From cmhanson at eschatologist.net Thu Aug 1 08:24:08 2024 From: cmhanson at eschatologist.net (Chris Hanson) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:24:08 -0700 Subject: [COFF] More LCM fallout In-Reply-To: <6f445be5-cde8-4f22-9b59-a43d3429a495@insinga.com> References: <20240713131716.A741818C075@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <21DB8095-4D00-42ED-891E-CA3BDBE5CB23@eschatologist.net> <6f445be5-cde8-4f22-9b59-a43d3429a495@insinga.com> Message-ID: <387FE153-E84C-4345-9F70-0682801018BA@eschatologist.net> I believe the LCM was always a distinct legal entity—regardless of the *ownership of* that legal entity—which would make it a distinct asset separate from his other assets. Similarly, his collection could be one asset, or it could be a large variety of assets, depending on how (and whether) he structured such things. -- Chris > On Jul 28, 2024, at 11:04 AM, Aron Insinga wrote: > > How is the LCM not part of his personal collection? It's part of his estate. IIUC he had not created and transferred it to another legal entity. (I wish he had, but....) > > > On 7/27/24 17:18, Chris Hanson wrote: >> On Jul 13, 2024, at 6:17 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: >>> I wonder what will happen to all such material at the LCM. Anyone know? >> Having talked to some folks close to this, my understanding is that what’s being auctioned off are pieces from Paul Allen’s *personal* collection, some (or all?) of which were *on loan* to the LCM. >> >> My understanding is that the LCM’s own collection is *not* being auctioned off, but is instead part of the package for whoever acquires the museum as a whole. >> >> -- Chris >> > From lars at nocrew.org Thu Aug 1 16:22:57 2024 From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff) Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2024 06:22:57 +0000 Subject: [COFF] More LCM fallout In-Reply-To: <387FE153-E84C-4345-9F70-0682801018BA@eschatologist.net> (Chris Hanson's message of "Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:24:08 -0700") References: <20240713131716.A741818C075@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <21DB8095-4D00-42ED-891E-CA3BDBE5CB23@eschatologist.net> <6f445be5-cde8-4f22-9b59-a43d3429a495@insinga.com> <387FE153-E84C-4345-9F70-0682801018BA@eschatologist.net> Message-ID: <7w1q38wym6.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> This presentation reveals a little more about LCM and a new upcoming museum: https://toobnix.org/w/ozjGgBQ28iYsLTNbrczPVo From clemc at ccc.com Fri Aug 2 04:09:20 2024 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 14:09:20 -0400 Subject: [COFF] SDF Beget's ICM - Interim Computer Museum Message-ID: Please excuse the wide distribution, but I suspect this will have general interest in all of these communities due to the loss of the LCM+Labs. The good folks from SDF.org are trying to create the Interim Computer Museum: https://icm.museum/join.html As Lars pointed out in an earlier message to COFF there is a 1hr presentation on the plans for the ICM. https://toobnix.org/w/ozjGgBQ28iYsLTNbrczPVo FYI: The yearly (Bootstrap) subscription is $36 They need to money to try to keep some of these systems online and available. The good news is that it looks like many of the assets, such as Miss Piggy, the Multics work, the Toads, and others, from the old LCM are going to be headed to a new home. ᐧ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lars at nocrew.org Fri Aug 2 15:32:46 2024 From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff) Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2024 05:32:46 +0000 Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] Re: SDF Beget's ICM - Interim Computer Museum In-Reply-To: (Gregg Levine's message of "Thu, 1 Aug 2024 21:55:40 -0400") References: Message-ID: <7wr0b7v69t.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> I think this is off topic for TUHS and more appropriate for COFF. Gregg Levine wrote: > Pardon me for asking Clem, but would you mind naming the survivors? I > have an idea what these Toads are, and of course what Multics happened > to be, but that's it. We don't know exactly yet, but according to the video, there's a VAX 7000 and a DEC-2020. The TOAD computers are XKL's PDP-10 remake; there's also another one called SC-40. Stephen also mentions Multics tapes were rescued. Maybe the best way to see what is there right now, is to dial into "ssh menu at sdf.org" [-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-] -+- SDF Vintage Systems REMOTE ACCESS -+- [-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-] [a] multics Multics MR12.8 Honeywell 6180 [b] toad-2 TOPS-20 7(110131)-1 XKL TOAD-2 [c] twenex TOPS-20 7(63327)-6 XKL TOAD-2 [d] sc40 TOPS-20 7(21733) SC Group SC40 [e] lc ITS ver 1648 PDP-10 KS10 [f] ka1050 TOPS-10 6.03a sim KA10 1050 [g] kl2065 