Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [midatlanticretro] More info on the latest TV prop deal -- show identified!

Expand Messages
  • Wesley Furr
    As promised, I now sit corrected. :-) Thanks for the info, that certainly makes more sense. Just sounded too much like one of those virus hoaxes that makes
    Message 1 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      As promised, I now sit corrected. :-) Thanks for the info, that certainly
      makes more sense. Just sounded too much like one of those virus hoaxes that
      makes the rounds every few years...you know, the one that says it will
      "burn" your hard drive, etc, etc. :-)

      Wesley


      -----Original Message-----

      Kids! ;-) (if the above is sarcasm, my apologies).

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halt_and_Catch_Fire

      It's a native op code on the Moto 6800/6809. It simply exercises the address
      bus (as I recall).
    • B. Degnan
      ... show identified! ... computing ... my ... I ... See: Killer Poke story, about the Commdore PET http://www.6502.org/users/andre/petindex/poke/ bd
      Message 2 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        > Subject: RE: [midatlanticretro] More info on the latest TV prop deal --
        show identified!
        >
        > "As a note, the series' unusual name is derived from a term for a
        computing
        > code specifically designed to destroy a machine's CPU."
        >
        > Really? Never heard of such a thing! That alone doesn't bode well in
        my
        > mind... Unless of course there actually was at some point in history a
        > machine that could be physically damaged by code alone...in which case,
        I
        > sit corrected.
        >
        > But...they still have my attention! Will be interesting to see how it
        > goes...
        >

        See: Killer Poke story, about the Commdore PET
        http://www.6502.org/users/andre/petindex/poke/

        bd
      • Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-
        ... Youngsters... http://www.nickh.org/silly/opcodes.txt -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG Well I speak to
        Message 3 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          "Wesley Furr" <wesley@...> writes:

          >"As a note, the series' unusual name is derived from a term for a computing
          >code specifically designed to destroy a machine's CPU."
          >
          >Really? Never heard of such a thing! That alone doesn't bode well in my
          >mind... Unless of course there actually was at some point in history a
          >machine that could be physically damaged by code alone...in which case, I
          >sit corrected.

          Youngsters...

          http://www.nickh.org/silly/opcodes.txt

          --
          VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

          Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
        • Neil Cherry
          ... And remember, always mount a scratch monkey! ... -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/
          Message 4 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            On 04/24/2013 08:55 AM, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:

            > http://www.nickh.org/silly/opcodes.txt
            >
            > --
            > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG
            >
            > Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

            And remember, always mount a scratch monkey!

            :-)

            --
            Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@...
            http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site
            http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog
            Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
          • Kelly D. Leavitt
            From: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Wesley Furr ... The TRS-80 model II had a built in HCF in its video system. If you set the sync way out of
            Message 5 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              From: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Wesley Furr
              > Really? Never heard of such a thing! That alone doesn't bode well in
              > my mind... Unless of course there actually was at some point in
              > history a machine that could be physically damaged by code alone...
              > in which case, I sit corrected.
              The TRS-80 model II had a built in HCF in its video system. If you set the sync way out of range it would actually burn things.

              From an old comp.sys.tandy post:
              Mark McDougall" <ma...@...> wrote in message
              news:45639840$0$1581$5a62ac22@......

              > Frank Durda IV wrote:
              >
              > > There were a few sound reasons
              > > behind this, because it was completely possible to program a Model II
              > > to burn up its video system (complete with smoke and sometimes
              > > flames), and a few other expensive hardware pieces were also
              > > vulnerable to being destroyed due to not knowing what you were doing or
              > > if you only programmed half the settings in the alloted time or
              > > similar issues.
              >
              > Wow, that's incredible, and one could argue, incredibly bad design.
              > Having said that, it's entirely possible to destroy your VGA monitor in
              > software too.
              The problem with the video was the monitor driver board. If a sync was
              way out of range, it could cause one of the drivers to just 'turn on solid',
              which exceeded power disapation specs. The problem with this was
              that not only did the part fail, it usually shorted such that it fed 12v
              back
              through the driver circuit. A lot of times it would get far enough to
              get all the way back to the video/keyboard card.

              Kelly
            • Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-
              ... ;) For those that don t understand it: http://whats.all.this.brouhaha.com/2007/05/07/always-mount-a-scratch-monkey-the-real-story/ FWIW, last month I was
              Message 6 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Neil Cherry <ncherry@...> writes:

                >On 04/24/2013 08:55 AM, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:
                >
                >> http://www.nickh.org/silly/opcodes.txt
                >>
                >> --
                >> VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG
                >>
                >> Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
                >
                >And remember, always mount a scratch monkey!

