knockoffs, was: Low cost logic analyzer

[Ken Seefried via cctalk]

FSF hasn't done anything in at least a decade, but someone from there "is
still around", so they're somehow relevant.  People who actually are doing
something (e.g litigating) are dismissed because you "don't know these
people" (aside: there's someone who cares about open source who doesn't
know who the EFF is?).  But someone not previously mentioned is doing
something, so...look! squirrel!?

No wonder GPL violators operate with impunity.

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 3:13 AM Alexander Huemer via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 09:25:31PM -0400, Ken Seefried wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 12:32 PM Alexander Huemer via cctalk <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:05:41PM +0800, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote:
> > > > FSF does not enforce anything.
> > >
> > > https://gpl-violations.org/
> > > They do though.
> > >
> > > -Alex
> > >
> >
> > Go to 'News' on that site and the last news about an enforcement action
> was
> > from 2013.
>
> True.
> Though, Harald Welte, the person behind the project is still very active
> in the free software community and surely happy to help.
>
> > If you actually want to pursue GPL violations, especially if it's related
> > to a non-FSF sponsored project, you'll have better luck with the EFF or
> > appealing to someone like Popehat/Ken White to help find some *pro bono *
> > representation.
>
> That might be the case, I don't know these people.
> There is also the SFC[1] who are currently attacking John Deere for
> violating the GPL in their farm equipment[2], which is kind of a big
> deal.
>
> -Alex
>
> [1] https://sfconservancy.org/
> [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/926330/
>

[cctalk] Re: Knockoffs, was: Low cost logic analyzer

[Sellam Abraham via cctalk]

I once heard a story from someone* who was told by a journalist that while
said journalist was interviewing Richard Stallman he was [WARNING: GRAPHIC
CONTENT COMMENCES HERE] picking the jam from between his toes and eating it.

Make of that what you will, but if that isn't just a slander, that's the
guy upon whose legacy everyone is relying.

Sellam

* remaining nameless

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 3:59 PM Ken Seefried via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> FSF hasn't done anything in at least a decade, but someone from there "is
> still around", so they're somehow relevant.  People who actually are doing
> something (e.g litigating) are dismissed because you "don't know these
> people" (aside: there's someone who cares about open source who doesn't
> know who the EFF is?).  But someone not previously mentioned is doing
> something, so...look! squirrel!?
>
> No wonder GPL violators operate with impunity.
>
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 3:13 AM Alexander Huemer via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 09:25:31PM -0400, Ken Seefried wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 12:32 PM Alexander Huemer via cctalk <
> > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:05:41PM +0800, Tom Hunter via cctalk
> wrote:
> > > > > FSF does not enforce anything.
> > > >
> > > > https://gpl-violations.org/
> > > > They do though.
> > > >
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > >
> > > Go to 'News' on that site and the last news about an enforcement action
> > was
> > > from 2013.
> >
> > True.
> > Though, Harald Welte, the person behind the project is still very active
> > in the free software community and surely happy to help.
> >
> > > If you actually want to pursue GPL violations, especially if it's
> related
> > > to a non-FSF sponsored project, you'll have better luck with the EFF or
> > > appealing to someone like Popehat/Ken White to help find some *pro
> bono *
> > > representation.
> >
> > That might be the case, I don't know these people.
> > There is also the SFC[1] who are currently attacking John Deere for
> > violating the GPL in their farm equipment[2], which is kind of a big
> > deal.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > [1] https://sfconservancy.org/
> > [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/926330/
> >
>

[cctalk] Re: Knockoffs, was: Low cost logic analyzer

[Ken Seefried via cctalk]

> I once heard...

You don't need hearsay.  FSF leadership seems to be proud, and vocal, of
things that make the rest of us cringe.

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 7:48 PM Sellam Abraham via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> I once heard a story from someone* who was told by a journalist that while
> said journalist was interviewing Richard Stallman he was [WARNING: GRAPHIC
> CONTENT COMMENCES HERE] picking the jam from between his toes and eating
> it.
>
> Make of that what you will, but if that isn't just a slander, that's the
> guy upon whose legacy everyone is relying.
>
> Sellam
>
> * remaining nameless
>
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 3:59 PM Ken Seefried via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> > FSF hasn't done anything in at least a decade, but someone from there "is
> > still around", so they're somehow relevant.  People who actually are
> doing
> > something (e.g litigating) are dismissed because you "don't know these
> > people" (aside: there's someone who cares about open source who doesn't
> > know who the EFF is?).  But someone not previously mentioned is doing
> > something, so...look! squirrel!?
> >
> > No wonder GPL violators operate with impunity.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 3:13 AM Alexander Huemer via cctalk <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 09:25:31PM -0400, Ken Seefried wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 12:32 PM Alexander Huemer via cctalk <
> > > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:05:41PM +0800, Tom Hunter via cctalk
> > wrote:
> > > > > > FSF does not enforce anything.
> > > > >
> > > > > https://gpl-violations.org/
> > > > > They do though.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Alex
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Go to 'News' on that site and the last news about an enforcement
> action
> > > was
> > > > from 2013.
> > >
> > > True.
> > > Though, Harald Welte, the person behind the project is still very
> active
> > > in the free software community and surely happy to help.
> > >
> > > > If you actually want to pursue GPL violations, especially if it's
> > related
> > > > to a non-FSF sponsored project, you'll have better luck with the EFF
> or
> > > > appealing to someone like Popehat/Ken White to help find some *pro
> > bono *
> > > > representation.
> > >
> > > That might be the case, I don't know these people.
> > > There is also the SFC[1] who are currently attacking John Deere for
> > > violating the GPL in their farm equipment[2], which is kind of a big
> > > deal.
> > >
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > [1] https://sfconservancy.org/
> > > [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/926330/
> > >
> >
>

[cctalk] Re: domesticating the computer - call for last inputs

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Ok, the final is up!   If anyone wants the background image, the link is in
the description.

Thank you all for helping to make this far better than what my daughter and
I started with.

Domesticating the Computer: how the appliance computer came to be - YouTube


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTHV-qRf-0c





On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Erik Bruchez  wrote:

> One question is: should this be set to "Yes it is for kids"?  My
>> understanding is Enabling that prevents Comments being enabled, but I'm
>> not
>> sure if there is any other benefit. But yes, this is NOT a documentary
>> and is intended more for a middle/high school audience.
>
>
> You probably shouldn't enable "Made for kids" as it will disable lots of
> other features, including saving the video to a playlist including Watch
> Later. So it's essentially all drawbacks and no benefits.
>
> -Erik
>

[cctalk] Found more CAMAC stuff

[Jon Elson via cctalk]

Sorry, I've lost track of the guy who was interested in 
collecting CAMAC bits.  Cleaning up our lab, I found a 
Kinetic Systems 3922 Z1A crate controller, and


a 2926 Z1A ISA slot controller for it.  Anybody interested?

Thanks,

Jon