TOPS-10 7.04 sim KL10 2065 [h] rosenkrantz OpenVMS 7.3 VAX 7000-640 [i] tss8 TSS/8 PDP-8/e [j] ibm4361 VM/SP5 Hercules 4361 [k] ibm7094 CTSS i7094 [l] cdc6500 NOS 1.3 DTCyber CDC-6500 [z] bitzone NetBSD BBS AMD64 [1] Proceed to the UNIX Systems sub-menu [2] Information about Vintage Systems at SDF.ORG And the Unix section: [a] misspiggy UNIX v7 PDP-11/70 [c] lcm3b2 UNIX SVR3.2.3 AT&T 3B2/1000-70 [d] guildenstern BSD 4.3 simh MicroVAX 3900 [e] snake BSD 2.11 PDP-11/84 [f] hkypux HP/UX 10.20 HP9000/715 [g] truly TRU64 5.0 DEC Alpha 500au [h] three SunOS 4.1.1 Sun-3/160 [i] indy IRIX 6.5 SGI Indy R5000 [j] ultra Ultrix 4.5 simh MicroVAX 3900 From clemc at ccc.com Sat Aug 3 00:58:43 2024 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:58:43 -0400 Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] SDF Beget's ICM - Interim Computer Museum In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Greg, this needs to move to COFF, so I'm BCCing TUHS in my reply. (My error in the original message was that I should have BCC'd everyone but COFF, so replies were directed there. Mei culpa). However, since I have seen different people on all these lists bemoan the loss of the LCM+L, I hope that by the broader announcement, a number of you will consider the $36/yr membership to help Stephen and his team to be able to keep these systems running and the at least the "labs" port of the old LCM+L mission alive. On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 9:56 PM Gregg Levine wrote: > Hello! > Pardon me for asking Clem, but would you mind naming the survivors? The details are still coming out from Stephen and friends -- I would recommend listening to his presentation and then maybe joining the List Server at SDF by sending a (plain text) email to majordomo at sdf.org with the subject and body containing the line: subscribe museum-l I have an idea what these Toads are, and of course what Multics happened to > be, but that's it. > LCM+L owned a real Honeywell 6180 front panel. The folks in their lab interfaced it to a microcontroller (I think it was an RP3 or 4, but it could be something like a BeagleBone, I never knew). It was running Multics Release 12.8 on a SimH-derived Honeywell 6180 [I'm not sure if those changes ever made it back to OpenSIMH - I have not personally tried it myself]. This system seems to have been moved to SDF's new site. Also, a number of the MIT Multics tapes had been donated to the LCM+L. These have survived, and the SDF has them. I'll not repeat Stephen's report here, but he describes what they have and are doing. Miss Piggy is the PDP 11/70 that Microsoft purchased and used for their SW original development. It has been running a flavor of Unix Seventh Edition - I do not know what type of updates were added, but I expect the DEC v7m and the V7 addendum to be there. You can log in and try it yourself by ssh menu at sdf.org" and picking Miss Piggy in the UNIX submenu. Miss Piggy used to live and be on display at the LCM+L, but Stephen and the SDF were involved in its admin/operation. Stephen says in his presentation that they are trying to get Miss Piggy back up and running [my >>guess<< is that the "Miss Piggy" instance on the SDF menu is currently running on an OpenSIMH instance while the real hardware is being set up at the new location]. In the early 1980s, as DEC started to de-commit to the 36-bit line after they introduced the 32-bit Vax systems, a number of PDP-10 clones appeared on the market. For instance, the System Concepts SC-40 was what Comp-U-Serve primarily switched to. Similarly, many ex-Stanford AI types forked to create the Toad Systems XXL, a KL10 clone. SDF and LCM+L owned several of these two styles of systems and were on display and available for login. Since Twenex.org is live (and has been) and Stephen shows a picture of the SC40, again, I am (again) >>guessing<< that these have all been moved to the new location for SDF. Stephen mentioned in his presentation that they have the LCM-L's Vax7000 but do not yet have the 3-phase power in their computer room. He suggested that it is one of the most popular machines in the SDF menu, and they intend to make it live shortly. It is unclear what became of some of the other items. It was pointed out that running a CDC6500 is extremely expensive to operate from a power standpoint, so they offer an NOS login using the DTCyber simulator. He never mentioned what became of the former Purdue machine that the LCM owned and had restored. I am interested in knowing what happened to the two PDP-7s. I know that at least one was privately owned, but was being restored and displayed at the LCM+L. It was one of these systems that Unix V0 was resurrected and ran for the UNIX 50th Anniversary Party that the LCM+L hosted. The LCM+L had some interesting peripherals. For instance, the console for Miss Piggy was a somewhat rare ASR37 [which is Upper/Lower case and the "native" terminal for Research Unix]. I hope they have it also. The LCM+L had a number of different types of tape transports for recovering old data. Stephen mentioned that they have some of these but did not elaborate. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From charles.unix.pro at gmail.com Sat Aug 3 04:53:03 2024 From: charles.unix.pro at gmail.com (Charles Anthony) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 11:53:03 -0700 Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] SDF Beget's ICM - Interim Computer Museum In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 2, 2024, 8:00 AM Clem Cole wrote: > > LCM+L owned a real Honeywell 6180 front panel. > Stephen Jones owns the panel; it was on display at the LCM as a loan. The folks in their lab interfaced it to a microcontroller (I think it was > an RP3 or 4, but it could be something like a BeagleBone, I never knew). > The LCM built a FPGA board to interface the hundreds of little unlabeled white wires on the panel to a RS-232 serial line. The simulator runs on an Intel NUC, and interfaces with the panel through an USB RS-232 dongle. It was running Multics Release 12.8 on a SimH-derived Honeywell 6180 [I'm > not sure if those changes ever made it back to OpenSIMH - I have not > personally tried it myself]. > SIMH based initially, but SIMH was unable to support the needed functionality and has been mostly replaced and the kept bits heavily modified; trying to merge those changes into OpenSIMH would break every other simulated system. > This system seems to have been moved to SDF's new site. Yes; I went and visited it last weekend. -- Charles -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul.winalski at gmail.com Sat Aug 3 07:34:57 2024 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:34:57 -0400 Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] Re: SDF Beget's ICM - Interim Computer Museum In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 10:59 AM Clem Cole wrote: > In the early 1980s, as DEC started to de-commit to the 36-bit line after > they introduced the 32-bit Vax systems, a number of PDP-10 clones appeared > on the market. For instance, the System Concepts SC-40 was what > Comp-U-Serve primarily switched to. Similarly, many ex-Stanford AI types > forked to create the Toad Systems XXL, a KL10 clone. SDF and LCM+L owned > several of these two styles of systems and were on display and available > for login. Since Twenex.org is live (and has been) and Stephen shows a > picture of the SC40, again, I am (again) >>guessing<< that these have all > been moved to the new location for SDF. > > There was also Foonly, founded by one of the researcher's on SAIL's DARPA-funded Super Foonly project to build a faster successor to DEC's PDP-10 KA10 processor. When DARPA cut the funding, many of the engineers on Super Foonly went to DEC and helped design the KL-10 PDP-10 processor. Dave Poole founded Foonly Inc. Their first machine, the F1, was a 4.5 MIPS PDP-10 implementation, but only one was ever built. Foonly survived for a while making cheap PDP-10 clones, but it was done in when DEC cancelled the Jupiter project, thus effectively ending the life of the PDP-10 line of processors. -Paul W. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Thu Aug 15 05:20:18 2024 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 15:20:18 -0400 Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] Re: Mailer History -- was Berkeley CSRG Building In-Reply-To: References: <711f46e8-c277-4d56-975b-cb0b469676e2@nomadlogic.org> <21863.1723450601@cesium.clock.org> <202408131813.47DIDdZp1159124@freefriends.org> Message-ID: Matt - I'm going to BCC: TUHS and move this to COFF - since while UNIX was certainly in the mix in all this, it was hardly first or the only place it happenned. On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 2:59 PM segaloco via TUHS wrote: > On Wednesday, August 14th, 2024 at 9:45 AM, Clem Cole > wrote: > > > > > ... > > The issue came when people started using the mail system as a > programmatic messaging scheme (i.e., fork: some_program | mail user) and > other programs started to parse the output. > > ... > > Mail as IPC...that's what I'm reading from that anyway...now that's an > interesting concept. It's kind of funny the history. ARPANET gives us FTP as a way to exchange files. So, people figure out how to hack the mailer to call FTP to send a file remotely and set up a submit a cron/batch submission, a.k.a RJE. This is encouraged by DARPA because part of the justification of the ARAPNET was to be able to share resources, and this enables supercomputers of the day to be able to provide cycles to DARPA folks who might not have access to larger systems. Also, remember, mailers were local to systems at that point. So someone