On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 22:43:58 -0500, Dave Garland wrote:
>
> On 8/19/2022 2:56 AM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>
>> Oh yes, and it may have been the event that made cross-cut
>> shredders popular, reconstructing cross-cut by hand would take a *long*
>> time.
>>
> Yup. But scanners and computers have gotten very cheap. I'm betting
> that these days, the time would mostly be determined by how long it
> took to lay the pieces out on a scanner, and then to flip each
> piece... wait, if you laid them out in plastic sleeves, flipping would
> be nil time.

Today, almost every cheap ass printer comes with a scanner.

Remember the 90s, when you had these odd hand scanners? You have to swipe
over a paper several times, and not still have missed parts of it. Black
and white of course.
--
Andreas

On 20 Aug 2022 07:00:01 GMT, maus wrote:
>
> On 2022-08-20, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>> On 8/18/2022 12:12 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>
>>> AFAIK did (does) the Irish State not have a similar fortified
>>> border. The former GDR border only comes second to that between North-
>>> and South-Korea.
>>
>> I doubt it, since in the early days there was no border of importance.
>> And today, the struggle is to prevent the border (between Eire and N.
>> Ireland) from being an obstruction to trade or travel. Certainly not
>> fortified.

Huh? There was always a border between the occupied east and west
sectors. Although in the beginning you could freely cross between eastern
and western sectors of Berlin.

They even laid mine fields and had spring guns. When someone trying to
flee touches a wire in the fence they would spray shrapnel all over the
place. Mines and spring guns were removed in the 80s due to the
"Détente", when West-Germany agreed to a financial aid to the GDR.

In fact, West-Germany indirectly paid for the maintenance of the wall,
which cost about 1 Billion Deutsch Mark. For example West-Germany would
pay up to 100,000 Deutsch Mark for every political prisoner released.

> No. Look at the map of the border around Clones.
>
> My point was that there was a big fuss about the people (not including A.Merkel)
> fleeing the GDR, and the larger numbers fleeing the Irish republic before
> Lemass became leader.

And today you see that in the Ukraine. Luckily most Ukrainians want to
get back as soon it calmed down - whenever that will be.
--
Andreas

On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 06:14:36 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 13:12:25 -0400

> > Now there are farms, villages and even buildings straddling the
> > border along with many places where the nearest shopping is on the other
> > side of the border. Closing it again would be very difficult - but if
> > the UK carry on the way they are it might be necessary since it is now
> > an EU border.
> >
>
> Just declare NI a free-trade zone with both England and the EU. Probably
> would be good for business there, too.

The problem with that is that the EU has a lot of very strict rules
about what can be imported (especially food and related items) and they
*really* don't want to see the UK and NI becoming a hole in the border
controls with a million and a half people poised to take advantage of it.

Viewed from the other side the UK does not want to see NI being
used as a route for people to enter the UK without border controls -
despite the dire shortage of migrant workers in the UK which has caused the
UK to leave millions of pounds worth of food to rot in fields - food which
they will now have to import.

Both the EU and the UK have a right and a duty to control their
borders.

All that being said, currently NI operates under EU customs rules so
that goods and people can travel freely across the unclosable border with
the ROI. The economy of NI is booming because of this because *they* alone
of all the UK have access to the single market of the EU. This is called
the NI protocol - negotiated by BJ and team.

The DUP rightly observe that this means there's a customs barrier
*inside* the UK (across the Irish sea) and are insisting on it being
removed - and refuse to participate in the NI executive (which prevents it
from working at all) until they get what they want.

The other catch in this story is a little thing called the Good
Friday Agreement - which ended the troubles in NI and guarantees that there
will be no border on the island of Ireland. The UK are signatories to that
along with the USA and the ROI. Nobody with a micro-gram of sanity wants
the troubles back.

Boris Johnson (and team) promised everybody they good have it both
ways and got away with it, despite it being clearly impossible, then
shafted the DUP as the only practical solution. One of his last acts as PM
was to put forward a bill to give the DUP what they want by allowing
anything that's intended to stay in NI to cross with no checks or barriers
and telling the EU "trust us we won't let anyone cross the border to the
ROI with it" - the EU are, unsurprisingly, not inclined to be trusting to
the UK.

