On Tuesday, July 20, 2021 at 4:51:02 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <0qrdfgdciig2lsgom...@4ax.com>,
> J. Clarke <jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 14:53:45 -0000 (UTC), Christian Weisgerber
> ><na...@mips.inka.de> wrote:
> >
> >>On 2021-07-19, Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
> >>
> [concerning the guy who kept switching disks and disk drives till
> he had ruined 32 of them]
> >>
> >>Must have been an implausibly dim guy.
> >
> >I dunno--our guy was a PhD computer science professor. There might be
> >some Pauli Effect going on
> ><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_effect>.
> Ooooooh, *another* one. I think this group mentions the
> Heisenberg effect, which holds that a sufficiently crucial
> experiment will fail if there is a distinguished theoretical
> physicist within a given distance. Named for Werner Heisenberg,
> of course, of whom it was said that any experiment would fail if
> he were in the same *city*.

They used to say something similar about J. J. Thompson. His assistants, Geiger and
Marsden, tried to keep him out of the lab, even if he designed the experiment in question.

On the other hand, he read one novel a day for decades. Perhaps this was all a
cunning plan.

William Hyde

On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 08:43:38 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
<jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, July 19, 2021 at 10:35:32 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> In article <a099de85-ef48-4142...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Jack Bohn <jack....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >They say the seventh wave is the largest.
>> >
>> >Then?
>> >
>> >There was cyberpunk. It even had a thesis statement anthology,
>> >_Mirrorshades_, but collecting previously published tales, it's not the leader
>> >of the revolution so much as a survey of it, maybe just one of many theme
>> >anthologies. Perhaps sf had gotten so large it doesn't have A movement, but
>> >smaller movements through the last forty years in various states of synthesis.
>> >
>> 1980s had cyberpunk but also the humanists like Kim Stanley Robinson. Terry
>> Carr included both in his third Ace Specials series. At some point, post-
>> cyberpunk came along.
>
>Steampunk? Heh, I'd thought it was named for _The Stirling Engine_ by Bruce D... I mean _The Difference Engine_ by William Gibson and Bruce Sterling. Looking it up, I see the term was suggested by K.W. Jeter a few years before the book, more on the fringes of trademark infringement than as a suggestion for a new direction.

The "Steampunk" I have experience with is a Japanese Animation genre,
and, for me, not a very satisfying one.

Some of the trailers are enticing, though.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
Heydt) wrote:

>In article <0qrdfgdciig2lsgom1knds95j03g7ms94i@4ax.com>,
>J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 14:53:45 -0000 (UTC), Christian Weisgerber
>><naddy@mips.inka.de> wrote:
>>
>>>On 2021-07-19, Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>>
>[concerning the guy who kept switching disks and disk drives till
>he had ruined 32 of them]
>
>>>
>>>Must have been an implausibly dim guy.
>>
>>I dunno--our guy was a PhD computer science professor. There might be
>>some Pauli Effect going on
>><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_effect>.
>
>Ooooooh, *another* one. I think this group mentions the
>Heisenberg effect, which holds that a sufficiently crucial
>experiment will fail if there is a distinguished theoretical
>physicist within a given distance. Named for Werner Heisenberg,
>of course, of whom it was said that any experiment would fail if
>he were in the same *city*.
>
>Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
>piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
>CE takes a look at it.
>
>Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
>effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
>until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
>again.
>
>Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?

Back before I retired, I was /very/ successful in getting balky fax
machines to straighten themselves up and start working properly. Just
by standing next to them.

Intimidation works, at least on some forms of machinery.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

