7 ms·

Officials weren't keen on these bespoke machines because there was a Comecon push to standardize on unified system based on IBM 360, with compatible peripherals

• jojobas 2y ago
  It was incredibly expensive to have dozens of research institutes work on esoteric architectures at their pleasure. The majority of the population worked their asses of in poverty to make thousands of tanks and dozens of submarines, not entertain some computer scientists.
  • drekipus 2y ago
    Sounds like the problems of acrappy economic theory
    • jojobas 2y ago
      The theory might or might not have worked if the leadership wasn't hell-bent on converting the entire world into their ideology by military force. Which it kind of had to do lest their citizens noticed they live in abject poverty compared to other countries.
      • lolinder 2y ago
        So in other words the crappy economic theory drove the militarism, lest the population recognize the fallout of the theory for what it was?
        • jojobas 2y ago
          It's not obvious that the militarism wasn't primary to the theory. World revolution won't make itself.
          • Koshkin 2y ago
            Well, to be fair, the idea was abandoned back in the 1930s.
            • broken-kebab 2y ago
              The idea that was abandoned in 30s, was of the world revolution happening so soon that it should be prioritized over trade, and diplomacy with capitalist countries. It was replaced with flexible strategy of long-term struggle for world domination which USSR faithfully followed until its demise
              • Koshkin 2y ago
                The USSR was not the only country vying for domination.
        • bigbacaloa 2y ago
          [dead]
        • psalminen 2y ago
          Sounds like most economic theories that are implemented around the globe today to me.
          • jojobas 2y ago
    • lupusreal 2y ago
      Not the theory, a crappy economic reality. If the economy were sound the computer researchers should have been able to fund their own research by commercializing it, instead of expecting handouts funded by the working class's hard labor.
      • rapidaneurism 2y ago
        My understanding of planned economies is that credit, investment, and profits are controlled by the state. In any way starting a commercial enterprise would surely mark them as capitalist class traitors, wouldn't it?
        • defrost 2y ago
          Not in the case of the planned economies of China nor the USSR (post Stalin, IIRC) nor Russia (if, indeed, there's still a plan there).
          • jojobas 2y ago
            There was no starting any private enterprise in USSR until Perestroika (1988ish). Best you could do is to suggest doing something to the government and if you knew the right people you could be allowed to, given some resources etc. Think starting a project within a large company, except you can't quit and start on your own.
            • broken-kebab 2y ago
              To be more precise, private enterprise was a crime in USSR until perestroika with punishments ranging up to death. But some people still risked
  • tgv 2y ago
    I don't get it. Are you arguing that the majority of Poles enjoyed being forced to pay (indirectly) for military equipment, and that that particular pleasure or pride and its consequences hence can be used to browbeat everything and everyone else? "Comrade, stop whistling? Don't you know you cannot be happier than us, who have to work for planes and guns?"
    • yetihehe 2y ago
      No, he wrote about motivation of ruling class, not rest of Poles.
      • jojobas 2y ago
        Of course, and then you have to remember that the ones calling the shots were not even Polish, and the situation was common for the whole Eastern Bloc. The Polish government was appointed from Moscow. Stalin went so far as to send one of his top brass, Rokossovsky, to be Polish minister of Defense.
• vanderZwan 2y ago
  > One of interesting things from modern perspective is that these machines didn't have synchronous clocks, but cycles were timed by RC delay circuits which were tuned differently for various groups of instructions. Between this and the GA144 I wonder if clockless architectures aren't an under-explored area, since they seem to be able to achieve a lot of performance per watt and per gate if done right