Crispin states this in the paper and says:-
The proof that actual modification of instructions is required for all
possible problems is contained in C.C. Elgot and A. Robinson,
''Random-Access
Stored-Program Machines, An Approach to Programming Languages,'' J. ACM,
vol. 11, no. 4, 1964, p. 397
I
I remember my Salesman (well he was the Company Salesman but we worked
together) once recounted an interview he had heard on US Radio...
.. Basically they were interviewing a Bank Robber and they asked him why he
robbed banks when they had armed guards and heavy security..
.. His response was that
> From: Dave Wade
> Crispin Rope concentrates on the power of ENIAC and its usefulness
Which is why you should look at the longer, later article:
http://eniacinaction.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/EngineeringTheMiracleoftheENIAC-scanned.pdf
in particular the part I pointed out (bott
> On Sep 16, 2015, at 11:36 PM, ben wrote:
>
> On 9/16/2015 9:25 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
>> On 2015-09-16 6:18 PM, Dave G4UGM wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> It is notable that in order to solve all problems, a computer must permit
>>> self modifying code.
>>
>>
>> Is that true? AFAIK Lambda calculus ca
> On Sep 16, 2015, at 6:19 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
>
> On 09/16/2015 12:23 PM, Sean Caron wrote:
>> And I actually got to play with NOS ... many years after the fact ...
>> never thought I'd see that! What the cray-cyber.org guys are doing is
>> remarkable.
>
> Sad that they don't have any early
On 09/17/2015 12:49 AM, Dave G4UGM wrote:
"Security" isn't just about secure software, it’s a total mind set.
One slip and you are doomed. I am pretty careful but even I managed
to install the d@mmed Ask tool bar whilst updating Java... .. in my
humble opinion many Linux users are rather more bl
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Paul
> Koning
> Sent: 17 September 2015 17:02
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
>
> Subject: Re: Self modifying code, lambda calculus - Re: ENIAC programming
>
>
> > On Sep 16, 20
So I have a couple of these Camintonn boards (a -500 and a -254, to be
exact), both using 256Kx1 DRAM's. I wanted to upgrade them both (by adding
memory chips) to be -504's (2MB), and I noticed that the -254 had a couple of
jumper wires that the -500 did not, so I needed to know what those jumpers
On 09/17/2015 09:04 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
They may not run those, but those certainly have been preserved as
part of the "controlfreaks" effort. COS, Scope, MACE, Kronos, NOS,
NOS/BE -- all those have been run on the DtCyber emulator. In fact,
a copy of a production PLATO system, on NOS 2.8.7
> From: Dave Wade
> to me a "computer" without self-modifying code is a programmable
> calculator even if it has index registers...
Most modern computer languages run with the executable
instructions in a "pure code" section, which is set to be
NOT writeable by the prog
On 09/17/2015 12:49 AM, Dave G4UGM wrote:
in my
humble opinion many Linux users are rather more blasé
about the
security of the OS that they should be
Absolutely true, and I will admit that I have fallen into
the trap, too. But, it has worked well so far!
Jon
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Noel
> Chiappa
> Sent: 17 September 2015 13:39
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Cc: j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
> Subject: Re: ENIAC programming Was: release dates of early microcomputer
> operating systems, i
> On Sep 17, 2015, at 12:30 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
>
> On 09/17/2015 09:04 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
>
>> They may not run those, but those certainly have been preserved as
>> part of the "controlfreaks" effort. COS, Scope, MACE, Kronos, NOS,
>> NOS/BE -- all those have been run on the DtCyber em
I took it from Crispin's paper and I assumed it was correct as he has done a
lot of work on this...
.. and I assumed when he said "solve all problems" we were referring to
problems that can be solved on a Turing Complete computer
It is easy to prove that a computer does not need the
On 09/17/2015 09:58 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
It turns out my memory was faulty. I remember discussions about
SCOPE, but I don't actually see a copy. There's COS, SMM 4.0, Kronos
1.0 and 2.1.2, lots of NOS from 1.2 through 2.8.7 and about 8 in
between, NOS/BE 1.2 and 1.5.