gets the bright idea to hooker the mailer into this system -- copy the "mail file" and set up a remote job to mail it locally. Let's just say this prioves to be a cool idea and the idea of intersystem email begins in the >>ARPANET<< community. So the idea of taking it to the next level was not that far off. The mailer transports started to offer (limited) features to access services. By the time of Kurt's "delivermail" but he added a feature, thinking it was system logs that allowed specific programs to be called. In fact, it may have been invented elsewhere but before Eric would formalize "vacation" - Jim Kleckner and I hacked together a "awk" script to do that function on the UCB CAD 4.1 systems. I showed it to Sam and a few other people, and I know it went from Cory to Evans fairly quickly. Vacation(1) was written shortly there after to be a bit more flexible than our original script. Did that idea ever grow any significant legs? I guess the word here is significant. It certainly was used where it made sense. In the CAD group, we had simulations that might run for a few days. We used to call the mailer every so often to send status and sometimes do something like a checkpoint. It lead to Sam writing syslogd, particularly after Joy created UNIX domain sockets. But I can say we used it a number of places in systems oriented or long running code before syslogd as a scheme to log errors, deal with stuff. > I can't tell if the general concept is clever or systems abuse, in those > days it seems like it could've gone either way. > > I guess it sorta did survive in the form of automated systems today > expecting specially formatted emails to trigger "stuff" to happen. Exactly. ᐧ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steffen at sdaoden.eu Thu Aug 15 06:24:50 2024 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 22:24:50 +0200 Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] Mailer History -- was Berkeley CSRG Building In-Reply-To: References: <711f46e8-c277-4d56-975b-cb0b469676e2@nomadlogic.org> <21863.1723450601@cesium.clock.org> <202408131813.47DIDdZp1159124@freefriends.org> Message-ID: <20240814202450.v3xBsVvz@steffen%sdaoden.eu> Kevin Bowling wrote in : |On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 11:59 AM segaloco via TUHS wrote: |> On Wednesday, August 14th, 2024 at 9:45 AM, Clem Cole \ |> wrote: |>> ... |>> The issue came when people started using the mail system as a programmat\ |>> ic messaging scheme (i.e., fork: some_program | mail user) and other \ |>> programs started to parse the output. |>> ... |> Mail as IPC...that's what I'm reading from that anyway...now that's \ |> an interesting concept. Did that idea ever grow any significant \ |> legs? I can't tell if the general concept is clever or systems abuse, \ |> in those days it seems like it could've gone either way. | |I like Clem's answer on mail IPC/RPC. | |To add I have heard some stories of NNTP being used once upon a time |at some service providers the way ansible/mcollective/salt might be |used to orchestrate UNIX host configurations and application |deployments. The concept of Control messages is somewhat critical to |operations, so it's not totally crazy, but isolating article flows |would give me some heartburn if the thing has privileged system |access.. would probably want it on a totally distinct |instance+port+configuration. | |Email and Usenet both have some nice properties of implementing a |"Message Queue" like handling offline hosts when they come back. But |the complexity of mail and nntp implementations lean more towards |system abuse IMO. The IETF will go for SML (structured email) https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/sml/about/ which then goes for machine interpretable email message( part)s. |> I guess it sorta did survive in the form of automated systems today \ |> expecting specially formatted emails to trigger "stuff" to happen. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt) From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sat Aug 17 04:25:56 2024 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 14:25:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] Re: Berkeley CSRG Building Message-ID: <20240816182556.5F9FB18C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Larry McVoy {Moving this to COFF, as it's not UNIX-related. I'll have another reply there as well, about the social media point.