>> The howls of protest when anything new is metricated can probably be
heard
>> clear across the pond! Mind you, prosecuting a greengrocer for
displaying
>> his weights in pounds (as happend recently) was a bit over the top....
>> I've been metric since I was at school (late 50's - early '60s) so I
can
>> cope with either. My old 386 tower weighs about 1 1/2 stone....
>
>I have no problems with either. There are plenty of approximate
>conversions for everyday use, like :
>
>1 foot ~= 30cm (and FWIW, ~= 1 light-nanosecond ;-)), so "I've estimated
>I need just over 9 feet of cable, so if I buy 3 metres it'll be enough)
;)
Me, I could care less. I have mostly inch/pound instruments but metric
are equally handy. Electronics is if anything biased to metric. I'm
rather
used to 10 meter band rather than the 10.9yard. Conversions are less
the problem for the metric world. It still bugs me to convert
Foot/pounds
to Inch/oz.
>Over here, second-hand imperial measuring tools, like micrometers, are
>often a lot cheaper than metric ones. I have no problem using either,
and
>would rather save money (or spend the same money and get a better tool).
Good tools transcend the units they measure.
Allison
From: Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk>
>>
>> I'm making a list of the processors and computers
>> that in one way or another tried to directly execute
>> a high-level programming language. Here's what I have
>> so far.
>>
>> Algol60 - Burroughs 5500
CISIC machine, ALGOL compiles to efficiently.
>> Pascal P-Code - Western Digital Pascal Microengine, Perq
WD runs P-code in hardware (microcode, yet another layer) but Pcode
is not Pascal.
>> Lisp - Symbolics, Lisp Machine, and many others
>> Ada - Intel 432
Fancy CISIC machine optimized for OOP.
>
>Are you sure? It may well have been designed/optimised to run ada
I'm with you Tony.
None of those machine ran HLL code directly. As Tony pointed out
they were designed to run the optimized COMPILED code not the
language directly.
Lisp And Forth primitives however are suitable for direct implmentation
but, the human readable versions would still be compiled.
Allison
On Mar 5, 16:20, Scott Guthery wrote:
> I'm making a list of the processors and computers
> that in one way or another tried to directly execute
> a high-level programming language. Here's what I have
> so far.
>
> Algol60 - Burroughs 5500
> Pascal P-Code - Western Digital Pascal Microengine, Perq
> Lisp - Symbolics, Lisp Machine, and many others
> Ada - Intel 432
> Java - picoJava
> Modula M-Code - Lilith
A transputer executes Occam more-or-less directly.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
Hi,
I am currently working on a planetary robotic rover which I am going to use some of my transputers as the embedded controller. However, B008s and the rest of the bunch are just too big. Is there any standalone size-4 transputer motherboards that can be booted via EEPROM with external connectors for power? I dont need any bus interfaces (ISA, PCI, VME, SBus, etc). Does such a thing exist or does anyone have schematics on how to build something like this? It should be very simple me thinks...
Ram
> >
> > Well, with a few caveats, it should be your marginal
>tax rate (your
> > 'bracket') times the valuation of the donation. For
>example, your $1000
> > donation should bring you a $280 tax deduction if you
>are in the 28%
> > bracket.
> > - don
The "value" of a item donated to a museum is not mecessarily the market
value. In many cases the numbers are vastly inflated in order to entice
additional donations.
Let's assume you are in a high tax bracket and looking for a little relief.
You find a bargain on a very rare computer and pay $10,000 for it. You haul
it down to the local technology museum, who is anxious to have the donation,
and agree to give them the item. In exchange you ask them to provide a
receipt for $100,000 for the machine. Since it's not costing them anything
and the addition to the museum will entice additional visitors, they gladly
agree to provide the receipt.
You claim a $100,000 donation on your tax return and pay taxes on that much
less of your income. That would probably be in the 30% - 40% range. Or a
savings of $30,000 to $40,000!!!
So... for your $10,000 investment you:
1.) Look like a real upstanding citizen for supporting the local museum.
2.) Get your name on a plaque in the museum (free advertising).
3.) Save $30,000 to $40,000 on your taxes.