No 64 bit, no 7600 -- D
On 2015-09-17 12:44 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
> From: Dave Wade
> to me a "computer" without self-modifying code is a programmable
> calculator even if it has index registers...
Most modern computer languages run with the executable instructions in a
"pure code" section, which is
On 9/17/15 9:58 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
DtCyber is open source
but their OS collection is not.
they're called "controlfreaks" for a reason.
Chuck,
It sounds like you might enjoy the Controlfreaks group. It's controlled
access but basically you just need to ask. http://www.controlfreaks.org has a
pointer.
paul
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Jon Elson
> Sent: 17 September 2015 17:44
> To: gene...@classiccmp.org; discuss...@classiccmp.org:On-Topic and Off-
> Topic Posts
> Subject: Re: ENIAC programming Was: release dates of early microcomp
> On Sep 17, 2015, at 1:33 PM, Al Kossow wrote:
>
> On 9/17/15 9:58 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
>>
>> DtCyber is open source
>
> but their OS collection is not.
> they're called "controlfreaks" for a reason.
Yes, because they like Control Data products.
From what I understand, COS is in fact ge
> Crispin Rope concentrates on the power of ENIAC and its usefulness, neither
> of which can be argued with, but to me a "computer" without self-modifying
> code is a programmable calculator even if it has index registers...
As a total thread-drift, I have in my hand a machine that anyone would c
On 09/17/2015 10:51 AM, tony duell wrote:
As a total thread-drift, I have in my hand a machine that anyone
would class as a a programmable calculator. It looks like a
calcualtor, it has key-per-function operation (that is, a 'SIN' key,
etc). And yet...
Back in the day, a friend who worked for
What is the definition of self modifying?
Is it changing an instruction to execute in the thread to be run?
How about adding or subtracting something to be done in an execution
queue?
I'm not sure there is a lot of difference.
In the first case, one might leave the instruction for a later execution
> From Dave
> AMD29K isn't "Modern"
Well, compared to the ENIAC it is! :-)
To be serious, the 29K is fully what we now think of as a 'computer'; that's
all I meant by saying it's "modern".
> If you have to use another external mechanism to arbitrarily change the
> program, then
> On Sep 17, 2015, at 2:56 PM, dwight wrote:
>
> What is the definition of self modifying?
> Is it changing an instruction to execute in the thread to be run?
> How about adding or subtracting something to be done in an execution
> queue?
I'm not sure if there is a universally agreed to definit
> On Sep 17, 2015, at 3:27 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 17, 2015, at 2:56 PM, dwight wrote:
>>
>> What is the definition of self modifying?
>> Is it changing an instruction to execute in the thread to be run?
>> How about adding or subtracting something to be done in an execution
>> q
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Dave G4UGM wrote:
> It is notable that in order to solve all problems, a computer must permit
> self modifying code.
>From a theory of computation view, I don't believe that's true. Any
computable function can be computed by a fixed program.
For a particular com
Hello,
in order to repair a HP-IL device I am looking for remains of HP-IB (yes)
Thinkjet Printers.
I only need the PCB resp. the HP-IL chip on the PCB for desoldering and
implanting into another PCB.
The mechanics can be damaged or even missing.
Martin
>
> Hello,
>
> in order to repair a HP-IL device I am looking for remains of HP-IB (yes)
> Thinkjet Printers.
On the grounds that the HPIB Thinkjet is an HPIL one with an HPIB-HPIL
interface (basically
an 82169 with different firmware)?
> I only need the PCB resp. the HP-IL chip on the PCB f
From: geneb
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 3:58 PM
> This discussion reminds me of this quote:
> "The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that
> English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words;
> on occasion, English has pursued other languag
On Sep 17, 2015, at 2:56 PM, dwight wrote:
What is the definition of self modifying? Is it changing an
instruction to execute in the thread to be run? How about adding or
subtracting something to be done in an execution queue?