There is a widespread opinion in the EU that if the UK passes that
bill they will be in breach of international law and if that happens the EU
will start legal action against the UK.

That's the mess, and if there's any way out of it at all it will
take an honest person with a mind like a corkscrew and an IQ of about 500
to find it. Looks like it will be up to Liz Truss - I don't think she
qualifies on *any* count.

The only simple (ish) way out of it that I can see is to re-unify
Ireland - which has to be started by the UK government calling a border
poll and the people of NI voting to become part of the Republic at which
point the UK ceases to exist and there is only GB. Perhaps enough time has
passed for this not to be seen as surrendering to the IRA but even so
dissolving the UK is not going to be a popular move with the likes of the
ERG or indeed the DUP, Orange Order etc.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 17:28:35 +0100
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

[good stuff just a bit long]
> The only simple (ish) way out of it that I can see is to re-unify
> Ireland - which has to be started by the UK government calling a border
> poll and the people of NI voting to become part of the Republic at which
> point the UK ceases to exist and there is only GB. Perhaps enough time has
> passed for this not to be seen as surrendering to the IRA but even so
> dissolving the UK is not going to be a popular move with the likes of the
> ERG or indeed the DUP, Orange Order etc.

Or UK Brexit Conservatives. It'll also only encourage the SNP; another
reason for the Tory 'British Empire's last stand'-types to rally together.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 12:17:30 -0400
Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:

> Remember the 90s, when you had these odd hand scanners? You have to swipe
> over a paper several times, and not still have missed parts of it. Black
> and white of course.

Hideous things - but they were cheap.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 06:14:36 -0700
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 13:12:25 -0400
>
>>> Now there are farms, villages and even buildings straddling the
>>> border along with many places where the nearest shopping is on the other
>>> side of the border. Closing it again would be very difficult - but if
>>> the UK carry on the way they are it might be necessary since it is now
>>> an EU border.
>>>
>>
>> Just declare NI a free-trade zone with both England and the EU. Probably
>> would be good for business there, too.
>
> The problem with that is that the EU has a lot of very strict rules
> about what can be imported (especially food and related items) and they
> *really* don't want to see the UK and NI becoming a hole in the border
> controls with a million and a half people poised to take advantage of it.
>
> Viewed from the other side the UK does not want to see NI being
> used as a route for people to enter the UK without border controls -
> despite the dire shortage of migrant workers in the UK which has caused the
> UK to leave millions of pounds worth of food to rot in fields - food which
> they will now have to import.
>
> Both the EU and the UK have a right and a duty to control their
> borders.
>
> All that being said, currently NI operates under EU customs rules so
> that goods and people can travel freely across the unclosable border with
> the ROI. The economy of NI is booming because of this because *they* alone
> of all the UK have access to the single market of the EU. This is called
> the NI protocol - negotiated by BJ and team.
>
> The DUP rightly observe that this means there's a customs barrier
> *inside* the UK (across the Irish sea) and are insisting on it being
> removed - and refuse to participate in the NI executive (which prevents it
> from working at all) until they get what they want.
>
> The other catch in this story is a little thing called the Good
> Friday Agreement - which ended the troubles in NI and guarantees that there
> will be no border on the island of Ireland. The UK are signatories to that
> along with the USA and the ROI. Nobody with a micro-gram of sanity wants
> the troubles back.
>
> Boris Johnson (and team) promised everybody they good have it both
> ways and got away with it, despite it being clearly impossible, then
> shafted the DUP as the only practical solution. One of his last acts as PM
> was to put forward a bill to give the DUP what they want by allowing
> anything that's intended to stay in NI to cross with no checks or barriers
> and telling the EU "trust us we won't let anyone cross the border to the
> ROI with it" - the EU are, unsurprisingly, not inclined to be trusting to
> the UK.

OTOH, the EU is being really hard-assed about it, because they want to
shaft the UK. A little bit of leakage wouldn’t be a major problem. Anything
intended to be resold would still have to meet the requirements of the
destination country, however it got there. At worst it might cost a few
euros in customs, and doesn’t the UK want a customs union with the EU
anyway?

