1979 called, and they want their "Intel Magnetics 7110" one megabit bubble memory chips back. At the time, it seemed that bubble memory would supplant disk, tape, and even core memory (RAM to you). Maybe memristors will happen.
There’s a strong connection between President Lincoln and log cabins. He grew up in a series of log cabins, and this fact was widely known during his campaign.
No, they always had legit California "temporary plates" for the allowable (at the time) 6 months. They were very ticketable; his motivation was to keep his car relatively anonymous when driving around. Source: Me, living near his house and walking by regularly.
This article has a picture of one of Steve Jobs' actual cars with no plates at all (temporary or otherwise). It explicitly talks about a "new" requirement for new cars to be issued temp plates. Before that, brand new cars from the dealer had a 6-month grace period.
> "From 2019, California joins most of the other states in the nation by requiring newly bought cars to be issued temporary license plates."
Right, not a plate: the 6 month temporary operating permit was taped inside the windshield, not on the back of the car, but was still ticketable. On the other hand, the car pictured is from after his death; all of his were black.
> note that they owned the parking, so its moot if they parked on a reserved spot on private property of theirs
Eh, pedantry, but you'll find that building and occupation codes dictate a certain number of disabled parking spots. You could argue that a spot that is ostensibly this, but "everyone knows" is Steve Jobs' spot, is not a disabled parking spot.
(But yes, odds of the City of Cupertino taking any issue with this whatsoever are entirely zero.)
DVI isn’t suitable as you’d still have to intuit where the paragraph- and even word-breaks are; what’s body text vs. headers/footers, sidebars, captions, etc; never mind what math expression a particular jumble of characters and rules came from.
They did. But that was back in the 2000s, when nobody really understood the nuance. Today, calling someone a “hacker” to mean “computer criminal” almost feels like a boomer move. We’ve got way better language now: white hat, black hat, script kiddie, scammer (and all its lovely subgenres—pig butchering, refund scammers), phisher, etc. Not to mention whatever we’re calling the folks running dark net markets these days.
And while the general public might not know the fine distinctions between these, I think society does get that there’s a whole spectrum of actors now. That wasn’t true in 2000—the landscape of online crime (and white hat work) hadn’t evolved yet.
Honestly, I’m just glad the debate’s over. “Cracker” always sounded goofy, and RMS pushing it felt like peak pedantry… par for course.
That said, this whole “vibe coding” thing feels like we’re at the beginning of a similar arc. It’s a broad, fuzzy label right now, and the LLM landscape hasn’t had time to split and specialize yet. Eventually I predict we’ll get more precise terms for all the ways people build software with LLM’s. Not just describing the process but the people behind the scenes too.
I mean, perhaps the term “script kiddie” will get a second life?
Being able to start a process, have it run for a bit to, say, read in initialization data, populating dynamic data structures along the way, and then interrupt the process and save the whole state as a new executable, was a feature built into DEC’s Tops10 and Tops20 operating systems / standard runtimes, along with related custom systems like Waits, under which TeX was developed. It took just two lines of code for TeX to implement its side of this feature on those first platforms.
It came as a bit of a shock at the time that all the Unix-y systems had no such native concept, and that fragile, non-portable user-space schemes were required to mimic this functionality.
The speaker’s claim that it’s hard to find a two-character name that hasn’t already been used for a CPU architecture seems ridiculous on its face. And his tone seems to indicate that he knows that (to me, anyway).
I programmed the real F8 back in the day, so I’m quite defensive about it. It’s most charming quirk: doing a long jump clobbers the accumulator.
Wasn't quite as strong a match for "G8", but G[n] does show up in a lot of product descriptions to indicate what generation of the product is involved.
LG also put out a phone named the G8 Thinq in 2019.
I would generally agree with the speaker that it's hard not to collide when using a 2 character name. The "for a CPU architecture" narrows the collision space substantially, which does affect the full accuracy of the statement. But the spirit of "2 char IDs are collision prone" is true.
Oh, wow...never heard of the E8 or Andes, but I guess RISC-V startups are thick on the ground these days. And I can't imagine searching for G8 and not getting carpet bombed with hits for HP servers. But the fundamental question is still "why would you even want a 2 character ID in a world where searching for it (even without the massive historical name collision with F8) will make it fruitless to search for".
reply