What he said. In the narrow viewpoint, "self-modifying" could be
> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:29:34 -0400
> From: t...@telegraphics.com.au
> To: gene...@classiccmp.org; classiccmp.org:On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> cctalk@classiccmp.org; gene...@classiccmp.org
> Subject: Immutability - was Re: ENIAC programming Was: release dates of early
> microcomputer oper
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015, dwight wrote:
If working on a newer X86 processor, this is necessary, not to protect the
code but because the code is cashed and my not be updated in time for
it to be executed.
Write through is expensive and only provided on the data side, if at all.
Dwight
On some/most ol
I am quite aware of the caching problem.
What I don't understand is what problem they thought they
were fixing by outlawing self modifying code.
It exist in so many forms that are not as obvious.
All of which can have the same potential problems.
The note about 8080 I/O's brought back memories
of
> From: space...@gmail.com
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Dave G4UGM wrote:
> > It is notable that in order to solve all problems, a computer must permit
> > self modifying code.
>
> From a theory of computation view, I don't believe that's true. Any
> computable function can be compute
On 9/17/2015 2:27 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>
>> On Sep 17, 2015, at 2:56 PM, dwight wrote:
>>
>> What is the definition of self modifying?
>> Is it changing an instruction to execute in the thread to be run?
>> How about adding or subtracting something to be done in an execution
>> queue?
>
> I'm
On 2015-09-17 18:30, Dave G4UGM wrote:
-Original Message-
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Paul
Koning
Sent: 17 September 2015 17:02
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Self modifying code, lambda calculus - Re: ENIAC programm
On 2015-09-17 18:01, Paul Koning wrote:
On Sep 16, 2015, at 11:36 PM, ben wrote:
On 9/16/2015 9:25 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
On 2015-09-16 6:18 PM, Dave G4UGM wrote:
...
It is notable that in order to solve all problems, a computer must permit
self modifying code.
Is that true? AFAIK Lambda
From: Eric Smith
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 12:48 AM
> On Twitter, @hotelzululima suggested Motorola MIKBUG, introduced in
> 1974, but IMO it's a monitor, not an operating system.
So the PDP-6 monitor, which booted from DECtape but had no other dependency
on that medium, was not an operati
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Johnny
> Billquist
> Sent: 18 September 2015 00:12
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: Self modifying code, lambda calculus - Re: ENIAC programming
>
> On 2015-09-17 18:30, Dave G4UGM wrote:
>
On 2015-09-18 01:29, Dave G4UGM wrote:
-Original Message-
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Johnny
Billquist
Sent: 18 September 2015 00:12
To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Self modifying code, lambda calculus - Re: ENIAC programming
On 2015-09-17 1
From: Paul Koning
Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 9:02 AM
> In any case, I do not believe the original statement. First of all, it is
> well known that no computer can solve "all problems" (see Gödel). For those
> it *can* solve, as far as I know, a Turing machine can solve a superset of
> wh
Wayne, if you see this please contact me ASAP.
Thanks.
--
Sellam ibn Abraham VintageTech
--
International Man of Intrigue and Dangerhttp://www.vintagetech.com
I have a Canon Cat in terrific shape for sale. It works just fine. The
screen is bright and clean. It also comes with the Canon Cat printer.
See photos here:
http://vintagetech.com/sales/Canon%20Cat/
More information available upon request.
Asking $1,400 or best offer.
Thanks.
--
Sellam
> What I don't understand is what problem they thought they were fixing
> by outlawing self modifying code.
As the discussion illustrates, and as I point out below, in some of the
weaker senses it's still alive and well, not outlawed at all.
In the usual sense, approximately "code which writes me
So last week I did a rather insane 3000km road trip that had me travel
through four states (Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montanna) and over an
international line to pick up a "pack-loading HP disk drive". It turned out
to be a rather nice condition 7925B with a 13037C controller in the cabinet.
It
> On Sep 17, 2015, at 5:44 PM, dwight wrote:
>
>
>
>> From: space...@gmail.com
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Dave G4UGM wrote:
>>> It is notable that in order to solve all problems, a computer must permit
>>> self modifying code.
