|
Jerry Cotton posted:
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 09:57 |
|
|
Can't go wrong with a reference to cctvcamerapros.com, these guys know what's up!
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
An important fact about Turing is that people immediately built on his work. Babbage's work was a dead end intellectually. I'd never heard of Zuse -- thanks for the mention -- but Wikipedia again suggests that most of his work was unpublished or forgotten in the aftermath of WWII. So Turing's the most fertile of the three, entendre entirely intentional.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
Grim Up North posted:Can't go wrong with a reference to cctvcamerapros.com, these guys know what's up! Yeah that's pretty much the only reference there
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
But do we blame Turing for Google’s algorithmic oopsie, or someone else?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:Why wasn't she able to finish her doctorate? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsYhNfxpUD0&t=72s
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:Why wasn't she able to finish her doctorate? She apparently developed other priorities in life. I'd ask for more details, but the tasteful wooden box with the cat pattern on it doesn't answer questions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
And that's why real programmers of the time numbered their punch cards.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
Preferably in a way that let you put your cards through a card sorter. Line numbers were genuinely useful once.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
If Turing completed the Bombe then it's... Turing complete! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
It's not like he came up with the first formal model of a computer in the first place  Computer designers before Turing were like "what useful features can I add to my computer", Turing was the first to go "how much can I remove before it's no longer a computer" and prove that the cool features of the cool computer can be replaced by programs that run on the simpler computer. He literally created computer science. Computer science wouldn't be relevant to computer engineering for a long time, but computer engineering wouldn't have gone very far without his theoretical work Take video games for example: some early games, like Pong, were single-purpose logic circuits that may as well be made of relays (in fact someone did make a Pong clone out of relays as a proof of concept, a few years ago), but all video games from about 1980 onward are programs running on a computer. Oversimplifying, we could say that without Turing, we would still be stuck with Pong hackbunny has a new favorite as of 23:33 on Sep 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
Yeah, Turing was the first person to really sit down and think about what computation could actually do if performed by machines. It turns out being able to solve math problems very quickly has all kinds of uses. Like enabling people to shitpost on forums
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
MAME, the universal arcade game emulator, for the longest time was unable to run Pong, because MAME was designed to emulate computers. Often complex computers, as arcade machines tended to be multiprocessors with complicated RAM/ROM layouts and several boards, but still computers, made of microprocessors, RAM chips, ROM chips, etc. (nowadays they're just PCs. Boo) Well, Pong wasn't even fully digital You'll notice that recent versions of MAME do, in fact, run Pong. If you look at the Pong "ROMs", you'll find that they aren't ROMs at all (i.e. binary dumps of code/data), but the circuit board's layout, as a structured text file (a "netlist"), listing every single gate, diode, resistor, capacitor, etc. and all connections between them
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Exit Strategy posted:She apparently developed other priorities in life. I'd ask for more details, but the tasteful wooden box with the cat pattern on it doesn't answer questions. Hope you're okay, Exit Strategy. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
hackbunny posted:MAME, the universal arcade game emulator, for the longest time was unable to run Pong, because MAME was designed to emulate computers. Often complex computers, as arcade machines tended to be multiprocessors with complicated RAM/ROM layouts and several boards, but still computers, made of microprocessors, RAM chips, ROM chips, etc. (nowadays they're just PCs. Boo) Well, Pong wasn't even fully digital The Magavox Odyssey, the first home video game system (arguably), was like that too. The console implemented a bunch of hardwired diode-transistor logic, and the game "cartridges" weren't ROMs, they were basically hardware dongles that changed the interconnects of the DTL circuitry and resulted in different behavior.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
hackbunny posted:MAME, the universal arcade game emulator, for the longest time was unable to run Pong, because MAME was designed to emulate computers. Often complex computers, as arcade machines tended to be multiprocessors with complicated RAM/ROM layouts and several boards, but still computers, made of microprocessors, RAM chips, ROM chips, etc. (nowadays they're just PCs. Boo) Well, Pong wasn't even fully digital https://vimeo.com/7548051
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