In article <ffigfgtb9i8o2npjghu485h3qs3kldn0ai@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 08:43:38 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
><jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Monday, July 19, 2021 at 10:35:32 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>>> In article <a099de85-ef48-4142...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Jack Bohn <jack....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >They say the seventh wave is the largest.
>>> >
>>> >Then?
>>> >
>>> >There was cyberpunk. It even had a thesis statement anthology,
>>> >_Mirrorshades_, but collecting previously published tales, it's not
>the leader
>>> >of the revolution so much as a survey of it, maybe just one of many theme
>>> >anthologies. Perhaps sf had gotten so large it doesn't have A movement, but
>>> >smaller movements through the last forty years in various states of
>synthesis.
>>> >
>>> 1980s had cyberpunk but also the humanists like Kim Stanley Robinson. Terry
>>> Carr included both in his third Ace Specials series. At some point, post-
>>> cyberpunk came along.
>>
>>Steampunk? Heh, I'd thought it was named for _The Stirling Engine_ by
>Bruce D... I mean _The Difference Engine_ by William Gibson and Bruce
>Sterling. Looking it up, I see the term was suggested by K.W. Jeter a
>few years before the book, more on the fringes of trademark infringement
>than as a suggestion for a new direction.
>
>The "Steampunk" I have experience with is a Japanese Animation genre,
>and, for me, not a very satisfying one.
>
>Some of the trailers are enticing, though.

There have lately been a number of instances of "Flintlock Punk".
The Powder Mage series, the Ten Thousand Names, and Signal Airship come to
mind.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> Heydt) wrote:

>> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
>> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
>> CE takes a look at it.
>>
>> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
>> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
>> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
>> again.
>>
>> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
>
> I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
> thing if it won't stay broke.

One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
worked just fine.

He finally soldered a scope probe in and it shipped that way.

--
Michael F. Stemper
Isaiah 58:6-7

Michael F. Stemper <michael.stemper@gmail.com> schrieb:
> On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>> Heydt) wrote:
>
>>> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
>>> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
>>> CE takes a look at it.
>>>
>>> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
>>> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
>>> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
>>> again.
>>>
>>> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
>>
>> I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
>> thing if it won't stay broke.
>
> One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
> work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
> worked just fine.
>
> He finally soldered a scope probe in and it shipped that way.

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/magic-story.html comes to mind.

On Wednesday, July 21, 2021 at 1:49:51 PM UTC-4, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> > Heydt) wrote:
>
> >> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
> >> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
> >> CE takes a look at it.
> >>
> >> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
> >> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
> >> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
> >> again.
> >>
> >> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
> >
> > I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
> > thing if it won't stay broke.
> One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
> work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
> worked just fine.
>
> He finally soldered a scope probe in and it shipped that way.

Reminds me of the 'Magic Switch' story from the dawn of the Internet.
This goes back to at least the last 70s:

https://github.com/PDP-10/its/issues/1232

Pt

On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:49:40 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
<michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>> Heydt) wrote:
>
>>> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
>>> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
>>> CE takes a look at it.
>>>
>>> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
>>> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
>>> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
>>> again.
>>>
>>> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
>>
>> I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
>> thing if it won't stay broke.
>
>One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
>work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
>worked just fine.

This reminds me of those occasions where something goes wrong when I
run a program I am working on ... but not when I debug it. When run in
the debugger, everything is fine.

>He finally soldered a scope probe in and it shipped that way.

Not having that option, I keep pounding until I figure out what is
/really/ happening and fix it.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 12:08:15 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:49:40 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
> <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
> >> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> >> Heydt) wrote:
> >
> >>> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
> >>> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
> >>> CE takes a look at it.
> >>>
> >>> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
> >>> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
> >>> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
> >>> again.
> >>>
> >>> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
> >>
> >> I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
> >> thing if it won't stay broke.
> >
> >One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
> >work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
> >worked just fine.
> This reminds me of those occasions where something goes wrong when I
> run a program I am working on ... but not when I debug it. When run in
> the debugger, everything is fine.

I've run into that. Turned out that when you did a malloc under the debugger, the
memory was zeroed. If run normally, it was not. The garbage data was causing
the problem, including buffer overruns.

pt

On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 5:08:15 PM UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:49:40 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
> <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
> >> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> >> Heydt) wrote:
> >
> >>> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
> >>> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
> >>> CE takes a look at it.
> >>>
> >>> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
> >>> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
> >>> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
> >>> again.
> >>>
> >>> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
> >>
> >> I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
> >> thing if it won't stay broke.
> >
> >One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
> >work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
> >worked just fine.
> This reminds me of those occasions where something goes wrong when I
> run a program I am working on ... but not when I debug it. When run in
> the debugger, everything is fine.
> >He finally soldered a scope probe in and it shipped that way.
> Not having that option, I keep pounding until I figure out what is
> /really/ happening and fix it.
> --
> "I begin to envy Petronius."
> "I have envied him long since."

