In the 1980s there was a project hosted at ISI called "MOSIS", which supported researchers around the country who wanted to create their own experimental chips according to their own specifications. They would send chip descriptor files to MOSIS, and MOSIS would grind out a run of chips according to those specs.

Unfortunately, some of those researchers were connected via CSNET, the world's first ISP, where I worked at the time. CSNET did provide reasonably high-speed IP access to customers who could afford it, but these were broke-ass researchers we're talking about here, and they could only afford dial-up email. Now, MOSIS did support accepting chip description files by email, but these were three megabyte monsters and dialup did not like them AT ALL. They took 3-4 hours to transfer over the phone, and something would go wrong and the phone call would drop nearly every time. We had to rip those monster files out of the queue by hand to get communications with the researcher's site working again. I remember those days not so fondly, but silver lining: this sort of faux pas was responsible for the "Ask Mr. Protocol" column in CSNET's newsletter, which in turn gave rise to a column of the same name that ran in the trade press for twelve years thereafter.

I wonder if they're going to use the SCIPS interplanetary internet protocol Vint Cerf has been pushing, or regular TCP/IP? If the latter, they're going to have to modify a few timers, I bet...

I momentarily read the article title as, "Humans Having Sex With Neanderthals Gave Us Protection Against Ancient Academics". This is plausible on so many levels that I rather think someone should write that article.

We have a type of surge protector/powerboard sold commonly in California called a âoeSquidâ. It resembles a squid: it has an oval body and five short cords of varying lengths, each one ending in a female power socket. It can power five wall warts at once regardless of their egregious size.

It's saying you don't know what you're talking about. All those guns are made in the U.S.

-B

hitting power

What in the actual fuck is that?

Oh, I know, it's absolute nonsense from an internet "expert".

-B

I'm not sure I'd reject a language out of hand just because people can write terrible code with it. I'd rather reject those programmers.

I do agree with you on K & R style, though. Vertical space is valuable real estate.

-B

Isn't it already hard enough to read someone else's perl code?

If they are shit programmers, yeah. You can write garbage in nearly any language. Perl just makes it easier to write shitty code.

-B

Except that their regex engine isn't very fast. I prototyped a project that used a lot of regexes in both python and perl and the python implementation was between 4 and 7 time slower. I really wanted to use python, but it wasn't the right tool for the job.

That's why anyone with a clue will see statements of "only viable" with comic disdain.

Say what you will, but perl is very, very good at parsing text.

-B

I've been doing UNIX since about 1974. I started out on research version 5 on a PDP-11, because that's the only architecture UNIX ran on in those days. v6 was the version that was much more widely distributed to academics, and v7 was the even more widely distributed update that led to the BSD derivatives.

v5 was pretty damn raw. There were no shell variables. "ed" was still written in assembler. Etc. Uphill through the snow both ways. Still, it was FAR better than any of the vendor OSes, no matter what people say about RSX-11. So I founded the first UNIX User's Group Software Distribution Center, purely so I could get my hands on all that goody-poo software. I also produced the very first T-shirt with a UNIX demon on it, for the Urbana, Ill. UNIX meeting - the first national meeting of UNIX users. I gave one to Ken Thompson, one to Dennis Ritchie, and kept two for myself. I still have them. If you've ever seen early USENIX T-shirts with a PDP-11 with pipes, demons, pitchforks, and a barrel labeled NULL, well, that was me (art by Phil Foglio to my design).

Newsweek uses scripts so it doesn't display if it detects AdBlock for example.

Their site loads fine for me. You're not letting sites run JavaScript without you whitelisting them first, are you? If so, why in the hell would you ever do that?

-B

I'm never going to unblock ads. Ever. The web is not usable without a script blocker and an ad blocker. That's the simple fact of the matter.

If that "kicks you in the guts" then too fucking bad. Find a viable business model. But don't expect me to put up with your intrusive, bandwidth-abusing horseshit.

-B

Here's what the guy who invented Linux has to say about what his OS is called:

Well, I think it's justified, but it's justified if you actually make a GNU distribution of Linux ... the same way that I think that "Red Hat Linux" is fine, or "SuSE Linux" or "Debian Linux", because if you actually make your own distribution of Linux, you get to name the thing, but calling Linux in general "GNU Linux" I think is just ridiculous.

The OS can have GNU stuff in userland or not, depending. So it's just called "Linux".

-B

Letters of Marque and Reprisal, as I've heard it. And "reprisal" is certainly closer to the mark (no pun intended).

This is untrue. An AR-15 can be made to fire more than one round simply by removing (or incorrectly installing) a very tiny spring. An AK-style rifle can be made full auto by removing a small amount of metal in the right place, no other parts needed. And an SKS can be made to empty its magazine without any trigger pull whatsoever by simply jamming one piece of its mechanism into a certain position with a tiny wad of paper or something. Those are just three examples.

So then, I could legally have in my possession an AR-15, an AKM, and an SKS. Right next to those rifles I could have a pair of wire cutters, and small file, and a scrap of paper. I would not be breaking the law.

The thing you're likely thinking of is called "constructive intent". If I have all of the above in my possession with the intent of violating the NFA, then I'm breaking the law. Of course, it's up to the BATFE to decide if my intent was worthy of charging me with a crime, and then the court to decide if that crime was committed.

-B