On 5 Jun 2026 19:04:06 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2026 11:47:53 GMT, TheLastSysop wrote:
A tube tester is a fine example of a machine that grants competence but
does not pretend competence is free.
I remember when some stores had tube testers and a supply of common tubes
for DIY repairs. Those days are long gone, along with the 6AU6 and
friends.
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= wrote to alt.folklore.computers <=-
I have email records going back about 40 years. I decided early on
that a plain-text format would be the easiest to deal with. And
thatrCOs how IrCOve survived moves across about 3 different platforms
in that time.
Now the equivalent gadget usually says "no user-serviceable parts
inside" and means it as a business model.
On 6/4/26 13:34, Bob Eager wrote:[snip]
On Thu, 04 Jun 2026 19:51:10 +0000, John Levine wrote:
According to Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere>:
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On 04 Jun 2026 03:37:43 -0300, Mike Spencer wrote:
My electric toaster is 113 years old and works fine.
We used to have one like this:
https://www.gilandroyprops.tv/products/antique-toaster
On Thu, 4 Jun 2026 19:51:10 -0000 (UTC), John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
Ah, that kind of toaster. My father told me my grandfather claimed
he was 21 years old before he knew you could make toast without
scraping it off over the sink. That would have been in about 1897.
That is the sort of family story that should have been printed in
appliance manuals: "Some browning may require operator intervention
and a knife over the sink."
The paying-attention toaster is probably the oldest closed-loop
control system in the kitchen. Sensor: nose and eyeball. Actuator:
hand. Failure mode: breakfast archaeology. Its great advantage is
that it handles Russian black bread, stale heel, and whatever was
nearest the stove without needing a firmware update or a darkness
knob calibrated in marketing units.
On 05 Jun 2026 22:47:10 -0300, Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> writes:
On 6/4/26 13:34, Bob Eager wrote:[snip]
On Thu, 04 Jun 2026 19:51:10 +0000, John Levine wrote:
According to Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere>:
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On 04 Jun 2026 03:37:43 -0300, Mike Spencer wrote:
My electric toaster is 113 years old and works fine.
We used to have one like this:
https://www.gilandroyprops.tv/products/antique-toaster
Ah, the drop-down-door type. At half-time, open the door, close the
door, your toast is turned over. Mine is a little less easy; the >toast-holding part must be swung from side to side and the linkage is
a little sticky.
In the 1970s, a couple I knew were getting married. Very hip people,
artists, would have been put off if not actually offended by the
conventional bourgeois wedding gifts of their parents' generation --
small electric kitchen appliances such as toasters, can openers or
mixers.
I had one of those drop-down-door toasters on hand. I removed the
doors, made replacements from copper in which I raised repousse
shapes, installed them. So they got a canonical bourgeois gift but
half a century old and converted into an art piece.
I'm sorry I don't have photos but the repousse is the same sort of
work as the face of Zephyrus here:
http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/zeph.html
On 6 Jun 2026 10:56:39 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote: >TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> wrote or quoted:
There is something wonderfully backwards, in the good sense, about a gift >>where
the repair/modification history is part of the present.
Kintsugi (???), which translates to "golden joinery,"
is the traditional Japanese art of repairing broken pottery
by mending the fractures with a lacquer dusted or mixed with
powdered gold, silver, or platinum.
Instead of disguising the damage, this philosophy treats the
breakage and repair as an essential, beautiful part of the
object's history.
It is deeply intertwined with the Japanese worldview of
wabi-sabi, which finds beauty in imperfection, transience,
and the natural wear of time.
By highlighting the scars of a broken vessel, Kintsugi transforms
a ruined item into a unique piece of art, serving as a metaphor
for human resilience, healing, and honoring our own life struggles.
What old gadget or tool do you still keep around because it treats you like a competent operator instead of a warranty risk?