                ;)

                For those that don't understand it:

                http://whats.all.this.brouhaha.com/2007/05/07/always-mount-a-scratch-monkey-the-real-story/

                FWIW, last month I was up in old DEC country for an HP Connect function.
                I spoke with the DEC field engineer responsible for the "Scratch Monkey"
                incident. Since his hame was elided from the text at the above URL, I'll
                assume that he doesn't want to be known for this, so I'll not mention his
                name here. Perhaps, after a few beers next "festivus", you could pry his
                name from me. :)

                --
                VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

                Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
              • Neil Cherry
                ... Let him be, I m pretty sure it wasn t intentional and he had to feel pretty bad at the time of the incident. I m pretty sure he s caught enough hell even
                Message 7 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 04/24/2013 09:17 AM, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:
                  > Neil Cherry <ncherry@... <mailto:ncherry%40linuxha.com>> writes:

                  > >And remember, always mount a scratch monkey!
                  >
                  > ;)
                  >
                  > For those that don't understand it:
                  >
                  > http://whats.all.this.brouhaha.com/2007/05/07/always-mount-a-scratch-monkey-the-real-story/
                  >
                  > FWIW, last month I was up in old DEC country for an HP Connect function.
                  > I spoke with the DEC field engineer responsible for the "Scratch Monkey"
                  > incident. Since his hame was elided from the text at the above URL, I'll
                  > assume that he doesn't want to be known for this, so I'll not mention his
                  > name here. Perhaps, after a few beers next "festivus", you could pry his
                  > name from me. :)

                  Let him be, I'm pretty sure it wasn't intentional and he had to feel pretty bad
                  at the time of the incident. I'm pretty sure he's caught enough hell even in the
                  pre-WWW.

                  Hmmm, let me archie that for you ... (doesn't quite have the same wring to it
                  does it? ;-) ).

                  --
                  Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@...
                  http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site
                  http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog
                  Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
                • Vince Fleming
                  Anyone remember these old Unix jokes (that no longer work...) http://www.jokes2go.com/lists/list27.html My favs: $ rm God and $ cat food in cans ;)
                  Message 8 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment

                    Anyone remember these old Unix jokes (that no longer work...)

                     

                    http://www.jokes2go.com/lists/list27.html

                     

                     

                    My favs: 

                     

                    $  rm God

                     

                    and

                     

                    $  cat "food in cans"

                     

                    ;)

                     

                     


                    From: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com [midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of Neil Cherry [ncherry@...]
                    Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 9:57 AM
                    To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [midatlanticretro] More info on the latest TV prop deal -- show identified!

                     

                    On 04/24/2013 09:17 AM, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:
                    > Neil Cherry <ncherry@... <mailto:ncherry%40linuxha.com>> writes:

                    > >And remember, always mount a scratch monkey!
                    >
                    > ;)
                    >
                    > For those that don't understand it:
                    >
                    > http://whats.all.this.brouhaha.com/2007/05/07/always-mount-a-scratch-monkey-the-real-story/
                    >
                    > FWIW, last month I was up in old DEC country for an HP Connect function.
                    > I spoke with the DEC field engineer responsible for the "Scratch Monkey"
                    > incident. Since his hame was elided from the text at the above URL, I'll
                    > assume that he doesn't want to be known for this, so I'll not mention his
                    > name here. Perhaps, after a few beers next "festivus", you could pry his
                    > name from me. :)

                    Let him be, I'm pretty sure it wasn't intentional and he had to feel pretty bad
                    at the time of the incident. I'm pretty sure he's caught enough hell even in the
                    pre-WWW.

                    Hmmm, let me archie that for you ... (doesn't quite have the same wring to it
                    does it? ;-) ).

                    --
                    Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@...
                    http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site
                    http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog
                    Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies

                  • David Riley
                    ... As others have noted, that description is incorrect, which makes me maybe a little less enthused about the show. Good chance their copywriters aren t as
                    Message 9 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Apr 24, 2013, at 8:15 AM, "Wesley Furr" <wesley@...> wrote:

                      > "As a note, the series' unusual name is derived from a term for a computing
                      > code specifically designed to destroy a machine's CPU."
                      >
                      > Really? Never heard of such a thing! That alone doesn't bode well in my
                      > mind... Unless of course there actually was at some point in history a
                      > machine that could be physically damaged by code alone...in which case, I
                      > sit corrected.