It's still funny that you need roughly the same horsepower to emulate the original pong hardware as you do to do accurate SNES emulation, just because of how much more abstract the latter machine is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:An important fact about Turing is that people immediately built on his work. Babbage's work was a dead end intellectually. I'd never heard of Zuse -- thanks for the mention -- but Wikipedia again suggests that most of his work was unpublished or forgotten in the aftermath of WWII. So Turing's the most fertile of the three, entendre entirely intentional. Zuse's Plankalkül was the first non-machine specific programming language, with at least ten year margin to the second language, Fortran. Or would have been, since his concept did not actually get made, but fifty years later some computer scientists proved, that Zuse's concept would have worked. Zuse was working for the Nazi government with scrap parts and very limited budget begged from the war department, but still managed to be a full decade ahead of his competition. Turing is the father of the computer science, that is given, but Zuse should be at least considered the father of the programming languages.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 10:05
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:The Magavox Odyssey, the first home video game system (arguably), was like that too. The console implemented a bunch of hardwired diode-transistor logic, and the game "cartridges" weren't ROMs, they were basically hardware dongles that changed the interconnects of the DTL circuitry and resulted in different behavior. Ralph Baer is and always will be king. drat Nolan Bushnell  EDIT: HAHA I didn't notice the SA TV Game text. Humphreys has a new favorite as of 11:18 on Sep 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:Zuse's Plankalkül was the first non-machine specific programming language, with at least ten year margin to the second language, Fortran. Or would have been, since his concept did not actually get made, but fifty years later some computer scientists proved, that Zuse's concept would have worked. Zuse was working for the Nazi government with scrap parts and very limited budget begged from the war department, but still managed to be a full decade ahead of his competition. Why? Because his unrealized concept, when examined long after programming was a thing, would have worked? To be the father of something, you should probably be the impetus of it at the very least. Is there any credible evidence that Zuse influenced the creation of Fortran? I'm not saying he wasn't an impressive person, but let's not get carried away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 11:32
|
|
|
Move over James Watt. Hero of Alexandria is now the father of the Industrial Revolution. I don’t know who Thomas Newcomen is in this analogy. Definitely not Zuse, because Watt was directly improving on his work, not working independently like Turing and Zuse. For content check out this old 12 V DC to 120 V AC converter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag1w5XzB3ac&t=1092s (should start at the right time, but go to 18:12 if it doesn’t.) What’s going on there (slowmo) is that the flappy bit switches the polarity of the DC sixty times per second, creating 12 V AC with a square wave. The transformer then steps it up to 120 V. Nowadays we use semiconductor devices for that—small, silent, efficient, and cheap, with no moving parts. They also eliminate the need for the chunky transformer. Platystemon has a new favorite as of 12:42 on Sep 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 12:23
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Move over James Watt. Hero of Alexandria is now the father of the Industrial Revolution. A bit like how Archimedes was definitely a mathematical prodigy who came really close to calculus centuries before hackbunny has a new favorite as of 12:58 on Sep 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 12:55
|
|
|
Depends, we don't have all his papers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
I did not expect him to be a fan. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU1aYAHmaJI&t=61s
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
hackbunny posted:A bit like how Archimedes was definitely a mathematical prodigy who came really close to calculus centuries before How could they conceive of 10000 but not 10001? If there was an army of 20000 approaching would they say "The enemy has 10000 x 2 soldiers"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Dick Trauma posted:How could they conceive of 10000 but not 10001? If there was an army of 20000 approaching would they say "The enemy has 10000 x 2 soldiers"? Accurate counting wasn't really a thing back then, your scouts would say if they thought the army was bigger or smaller than yours on land. At sea it was boats, and nobody had even heard of ten thousand ships.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
I'm not disputing the difficulty the ancients had with counting large numbers accurately, but they did have numbers or concepts higher than 10,000. For example, Herodotus, who lived 200 years before Archimedes, describes the Persian army at Thermopylae as consisting of "three hundred myriads". A myriad can be interpreted as 10,000, so he's saying the Persian army had 3,000,000. That's a ridiculous claim, but definitely shows he had a specific concept much higher than 10,000. "Here did four thousand men from Pelops'land Against three hundred myriads bravely stand." Edited to remove unnecessarily combative language. Imagined has a new favorite as of 00:12 on Sep 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