--
Pete

On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 10:39:50 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> OTOH, the EU is being really hard-assed about it, because they want to

Yes it's our border, our food, our goods, our safety standards ...

They are quite right to be hard arsed about it and it has *nothing*
to do with shafting the UK and everything to do with preventing the UK
shafting the EU by dumping unacceptable foods and dangerous products into
the EU single market.

It's self protection!

> shaft the UK. A little bit of leakage wouldn’t be a major problem.

It could easily be a *lot* of leakage.

Also it doesn't take much leakage in animal feeds to pollute the
food chain with things banned in the EU. Consider a NI cattle farmer who
buys feed from the UK which turns out to have additives banned in the EU -
when the meat from their cattle is tested they will not be able to sell it
in the EU. Ooops that's one bankrupt farmer because he got the wrong feed.

Dangerous children's toys would be another one - a little bit of
leakage, say a container load of dolls with poisonous paint or choke
hazards. How many dead children does it take to make a major problem ?

A little bit pregnant!

> Anything intended to be resold would still have to meet the requirements
> of the destination country, however it got there.

There are no borders inside the EU for it to be checked at and
there *cannot* be since free movement of goods is one of the four
*fundamental* freedoms of the EU. The point at which the standards are
enforced is the point of entry to the EU, also in EU farms, factories etc.

> At worst it might cost a few euros in customs,

Where would those customs be ? Customs barriers are at ports of
entry, and no at worst it's bankrupt farmers and dead children.

> and doesn’t the UK want a customs union with the
> EU anyway?

The UK wanted to pick and choose and have free trade without free
movement of people, services and capital - the EU, rightly, refuses to
separate the four fundamental freedoms that make the EU what it is. At the
same time the UK wanted (and want) to set their own rules about what they
do and do not import and so their standards are expected to diverge from
the EU standards.

A country is either in the EU or out of it - there's no halfway
point without an awful lot of negotiation and *trust* - the UK eroded every
bit of trust the EU might have had in them during the Brexit negotiations.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 2022-08-15, Anonymous Reactionary <anonymous@internet.everywhere> wrote:
> Still better than a Leftist, who wants to kill everyone, including
> himself.

I frankly do not understand the negative reactions when discussing
the incontrovertible fact that the American Left must be eradicated.
Leftists have shown us time and time again that they simply will
not leave the rest of us alone to live our lives. The Left is like
a cancer. You may beat them back temporarily, but as long as some
are left standing they come back with a vengeance.

You do not argue with cancer. You do not debate it. You do not compromise
with it. Cancer cannot be negotiated with. It can only be destroyed before
the disease spreads beyond any hope of recovery. This is what we are facing
in the United States today. The "progressive" disease has been metastasizing
for decades and is rapidly approaching terminal proportions. Some despair
that it may already be too late.

Fortunately as the self-styled "Progressives" become more crazed, demanding,
and intrusive to our lives more people are coming around to the realization
of what must be done to put a stop to it once and for all.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)

"Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental
protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually
an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's
resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 2022-08-20, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
> On 20 Aug 2022 07:00:01 GMT, maus wrote:
>>
>> On 2022-08-20, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>>> On 8/18/2022 12:12 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>>
>>>> AFAIK did (does) the Irish State not have a similar fortified
>>>> border. The former GDR border only comes second to that between North-
>>>> and South-Korea.
>>>
>>> I doubt it, since in the early days there was no border of importance.
>>> And today, the struggle is to prevent the border (between Eire and N.
>>> Ireland) from being an obstruction to trade or travel. Certainly not
>>> fortified.
>
>> My point was that there was a big fuss about the people (not including A.Merkel)
>> fleeing the GDR, and the larger numbers fleeing the Irish republic before
>> Lemass became leader.
>
> And today you see that in the Ukraine. Luckily most Ukrainians want to
> get back as soon it calmed down - whenever that will be.

A lot of Christians have gone back to Syria since Isis was partly chased out.

