Live data from Hacker News

Collapse OS

collapseos.org

281–290 of 323 posts

Re: Collapse OS

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, no. I can’t believe it’s gotten this bad. I’m amazed we haven’t done much in the way of climate change control. It’s going to be too late very, very soon.

> It’s going to be too late very, very soon. Sorry to ruin this for you, but it is already too late. We are already in the process of damage control.

Isn't our best course of action to achieve technological progress and fix the situation instead of 'preventing' it?

Like build dikes around low lying areas rather than trying to coordinate a worldwide slowdown of economic activity which faces the worst outcome of prisoner's dilemma.

Re: Collapse OS

#282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, in a worse-case scenario, it's much easier to build a Z80 by hand from individual transistors and/or logic gates¹ (which would still be absurdly difficult, but not impossible) than any ARM CPU (including the ones in any generation of RPi). In a slightly-less-than-worse-case scenario, it's much easier to build a Z80-based computer by hand (i.e. with a Z80 you pulled off some other piece of hardware) than your av…

Uhm.... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture#Acorn_RISC_Ma... says about 30.000 gates, which is 10.000 less than Motorola 68000 and arguably faster. [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zarch at least made us Amiga and AtariST geeks envious. Furthermore there is 'Microsequencer' like described there: [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsequencer and following up from there to for example [4] http://www.…

> says about 30.000 gates, which is 10.000 less than Motorola 68000 and arguably faster.

The Z80's at 9,000 transistors (not sure how many gates, but almost certainly a fraction of that transistor count), so even the Acorn would be heavy in comparison. Still doable, though; just takes more time.

In terms of speed, it has less to do with transistor count and more about how close together you can get the transistors. Big, hand-wired CPUs tend to be slower than small single-chip ones just from the sheer latency differences between components.

> One does not have to make an exact copy of something which made sense for arbitrary reasons, which don't necessarily apply when doing it from scratch under different circumstances.

True, and I ain't saying one does. If we're at the point where we have to hand-wire replacements, though, it helps to have at least some degree of compatibility with the thing we're replacing. There are at least some schematics out there for building 8-bit CPUs from TTL chips¹², and I'd imagine those would all be viable candidates if we have to re-bootstrap our computational power and run out of other CPUs to tide us over in the meantime.

Ideally we should be working on CollapseOS equivalents/ports for as many CPUs as possible, so that we know that no matter what we're stuck with, there's always a way to repurpose it. Just as importantly, though, we should be hoarding copies of pinout/wiring diagrams, hardware manuals, etc. to make sure we have the knowhow on the hardware side, too.

¹ http://cpuville.com/Kits/8-bit-processor-kit.html - happens to be bus-compatible with the Z80, though not ISA-compatible as far as I can tell.

² http://mycpu.thtec.org/www-mycpu-eu/index1.htm - more "modern" features like Ethernet and VGA out, so a more likely candidate for general purpose computing if we really do run out of Z80s to scavenge

Re: Collapse OS

#283
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just a few thousand Z80 instructions in assembly notation. You can print it on paper, store the listings somewhere safe and type the code in by hand just like in the old days.

Why is that possible in this fictional reality but stockpiling an RPi isn't?

I don’t think it’s any coincidence that this collapse brings computing down to an era which is many people’s personal computing heyday, and not a decade before or after.

I’d hazard a guess that 8-bit machines played a part in the author’s young life - first computer, first job, happiest childhood summer, last computer they felt in control of before they got annoyingly complex - something like that. And therefore a collapse ending right when the author would have useful skills but things wouldn’t be too hard, is the most fun one to imagine.

Computing was around 40 years before the 1980s and electricity for a hundred years, but who wants to try and rebuild room sized punched card machines for ballistic trajectory calculations, get greasy fingers on mechanical parts, or deal with HT electrical power supplies safely, yawn, no fun there. rPi the same - by then everyone can do it and author isn’t special, so whatever. It’s not different enough from right now.

Re: Collapse OS

#284
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or System 7 Unix, runs fine on a 16 bit processor, has proven history being easy to port, is a fully functional operating system, and would be pretty easy to retrofit some sort of networking to.

There are millions of millions of x86 computers and free software to run on them from any era. That should suffice for a collapsian civilization. Unless it's full on Mad Max post apocalyptic we're talking about.

Including Unix System 7, its been ported.

Though I suspect your right, PC DOS is very powerful, and allows you to do a bunch of stuff.

Re: Collapse OS

#285

I think some sort or retro low-performance OS should start with NeXTSTEP. Ryzen processors have 80MB of L3 cache! IIRC that may have been twice what was needed to run the colorized versions of NeXT. A lot of "man the old days were all we needed" recollections of Windows and DOS forget how crappy those OSes were... But NeXT? That was basically a modern OS, with a bit less anti-aliasing. XWindow systems STILL look horr…

NeXTSTEP basically became MacOSX when Apple merged MacOS with it. AROS is the next best OS to use as it has a low memory footprint and can run on X86 systems: http://aros.sourceforge.net/ If you want Windows try ReactOS: https://reactos.org/ OS/2 try OSFree: http://osfree.org/ BeOS try HaikuOS: https://www.haiku-os.org/ All are low memory OSes.