If there is one thing I have learnt during my career as a programmer, it is that anything you don't understand will invariably come back to bite you, generally at the worst possible time, such as during site acceptance tests. I seem to remember one of the commanders in Babylon 5 saying something like "what you don't know will kill you" but I can't find it as a quote on the internet.

In article <ca23bcd7-c75a-4638-ba0b-9bc436f78f34n@googlegroups.com>,
Andrew McDowell <mcdowell_ag@sky.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 5:08:15 PM UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:49:40 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
>> <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>> >> Heydt) wrote:
>> >
>> >>> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
>> >>> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
>> >>> CE takes a look at it.
>> >>>
>> >>> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
>> >>> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
>> >>> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
>> >>> again.
>> >>>
>> >>> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
>> >>
>> >> I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
>> >> thing if it won't stay broke.
>> >
>> >One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
>> >work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
>> >worked just fine.
>> This reminds me of those occasions where something goes wrong when I
>> run a program I am working on ... but not when I debug it. When run in
>> the debugger, everything is fine.
>> >He finally soldered a scope probe in and it shipped that way.
>> Not having that option, I keep pounding until I figure out what is
>> /really/ happening and fix it.
>> --
>> "I begin to envy Petronius."
>> "I have envied him long since."
>
>If there is one thing I have learnt during my career as a programmer, it
>is that anything you don't understand will invariably come back to bite
>you, generally at the worst possible time, such as during site
>acceptance tests. I seem to remember one of the commanders in Babylon 5
>saying something like "what you don't know will kill you" but I can't
>find it as a quote on the internet.

There's an old Larry Niven story (old enough that I can't
remember anything else about it) whose punchline is "If you don't
understand it, it's dangerous." Was that what you were looking
for?

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 20:32:37 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
Heydt) wrote:

>In article <ca23bcd7-c75a-4638-ba0b-9bc436f78f34n@googlegroups.com>,
>Andrew McDowell <mcdowell_ag@sky.com> wrote:
>>On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 5:08:15 PM UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:49:40 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
>>> <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> >> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>>> >> Heydt) wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
>>> >>> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
>>> >>> CE takes a look at it.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
>>> >>> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
>>> >>> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
>>> >>> again.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
>>> >>
>>> >> I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
>>> >> thing if it won't stay broke.
>>> >
>>> >One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
>>> >work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
>>> >worked just fine.
>>> This reminds me of those occasions where something goes wrong when I
>>> run a program I am working on ... but not when I debug it. When run in
>>> the debugger, everything is fine.
>>> >He finally soldered a scope probe in and it shipped that way.
>>> Not having that option, I keep pounding until I figure out what is
>>> /really/ happening and fix it.
>>> --
>>> "I begin to envy Petronius."
>>> "I have envied him long since."
>>
>>If there is one thing I have learnt during my career as a programmer, it
>>is that anything you don't understand will invariably come back to bite
>>you, generally at the worst possible time, such as during site
>>acceptance tests. I seem to remember one of the commanders in Babylon 5
>>saying something like "what you don't know will kill you" but I can't
>>find it as a quote on the internet.
>
>There's an old Larry Niven story (old enough that I can't
>remember anything else about it) whose punchline is "If you don't
>understand it, it's dangerous." Was that what you were looking
>for?

While what you don't know is dangerous, at least you know you don't
know it. What's really lethal is the stuff that you know that turns
out to be wrong.

On 2021-07-22, Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:

> There's an old Larry Niven story (old enough that I can't
> remember anything else about it) whose punchline is "If you don't
> understand it, it's dangerous."

"Flatlander" (1967)

That's the one where Beowulf Shaeffer accompanies a rich Earther
who asks the Outsiders for the most unusual planet within reach,
they travel there, notice a few oddities they can't make sense of,
and barely survive when their indestructible General Products hull
desintegrates before they can land.