The museum gets a nice addition to it's collection at no cost.
Next time you go to a museum, look around. Most of the really valuable
things were not donated because someone felt particularily generous. They
were donated because the owners got huge tax breaks by donating them. The
whole thing is a SCAM!
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Hi all,
was there much Northstar kit in the UK at any point?
I seem to remember seeing a Northstar Horizon in the computer junk shop, widnes, many years ago (ten years ago at least). I wouldn't mind something like that now, or an Advantage, but would it be a wild goose chase?
Regards,
Stu
Re: non profit orgs:
starting a non profit org is certainly much more than $35 as listed below.
>From reasearch I was doing, you have to draft up a statement of purpose or
something like that, then there's a $500 fee payable to the govt as well as
much more paperwork. doesnt seem too cost effective at first viewing.
In a message dated 3/4/01 6:53:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, at258(a)osfn.org
writes:
<< Uhhh...
do you really have to ask...
Why can't you execute the paper work for a non-profit yourself? In RI,
it's $35.
M. K. Peirce
Rhode Island Computer Museum
Shady Lea, Rhode Island
>>
From: Jeffrey S. Sharp <jss(a)ou.edu>
> coerced into doing. I want to get as close as I can to the
> *experience* of computing in these machines' era. If these
> machines go to a museum, they're just pretty art, and they will
> educate _no_one_. They will sit behind glass walls, no one
> ever will touch them again, and no one will ever turn them on or
> keep them in working order. They are effectively lost. That's
> little better then scrapping them, and you _KNOW_ how you feel
> about that!
It's combative. I'd also say it's not absolutly true, though, it
could be.
Things to consider:
Is it truly rare or uncommon.
Does an institution actually want it.
Who removes, moves and/or ships it for either case?
A) museum may or may not...
B) You can make points by also providing that service.
Often the "impressive deduction" is not real and the cost to remove and
move the system is up to the owner. If there is a goal, I'd say make it
easiest for the system owner to give or sell to you.
The impressive deduction point is that most machines are simply used
computers in the eyes of the IRS and of limited value and in all serious
consideration most are common enough to not be "collectable" even if
useable.
I got a truckload of small VAXen once because the owner could not
accept cash nor ship and was off in the corner of Vermont. Cost to me
was a day of my time to load it and the 400miles of travel.
Allison
I don't know everyone's perspective on this issue, and it would be good to hear
some alternate viewpoints. Basically, I am against people giving classic
computers in working condition to museums. Instead, I believe that they should
donate or sell their machines to enthusiasts who will play with them and learn
things.
A while back, I ran across a person that had some hardware I wanted. He was
torn between selling it to me and giving it to a museum. I didn't have a lot
of money available to give him, and donation to a museum (a nonprofit) would
get him an impressive tax deduction. I did some research about what it takes
to start a nonprofit organization, but it looked too expensive (lawyers) and
time-consuming to be a viable option for me. I sent the following argument to
him:
> While I would love to establish a collection of these machines,
> I'm definitely not a 'collector' as the term has come to mean
> today; I'm not in it to get something rare, to make money, or
> to have some pretty decorations in my house. While it would
> certainly be nice to have a pretty system, my priority is to
> get something that I can learn with. I want to *run* these
> machines. I want to *explore* these machines. I want to *hack*
> on these machines, to see what unexpected things they can be
> coerced into doing. I want to get as close as I can to the
> *experience* of computing in these machines' era. If these
> machines go to a museum, they're just pretty art, and they will
> educate _no_one_. They will sit behind glass walls, no one
> ever will touch them again, and no one will ever turn them on or
> keep them in working order. They are effectively lost. That's
> little better then scrapping them, and you _KNOW_ how you feel
> about that!
What do you think about this?
(BTW, if anyone wants to use the quoted paragraph, they are free to)
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)ou.edu
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.12
GCS/MU d-@ s-:+ a-- C+++(++++) UB+++$> P+ L+(++) E>
W++ N+(++) o? K? w++$ !O M(-) !V PS+++ PE Y+ PGP t+
5 X(+) R++ tv+ b+ DI++(+++) D+ G++ e> h--- r+++ y+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