} > The amazing thing, to me, is I was a CS student in very early 1980's > and I had no idea of the history behind the arpanet. I don't think that was that uncommon; at MIT (slightly earlier, I think - -'74-'77 for me) the undergrad's weren't learning anything about networking there either, then. I think the reason is that there wasn't much to teach - in part because we did not then know much about networking, and in part because it was not yet crystal clear how important it would become (more below on that). There was research going on in the area, but even at MIT one doesn't teach (or didn't then; I don't know about now) on-going research subjects to undergrads. MIT _did_ have, even then, a formal UROP ('undergrad research opportunities') program, which allowed undergrads to be part of research groups - a sheer genius idea - which in some fast-moving fields, like CS, was an inestimable benefit to more forward undergrads in those fields. I joined the CSR group at LCS in '77 because I had some operating system ideas I wanted to work on; I had no idea at that point that they were doing anything with networks. They took me on as the result of the sheerest chance; they had just gotten some money from DARPA to build a LAN, and the interface was going to be built for a UNIBUS PDP-11, and they needed diagnostics, etc written; and they were all Multicians. I, by chance, knew PDP-11 assembler - which none of them did - the MIT CS introductory course at that point taught it. So the deal was that I'd help them with that, and I could use the machine to explore my OS ideas in return. Which never really happened; it fairly became clear to me that data networking was going to have an enormous impact on the world, and at that point it was also technically interesting, so I quickly got sucked into that stuff. (I actually have a written document hiding in a file drawer somewhere from 1978 or so, which makes it plain that that I'm not suffering 20-20 hindsight here, in talking about foreseeing the impact; I should dig it up.) The future impact actually wasn't hard to foresee: looking at what printed books had done to the world, and then telgraphs/telephones, and what computers had already started to do at that point, it was clear that combining them all was going to have an incredible impact (and we're still adapting to it). Learning about networking at the time was tricky. The ARPANET - well, NCP and below - was pretty well documented in a couple of AFIPS papers (linked to at the bottom here: https://gunkies.org/wiki/ARPANET which I have a very vague memory I photocopied at the time out of the bound AFIPS proceedings in the LCS library). The applications were only documented in the RFC's. (Speaking of which, at that level, the difference between the ARPANET and the Internet was not very significant - it was only the internals, invisible to the people who did 'application' protocols, that were completely different. HTTP would probably run just fine on top of NCP, for instance.) Anything past that, the start of the internet work, that, I picked up by i) direct osmosis from other people in CSR who were starting to think about networks - principally Dave Clark and Dave Reed - and then ii) from documents prepared as part of the TCP/IP effort, which were distributed electronically. Which is an interesting point; the ARPANET was a key tool in the internet work. The most important aspect was email; non-stop discussion between the widely separated groups who were part of the project. It also made document distribution really easy (which had also been true of the latter stages of the ARPANET project, with the RFC's). And of course it was also a long-haul network that we used to tie the small internets at all the various sites (BBN, SRI, ISI - and eventually MIT) into the larger Internet. I hate to think about trying to do all that work on internets, and the Internet, without the ARPANE there, as a tool. Noel From clemc at ccc.com Sat Aug 17 05:01:04 2024 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 15:01:04 -0400 Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] Re: Berkeley CSRG Building In-Reply-To: <20240816182556.5F9FB18C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20240816182556.5F9FB18C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: First, Noel - thank you. Get commentary. Some thoughts below... On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 2:26 PM Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Larry McVoy > > {Moving this to COFF, as it's not UNIX-related. I'll have another reply > there > as well, about the social media point.