<rot13>
Gurl jrer yhpxl. Gur cynarg naq vgf fha ner znqr sebz nagvznggre.
</rot13>

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de

On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 4:49:43 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 20:32:37 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> Heydt) wrote:
>
> >In article <ca23bcd7-c75a-4638...@googlegroups.com>,
> >Andrew McDowell <mcdow...@sky.com> wrote:
> >>On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 5:08:15 PM UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:49:40 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
> >>> <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>> >> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> >>> >> Heydt) wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >>> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
> >>> >>> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
> >>> >>> CE takes a look at it.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
> >>> >>> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
> >>> >>> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
> >>> >>> again.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
> >>> >> thing if it won't stay broke.
> >>> >
> >>> >One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
> >>> >work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
> >>> >worked just fine.
> >>> This reminds me of those occasions where something goes wrong when I
> >>> run a program I am working on ... but not when I debug it. When run in
> >>> the debugger, everything is fine.
> >>> >He finally soldered a scope probe in and it shipped that way.
> >>> Not having that option, I keep pounding until I figure out what is
> >>> /really/ happening and fix it.
> >>> --
> >>> "I begin to envy Petronius."
> >>> "I have envied him long since."
> >>
> >>If there is one thing I have learnt during my career as a programmer, it
> >>is that anything you don't understand will invariably come back to bite
> >>you, generally at the worst possible time, such as during site
> >>acceptance tests. I seem to remember one of the commanders in Babylon 5
> >>saying something like "what you don't know will kill you" but I can't
> >>find it as a quote on the internet.
> >
> >There's an old Larry Niven story (old enough that I can't
> >remember anything else about it) whose punchline is "If you don't
> >understand it, it's dangerous." Was that what you were looking
> >for?
> While what you don't know is dangerous, at least you know you don't
> know it. What's really lethal is the stuff that you know that turns
> out to be wrong.

The 'unknown unknowns', the things you have no idea exist, and would
be helpful to know, are just as bad.

Pt

In article <0830e2e5-870e-4150-8cfe-03da84878c38n@googlegroups.com>,
pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 12:08:15 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:49:40 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
>> <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>> >> Heydt) wrote:
>> >
>> >>> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
>> >>> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
>> >>> CE takes a look at it.
>> >>>
>> >>> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
>> >>> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
>> >>> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
>> >>> again.
>> >>>
>> >>> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
>> >>
>> >> I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
>> >> thing if it won't stay broke.
>> >
>> >One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
>> >work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
>> >worked just fine.
>> This reminds me of those occasions where something goes wrong when I
>> run a program I am working on ... but not when I debug it. When run in
>> the debugger, everything is fine.
>
>I've run into that. Turned out that when you did a malloc under the
>debugger, the
>memory was zeroed. If run normally, it was not. The garbage data was causing
>the problem, including buffer overruns.
>
>pt

Heisenbugs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisenbug
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 4:49:43 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:

[snip]

> While what you don't know is dangerous, at least you know you don't
> know it. What's really lethal is the stuff that you know that turns
> out to be wrong.

That's a version of something Anonymous once said.
Others often get the credit.

"It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you
know for sure that just ain’t so."

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/11/18/know-trouble/

--
Kevin R

On Friday, 23 July 2021 at 10:05:00 UTC+1, Kevrob wrote:
> On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 4:49:43 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> [snip]
> > While what you don't know is dangerous, at least you know you don't
> > know it. What's really lethal is the stuff that you know that turns
> > out to be wrong.
> That's a version of something Anonymous once said.
> Others often get the credit.
>
> "It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you
> know for sure that just ain’t so."
>
> https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/11/18/know-trouble/

A distinct point that I don't remember being discussed
or made into an epigram is that if you think you know
what's wrong in your computer program or your machine
or your recipe or whatever, and you fix it, but it's still wrong,
then probably that is not what was wrong. Even if it's the
only thing that could be wrong.

It's also possible that you're right about what is wrong, but
you didn't actually fix it. But after the second or third try,
it's all the more likely that the problem is hidden elsewhere.

And finally you notice that you're inputting the zip code and
the calendar year the wrong way around.

