we are just an investment toy

Some of them were.

Donald Trump hasn't been able to generate an equally satirical reaction, which does suggest that America now less civilised than England was in

Such TDS.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

Don Y snipped-for-privacy@foo.invalid wrote: |------------------------------------------------| |"[. . .] I was typically using [. . .] MULTICS."| |------------------------------------------------|

Is MULTICS really better than UNIX(R)? I am not old enough to ever use MULTICS. (S.

Bill Sloman snipped-for-privacy@IEEE.org wrote: |-------------------------------------| |"You snipped a lot of context there."| |-------------------------------------|

Indeed. A References: field makes it easy to reload previous installments, as do various republishers on the WWW.

|----------------------------------| |"I was responding to John Larkin,"| |----------------------------------|

As do I, as I had decided to do before I have read news:10tpnbg$a4en$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me which republishes a dubious claim by Larkin from news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com

|----------------------------------------------------------| |"[Snipping again. "Oh No! More Lemmings!" is fun. Snipping| |isn't. . . .] and reacting to his claim that Ireland is | |civilised when Russia isn't." | |----------------------------------------------------------|

news:10tqcb6$1n8g8$ snipped-for-privacy@paganini.bofh.team is not about Russia.

|-------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"I did go on to point out that southern Ireland had got it's independence| |in the 1920's by methods that had included quite a lot of civil | |insurrection, and that Northern Ireland had been tolerably uncivilised | |in more recent times in pursuit of a similar sort of self-rule." | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|

news:10tpnbg$a4en$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me does not say "southern". I reload it below.

|------------------------------------------------------------| |"I think you are [. . . ró-threise!] of text-chopping here -| |[. . .] by quoting a small chunk of it" | |------------------------------------------------------------|

news:10tqcb6$1n8g8$ snipped-for-privacy@paganini.bofh.team and this post are responses to 1 dubious claim by Doctor Sloman and John Larkin. Quoting the irrelevant context is - gan teastáil uaimse!

Bill Sloman wrote: |------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"On 10/05/2026 10:17 am, john larkin wrote: | |> On Sat, 9 May 2026 21:00:43 -0000 (UTC), Nioclás Pól Caileán de | |> Ghloucester snipped-for-privacy@Taf.com wrote: | |> | |>> John Larkin snipped-for-privacy@Glen--Canyon.com wrote: | |>> |----------------------| | |>> |"civilized countries."| | |>> |----------------------| | |>> | |>> Please identify a civilized country. Even if it would exist, then it | |>> is not in Ireland. | |>> (S.

John Larkin snipped-for-privacy@Glen--Canyon.com wrote: |----------------------------------------------------------------------| |"As far as Irish history goes, it was the British who were univilized.| | | |

Uh, civilized British Quakers saved many Irish lives during this famine.

Irish persons are uncivilized. Cf. boasting in the Ulster cycle of murdering a Connaught man; Maguire butchering children from Great Britain in Northern Ireland who surrendered who are never even combatants anyway; malicious illegal arrests against e.g. T.D.s Clare Daly and Joe Higgins and pro-life activists (along with police officers demanding children to name themselves); a government which undemocratically disregarded a referendum on the Treaty of Nice;

Any country, in its history, has had some bad guys. I've spent time in Ireland and in Russia; Ireland is better.

The USA is mostly civilized. It's huge, almost 4 million square miles, with 50 states, so there is a lot of variety.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

John Larkin snipped-for-privacy@Glen--Canyon.com wrote: |-----------------------------------------------------| |"Any country, in its history, has had some bad guys."| |-----------------------------------------------------|

True. (S.

MULTICS was designed with an entirely different philosophy than UNIX. UNIX is "cheap and dirty". MULTICS was designed with the thought that "computing" should be a "utility" just like electricity, water, sanitation, etc. As such, it should be "highly available".

E.g., replace a disk drive WHILE the system is running. Or, replace a *processor*, "library", etc.

MULTICS had a set of 8 different security "rings" so a process could have "more privilege" than others without having the ultimate level of privilege (what UNIX would call "root"). (This particularly important if you want to open the system to enhancement by "semi-trusted" others without giving away the farm)

It also had mandatory access control that enforced how actors could interact with the system and each other, without being compromised by *discretionary* access control (that is under the users' control).