OSX is horribly bloated already. I want to add in things without the bloat.

Never heard of AROS...

ReactOS is bloated by definition of replicating windows, isn't it? It probably uses less than main windows, but it is just my opinion that the 1990-1997 period preceded some of the real bloat added due to the massive Moore's law gains after that with the GHz races.

OS/2 ... seems obscure to me but I never used it. But NeXT and Beos had revolutionary capabilities, I think OS/2 was basically just preemptive multitasking for Windows. Is that right?

BeOS, which I've never used, is probably also a good starting spot. HaikuOS probably has more oomph behind it community wise.

Re: Collapse OS

#286
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Practically speaking, you'd be better off with a stripped down Linux or BSD. Linux from the NeXTStep era (early 90's) could also run in a few megs of RAM. My first Linux box had 4 megs. I worked at a few early ISP's that tried setting up operations on NeXT boxes. They all moved to Solaris, FreeBSD, or Linux because though NeXT looked pretty, many of the API's were a bit off and you'd have much better luck building op…

Or System 7 Unix, runs fine on a 16 bit processor, has proven history being easy to port, is a fully functional operating system, and would be pretty easy to retrofit some sort of networking to.

But the NeXT UI was (IMO) the best UI of that stage of processing power.

Re: Collapse OS

#287

I think some sort or retro low-performance OS should start with NeXTSTEP. Ryzen processors have 80MB of L3 cache! IIRC that may have been twice what was needed to run the colorized versions of NeXT. A lot of "man the old days were all we needed" recollections of Windows and DOS forget how crappy those OSes were... But NeXT? That was basically a modern OS, with a bit less anti-aliasing. XWindow systems STILL look horr…

Interesting idea. But okay, how? Could you scribble down a proof of concept Quemu configuration in order to achieve it? Also where to get Next compiled for AMD64?

Decompile the old kernel? Yeah, definitely above my modest pay grade, and OpenStep was created to be more portable (but probably not open in the OSS sense). Hm, there is GNUStep

You are correct that one can't snap their fingers and create the community that even FreeBSD has. The last big corporate sponsor opportunity for this was the infant smartphones like the Palm Pre era (they owned Beos IP at that point I think) and early Android.

Re: Collapse OS

#288

I think some sort or retro low-performance OS should start with NeXTSTEP. Ryzen processors have 80MB of L3 cache! IIRC that may have been twice what was needed to run the colorized versions of NeXT. A lot of "man the old days were all we needed" recollections of Windows and DOS forget how crappy those OSes were... But NeXT? That was basically a modern OS, with a bit less anti-aliasing. XWindow systems STILL look horr…

Interesting idea. But okay, how? Could you scribble down a proof of concept Quemu configuration in order to achieve it? Also where to get Next compiled for AMD64?

Decompile the old kernel? Yeah, definitely above my modest pay grade, and OpenStep was created to be more portable (but probably not open in the OSS sense). Hm, there is GNUStep

You are correct that one can't snap their fingers and create the community that even FreeBSD has. The last big corporate sponsor opportunity for this was the infant smartphones like the Palm Pre era (they owned Beos IP at that point I think) and early Android.

Sigh, that reminds me that Beos should have been the foundation of OSX, if not for the exhorbitant buyout cost they were insisting on.

Re: Collapse OS

#289
post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar reasons are likely why they were in the TRS-80.

The TRS-80 was... not built for ruggedness and durability. At least not if you had a system with any peripherals; the cables were notoriously flaky, to the point that the problems are on record in the Wikipedia page, as an explanation for the "Trash-80" sobriquet. (I recall at the time seeing aftermarket recommendations for expensive cables and doing things like wrapping components in tinfoil to try to get some extra…

The system wasn't built for ruggedness. The chip had to be, because the system provided that ropey power supply previously mentioned and very few ancillary chips. It was a relatively inexpensive chip that one could build an even less expensive home computer around.

Re: Collapse OS

#290
post #277
post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> breakdown of the current economic system As the author themselves admits, this requires a very narrow band of Goldilocks catastrophe. Not catastrophic enough that you still have electricity, but catastrophic enough that all the plants on this list are destroyed or rendered unusable or embargoed from you? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabricat... How is that going to work exactly? No, it's a fa…

> but catastrophic enough that all the plants on this list are destroyed or rendered unusable All the fabs on your list are fairly modern, and it is easy to see how they would be impossible to maintain in a Tainter-style collapse. I would be looking into what you can do with ~1 um processes, which are currently accessible to amateurs. E.g. designs like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11720289

Tainter-style collapse over what time period, though? One of his examples seems to be the Roman Empire, which depending on how you measure it took over a hundred years.
Post reply on HN