Paul S Person wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 08:43:38 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
> <jack....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, July 19, 2021 at 10:35:32 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
> >> In article <a099de85-ef48-4142...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> Jack Bohn <jack....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Then?
> >> >
> >> >There was cyberpunk. It even had a thesis statement anthology,
> >> >
> >> 1980s had cyberpunk but also the humanists like Kim Stanley Robinson. Terry
> >> Carr included both in his third Ace Specials series. At some point, post-
> >> cyberpunk came along.
> >
> >Steampunk? Heh, I'd thought it was named for _The Stirling Engine_ by Bruce D... I mean _The Difference Engine_ by William Gibson and Bruce Sterling. Looking it up, I see the term was suggested by K.W. Jeter a few years before the book,

> The "Steampunk" I have experience with is a Japanese Animation genre,
> and, for me, not a very satisfying one.
>
> Some of the trailers are enticing, though.

What entices? What does not satisfy?

There's extrapolating technology of the time, and a bit of allowing the science fiction inventions of the time to work. That's why I grandfather in the Disney movie of "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea," they realized that book, unlike, say, _War of the Worlds_, was past the point where its present could be presented as the present present, so was set in the past, explicitly designing its inventions in terms of antiquated technology.

Further adventures of famous persons of that era, historical or fictional (and crossovers!).

Or just the look: less wondering how an analytical engine could fit on your desktop, and just making the case out of wood and brass, hanging around people dressed in clothes from the Victorian Era, or at least Victoria's Secret.

--
-Jack

On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 05:23:26 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
<jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:

>Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 08:43:38 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
>> <jack....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Monday, July 19, 2021 at 10:35:32 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> >> In article <a099de85-ef48-4142...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> Jack Bohn <jack....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >Then?
>> >> >
>> >> >There was cyberpunk. It even had a thesis statement anthology,
>> >> >
>> >> 1980s had cyberpunk but also the humanists like Kim Stanley Robinson. Terry
>> >> Carr included both in his third Ace Specials series. At some point, post-
>> >> cyberpunk came along.
>> >
>> >Steampunk? Heh, I'd thought it was named for _The Stirling Engine_ by Bruce D... I mean _The Difference Engine_ by William Gibson and Bruce Sterling. Looking it up, I see the term was suggested by K.W. Jeter a few years before the book,
>
>> The "Steampunk" I have experience with is a Japanese Animation genre,
>> and, for me, not a very satisfying one.
>>
>> Some of the trailers are enticing, though.
>
>What entices? What does not satisfy?

The trailers entice. They make the films look attractive, at least to
me.

The films do not satisfy. I did not find them as attractive as the
trailers promised. And I don't think I liked the stories very much
either, although, after all this time, it is hard to tell.

And just changing everything to steam power doesn't really work for
me. That isn't something new; it's something current and up-to-date
that is drawn oddly. Not badly (they are well-enough done), but oddly.

>There's extrapolating technology of the time, and a bit of allowing the science fiction inventions of the time to work. That's why I grandfather in the Disney movie of "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea," they realized that book, unlike, say, _War of the Worlds_, was past the point where its present could be presented as the present present, so was set in the past, explicitly designing its inventions in terms of antiquated technology.
>
>Further adventures of famous persons of that era, historical or fictional (and crossovers!).

Actually, the tendency to introduce famous persons of the era is one
of the more irritating aspects. It never seems to work. A
non-steampunk film, /Dilili in Paris/, introduced so many of them that
I got quite tired of the distraction from the story (which had its
interesting points).

OTOH, I rather enjoyed the references in the novel /Anno Dracula/.

>Or just the look: less wondering how an analytical engine could fit on your desktop, and just making the case out of wood and brass, hanging around people dressed in clothes from the Victorian Era, or at least Victoria's Secret.

The look (as you illustrate it; as I noted above, the look in general
was done well enough) did nothing to enhance the film for me.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 11:14:35 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 12:08:15 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:49:40 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
>> <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On 20/07/2021 17.10, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 20:40:02 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>> >> Heydt) wrote:
>> >
>> >>> Sort of the reverse of the CE effect, whereby any nonfunctioning
>> >>> piece of hardware will begin to function perfectly as soon as the
>> >>> CE takes a look at it.
>> >>>
>> >>> Hal was never a professional CE, but I have observed the CE
>> >>> effect countless times, wherein my computer won't do [$ANYTHING]
>> >>> until Hal gets up and comes to look at it, whereupon it works
>> >>> again.
>> >>>
>> >>> Possibly he fixes it with a stern glance?
>> >>
>> >> I find that effect very frustrating because I can't fix the damned
>> >> thing if it won't stay broke.
>> >
>> >One instance of a piece of equipment made by my former employer didn't
>> >work and didn't work. Every time the CE hooked a scope probe to it, it
>> >worked just fine.
>> This reminds me of those occasions where something goes wrong when I
>> run a program I am working on ... but not when I debug it. When run in
>> the debugger, everything is fine.
>
>I've run into that. Turned out that when you did a malloc under the debugger, the
>memory was zeroed. If run normally, it was not. The garbage data was causing
>the problem, including buffer overruns.