--
greymausg@mail.org

Where is our money gone, Dude?
Do you want earwigs with that?.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#76 Why the Soviet computer failed
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#79 Why the Soviet computer failed

linkedin along with archived copies

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mainframe-channel-io-lynn-wheeler/
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022e.html#100 Mainframe Channel I/O
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022e.html#102 Mainframe Channel I/O
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#0 Mainframe Channel I/O
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/john-boyd-ibm-wild-ducks-lynn-wheeler/
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022e.html#103 John Boyd and IBM Wild Ducks
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022e.html#104 John Boyd and IBM Wild Ducks
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#2 John Boyd and IBM Wild Ducks
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#32 John Boyd and IBM Wild Ducks
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#42 IBM Bureaucrats
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#60 John Boyd and IBM Wild Ducks
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#67 John Boyd and IBM Wild Ducks
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/zvm-50th-lynn-wheeler/
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#44 z/VM 50th
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#47 z/VM 50th
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/zvm-50th-part-2-lynn-wheeler/
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#49 z/VM 50th - part 2
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/zvm-50th-part-3-lynn-wheeler/
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#50 z/VM 50th - part 3
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/zvm-50th-part-4-lynn-wheeler/
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#53 z/VM 50th - part 4
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#54 z/VM 50th - part 4

youtube, VM Workshop, VM 50th Anniversary Celebration (precursor CP67 is
54th anniversary from houston spring '68 share meeing(
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT-QOjr8IaE&list=PL5WWepmN1fC2CuvO323tldEMwGJtu0gpE&t=2019s

recent (facebook) IBM clone controller post (COMTEN, Interdata,
perkin-elmer, etc)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#70 COMTEN - IBM Clone Telecommunication Controller
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#71 COMTEN - IBM Clone Telecommunication Controller

and some IBM/PC comments in linkedin post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#72 IBM/PC
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#73 IBM/PC
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#74 IBM/PC
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2022f.html#75 IBM/PC

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

On 2022-08-20, maus <maus@dmaus.org> wrote:
> Babbage's machine (and the curta, I think) used decimal, i was wondering was it
> turing's imaginary machine that inspired the change to binary ?

That would be Shannon. His Masters thesis, "A Symbolic Analysis of
Relay and Switching Circuits", showed that relays could be used to
represent boolean algebra problems.

maus <maus@dmaus.org> writes:

> On 2022-08-20, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 3:33:51 AM UTC-6, maus wrote:
>>
>>> At what point in the history of computers (mechanical) was it decided to
>>> use binary calculations, rather than some sort of decimal things?.
>>> Turing's machines?
>>
>> I think Konrad Zuse made a mechanical computer that worked
>> in binary. Otherwise, binary made its debut on electronic computers.
>>
>> John Savard
>
> Babbage's machine (and the curta, I think) used decimal, i was wondering was it
> turing's imaginary machine that inspired the change to binary ?

No. I don't think any of that work made any real use of radix (but
that's so far from my area you can barely see it from there). It would
be more likely for his Colossus machine, but I don't know what radix it
used for arithmetic, and it was still secret when the switch to binary
took place anyway.

> reading Zuse's entry in Wikipedia was very revealing. I suppose that the
> modern computer had many parents

Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> writes:
>maus <maus@dmaus.org> writes:
>
>> On 2022-08-20, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>> On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 3:33:51 AM UTC-6, maus wrote:
>>>
>>>> At what point in the history of computers (mechanical) was it decided to
>>>> use binary calculations, rather than some sort of decimal things?.
>>>> Turing's machines?
>>>
>>> I think Konrad Zuse made a mechanical computer that worked
>>> in binary. Otherwise, binary made its debut on electronic computers.
>>>
>>> John Savard
>>
>> Babbage's machine (and the curta, I think) used decimal, i was wondering was it
>> turing's imaginary machine that inspired the change to binary ?
>
>No. I don't think any of that work made any real use of radix (but
>that's so far from my area you can barely see it from there). It would
>be more likely for his Colossus machine, but I don't know what radix it
>used for arithmetic, and it was still secret when the switch to binary
>took place anyway.
>
>> reading Zuse's entry in Wikipedia was very revealing. I suppose that the
>> modern computer had many parents

I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer (we had
the only remaining original component (the storage drum) in
the CS department[*]). A replica is at the CHM in Mountain View, Ca.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atanasoff%E2%80%93Berry_computer

[*] The chairman of which was responsible for disassembling the original
to make space for his graduate student office twenty years earlier :-(.

Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> writes:
>> maus <maus@dmaus.org> writes:
>>
>>> On 2022-08-20, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>> On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 3:33:51 AM UTC-6, maus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> At what point in the history of computers (mechanical) was it decided to
>>>>> use binary calculations, rather than some sort of decimal things?.
>>>>> Turing's machines?
>>>>
>>>> I think Konrad Zuse made a mechanical computer that worked
>>>> in binary. Otherwise, binary made its debut on electronic computers.
>>>>
>>>> John Savard
>>>
>>> Babbage's machine (and the curta, I think) used decimal, i was wondering was it
>>> turing's imaginary machine that inspired the change to binary ?
>>
>> No. I don't think any of that work made any real use of radix (but
>> that's so far from my area you can barely see it from there). It would
>> be more likely for his Colossus machine, but I don't know what radix it
>> used for arithmetic, and it was still secret when the switch to binary
>> took place anyway.
>>
>>> reading Zuse's entry in Wikipedia was very revealing. I suppose that the
>>> modern computer had many parents
>
> I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
> arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer (we had
> the only remaining original component (the storage drum) in
> the CS department[*]). A replica is at the CHM in Mountain View, Ca.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atanasoff%E2%80%93Berry_computer
>
> [*] The chairman of which was responsible for disassembling the original
> to make space for his graduate student office twenty years earlier :-(.
>
>

Makes you wonder what he was thinking, doesn’t it.

--
Pete

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>> Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> writes:
>>> maus <maus@dmaus.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2022-08-20, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 3:33:51 AM UTC-6, maus wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> At what point in the history of computers (mechanical) was it decided to
>>>>>> use binary calculations, rather than some sort of decimal things?.
>>>>>> Turing's machines?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think Konrad Zuse made a mechanical computer that worked
>>>>> in binary. Otherwise, binary made its debut on electronic computers.
>>>>>
>>>>> John Savard
>>>>
>>>> Babbage's machine (and the curta, I think) used decimal, i was wondering was it
>>>> turing's imaginary machine that inspired the change to binary ?
>>>
>>> No. I don't think any of that work made any real use of radix (but
>>> that's so far from my area you can barely see it from there). It would
>>> be more likely for his Colossus machine, but I don't know what radix it
>>> used for arithmetic, and it was still secret when the switch to binary
>>> took place anyway.
>>>
>>>> reading Zuse's entry in Wikipedia was very revealing. I suppose that the
>>>> modern computer had many parents
>>
>> I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
>> arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer (we had
>> the only remaining original component (the storage drum) in
>> the CS department[*]). A replica is at the CHM in Mountain View, Ca.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atanasoff%E2%80%93Berry_computer
>>
>> [*] The chairman of which was responsible for disassembling the original
>> to make space for his graduate student office twenty years earlier :-(.
>>
>>
>
>Makes you wonder what he was thinking, doesn’t it.

The chairman needed space for his desk in the basement of the physics
building (this was circa 49, I think) when it just appeared
to be a pile of random electronic components.

He was quite adamant that he didn't know, at the time, what
it was. And quite regretted it years later. Although we did
have the one remaining memory drum to display at the annual
campus-wide open-house (VEISHEA, named after the five colleges,
the open-house got way out of hand and is now defunct sadly).

Dr. Atansoff himself would visit periodically and give talks to
the computer science club, and we'd take him out for dinner
afterwords. He was fond of telling the story about his drive
to the river, and the idea of 'jogging' memory (which we call
refresh today).