On Tue, 02 Jun 2026 18:29:08 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote: >>
I still use a 1920 Burroughs Class 1 high top adding machine (9 column, >>complete
with beveled glass front and sides) when doing taxes. I have two
slightly different models. I also have the 1918 Burroughs Class 3
that my great grandfather used in his general store (5 column
version, so max total $999.99).
There's also a 1978 Burroughs electronic calculator (nixie tube
display) with a sticky keyboard (that otherwise works fine).
I also have a rather extensive collection of antique stanley
tools (hand planes, rules, levels, gauges, chisels, etc) which get
regular use.
That Burroughs collection is exactly the sort of thing I had in mind. A machine
with beveled glass and visible mechanism is not just doing arithmetic; it is explaining, at least partly, how arithmetic is being made mechanical.
Using one for taxes is wonderful. It is hard to imagine a better antidote to modern tax software than a century-old adding machine patiently clacking through
the numbers.
The hand tools belong in the same category. A good plane or rule does not hide
its intent. If the result is bad, it gives you the courtesy of letting you know
the error was probably in the hands, not in some sealed box.
On 2026-06-03, Koen Martens <gmc@metro.cx> wrote:
You could and were encouraged to understand every little corner of the machine. Build your own extensions or modifications to the base system.
I still enjoy using and fixing these machines. None of the layers
and layers of abstraction that hide the inner workings like on modern computing.
There was that famous comment in early Unix source code that
described a particularly convoluted piece of logic. The last
line was:
You are not expected to understand this.
Unfortunately, modern gadgets seem to have swapped two words:
You are expected not to understand this.
Remember the slogan from Orwell's _Nineteen Eighty-Four_:
Ignorance is strength.
ERROR "unexpected byte sequence starting at index 99: '\xE2'" while decoding:
In article <87bjdqe881.fsf@posteo.de>,
Jonathan Lamothe <jonathan@jlamothe.net> wrote:
Lawrence Dƒ??Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On 04 Jun 2026 03:37:43 -0300, Mike Spencer wrote:
My electric toaster is 113 years old and works fine.
Presumably thermostat-based, rather than timer-based.
That means, if you put in new bread too quickly after toasting the
previous slices without waiting for it to cool down a bit, they will
come out underdone.
Yes, timer-based toasters are a real improvement.
This has been out for a while, but in case anyone hasn't seen it, it
feels relevant to this thread:
https://youtu.be/1OfxlSG6q5Y
They don't make 'em like they used to, apparently.
How to make Toast:
Electrical Engineering vs. Computer Science
Users click on it, and the message 'Booting UNIX v.8.3' appears
on the screen. (UNIX 8.3 should be out by the time the product
gets to the market.) Users can pull down a menu and click on
the foods they want to cook."
adequate hardware platform for the implementation phase. An
Intel 80386 with 8MB of memory, a 30MB hard disk, and a VGA
monitor should be sufficient. If you select a multitasking,
There was that famous comment in early Unix source code that describedIt was the context switcher for the unix kernel. one particular line
a particularly convoluted piece of logic. The last line was:
You are not expected to understand this.
Unfortunately, modern gadgets seem to have swapped two words:
You are expected not to understand this.
Remember the slogan from Orwell's _Nineteen Eighty-Four_:
Ignorance is strength.
that was a mess of symbols more than text, i probably couldn't read it
now but i could when I read and wrote c more frequently.
The comment itself was actually directed at students and intended to
indicate that they shouldn't waste time studying it because it wouldn't
be on the test. Which was probably helpful because it's alarmingly
obtuse and would have sent me into a panic if anyone ever told me to
make sure i knew the kernel for finals.
On Sun, 07 Jun 2026 20:07:49 +0000, Etheromania wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Commentary_on_the_UNIX_Operating_System#%22You_are_not_expected_to_understand_this%22
There was that famous comment in early Unix source code that describedIt was the context switcher for the unix kernel. one particular line
a particularly convoluted piece of logic. The last line was:
You are not expected to understand this.