It's been a while, but /that/ sounds familiar!
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 03:38:55 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>On Friday, 23 July 2021 at 10:05:00 UTC+1, Kevrob wrote:
>> On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 4:49:43 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> [snip]
>> > While what you don't know is dangerous, at least you know you don't
>> > know it. What's really lethal is the stuff that you know that turns
>> > out to be wrong.
>> That's a version of something Anonymous once said.
>> Others often get the credit.
>>
>> "It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you
>> know for sure that just ain’t so."
>>
>> https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/11/18/know-trouble/
>
>A distinct point that I don't remember being discussed
>or made into an epigram is that if you think you know
>what's wrong in your computer program or your machine
>or your recipe or whatever, and you fix it, but it's still wrong,
>then probably that is not what was wrong. Even if it's the
>only thing that could be wrong.
>
>It's also possible that you're right about what is wrong, but
>you didn't actually fix it. But after the second or third try,
>it's all the more likely that the problem is hidden elsewhere.
>
>And finally you notice that you're inputting the zip code and
>the calendar year the wrong way around.

Been there. Seen/done that.

The problems I am working on now are /mostly/ (some require a more
extensive fix) fixed by changing /one line/ of code. It is finding
that one line (that is, figuring out what is /really/ going on) that
takes up the time.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

In article <ddplfgpeq6subitsgre5nbrtve4h3167rc@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
>The problems I am working on now are /mostly/ (some require a more
>extensive fix) fixed by changing /one line/ of code. It is finding
>that one line (that is, figuring out what is /really/ going on) that
>takes up the time.

Right.

I think I've already described how, when we were first married
(fifty years ago), Hal was the programmer who was on-call to fix
any batch job didn't run in the middle of the night. Once in a
long time he'd have to go in (from Berkeley to San Francisco) to
look at the whole listing, but usually it'd go like this:

"Yellow.

"Oh. Well, go to line [number] and change [string] to [string],
and run it again, and if it still won't run, call me back, 'bye."

And he would hang up and be asleep again slightly before his head
touched the pillow, and what's more, the operator wouldn't call
back because the job would run.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

On Friday, July 23, 2021 at 11:54:32 AM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 03:38:55 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
> <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, 23 July 2021 at 10:05:00 UTC+1, Kevrob wrote:
> >> On Thursday, July 22, 2021 at 4:49:43 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >> > While what you don't know is dangerous, at least you know you don't
> >> > know it. What's really lethal is the stuff that you know that turns
> >> > out to be wrong.
> >> That's a version of something Anonymous once said.
> >> Others often get the credit.
> >>
> >> "It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you
> >> know for sure that just ain’t so."
> >>
> >> https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/11/18/know-trouble/
> >
> >A distinct point that I don't remember being discussed
> >or made into an epigram is that if you think you know
> >what's wrong in your computer program or your machine
> >or your recipe or whatever, and you fix it, but it's still wrong,
> >then probably that is not what was wrong. Even if it's the
> >only thing that could be wrong.
> >
> >It's also possible that you're right about what is wrong, but
> >you didn't actually fix it. But after the second or third try,
> >it's all the more likely that the problem is hidden elsewhere.
> >
> >And finally you notice that you're inputting the zip code and
> >the calendar year the wrong way around.
> Been there. Seen/done that.
>
> The problems I am working on now are /mostly/ (some require a more
> extensive fix) fixed by changing /one line/ of code. It is finding
> that one line (that is, figuring out what is /really/ going on) that
> takes up the time.

Took me many, many hours spread over weeks to find out that in a long
piece of terribly documented code the variables "ll" and "l1" had been
switched in one place.

And I was the one who made the typo.

But I wasn't the one who thought that having variables as optically similar
as ll and l1 was a good idea.

William Hyde

Paul S Person wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 05:23:26 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
> <jack....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Paul S Person wrote:
> >> The "Steampunk" I have experience with is a Japanese Animation genre,
> >> and, for me, not a very satisfying one.
> >>
> >> Some of the trailers are enticing, though.
> >
> >What entices? What does not satisfy?
> The trailers entice. They make the films look attractive, at least to
> me.

Well, that is their job.

> The films do not satisfy. I did not find them as attractive as the
> trailers promised. And I don't think I liked the stories very much
> either, although, after all this time, it is hard to tell.

Alas, with films the only promise you can rely on is the running time.

> And just changing everything to steam power doesn't really work for
> me. That isn't something new; it's something current and up-to-date
> that is drawn oddly. Not badly (they are well-enough done), but oddly.

Indeed. There should be thought into how things would be done differently.
(I'm thinking there was a clever reference to some type of peripheral to a mechanical computer, but it's not coming to mind.)

> >Further adventures of famous persons of that era, historical or fictional (and crossovers!).
> Actually, the tendency to introduce famous persons of the era is one
> of the more irritating aspects. It never seems to work. A
> non-steampunk film, /Dilili in Paris/, introduced so many of them that
> I got quite tired of the distraction from the story (which had its
> interesting points).
>
> OTOH, I rather enjoyed the references in the novel /Anno Dracula/.

Herm... well, I thought the idea that Vlad was going for Queen Victoria was brilliant, and the Ripper-like murderer of vampire prostitutes also good, bringing up the activities of all the members of the Wold-Newton family was a distraction from the horror. (That Doctor Moreau was trying to make animals human enough to use for blood is and interesting idea, but maybe a sequel.)

--
-Jack

On Sat, 24 Jul 2021 05:16:55 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
<jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:

>Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 05:23:26 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
>> <jack....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Paul S Person wrote:
>> >> The "Steampunk" I have experience with is a Japanese Animation genre,
>> >> and, for me, not a very satisfying one.
>> >>
>> >> Some of the trailers are enticing, though.
>> >
>> >What entices? What does not satisfy?
>> The trailers entice. They make the films look attractive, at least to
>> me.
>
>Well, that is their job.
>
>> The films do not satisfy. I did not find them as attractive as the
>> trailers promised. And I don't think I liked the stories very much
>> either, although, after all this time, it is hard to tell.
>
>Alas, with films the only promise you can rely on is the running time.
>
>> And just changing everything to steam power doesn't really work for
>> me. That isn't something new; it's something current and up-to-date
>> that is drawn oddly. Not badly (they are well-enough done), but oddly.
>
>Indeed. There should be thought into how things would be done differently.
>(I'm thinking there was a clever reference to some type of peripheral to a mechanical computer, but it's not coming to mind.)
>
>> >Further adventures of famous persons of that era, historical or fictional (and crossovers!).
>> Actually, the tendency to introduce famous persons of the era is one
>> of the more irritating aspects. It never seems to work. A
>> non-steampunk film, /Dilili in Paris/, introduced so many of them that
>> I got quite tired of the distraction from the story (which had its
>> interesting points).
>>
>> OTOH, I rather enjoyed the references in the novel /Anno Dracula/.
>
>Herm... well, I thought the idea that Vlad was going for Queen Victoria was brilliant, and the Ripper-like murderer of vampire prostitutes also good, bringing up the activities of all the members of the Wold-Newton family was a distraction from the horror. (That Doctor Moreau was trying to make animals human enough to use for blood is and interesting idea, but maybe a sequel.)

Interestingly, in the actual sequel, /The Bloody Red Baron/, I found
the references less enjoyable.

There was a third novel but, when I looked for it, I couldn't find it.
At the time, though, I wasn't doing Kindle, so I was looking for it on
paper.

Perhaps its simply a difference in culture: English (British) literary
names vs French literary names -- IOW, names I recognized vs names I
did not.

I did recognize the names /Dilili in Paris/, however. It was just too
much, too often, too conveniently.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."