                      As others have noted, that description is incorrect, which makes me
                      maybe a little less enthused about the show. Good chance their
                      copywriters aren't as up on the lingo, though. An HCF opcode was
                      one that, intentionally or otherwise, trapped a processor in a
                      tight loop that was unrecoverable except by reset. If it was an
                      intentional opcode, it was usually for e.g. factory testing (just
                      incrementing the PC forever or something else with a diagnostic
                      purpose). If it was unintentional, as was the case with a few
                      early micros that used a PLA-based state machine instead of ROM
                      microcode, it was just a not-very-programmed area of the PLA that
                      had unexpected results.

                      Either way, it generally never resulted in the destruction of
                      anything unless there was some peripheral on the board (or off it)
                      that reacted poorly to random data writes. That definitely did
                      happen on occasion, but it was rare.

                      Seeing the phrase, though, does make me optimistic, however they
                      might have treated it in the promo copy.


                      - Dave
                    • DuaneCraps
                      The wikipedia entry explains the reference .The writers must be geeks. I remembered from somewhere. I think it was an old BYTE article.
                      Message 10 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        The wikipedia  entry explains the reference .The writers must be geeks. I remembered from somewhere. I think it was an old BYTE article.
                         
                         
                        Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:52 AM
                        Subject: Re: [midatlanticretro] More info on the latest TV prop deal -- show identified!
                         
                         

                        On Apr 24, 2013, at 8:15 AM, "Wesley Furr" <mailto:wesley%40megley.com> wrote:

                        > "As a note, the series' unusual name is derived from a term
                        for a computing
                        > code specifically designed to destroy a machine's
                        CPU."
                        >
                        > Really? Never heard of such a thing! That alone doesn't
                        bode well in my
                        > mind... Unless of course there actually was at some
                        point in history a
                        > machine that could be physically damaged by code
                        alone...in which case, I
                        > sit corrected.

                        As others have noted, that description is incorrect, which makes me
                        maybe a little less enthused about the show. Good chance their
                        copywriters aren't as up on the lingo, though. An HCF opcode was
                        one that, intentionally or otherwise, trapped a processor in a
                        tight loop that was unrecoverable except by reset. If it was an
                        intentional opcode, it was usually for e.g. factory testing (just
                        incrementing the PC forever or something else with a diagnostic
                        purpose). If it was unintentional, as was the case with a few
                        early micros that used a PLA-based state machine instead of ROM
                        microcode, it was just a not-very-programmed area of the PLA that
                        had unexpected results.

                        Either way, it generally never resulted in the destruction of
                        anything unless there was some peripheral on the board (or off it)
                        that reacted poorly to random data writes. That definitely did
                        happen on occasion, but it was rare.

                        Seeing the phrase, though, does make me optimistic, however they
                        might have treated it in the promo copy.

                        - Dave

                      • B. Degnan
                        ... show identified! ... computing ... my ... I ... Dave, I don t know if you ve noticed, but sometimes TV shows are kind of dumb. No, really. I never
                        Message 11 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
                        • 0 Attachment
                          -------- Original Message --------
                          > From: "David Riley" <fraveydank@...>
                          > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 11:19 AM
                          > To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
                          > Subject: Re: [midatlanticretro] More info on the latest TV prop deal --
                          show identified!
                          >
                          > On Apr 24, 2013, at 8:15 AM, "Wesley Furr" <wesley@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > > "As a note, the series' unusual name is derived from a term for a
                          computing
                          > > code specifically designed to destroy a machine's CPU."
                          > >
                          > > Really? Never heard of such a thing! That alone doesn't bode well in
                          my
                          > > mind... Unless of course there actually was at some point in history a
                          > > machine that could be physically damaged by code alone...in which case,
                          I
                          > > sit corrected.
                          >
                          > As others have noted, that description is incorrect, which makes me
                          > maybe a little less enthused about the show. Good chance their
                          > copywriters aren't as up on the lingo, though.
                          <snip>

                          Dave,
                          I don't know if you've noticed, but sometimes TV shows are kind of dumb.
                          No, really. I never watch tv shows though, so what do I know.
                          b
                        • David Riley
                          ... Well, yeah. I was just excited when I saw the title of the show, since it s definitely a somewhat obscure term if you don t work with 80s micros much, so
                          Message 12 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Apr 24, 2013, at 11:42 AM, "B. Degnan" <billdeg@...> wrote:

                            > Dave,
                            > I don't know if you've noticed, but sometimes TV shows are kind of dumb.
                            > No, really. I never watch tv shows though, so what do I know.

