Re: Clive Sinclair has died.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sdhn7c$pkp$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sg3kr7$qt5$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another incorectly formatted USENET posting on Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:46:50 -0000 (UTC) in message-id <si9laa$vd7$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sdhn7c$pkp$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sg3kr7$qt5$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another incorectly formatted USENET posting on Mon, 20 Sep 2021 14:29:46 -0000 (UTC) in message-id <sia5sp$1b1$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me.

Would you please post a link to the official sed formatting website.

Dan

Would you please post a link to the official sed formatting website.

ww

Ed Hernia keeps reposting the same misspelled bullshit.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sdhn7c$pkp$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sg3kr7$qt5$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another incorectly formatted USENET posting on Tue, 21 Sep 2021 10:27:18 -0000 (UTC) in message-id <sicc26$jf4$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sdhn7c$pkp$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sg3kr7$qt5$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another incorectly formatted USENET posting on Tue, 21 Sep 2021 10:28:07 -0000 (UTC) in message-id <sicc3n$jf4$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sdhn7c$pkp$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sg3kr7$qt5$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another incorectly formatted USENET posting on Tue, 21 Sep 2021 10:27:08 -0000 (UTC) in message-id <sicc1r$jf4$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me.

"Computer science" meaning the science of computation in its pure form, not just the name most universities apply to any 4 year program for students who want to go into writing software professionally, is a branch of pure mathematics that studies the properties of an abstract mathematical object called a "universal Turing machine", in the way the branch of pure mathematics called "complex analysis" studies the properties of the abstract mathematical objects called "complex numbers", or the branch of pure mathematics called "functional analysis" studies abstract mathematical objects called "functions", defined on vector spaces.

That many real-world digital computers are approximations of universal Turing machines is regardless of the fact that universal Turing machines have independent existence outside of whether digital computers exist in the real world or not, in the way that the field of complex numbers has independent existence outside of whether anyone uses them to do e.g. engineering mathematics for practical applications.

bitrex = One vile, anencephalic, vile, ASD f***ed pile of s*it psychopath ==========================================================

Unlikely it came directly out of your own, putrid arse hole.

.... Phil

If you read over the set of topics on the "Theoretical Computer Science" stack exchange you'll notice almost none of it is about "code scribbling" or "compiling" a damn thing, it's almost entirely pure mathematical topics, involving graduate-level math way above the ability of just about anyone here, see e.g.

as just one example.

As if Phil would know.

What's that got to do with anything?

Pretty much any book on the subject.

Turing, A.M. (1936). "On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem". Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society. 2 (published 1937). 42: 230–265. doi:10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230. (and Turing, A.M. (1938). "On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem: A correction". Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society. 2 (published 1937). 43 (6): 544–6. doi:10.1112/plms/s2-43.6.544.). Reprinted in many collections, e.g. in The Undecidable, pp. 115–154; available on the web in many places.

Phil doesn't know much, and sometimes it shows a bit too obviously. The "Entscheidungsproblem" is a pure math question about whether you can prove that a finite procedure will stop in a finite number of operations, and Turing proved that it couldn't. There was a minor error in the paper which Donald Davies (whom I met and did some very minor work with around 1980) found a few years later and corrected, which apparently peeved Alan Turing quite a bit.

Yes, almost nobody comes out of a 4 years comp sci BS program equipped to "do" computer science in this sense of the term, any more than anyone comes out of a 4 year English program equipped to write a best-selling novel, or out of a 4 year psychology program equipped to figure out wtf is wrong with Phil's brain.

John Doe snipped-for-privacy@message.header wrote in news:sif1cu$6fd$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

This decidedly shows that you have very littel grasp of just what "science" even is.

Sad thing... your mother s*it a lot... you are a piece of s*it. I guess that makes her a eat, get buttfucked, and s*it replicator. Damned shame that she failed to flush you.

When it ain't.

...... Phil

Physical general purpose computers didn't exist but humans who could simulate the actions of a computer did. Arguably Collosus used against Lorentz cypher was the first true computer of sorts but using still using a paper tape to store its program.

The Turing machine for computation "On computable numbers" predated any physical implementation of an electronic stored program computer. It still remains one of the foundations of real Computer Science. These days SKIM is more often taught as a way to get into the theory.

On that we are pretty much agreed.

But Computer Science in its purest sense is about how quickly a given problem can be solved in general and classifying algorithms in terms of how suited they are to the task in hand timing as N, NlogN, N^2 etc.

Computer Science isn't a science but in many respects it is better than a science. They can choose their starting axioms and follow them through using logic - they are not dependent on inferring the rules of nature from noisy observations of the real world like scientists are.

In some ways CS is better than a science in that they can build their own computer worlds to explore and examine. The most notable popular one being Conway's game of life which was proved Turing complete after the discovery of Gosper's glider gun and how to assemble one by colliding gliders. It is still a field of active (hobby) research and a new even smaller one was discovered recently in 2015 by Simkin.

The modern world is highly imperfect but that isn't the fault of Computer Science it is the fault of CEO's demanding that their programmers churn out buggy code at a ridiculous rate to meet unrealistic launch dates. Software can always be updated...

It got even worse once the internet allowed patch Tuesdays :( (assumes unmetered high speed internet too)

.... Phil

Computer science has given us a fair number of the tools like Ada (too big) VDHL (better) and formal methods that form the basis of all modern digital chip design! One of the first circuit design CAD systems was at ETH and used to design Lilith (II). It was all written in one of Wirth's more effective languages Modula 2 as was the Medos-2 operating system.

Logitech now best known for its mice and keyboards started out selling the ETH Logitech Modula 2 compiler for VAX and PC - the mouse product was an afterthought inspired by seeing the Lilith machine in action.

Unfortunately the commercial market decided to go the way of C and we are now where we are with Mickeysoft having world domination. Android is somewhat more robust and iOS is an even tougher nut to crack. But they all have vulnerabilities - you just have to look harder to find them.

Computer Science has also greatly improved modern compilers so that most of them can now detect many of the common programmer errors (like uninitialised variables being used in a RHS) at compile time.

Unfortunately there is little that can be done about a flat memory architecture where you can convert any integer you like into a pointer.