UNIX devalues these things, considering the costs to implement them as too high to justify the value they represent to the users served. Like most of the Internet design, it assumed benevolent actors who only occasionally made mistakes from which they needed some degree of protection. MULTICS assumed that hostile actors would exist and took things more seriously (there are costs to these features)

I've taken MULTICS goals to heart in my current design. I can replace hardware and software components WHILE they are being used -- none of this "please reboot" nonsense.

Organick is the classic text describing MULTICS's design and goals. It's worth reading if only to see how you can *design* a system (instead of hacking it together "on the cheap"). Perhaps MULTICS true success was that you could even *attempt* to design a system of that complexity in the 1960's!

Actually, I think there is a port/simulation of MULTICS that you can download. But, most of what you "see" would look old and dated (perhaps if you installed a V6 UNIX by way of comparison)

Don Y snipped-for-privacy@foo.invalid wrote: |---------------------------------------------------------------------| |"E.g., replace a disk drive WHILE the system is running. Or, replace| |a *processor*, "library", etc. | | | |[. . .] | | | |I've taken MULTICS goals to heart in my current design. I can | |replace hardware and software components WHILE they are | |being used -- none of this "please reboot" nonsense." | |---------------------------------------------------------------------|

An ex-boss would like to use systems by you, because he is frustrated that satellites' software (usually without an operating system with an Ada-run-time executive) cannot easily be safely patched while running.

Why do they need to be patched? No - not because of bugs! Satellites last longer than they are supposed to, but parts become permanently damaged so patches try to work around e.g. 1 gyroscope or whatever not working by e.g. using a different (but maybe imperfect) algorithm to make the best of what are still working.

So why did MULTICS not make a resurgence or why did a clone or even Plan 9 not eventually take over? Why do persons still code in C++ or Verilog (not counting SystemVerilog) on Windows? :) - or should this emoticon be :( ? (S.

Very few things can be patched or updated while ALSO providing their intended services. Perhaps hot-swapped disks and power supplies are the exception. Surely NOT software or firmware.

Being able to swap "components" also lets you take advantage of new technologies or algorithms, instead of being saddled with something that was *designed* years earlier. In the hardware world, you just toss out the old product and replace *it* with something new. That's a pretty heavy-handed strategy (imagine having to replace your car because the tires went bald!)

And, if you have these "formal fittings" between components, you can use them as convenient places to reconfigure the system. E.g., the device on one side of the fitment can be located distant from the other -- as long as the interface adheres to the contracted design!

E.g., I have a daemon that monitors for unexpected domestic water consumption -- sort of a "water watchdog". It doesn't have to be executing on the processor that has a connection to the water meter. *Or*, the processor that has a connection to the shutoff valve. As long as it adheres to the formalized interfaces of these two *services*, it can reside anywhere and still perform its duties.

If I choose to replace the water meter with one that uses a different technology, then I just swap out the old water meter service for the new one WHILE the daemon is accessing it (it just looks like his access took longer than normal).

Componentizing like this also means you are free to adopt interfaces that further enforce your design goals. E.g., the aforementioned daemon has no inherent need to be able to turn the water *on*! So, the system should ensure that the "hook" to do so is not available to it. Without interfering with any other "client's" ability to do exactly that.

MULTICS is *big* and provides services that John Doe's don't require. Like businesses who lock up their server room. Or, run a different server to handle payroll vs. production vs. front office. Hardware is (and has been) cheap enough that you can afford to "have two" (or thirty) boxes instead of relying on one box to act *as* thirty.

Compartmentalization being one of the main tenets of good software design; why not just use physical hardware to provide that? (Of course, the answer is that it can -- but, only when the number of effective compartments is small; once you have thousands of actors in a system, keeping them separated -- yet also ALLOWING for sharing -- becomes costly if it has to be implemented across thousands of devices)

When you design hardware, you don't worry about these things; YOU just ensure the power supply circuitry doesn't commingle with the RF front end. And, if someone opened your box and added a jumper that violated this, you would throw your hands up and plead "it's not my fault!" (You would also likely be able to easily *spot* said jumper; software is considerably more complex than hardware and such revelations are far from obvious)

I agree, the tests-and-grades model is an antiquated dinosaur, many people in education feel this way also, though higher ed in aggregate hasn't managed to come to any kind of agreement on what should replace it.

Hampshire College used a different model consisting mainly of detailed performance evaluations and roll-your-own programs of study rather than letter grades and a standard menu of majors for many years and they went out of business recently; partly because higher education is too expensive now for most people to spend money on without receiving a GPA, class rank, and standardized diploma from a standardized program of study that the AI panoptocons scanning the resumes at large white-collar employers will hopefully recognize.