>>
>> From a theory of computation view, I don't bel
Rich Alderson on Thu, 17 Sep 2015 23:49:59 + wrote:
> From: Paul Koning
> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 9:02 AM
>
> > In any case, I do not believe the original statement. First of all, it is
> > well known that no computer can solve "all problems" (see Gödel). For those
> > it *can* so
> On Sep 17, 2015, at 7:17 PM, Rich Alderson
> wrote:
>
> From: Eric Smith
> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 12:48 AM
>
>> On Twitter, @hotelzululima suggested Motorola MIKBUG, introduced in
>> 1974, but IMO it's a monitor, not an operating system.
>
> So the PDP-6 monitor, which booted fro
> On Sep 17, 2015, at 5:52 PM, Jay Jaeger wrote:
>
> On 9/17/2015 2:27 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 17, 2015, at 2:56 PM, dwight wrote:
>>>
>>> What is the definition of self modifying?
>>> Is it changing an instruction to execute in the thread to be run?
>>> How about adding or subtr
> On Sep 17, 2015, at 5:42 PM, dwight wrote:
>
> I am quite aware of the caching problem.
> What I don't understand is what problem they thought they
> were fixing by outlawing self modifying code.
Self modifying code in sense #4 from my earlier note (i.e., a program that
scribbles on bits of
On 9/17/2015 6:50 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
This conclusion should have been obvious to anyone thinking about
general purpose computers implemented with microcode in ROM.
Are there any computers that do let you put microcode into RAM now-days.
You have a lot of byte code virtual machines
On 9/17/2015 7:06 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
Clearly that would be silly. Not to mention the RT-11 operating
system, which could boot and run with just DECtape. Or the famous
THE operating system, which boots from paper tape (though it pages to
drum at runtime).
With paper tape, would it not PAS
I have Lunar Lander (in Focal) working again on my PDP-8/A with two RL02
drives (about which you have been reading a lot lately). It's been so long I
don't remember where I got the text file (LUNAR.TX) from, but it's on both
my RL02 OS/8 image and the physical pack...
The rather unusual way I
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015, Sellam ibn Abraham wrote:
>
> I have a Canon Cat in terrific shape for sale. It works just fine. The
> screen is bright and clean. It also comes with the Canon Cat printer.
>
> See photos here:
>
> http://vintagetech.com/sales/Canon%20Cat/
>
> More information availabl
On Sep 17, 2015, at 9:11 PM, Eric Christopherson wrote:
>
> You're Raskin' too much! ;)
(groan!)
Is he also in the UK? Details or dates would help. Did he say it was a floppy
like disk or just disc like a platter? I have to look around but i actually
have something that sounds like it but I've never looked up what it really was.
Figured it'd be disappointing and newer than it looks lol. I d
I have a limited of M8357, RX8-Es for sale, first come, first served, for
$175.
I think I found the M8316, M8317, LQP01 interface, and LA180 interface, and
will try to post a price in the next few days.
Shipping within US is $10 for up to 10. Shipping from 61853.
On 09/17/2015 08:40 PM, ben wrote:
On 9/17/2015 6:50 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
This conclusion should have been obvious to anyone
thinking about
general purpose computers implemented with microcode in ROM.
Are there any computers that do let you put microcode into
RAM now-days.
You
On 9/17/15 8:55 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
I think the later X86 machines have a tiny block of patch microcode
that is available to the OS to put special routines into.
Certainly not Intel CPUs. All of the microcode patches are loaded via
special instruction sequences
(described in the SDM). T
opps- Please contact me off list.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Paul Anderson wrote:
> I have a limited of M8357, RX8-Es for sale, first come, first served, for
> $175.
>
> I think I found the M8316, M8317, LQP01 interface, and LA180 interface,
> and will try to post a price in the next few
I wrote:
> On Twitter, @hotelzululima suggested Motorola MIKBUG, introduced in
> 1974, but IMO it's a monitor, not an operating system.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Rich Alderson
wrote:
> So the PDP-6 monitor, which booted from DECtape but had no other dependency
> on that medium, was not an
62 matches
Mail list logo