In article <HM2UK.170253$9Yp5.141468@fx12.iad>,
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
>Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> writes:
>>maus <maus@dmaus.org> writes:
>>
>>> On 2022-08-20, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>> On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 3:33:51 AM UTC-6, maus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> At what point in the history of computers (mechanical) was it decided to
>>>>> use binary calculations, rather than some sort of decimal things?.
>>>>> Turing's machines?
>>>>
>>>> I think Konrad Zuse made a mechanical computer that worked
>>>> in binary. Otherwise, binary made its debut on electronic computers.
>>>>
>>>> John Savard
>>>
>>> Babbage's machine (and the curta, I think) used decimal, i was
>wondering was it
>>> turing's imaginary machine that inspired the change to binary ?
>>
>>No. I don't think any of that work made any real use of radix (but
>>that's so far from my area you can barely see it from there). It would
>>be more likely for his Colossus machine, but I don't know what radix it
>>used for arithmetic, and it was still secret when the switch to binary
>>took place anyway.
>>
>>> reading Zuse's entry in Wikipedia was very revealing. I suppose that the
>>> modern computer had many parents
>
>I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
>arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer

Well, according to Wikipedia, Konrad Zuse's Z1

"... was the first freely programmable computer in the world which used
Boolean logic and binary floating-point numbers ..."

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z1_(computer)

> (we had
>the only remaining original component (the storage drum) in
>the CS department[*]). A replica is at the CHM in Mountain View, Ca.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atanasoff%E2%80%93Berry_computer

So binary was already in use prior to the ABC; which also, even
according to that article, was more of an ALU than a full computer,

"... because it was neither programmable, nor Turing-complete."

It did pioneer the use of vacuum tubes, where the Z1 was electromechanical,
but that's a different issue from the introduction of binary for airthmetic,
which the Z1 was doing several years earlier.

// Christian

According to Christian Brunschen <cb@elaine.df.lth.se>:
>>I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
>>arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer
>
>Well, according to Wikipedia, Konrad Zuse's Z1
>
>"... was the first freely programmable computer in the world which used
> Boolean logic and binary floating-point numbers ..."
>
>See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z1_(computer)

I would be very surprised if Zuse and Atanasoff were aware of each
other. Zuze was isolated in Nazi Germany until after the war.

Eckert and Mauchly had seen the ABC before starting work on the ENIAC,
which is one reason their ENIAC patent was later voided. So it seems
fair to say that Atanasoff brought us binary computer arithmetic.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

In article <tfqqon$2i2r$1@gal.iecc.com>, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>According to Christian Brunschen <cb@elaine.df.lth.se>:
>>>I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
>>>arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer
>>
>>Well, according to Wikipedia, Konrad Zuse's Z1
>>
>>"... was the first freely programmable computer in the world which used
>> Boolean logic and binary floating-point numbers ..."
>>
>>See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z1_(computer)
>
>I would be very surprised if Zuse and Atanasoff were aware of each
>other.

That doesn't change the timeline, though. Zuse clearly was using binary
arithmetic before others such as Atanasoff did.

>Zuze was isolated in Nazi Germany until after the war.
>
>Eckert and Mauchly had seen the ABC before starting work on the ENIAC,
>which is one reason their ENIAC patent was later voided. So it seems
>fair to say that Atanasoff brought us binary computer arithmetic.

Just beacuse Zuse's pioneering efforts weren't in a position to influence
other designs, doesn't mean that they should be ignored. He did
get to binary arithmetic before others.

Atanasoff's slightly later use of the same thing then was able to influence
other parallel developmments that ended up having wider reach.

So I don't think it's fair to ignore Zuse - he got there first, even though
it was from a different later track that the same idea was more widely
spread.

// Christian

On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 20:55:51 -0000 (UTC), John Levine wrote:
>
> I would be very surprised if Zuse and Atanasoff were aware of each
> other. Zuze was isolated in Nazi Germany until after the war.

The Nazis didn't even understood what they would have gotten if they'd
funded Zuse's work. Didn't think of potentially applications like code
breaking (like they did in Bletchley at that time), or calculating tables
for artillery (like the Americans did shortly after the war).
--
Andreas

On 2022-09-13, Christian Brunschen <cb@elaine.df.lth.se> wrote:
> In article <HM2UK.170253$9Yp5.141468@fx12.iad>,
> Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
>>Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> writes:
>>>maus <maus@dmaus.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2022-08-20, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 3:33:51 AM UTC-6, maus wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> At what point in the history of computers (mechanical) was it decided to
>>>>>> use binary calculations, rather than some sort of decimal things?.
>>>>>> Turing's machines?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think Konrad Zuse made a mechanical computer that worked
>>>>> in binary. Otherwise, binary made its debut on electronic computers.
>>>>>
>>>>> John Savard
>>>>
>>>> Babbage's machine (and the curta, I think) used decimal, i was
>>wondering was it
>>>> turing's imaginary machine that inspired the change to binary ?

