Yes, the latest chips were very expensive back then, and out of reach for most people who would continue buying new computers with older chips. (As opposed to how most people today buy an iPhone or a Mac or whatever with the latest semiconductor technology.) I got my 25MHz 386 in 1991, over two years after the 486 was announced, and I had one of the fastest computers of anybody in school... for a short time.
Wow, that takes me back. It reminds me of the pre-web days when people would set up telnet services for providing information about the weather, ham radio callsigns, lyrics, FTP search engine (archie), and of course BBSs. An acquaintance of mine maintained a list of telnet BBSs and services that was fairly popular at the time. [1]
I was excited earlier this year to discover that Micron (Crucial) was manufacturing 64GB DDR5 "laptop memory" modules, allowing me to pick up a couple in early September to build an ASUS NUC VM server with 128GB of RAM. It was a little hard to get even then, but I found a vendor selling it at a reasonable price.
It worked out so well that I decided to get some more. Needless to say, it went from unavailable to being available for double the price. Now, I guess it won't be available at all in the future. :(
I don't think it was ever common, since earphones weren't that popular until people started calling them "earbuds", but the term was historically used in at least some circles in the U.S. The 1988 Radio Shack catalog [1] seems to mention "earphone" 57 times, including two mono earphone products.
That’s interesting, although that seems to be a different usage than OP mentioned. It seems to be used interchangeably with headphones as it’s also being used to describe cables and jacks.
When you become good at using Palm graffiti, it's not too bad. I remember playing through all of the _Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy_ game on a Palm IIIx while commuting on the bus between Boulder and Denver back in 1999 or so, and being amazed that I could play an actual computer game on a handheld device.
I was in this same situation earlier this year with one machine that was using a license attached to my Microsoft account. From what I read online, I thought I was freeing up the license by running "slmgr /upk" and "slmgr /cpky" on the old machine, but I guess not. I was eventually able to get the license transferred to the new machine, but only after a very painful morning of working with an MS support person.
I learned that there are two ways of buying a Windows 11 license. One way results in getting a traditional license key that can be reliably transferred, and the other way (tying the license to your Microsoft account) risks losing your license. :( I'm very careful to only buy licenses the former way, now.
It's just a matter of buying from the right web page at Microsoft's web site. At least as of June, I was able to buy a license with a traditional license key here:
I don't think it would exactly be "create a fork of this repo", but if a developer invests significant time and effort solving hard problems where the solutions are implemented in the released source, once an LLM model is trained on it, then someone else could quickly and easily have the LLM generate a new program that implements the novel solutions. Whether this is a problem or not may depend on the motivations of the developer, but this potential for IP laundering may very well begin influencing the licenses and methods of distribution that people choose.
(Of course, I suppose at some point AI will be able to analyze and learn from binary executables or obfuscated source...)
Very cool! I had an MC-10 when I was a little kid. It was my first computer, and I didn't know anyone else who had one. I didn't have the book with this Arctic Adventure program, but I had another book with an adventure game you could type in. [1] I stayed up past my bedtime and spent significant time typing it in. However, after typing in much of the program, I encountered my very first "out of memory" error. I was astonished that 4KB of RAM wouldn't be enough, and that I was going to need a better computer!
I clearly had the wrong book for that computer. ;)
Neat! I sometimes play around with the idea of reverse engineering and transcompiling a tiny game that I think was probably written in Turbo Pascal 4.0. Maybe 4.0 supported optimizations, but this program seems to have been compiled in a debug mode. (At least, it seems to have no optimization, and has the default {$S+} stack overflow checking at the start of every function.) The lack of optimization makes it (and perhaps other programs written in Turbo Pascal) a really attractive artifact to experiment with transcompiling. When I realized that only the first segment was the actual game, and the other three segments corresponded to standard units used for I/O (etc.), which could be harder to analyze, I realized I could just omit those segments and replace them with new functions suitable for the transcompilation target. Maybe some day I'll get around to finishing it.
It's similar with Turbo Pascal 3.0, but there's only one segment since it's a good old COM file. The compiler just copies its own first ~10000 bytes, comprising the standard library, and splices the compiled result to the end.
I can see how this makes transcompilation relatively straightforward, although the real mode 16-bit code is a bit unpleasant with all the segment stuff going on, so you might as well just decompile :D. It's very possible that similar instructions will be emitted in 3.0 and 4.0 for the same source input.
My program also has the stack checking calls everywhere before calling functions. I think that people using Pascal weren't worried about performance that much to begin with, so they didn't bother disabling it.
reply