Unfortunately, modern gadgets seem to have swapped two words:
You are expected not to understand this.
Remember the slogan from Orwell's _Nineteen Eighty-Four_:
Ignorance is strength.
that was a mess of symbols more than text, i probably couldn't read it
now but i could when I read and wrote c more frequently.
The comment itself was actually directed at students and intended to indicate that they shouldn't waste time studying it because it wouldn't
be on the test. Which was probably helpful because it's alarmingly
obtuse and would have sent me into a panic if anyone ever told me to
make sure i knew the kernel for finals.
The average student wasn't permitted to read it. When it was written, it
was Bell Labs internal only.
Even when UNIX was released to the outside world, access under the edicational licence only permitted graduates and staff to see it.
The comment itself was actually directed at students and intended to
indicate that they shouldn't waste time studying it because it
wouldn't be on the test.
On Sun, 07 Jun 2026 20:07:49 +0000, Etheromania wrote:
There was that famous comment in early Unix source code that describedIt was the context switcher for the unix kernel. one particular line
a particularly convoluted piece of logic. The last line was:
You are not expected to understand this.
Unfortunately, modern gadgets seem to have swapped two words:
You are expected not to understand this.
Remember the slogan from Orwell's _Nineteen Eighty-Four_:
Ignorance is strength.
that was a mess of symbols more than text, i probably couldn't read it
now but i could when I read and wrote c more frequently.
The comment itself was actually directed at students and intended to
indicate that they shouldn't waste time studying it because it wouldn't
be on the test. Which was probably helpful because it's alarmingly
obtuse and would have sent me into a panic if anyone ever told me to
make sure i knew the kernel for finals.
The average student wasn't permitted to read it. When it was written, it
was Bell Labs internal only.
Even when UNIX was released to the outside world, access under the >edicational licence only permitted graduates and staff to see it.
On Sun, 07 Jun 2026 20:07:49 GMT, Etheromania wrote:its from the lions commentary which was written by a professor and sent
The comment itself was actually directed at students and intended to indicate that they shouldn't waste time studying it because it
wouldn't be on the test.
Not sure how that could be, given that AT&T Bell Labs never
entertained ?students? who sat ?tests?.
Sure, there were outside places like Universities using the Unix
sources (up to the 6th Edition, anyway) in CS courses for study
purposes, but none of them contributed comments -- or indeed, any
other patches -- back to Bell Labs ...
On Sun, 7 Jun 2026 23:15:32 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D?Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 07 Jun 2026 20:07:49 GMT, Etheromania wrote:its from the lions commentary which was written by a professor and
The comment itself was actually directed at students and intended
to indicate that they shouldn't waste time studying it because it
wouldn't be on the test.
Not sure how that could be, given that AT&T Bell Labs never
entertained ?students? who sat ?tests?.
Sure, there were outside places like Universities using the Unix
sources (up to the 6th Edition, anyway) in CS courses for study
purposes, but none of them contributed comments -- or indeed, any
other patches -- back to Bell Labs ...
sent back to bell labs.
On Sun, 07 Jun 2026 23:33:20 GMT, Etheromania wrote:youre right i edited the wikipedia article to make a nonsensical shitpost
On Sun, 7 Jun 2026 23:15:32 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D?Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 07 Jun 2026 20:07:49 GMT, Etheromania wrote:its from the lions commentary which was written by a professor and
The comment itself was actually directed at students and intended
to indicate that they shouldn't waste time studying it because it
wouldn't be on the test.
Not sure how that could be, given that AT&T Bell Labs never
entertained ?students? who sat ?tests?.
Sure, there were outside places like Universities using the Unix
sources (up to the 6th Edition, anyway) in CS courses for study
purposes, but none of them contributed comments -- or indeed, any
other patches -- back to Bell Labs ...
sent back to bell labs.