                            Well, yeah. I was just excited when I saw the title of the show, since it's definitely a somewhat obscure term if you don't work with '80s micros much, so I figured someone was part of the "in" crowd on their creative team. I don't watch "real" TV at all, mostly because 95% of it is worthless, but we do watch a few shows through Netflix (I will gladly pay $8 a month to not watch commercials ever again).

                            Most of the shows we do watch are AMC shows (Mad Men, Breaking Bad), which turn out to actually be pretty good, so I'd give this one a fair chance of being OK. I'll probably have to wait a while to watch it, though, because they don't usually come out on Netflix or DVD/BluRay until about a year later.

                            Still, something to look forward to. I mean, it's gotta be better than Big Bang Theory (which I did like at first, but which I find increasingly less interesting).

                            - Dave
                          • Bill Dromgoole
                            The Motorola M56000 digital signal processor chip has legal instructions that are considered as Insane . One is a parallel move instruction that writes the x
                            Message 13 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
                            • 0 Attachment
                              The Motorola M56000 digital signal processor chip has legal instructions that
                              are considered as "Insane".
                              One is a parallel move instruction that writes the x register and the y register
                              to the same location.
                              The data book states that XDB and the YDB bus drivers may be damaged and
                              permanent damage to the chip may result.

                              See Motorola manual DSP56000UM/AD Rev 1 Appendix A.9.5 Insane instructions.
                              On page A-260 of my copy.

                              Later on Motorola said that it would not damage the chip but that the results of
                              execution are indeterminate.
                              https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!msg/comp.sys.next/5Bxs94tydJI/EdbFYWvNBz4J

                              BillDrom

                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: "Wesley Furr" <wesley@...>
                              To: <midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com>
                              Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 8:15 AM
                              Subject: RE: [midatlanticretro] More info on the latest TV prop deal -- show
                              identified!


                              > "As a note, the series' unusual name is derived from a term for a computing
                              > code specifically designed to destroy a machine's CPU."
                              >
                              > Really? Never heard of such a thing! That alone doesn't bode well in my
                              > mind... Unless of course there actually was at some point in history a
                              > machine that could be physically damaged by code alone...in which case, I
                              > sit corrected.
                              >
                              > But...they still have my attention! Will be interesting to see how it
                              > goes...
                              >
                              > Wesley
                              >
                              >
                              > -----Original Message-----
                              >
                              > On Apr 23, 2013, at 10:35 PM, Evan Koblentz wrote:
                              >
                              >> The new show is called "Halt and Catch Fire" about fictional early
                              >> 1980s techies.
                              >
                              > With a name like that, I'm already interested.
                              >
                              >
                              > - Dave
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > ------------------------------------
                              >
                              > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              >
                              >
                              >
                            • Dave McGuire
                              ... ROFL! But yes. This is precisely why I ve not had TV reception capability at home for something like fifteen years. ;) (who the hell has that much free
                              Message 14 of 19 , Apr 24, 2013
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On 04/24/2013 11:42 AM, B. Degnan wrote:
                                >>> "As a note, the series' unusual name is derived from a term for a
                                > computing
                                >>> code specifically designed to destroy a machine's CPU."
                                >>>
                                >>> Really? Never heard of such a thing! That alone doesn't bode well in
                                > my
                                >>> mind... Unless of course there actually was at some point in history a
                                >>> machine that could be physically damaged by code alone...in which case,
                                > I
                                >>> sit corrected.
                                >>
                                >> As others have noted, that description is incorrect, which makes me
                                >> maybe a little less enthused about the show. Good chance their
                                >> copywriters aren't as up on the lingo, though.
                                > <snip>
                                >
                                > I don't know if you've noticed, but sometimes TV shows are kind of dumb.
                                > No, really. I never watch tv shows though, so what do I know.

                                ROFL!

                                But yes. This is precisely why I've not had TV reception capability at
                                home for something like fifteen years. ;) (who the hell has that much free
                                time?!)

                                -Dave

                                --
                                Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
                                New Kensington, PA
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.