on mature consideration, I should have written (thought exercise)
Leibnitz ((i-e) problem with German), as far as I read, had already been
thinking about binary
>>
>>I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
>>arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer
>
> "... was the first freely programmable computer in the world which used
> Boolean logic and binary floating-point numbers ..."
>
> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z1_(computer)

according to that, Zuse had done work in the development of Algol
>
>> (we had
>>the only remaining original component (the storage drum) in
>>the CS department[*]). A replica is at the CHM in Mountain View, Ca.
>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atanasoff%E2%80%93Berry_computer
>
> So binary was already in use prior to the ABC; which also, even
> according to that article, was more of an ALU than a full computer,
>
> "... because it was neither programmable, nor Turing-complete."
>
> It did pioneer the use of vacuum tubes, where the Z1 was electromechanical,
> but that's a different issue from the introduction of binary for airthmetic,
> which the Z1 was doing several years earlier.
>
> // Christian
>

--
greymausg@mail.org

Fe,Fi, Fo, Fum, I smell the stench of an Influencer.
Where is our money gone, Dude?

On 2022-09-13 19:06, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> writes:
>> maus <maus@dmaus.org> writes:
>>
>>> On 2022-08-20, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>> On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 3:33:51 AM UTC-6, maus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> At what point in the history of computers (mechanical) was it decided to
>>>>> use binary calculations, rather than some sort of decimal things?.
>>>>> Turing's machines?
>>>>
>>>> I think Konrad Zuse made a mechanical computer that worked
>>>> in binary. Otherwise, binary made its debut on electronic computers.
>>>>
>>>> John Savard
>>>
>>> Babbage's machine (and the curta, I think) used decimal, i was wondering was it
>>> turing's imaginary machine that inspired the change to binary ?
>>
>> No. I don't think any of that work made any real use of radix (but
>> that's so far from my area you can barely see it from there). It would
>> be more likely for his Colossus machine, but I don't know what radix it
>> used for arithmetic, and it was still secret when the switch to binary
>> took place anyway.
>>
>>> reading Zuse's entry in Wikipedia was very revealing. I suppose that the
>>> modern computer had many parents
>
> I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
> arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer (we had
> the only remaining original component (the storage drum) in
> the CS department[*]). A replica is at the CHM in Mountain View, Ca.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atanasoff%E2%80%93Berry_computer
>
> [*] The chairman of which was responsible for disassembling the original
> to make space for his graduate student office twenty years earlier :-(.

The Zuse Z1 predates the ABC, and did use binary. The ABC merely made it
all more electronic by using vacuum tubes. The Z1 used relays.

So the pioneering in the ABC was not the "binary" part, but the
"electronic" part, as opposed to earlier electro-mechanical.

Johnny

On 2022-09-13 22:55, John Levine wrote:
> According to Christian Brunschen <cb@elaine.df.lth.se>:
>>> I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
>>> arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer
>>
>> Well, according to Wikipedia, Konrad Zuse's Z1
>>
>> "... was the first freely programmable computer in the world which used
>> Boolean logic and binary floating-point numbers ..."
>>
>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z1_(computer)
>
> I would be very surprised if Zuse and Atanasoff were aware of each
> other. Zuze was isolated in Nazi Germany until after the war.

It's likely they were unaware of each other, I agree. However, Zuse
filed a patent already in 1936, which was back when there were still a
lot of open communication going on. So who knows...?

> Eckert and Mauchly had seen the ABC before starting work on the ENIAC,
> which is one reason their ENIAC patent was later voided. So it seems
> fair to say that Atanasoff brought us binary computer arithmetic.

As far as binary arithmetic goes, neither Atanasoff nor Zuse should get
the credit. Binary, as such, was already three centuries old by that
time. Credit goes to Liebnitz
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottfried_Wilhelm_Leibniz).

It was merely a question of marrying the idea with the existing
technology. Which both Zuse and Atanasoff did. But Zuse did it before
Atanasoff.