John Lions would never have written anything so stupid in a book meant
to *explain* how the Unix kernel worked.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Commentary_on_the_UNIX_Operating_System#%22You_are_not_expected_to_understand_this%22>
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> posted:
On Sun, 07 Jun 2026 20:07:49 GMT, Etheromania wrote:its from the lions commentary which was written by a professor and sent
The comment itself was actually directed at students and intended to
indicate that they shouldn't waste time studying it because it
wouldn't be on the test.
Not sure how that could be, given that AT&T Bell Labs never entertained
?students? who sat ?tests?.
Sure, there were outside places like Universities using the Unix
sources (up to the 6th Edition, anyway) in CS courses for study
purposes, but none of them contributed comments -- or indeed, any other
patches -- back to Bell Labs ...
back to bell labs.
On Sun, 07 Jun 2026 23:33:20 +0000, Etheromania wrote:
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> posted:
On Sun, 07 Jun 2026 20:07:49 GMT, Etheromania wrote:its from the lions commentary which was written by a professor and sent back to bell labs.
The comment itself was actually directed at students and intended to
indicate that they shouldn't waste time studying it because it
wouldn't be on the test.
Not sure how that could be, given that AT&T Bell Labs never entertained
?students? who sat ?tests?.
Sure, there were outside places like Universities using the Unix
sources (up to the 6th Edition, anyway) in CS courses for study
purposes, but none of them contributed comments -- or indeed, any other
patches -- back to Bell Labs ...
But the comment was in the accompanying source code. Which was written by Dennis Ritchie.
From the man himself, on his preserved home page; see the second heading.
http://cm.bell-labs.co/who/dmr/odd.html
Im not sure why it has an entry on wikipedia in the lions book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Commentary_on_the_UNIX_Operating_System#%22You_are_not_expected_to_understand_this%22
after reviewing it again it doesn't attribute the comment directly to
the lions book and merely explains where to find it.
In article <1780863612-19817@newsgrouper.org>,
Etheromania <user19817@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) posted:
How to make Toast:
Electrical Engineering vs. Computer Science
Users click on it, and the message 'Booting UNIX v.8.3' appears
on the screen. (UNIX 8.3 should be out by the time the product
gets to the market.) Users can pull down a menu and click on
the foods they want to cook."
adequate hardware platform for the implementation phase. An
Intel 80386 with 8MB of memory, a 30MB hard disk, and a VGA
monitor should be sufficient. If you select a multitasking,
Having a really hard time pinning down when this could have been written
When they say Unix 8.3 do they mean Bell Labs Research Unix?
Because by the time VGA was a thing they were on RU-9
The particular page I pulled it from goes back to 2006
https://web.archive.org/web/20060909110208/https://web.cs.wpi.edu/~gogo/humor/hum_toast.html
but I seem to recall seeing from some time well before that.
Im not sure why it has an entry on wikipedia in the lions book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Commentary_on_the_UNIX_Operating_System#%22You_are_not_expected_to_understand_this%22
after reviewing it again it doesn't attribute the comment directly
to the lions book and merely explains where to find it.
"Scott" == Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> writes:
Well, there was the Lions' commentary, which was widely
available in
the late 70's and beyond. We actually used a photocopy version
of the
Lions text for a college course in 1979/80.
An entire lecture was devoted to the "You are expected not to
understand this" comment and we were expected to understand it in
detail.
On Wed, 10 Jun 2026 19:57:46 +1000, Malcolm Purvis wrote:
An entire lecture was devoted to the "You are expected not to
understand this" comment and we were expected to understand it in
detail.
You mean, ?you are not expected to understand this??
At a wild guess, I?d say that the reason that the data restored from
the stack is not (necessarily) the same as was saved onto the stack
was quite simple: they were process-specific stacks belonging to
different processes.
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 9 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 42:04:27 |
| Calls: | 220 |
| Files: | 21,513 |
| Messages: | 84,866 |