} > > > The amazing thing, to me, is I was a CS student in very early 1980's > > and I had no idea of the history behind the arpanet. > > I don't think that was that uncommon; at MIT (slightly earlier, I think - > -'74-'77 for me) the undergrad's weren't learning anything about networking > there either, then. > I can say ditto for CMU - although the EE Dept's Real-Time System's course that I took we made an "ethernet" between an 11/20, 11/03 and some KIM-1's as a term project (much slower and not as good -- but it worked to a point). So the ideas were being talk about and we knew it was important. Which is how I got asked to be part of the distributed front-end development - which was were I got to read the proposals as RFC's would later lead to what we think of as IPv4 and TCPv4. > > I think the reason is that there wasn't much to teach - in part because we > did not then know much about networking, and in part because it was not yet > crystal clear how important it would become (more below on that). > Right there was not a networking course. There was a real-time course and used networking to demonstrate ideas from RT course (co-routines, constraint based processing, etc,.). > .... > Which never really happened; it fairly became clear to me that data > networking was going to have an enormous impact on the world, and at that > point it was also technically interesting, so I quickly got sucked into > that > stuff. You and me both. But I suspect only the most nieve people would not have seen it. As you say, the hand writing was on the wall. Processors were becoming extremely economical, so using multiple ot them pretty obvious. Lots of people we already sending things down RS-232 wires, but anyone that had experienced anything like ethernet, knew the speeds had to and would get better. > .... > (Speaking of which, at that level, the difference between the ARPANET and > the > Internet was not very significant - it was only the internals, invisible to > the people who did 'application' protocols, that were completely different. > HTTP would probably run just fine on top of NCP, for instance.) > > Anything past that, the start of the internet work, that, I picked up by i) > direct osmosis from other people in CSR who were starting to think about > networks - principally Dave Clark and Dave Reed - and then ii) from > documents > prepared as part of the TCP/IP effort, which were distributed > electronically. > Shout out to Dave - the unsung internetworking hero and does not get enough credit. The idea is that each of us has our own locally controlled network, but we could make a new (larger) network from lots of smaller ones in a hierarchy of some type without needing any real type of "central control." I like to call it 'Clark's Observation' - why did a screw-up at CMU cause the MIT IMP and a couple of hosts to have to be rebooted? I remember seeing that comment as being really profound and I think it was when I really started to appreciate Parnes' "Information hiding" ideas that were being drilled into our heads. Really good (and simple) interfaces -- the UNIX concept of doing "one job well" started to hit home. When we had done the work for the RT course, that code was pretty sloppy in retrospect. I learned a lot, but other than we made it work on a couple of different processors, it was really nothing to be proud. > ... > > I hate to think about trying to do all that work on internets, and the > Internet, without the ARPANE there, as a tool. > Amen. ᐧ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From halbert at halwitz.org Sat Aug 31 07:50:31 2024 From: halbert at halwitz.org (Dan Halbert) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 17:50:31 -0400 Subject: [COFF] More LCM fallout In-Reply-To: <7w1q38wym6.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> References: <20240713131716.A741818C075@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <21DB8095-4D00-42ED-891E-CA3BDBE5CB23@eschatologist.net> <6f445be5-cde8-4f22-9b59-a43d3429a495@insinga.com> <387FE153-E84C-4345-9F70-0682801018BA@eschatologist.net> <7w1q38wym6.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: <929aa508-4f6b-4019-8393-35f1e3f1611d@halwitz.org> Late followup in this thread: here is the Christie's auction for items being auctioned off: https://onlineonly.christies.com/s/firsts-history-computing-paul-g-allen-collection/lots/3726 From johnl at taugh.com Sat Aug 31 08:09:03 2024 From: johnl at taugh.com (John Levine) Date: 30 Aug 2024 18:09:03 -0400 Subject: [COFF] More LCM fallout In-Reply-To: <929aa508-4f6b-4019-8393-35f1e3f1611d@halwitz.org> References: <20240713131716.A741818C075@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <21DB8095-4D00-42ED-891E-CA3BDBE5CB23@eschatologist.net> <6f445be5-cde8-4f22-9b59-a43d3429a495@insinga.com> <7w1q38wym6.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> <387FE153-E84C-4345-9F70-0682801018BA@eschatologist.net> <929aa508-4f6b-4019-8393-35f1e3f1611d@halwitz.org> Message-ID: <20240830220904.36A4692CF4CF@ary.qy> It appears that Dan Halbert said: >Late followup in this thread: here is the Christie's auction for items >being auctioned off: >https://onlineonly.christies.com/s/firsts-history-computing-paul-g-allen-collection/lots/3726 Many of the bids are underwhelming. KA-10 for $300, KI-10 for $400, KS-10 for $400. Somebody wants the IBM 7090, bid $11,000 but still well below the $40-$60K estimate, and somebody really wants the CDC 6500, bid $160,000. All plus packing and shipping from Seattle, of course.