Problem is the washouts tend to not just stay in the bedroom and live off their parent's largess forever, they tend to become MAGA and blame their problems on everyone else..

I think part of it comes from a paternalistic attitude that teachers must

In college, this changes -- often leaving students unprepared for the "freedom" they now have (No, you don't HAVE to attend class -- no one is taking attendance and notifying your parents of your "unexplained absences". No, you don't have to do the homework. Or pass the exams. The school will gladly charge you the same tuition to RETAKE the course, again! It's YOUR dime!)

I think "self study" can work when there is a longer term relationship with the student. In college, most relationships are a semester or two before moving on to some other set of classes. And, many more students involved.

In "primary school", you typically interacted with the same set of teachers (students) for many years. So, a teacher could have a feel for what a student was like BEFORE they were ever in their care. "Reputation", etc. Ditto students feels for teachers.

So, a teacher could have a certain level of confidence in letting (some) students embark on their own learning experience and still be able to "rate" their performance with a letter grade. Despite not conforming to the "standard curriculum".

For a "class" of 100 students, even a staff of 6 teachers could have a good enough feel for the student population. Esp having their "history" available (firsthand or by consultation with other staff who taught them in years before).

Step up to a class of 1000 and that level of familiarity fades.

Of course! It is NEVER "your fault"! We're about to create a generation of disaffected young men who eschew higher education in favor of the trades -- only to discover that those positions will see increased competition (from all the other young men who've come to this "realization"). And, likely despise their female bosses (the folks who

Sadly, after about 30, the "cost" of returning to school is too high for most of them willing to admit their mistake to actually undertake (families, costs of living, health insurance, etc.).

But, hey, maybe someone will come along and promise you free money?!

Trump provides all the derangement required. Imagining that his antics aren't worthy of derision is the sort of reaction you get from people who have been conned, and can't bear to admit it.

Get a job.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

Easier said than done. I've been apply for jobs since I moved back to Australia back when I was just 70. I got as far as a job interview about once a year, early on, but never got an offer. I may put in perhaps a dozen applications a year, for jobs where I figure I might have something to offer. the probability that I'll find something does seem to be vanishingly small. You may be dim enough to be unaware of this - you do think that Donald trump has "common sense" - but it's more likely that you are just being unpleasant.

Yet more TDS.

I have made suggestions as to how you could meet people and find interesting stuff to do. You don't seem to approve. Keep playing pickleball or whatever.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

Don Y snipped-for-privacy@foo.invalid wrote: |------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"On 5/11/2026 3:16 PM, Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester wrote: | |> An ex-boss would like to use systems by you, because he is frustrated | |> that satellites' software (usually without an operating system with an| |> Ada-run-time executive) cannot easily be safely patched while running.| | | |Very few things can be patched or updated while ALSO providing their | |intended services. Perhaps hot-swapped disks and power supplies are | |the exception. Surely NOT software or firmware." | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|

This ex-boss then at the European Space Agency could probably tolerate a few minutes of readings being canceled/ignored/suspended for a live software update if such live software updates happen only months apart or years apart. That it is not as easy as he wants disappoints him, as he says he wants to be able to update software on a satellite like he can upgrade Spreadsheet Program Version Crap on Windows to Spreadsheet Program Version Crappier But With Improved Eye Candy, but I tried to convey to him that the behavior of Windows is ill defined (uncontrollable) and you do not run a spreadsheet program while you are uninstalling it and installing the next version.

|--------------------------------------------------------------------| |"Being able to swap "components" also lets you take advantage of new| |technologies [. . .]" | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|

Such hardware swapping is not available to us after a spacecraft has become launched. (The repair of the Hubble Space Telescopes by astronauts is an exception, and has nothing to do with us.)

|----------------------------------------------------------| |"[. . .] | |[. . .] And, if someone opened your box and added | |a jumper that violated this, you would throw your hands up| |and plead "it's not my fault!" [. . .] | |[. . .]" | |----------------------------------------------------------|

The then boss of this ex-boss said that all European-Space-Agency spacecraft have an American component called "the Blame Component"! (S.

In Silicon Valley, I hear that the biggies (like Apple, Google) have bidding wars for extreme talent, partly to keep the others from getting them.

We know a couple who met at google. One still works there and the other has jumped to Apple. They must make $300K each or so.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics