6 ms·

Useless? Like the RTX2000 which landed on a comet kind of useless? Or do you mean some other kind of useless. Maybe the controlling radio telescopes kind of

Useless? Like the RTX2000 which landed on a comet kind of useless? Or do you mean some other kind of useless. Maybe the controlling radio telescopes kind of useless. That must be it.

darin2try 2y ago
[dead]
Sesse__ 2y ago
> Like the RTX2000 which landed on a comet kind of useless? Yeah, in 1983 he designed a chip that was further developed by others for space usage. > Maybe the controlling radio telescopes kind of useless. Yeah, which he did in 1970. Note a pattern here? That this design paradigm holds up pretty well in a primitive computing world when things are simple and demands are low, and is thoroughly useless to keep on promoting today?
- astrobe_ 2y ago
  > Yeah, which he did in 1970. Yes, and Forth has been maintaining somehow its ties with aerospace for over 50 years: https://www.forth.com/resources/forth-apps https://www.forth.com/resources/forth-apps > That this design paradigm holds up pretty well in a primitive computing world when things are simple and demands are low, and is thoroughly useless to keep on promoting today? Apparently some people are still interested in it: https://www.mpeforth.com/news-gossip-and-rumour/ https://www.mpeforth.com/news-gossip-and-rumour/ Did you know that desktops, servers and smartphones together is a tiny fraction of the total number of processors running in the world?
  - Sesse__ 2y ago
    > Yes, and Forth has been maintaining somehow its ties with aerospace for over 50 years: https://www.forth.com/resources/forth-apps https://www.forth.com/resources/forth-apps Somehow all of those projects are… really old? A satellite control UI on top of Windows 7 from 2015 (somehow Chuck Moore's assertion that “If they are starting from the OS they have made the first mistake” did not extend to Windows here). A STM-16 (2 Mbit/sec!) multiplexer, very modern. A power plant control system from 1995. And yes, an aerospace project indeed, also from 1995. Notably none of these are using his CAD software, much less using any of his chips. > Apparently some people are still interested in it: https://www.mpeforth.com/news-gossip-and-rumour/ https://www.mpeforth.com/news-gossip-and-rumour/ I'm sure they are? There are people interested in all sorts of things. (Well, at least some of them were in 2022, which is the last time someone bothered to add a news post.) That doesn't mean it is a useful design paradigm for the world at large. Remember, Chuck Moore's claim is that not following his ways means 10x the bugs, cost, etc. -- I don't really see anything supporting that claim.
- samatman 2y ago
  What have you accomplished that is noteworthy or useful? We could use a point of comparison here.
theamk 2y ago
Harris RTX2000 is a 8Mhz machine with 16-bit data-path, paged program memory, and 1MB addressable memory. This is really an example of "small machine". Philae had to choose this CPU because there are very few rad-hard low-power CPUs available (and it's not even that low power by modern standarts, 5 mA/MHz), but I am sure they'd choose something bigger if they could. As for radio telescope, I am not sure which ones are you talking about, but those environments are not particularly challenging compared to spaceflight, so those run whatever hardware designers like. I am sure some of them used to run tiny 16-bit CPUs, but I'd be surprised to hear new designs run something that old.

Useless? Like the RTX2000 which landed on a comet kind of useless? Or do you mean some other kind of useless. Maybe the controlling radio telescopes kind of useless. That must be it.

darin2try 2y ago

[dead]

Sesse__ 2y ago

> Like the RTX2000 which landed on a comet kind of useless? Yeah, in 1983 he designed a chip that was further developed by others for space usage. > Maybe the controlling radio telescopes kind of useless. Yeah, which he did in 1970. Note a pattern here? That this design paradigm holds up pretty well in a primitive computing world when things are simple and demands are low, and is thoroughly useless to keep on promoting today?

astrobe_ 2y ago
> Yeah, which he did in 1970. Yes, and Forth has been maintaining somehow its ties with aerospace for over 50 years: https://www.forth.com/resources/forth-apps https://www.forth.com/resources/forth-apps > That this design paradigm holds up pretty well in a primitive computing world when things are simple and demands are low, and is thoroughly useless to keep on promoting today? Apparently some people are still interested in it: https://www.mpeforth.com/news-gossip-and-rumour/ https://www.mpeforth.com/news-gossip-and-rumour/ Did you know that desktops, servers and smartphones together is a tiny fraction of the total number of processors running in the world?
- Sesse__ 2y ago
  > Yes, and Forth has been maintaining somehow its ties with aerospace for over 50 years: https://www.forth.com/resources/forth-apps https://www.forth.com/resources/forth-apps Somehow all of those projects are… really old? A satellite control UI on top of Windows 7 from 2015 (somehow Chuck Moore's assertion that “If they are starting from the OS they have made the first mistake” did not extend to Windows here). A STM-16 (2 Mbit/sec!) multiplexer, very modern. A power plant control system from 1995. And yes, an aerospace project indeed, also from 1995. Notably none of these are using his CAD software, much less using any of his chips. > Apparently some people are still interested in it: https://www.mpeforth.com/news-gossip-and-rumour/ https://www.mpeforth.com/news-gossip-and-rumour/ I'm sure they are? There are people interested in all sorts of things. (Well, at least some of them were in 2022, which is the last time someone bothered to add a news post.) That doesn't mean it is a useful design paradigm for the world at large. Remember, Chuck Moore's claim is that not following his ways means 10x the bugs, cost, etc. -- I don't really see anything supporting that claim.
samatman 2y ago
What have you accomplished that is noteworthy or useful? We could use a point of comparison here.

theamk 2y ago

Harris RTX2000 is a 8Mhz machine with 16-bit data-path, paged program memory, and 1MB addressable memory. This is really an example of "small machine". Philae had to choose this CPU because there are very few rad-hard low-power CPUs available (and it's not even that low power by modern standarts, 5 mA/MHz), but I am sure they'd choose something bigger if they could. As for radio telescope, I am not sure which ones are you talking about, but those environments are not particularly challenging compared to spaceflight, so those run whatever hardware designers like. I am sure some of them used to run tiny 16-bit CPUs, but I'd be surprised to hear new designs run something that old.