OK, my bad, being vague in PYF. Ancient Greeks and Romans had goofy, non-positional numbering systems that weren't designed for mathematics. Look at this mess, it's even worse than I remembered:quote:This alphabetic system operates on the additive principle in which the numeric values of the letters are added together to obtain the total. For example, 241 was represented as ΣΜΑ (200 + 40 + 1). (It was not always the case that the numbers ran from highest to lowest: a 4th-century BC inscription at Athens placed the units to the left of the tens. This practice continued in Asia Minor well into the Roman period.) They used distinct symbols, alphabet letters in fact, for units, tens and hundreds. You run out of alphabet by the time you reach the thousands, so you have to recycle letters, written in small type over the thousands sign. So the tens of thousands are just the tens, written in small type over the thousands sign, right? Nope, the notation changes completely: units, tens, hundreds and thousands written in small type over a ten thousands sign. So I guess you can write numbers larger than 10000, but you literally can't write numbers larger than 99'999'999. I wonder if you can even mix myriad notation with 1-9999 numbers, or if by the time you reach 10000, numbers smaller than it cease to matter But in any case myriad notation wasn't available to Archimedes, it seems, and even if it was it's just a "good enough" solution that doesn't scale, so he made up his own notation to express arbitrarily large numbers Roman numerals are much worse being half additive and half subtractive, and they went from 1 up to "a few thousands"
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
hackbunny posted:OK, my bad, being vague in PYF. Ancient Greeks and Romans had goofy, non-positional numbering systems that weren't designed for mathematics. Look at this mess, it's even worse than I remembered: Nice bit of astronomy on his part, too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Larger numbers were probably created by the first millionaire.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Kwyndig posted:And that's why real programmers of the time numbered their punch cards. 'Clever' assholes used to mess with my mothers punchcards by putting in a date/marriage proposals in the middle of her programs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Dick Trauma posted:Larger numbers were probably created by the first millionaire. "I need a better way to say that I have 10 wheelbarrows of gold"
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
Dick Trauma posted:Larger numbers were probably created by the first millionaire. Proper numerical systems were clearly invented by the first turbosperg of them all. Just some guy, really really mad at how there isn't any logical pattern in the written numbers when you add or subtract, angrily scribbling away until he has something that is consistent on all scales if somewhat annoying when the numbers get too large for whatever you're writing on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
I don't know if this is failed, but here's a working version of the Xerox Alto Y, granddaddy of the modern GUI.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
sebmojo posted:I don't know if this is failed, but here's a working version of the Xerox Alto Y, granddaddy of the modern GUI. It's good to see one of Microsoft's founders is doing something good for the world
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
sebmojo posted:I don't know if this is failed, but here's a working version of the Xerox Alto Y, granddaddy of the modern GUI. And this guy has been posting videos of the restoration progress: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3bosUr3WlKYm4sBaLs-Adw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPyqQXFC2yw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9XgplGqSrw
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:And this guy has been posting videos of the restoration progress:
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 11:05
|
|
|
I was on an electromechanical arcade youtube detour and found this amazing thing. It's mostly run off an electric powered flywheel. The guts are great. I love the scoreboard.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0vZLRCWUqk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-r5MA9sb7kY Sadly it doesn't payout in baseball cards like Slugfest the greatest pitch and bat game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 12:41
|
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:And this guy has been posting videos of the restoration progress: This is awesome. Looking forward to seeing the alto finally boot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 15:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 09:57 |
|
|
UltimoDragonQuest posted:I was on an electromechanical arcade youtube detour and found this amazing thing. It's mostly run off an electric powered flywheel. The guts are great. I have had a play on one of these here in Australia. I really love those mechanical games. The owner also had a restored mechanical 10 pin bowling game like you find in arcades these days that you actually bowl mini balls.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2016 08:42
|
|