Johnny

Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
> On 2022-09-13 19:06, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> writes:
>>> maus <maus@dmaus.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2022-08-20, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 3:33:51 AM UTC-6, maus wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> At what point in the history of computers (mechanical) was it decided to
>>>>>> use binary calculations, rather than some sort of decimal things?.
>>>>>> Turing's machines?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think Konrad Zuse made a mechanical computer that worked
>>>>> in binary. Otherwise, binary made its debut on electronic computers.
>>>>>
>>>>> John Savard
>>>>
>>>> Babbage's machine (and the curta, I think) used decimal, i was wondering was it
>>>> turing's imaginary machine that inspired the change to binary ?
>>>
>>> No. I don't think any of that work made any real use of radix (but
>>> that's so far from my area you can barely see it from there). It would
>>> be more likely for his Colossus machine, but I don't know what radix it
>>> used for arithmetic, and it was still secret when the switch to binary
>>> took place anyway.
>>>
>>>> reading Zuse's entry in Wikipedia was very revealing. I suppose that the
>>>> modern computer had many parents
>>
>> I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
>> arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer (we had
>> the only remaining original component (the storage drum) in
>> the CS department[*]). A replica is at the CHM in Mountain View, Ca.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atanasoff%E2%80%93Berry_computer
>>
>> [*] The chairman of which was responsible for disassembling the original
>> to make space for his graduate student office twenty years earlier :-(.
>
> The Zuse Z1 predates the ABC, and did use binary. The ABC merely made it
> all more electronic by using vacuum tubes. The Z1 used relays.
>
> So the pioneering in the ABC was not the "binary" part, but the
> "electronic" part, as opposed to earlier electro-mechanical.

I don’t think Atanasoff knew about Zuse’s work, though.

--
Pete

On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:22:01 PM UTC+10, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2022-09-13 22:55, John Levine wrote:
> > According to Christian Brunschen <c...@elaine.df.lth.se>:
> >>> I thought everyone knew that John V Atanasoff pioneered binary
> >>> arithmetic in electronic devices with the ABC computer
> >>
> >> Well, according to Wikipedia, Konrad Zuse's Z1
> >>
> >> "... was the first freely programmable computer in the world which used
> >> Boolean logic and binary floating-point numbers ..."
> >>
> >> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z1_(computer)
> >
> > I would be very surprised if Zuse and Atanasoff were aware of each
> > other. Zuze was isolated in Nazi Germany until after the war.
> It's likely they were unaware of each other, I agree. However, Zuse
> filed a patent already in 1936, which was back when there were still a
> lot of open communication going on. So who knows...?
> > Eckert and Mauchly had seen the ABC before starting work on the ENIAC,
> > which is one reason their ENIAC patent was later voided. So it seems
> > fair to say that Atanasoff brought us binary computer arithmetic.
> As far as binary arithmetic goes, neither Atanasoff nor Zuse should get
> the credit. Binary, as such, was already three centuries old by that
> time. Credit goes to Liebnitz
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottfried_Wilhelm_Leibniz).
..
How old is the Chinese method of multiplying by halving one
operand and doubling the other?

According to Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se>:
>> Eckert and Mauchly had seen the ABC before starting work on the ENIAC,
>> which is one reason their ENIAC patent was later voided. So it seems
>> fair to say that Atanasoff brought us binary computer arithmetic.
>
>As far as binary arithmetic goes, neither Atanasoff nor Zuse should get
>the credit. Binary, as such, was already three centuries old by that
>time. Credit goes to Liebnitz
>(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottfried_Wilhelm_Leibniz).
>
>It was merely a question of marrying the idea with the existing
>technology. Which both Zuse and Atanasoff did. But Zuse did it before
>Atanasoff.

People were certainly aware of binary arithmetic but it took a
surprisingly long time to realize that the benefits of doing
everything in binary outweighed the cost of converting to and from
decimal for I/O. ENIAC was 1-out-of-10 decimal with 10 flip-flops for
each digit. In the 1950s there were biquinary (IBM 650) and various
kinds of BCD.

I think S/360 killed off decimal machines by embedding a small nominally
optional set of BCD arithmetic instructions inside a binary machine.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly