So I have the following (it all works unless specified and I fire it up at least twice a year unless specified). And yes, my office looks like a train-wreck twice a year when I pull all this stuff out to keep it alive..

2 Commodore 64s (one works, the other is for parts), and a Commodore 64C
1 1541-II disk drive (works) and a bunch of software.
1 Commodore 128 (Has a couple of broken keys on the numeric pad), and a 1571 disk drive
1 Laser 128 (Apple II clone) with two drives. Works fine and I have a bunch of games and office type software to go with it.
1 Amiga 500, the internal and two external drives (one pulled from an A1000 so it's very big. Another is an off-brand, very small and cool 3 1/2)
1 Commodore Plus/4. Works great.
1 Commodore Vic-20. Works great
1 Commodore 16 which is unfortunately busted
I have a serial modem (14.4) I use to hook up the Amiga to a PC. I cheat because it's actually just doing telnet, but it's cool to get on the web with Lynx by using a kermit terminal program (my Amiga software is so old that it doesn't have a TCP stack). At some point I started getting some public domain amiga tcp stack off ftp but I needed a hard drive to hold it all so I stopped (even emulation is better than the real thing when you don't have enough hardware).

And of course I also keep a bunch of emulators on the modern machines so I can try things out and have interesting stuff to run (being able to run it on the actual hardware gives you a reason to want to pull it out). I love retrocomputing. In fact, that's how I plan on teaching programming to my kids. Yes, they'll use modern hardware too, but for programming I want them to see how there can be very little between you and the metal and you can still accomplish a bunch. All the layers of abstractions can actually make the basics (like why assembly is important and how you actually talk to hardware) a lot harder to understand. If all you have is a Commodore and you have to send commands to the drive to initialize the hardware, and you have to poke values in order to create a little assembly routine or change colors, it just makes it so much more *real*, and there's a lot less to explain of what's going on in the background. Since everything is an extrapolation of that pattern of thought anyway, I think it's better to start the understanding at that level.

It's relatively easy to get a time-to-digital converter (TDC) with ~tens of picosecond timing granularity, and if you work hard enough, you can get down to ~10 ps resolution or so. If you do insane things, like use superconducting electronics, you can get down to ~few picoseconds or so.

For the simple ~tens of picosecond TDCs, a simple method is just a capacitor with a switched constant-current source. The capacitor charges at a fixed rate, and then the voltage is read out with an ADC. The limiting factors there are the speed of the switch.

From any truly intelligent, open-minded evangelical Christian (I'm not evangelical though) :-), the good answer is to relate the good samaritan parable.

Most people, Christian or not, know about this one. It is part of Jesus' response to the question "What shall I do to inherit eternal life". He answered to love God, and your neighbor. To the question "Who is my neighbor", he answered with the parable.

Basically a bunch of good, God loving people (even a priest!) pass a badly hurt man on the street without helping him, even going out of their way to avoid them (some of them thought he must be drunk). Then a nonbeliever (a Samaritan) had compassion for him, took him to an inn, patched his wounds, and asked the innkeeper to take care of him for as long as he needed and he would reimburse him.

This story is great, because it has two points. First, that we are not supposed to be judging other people over whether they are "Buddhists, Jews, Hindus, or secularists". We're in fact not supposed to judge at all - that's up to Him for later.

The second, and most important, point is that even these "Buddhists, Jews, Hindus and secularists" (you forgot Muslims) can be deserving because of their acts of love and kindness, since love is something you feel and do, not something you talk and thump your Bible about. Their acts can make them even more so deserving than a born and raised Christian.

The question you are posing is not easy, and has been addressed on Christian theological discussion throughout the years. The particular question "are you saved by your faith or by your acts?" has always been a difficult thing to ponder for Christians. In my opinion, why not do both, ignore the naysayers, don't judge the ones who "won't convert" and keep the question unimportant anyway. :-)

The other part of your post, about the exclusionary doctrines, nothing I've ever read about Larry Wall has ever made me think that he hates non-christian folken. That reveals a possible prejudice against religion on yourself.

But again, who am I to judge? :-)

Just my 2c.