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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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.