I've written recently on the untimely death of Moore's Law and on one of the first side-effects of the faltering and failure of that law. But, being somewhat dead myself, I didn't have the time or energy to go into any detail, and probably left my less-geeky readers saying something along the lines of Huh?

But this is important, so I'm going to give it another try.

Way back in 1965, just four years after the first integrated circuit was built, Gordon Moore, then working at Fairchild, made an observation and a prediction.

His observation was that the number of components in an integrated circuit was increasing, while the cost of each component was decreasing; his prediction was that this trend would continue. Intel has made his original paper available for you to read. It's a little bit complicated; Moore is talking about trends in the number of elements in a integrated circuit required to achieve the minimum cost per component - efficiencies of scale, in other words.

Reduced cost is one of the big attractions of integrated
electronics, and the cost advantage continues to increase as
the technology evolves toward the production of larger and
larger circuit functions on a single semiconductor substrate.
For simple circuits, the cost per component is nearly inversely
proportional to the number of components, the result of the
equivalent piece of semiconductor in the equivalent package
containing more components. But as components are added,
decreased yields more than compensate for the increased
complexity, tending to raise the cost per component. Thus
there is a minimum cost at any given time in the evolution of
the technology. At present, it is reached when 50 components
are used per circuit. But the minimum is rising rapidly
while the entire cost curve is falling (see graph below). If we
look ahead five years, a plot of costs suggests that the minimum
cost per component might be expected in circuits with
about 1,000 components per circuit (providing such circuit
functions can be produced in moderate quantities.) In 1970,
the manufacturing cost per component can be expected to be
only a tenth of the present cost.

The complexity for minimum component costs has increased
at a rate of roughly a factor of two per year (see
graph on next page). Certainly over the short term this rate
can be expected to continue, if not to increase. Over the
longer term, the rate of increase is a bit more uncertain, although
there is no reason to believe it will not remain nearly
constant for at least 10 years. That means by 1975, the number
of components per integrated circuit for minimum cost
will be 65,000.

I believe that such a large circuit can be built on a single
wafer.

Events since then have proved him right (and happily he is still around to enjoy it). And more right than he imagined because not only have the components been getting smaller and cheaper, but at the same time they have been getting faster and using less power. And this has been going on, following a curve where (to take the most widely noted example) processing power has been doubling every 18 months. For my entire life processing power has been doubling roughly every 18 months.

My first computer, which I bought as a teenager, saving pocket money every week until the day of the Big! Christmas! Sale! was a Tandy (Radio Shack to many) Colour Computer. It had 16k of ROM (which contained the BASIC interpreter; there was no operating system as such) and 16k of RAM. It was powered by a Motorola 6809 processor and a 6847 video chip. It had a maximum resolution of 256 by 192 - in black and white - or 16 lines of 32 columns in text mode.

It ran at 895kHz.

Yes, boys and girls, kiloherz. It was an 8 bit chip (with a few 16-bit tricks up its sleeve, admittedly); it could execute, at most, one instruction each cycle, and it ran at less than a megahertz. (Also, it had no disk drives at all; everything was stored on cassette tape, which fact is directly responsible for the irretrievable loss of my version of Star Trek and the completely original game Cheese Mites.)

Not quite twenty years on, I'm typing this on a system with a 2.6 gigahertz 32-bit processor than can execute as many as three instructions per cycle, some of which can perform multiple operations like doing 4 16-bit multiply-accumulates all at once. It has more level-one cache than my Colour Computer had total memory. Its front-side bus is eight times as wide and nearly a thousand times as fast. My display is running at 1792 by 1344 in glorious 24-bit colour. And it has six hundred and fifty gigabytes of disk.*

It cost a bit more, it's true. My 1984 Colour Computer cost me $199.95, and Kei, my 2003 Windows XP box, cost me around $2000. The best I can do today for $199.95 (ignoring for the moment two decades of inflation and the fact that this now represents a morning's earnings rather than a year's) is a Nintendo Gamecube. The Gamecube only runs at 485MHz (achieving a measly 1125 MIPS); it only has 40MB of memory; it only has 1.5GB of storage. Its peak floating-point performance is a mere 10.5 GFLOPS, compared to the Colour Computer's... I don't know, exactly, since the CoCo had no floating-point hardware at all, and I doubt that the software emulation achieved so much as 10.5 kiloFLOPS.

So, depending on exactly what you wish to measure, 20 years of innovation has given us somewhere between a thousand and a million times better value for money.

And here it is again: This has been going on for my entire life. Every year, tick tick tick, new and better and faster and cheaper. You buy the latest and greatest and it's obsolete before you get home from the mall. It's so much a part of our lives that it's a joke, a cliche.

And it just died. [That last link goes to an IBM presentation, the first 13 pages of which are just general marketing material, but pages 14 to 24 go right to the heart of the problem.]

The death of Moore's Law has been predicted many times, not least by Moore himself, but when you get IBM's Chief Technology Officer saying

Scaling is already dead but nobody noticed it had stopped breathing and its lips had turned blue.

And everything was planned so neatly too. 90 nanometres was to come on line late '03, ramping up this year; 65 nanometres was to be the big thing of '05, followed by 45 nanometres in '07. Now, beyond that, at 30 nanometres and 20 nanometres, things were less clear, and beyond 20 nanometres not clear at all, but at least the path was marked out from the old 130 nanometre stuff down to 45, giving us 9 times the transistors and 3 times the speed. Only someone forgot to check with the laws of physics.

Wired: How long will Moore's Law hold?

Moore:

It'll go for at least a few more generations of technology. Then, in about a decade, we're going to see a distinct slowing in the rate at which the doubling occurs. I haven't tried to estimate what the rate will be, but it might be half as fast - three years instead of eighteen months.

What will cause the slowdown?

We're running into a barrier that we've run up against several times before: the limits of optical lithography. We use light to print the patterns of circuits, and we're reaching a point where the wavelengths are getting into a range where you can't build lenses anymore. You have to switch to something like X rays.

So what? Electricity is cheap. Well, the so what is heat. Modern microprocessors use as much electricity as a light bulb, and that means they produce just as much heat. If they didn't have huge heat sinks and fans bolted onto them, they'd very quickly overheat and fail - a fact that some people have inadvertantly discovered.

Until now, each new generation of scaling, each new node, has brought smaller, faster, cheaper and cooler transistors. At 90 nanometres, transistors are smaller, cheaper, probably faster again - but they run hotter. And the competition in the processor market has already driven power consumption (and heat generation) about as high as it can go. So when the new generation was discovered to increase the heat rather than decrease it, the whole forty-year process of accelerating change ran head-first into a wall.

Back at the end of 2002, I made the following set of predictions for the coming year. I felt pretty comfortable in all of them, the first no less than any of the others:

My predictions for 2003:

1. Microprocessors will hit 4GHz by the end of the year. Marketers will try and largely fail to convince the public to buy them.
2. A major scientific breakthrough will lead to a new and deeper understanding of something.
3. A major political scandal will result in a huge media kerfuffle and only die down when someone resigns.
4. There will be a war.
5. Bad weather will affect the lives of millions of people.
6. There will not be any major, civilisation-destroying meteor impacts.
7. Astronomers will find new and interesting things in the sky.
8. Spam, pop-ups and viruses will continue to plague us. The Internet will fail to collapse under the strain. Pundits will predict that this will now happen in 2004.
9. A rocket will explode either on the launch pad or early in its flight, destroying its expensive payload - which will turn out to be uninsured.
10. Cod populations in European waters will continue to fall, and the European parliament will fail to act to prevent this.
11. A new species of mammal will be discovered.
12. A species of reptile or amphibian will be reported as extinct.

Now, assuming you're not a hard-core computer gamer, hanging out for the release of Doom 3 and Half-Life 2, why should you care?

Well if you have broadband internet, or a mobile phone, or a DVD player, or a PDA, or a notebook computer, or a digital camera (or a digital video camera), or you use GPS on your camping trips, or you enjoy the low cost of long-distance phone calls these days, if you download anime or the latest episode of Angel off the net, if take your iPod with you everywhere you go, if your job or your hobby involves using e-mail or looking things up on the Web, you can thank Moore's Law for it.

Modern communications depend critically on advanced signal processing techniques, performed by specialised chips called Digital Signal Processors, or DSPs. These things are everywhere - every modem, every mobile or cordless phone, every digital camera, every TV or VCR or DVD player, every stereo, every disk drive. It's the relentless advance of Moore's Law that has made DSPs fast enough and cheap enough to do all this, and made them efficient enough to run on batteries so well that your mobile phone might last a week between charging. (My first mobile was lucky to make it through the day.) Disk drives demand high-speed DSPs to sort out the signals coming from the magnetic patterns on the disk and turn them back into the original data. DVD players need them to turn the tiny pits pressed into the aluminium surface into a picture. The entire global telephone network, mobile and fixed, depends on DSPs. And any advances in any of these areas will require more and faster and cheaper DSPs and - uh-oh.

And there's more: The advances in computers and communications over the past four decades have been the primary driver of the global economy. The economy has been growing all that time, even though we have made no fundamental breakthroughs in finding new resources or new materials. If you're better off than your parents, you can thank Moore's Law for a big chunk of that - if not the effort you put in, then the new opportunities it opened up.

And it just died.

I don't think the financial markets have a clue yet what's going on, but in any case it's going to be a soft landing. All of the processor manufacturers have been in a mad rush over the last decade to produce faster chips at the expense of pretty much anything else. The funny thing is that they've been pushing so hard, they've left a lot of things behind. Take a look at this chart:

int fp
base base
1076 763 Pentium M 1.6GHz
805 635 Pentium M 1.1GHz
237 148 C3 1.0GHz (C5XL)
398 239 Celeron 1.2GHz (FSB100)
543 481 Athlon XP Barton 1.1GHz (FSB100 DDR)
581 513 Athlon XP Thoroughbred-B 1.35GHz (FSB100 DDR)
1040 909 Athlon XP 3200+ (Barton 2.2GHz, FSB200 DDR)
1276 1382 Pentium 4 3.0E GHz Prescott (FSB800), numbers from spec.org
1329 1349 Pentium 4 3.2E GHz Prescott (FSB800)
560 585 Athlon 64 3200+ 0.8GHz 1MB L2
1257 1146 Athlon 64 3200+ 2GHz 1MB L2

The Pentium M is a modified version of the Pentium III, customised for notebook computers. Since notebook computers run off batteries, and batteries don't hold much power at all, the Pentium M has been tweaked to provide as much speed as possible while using as little power as possible. The Pentium 4, on the other hand, is designed for speed at the expense of everything else. And what we find is that the 3.2GHz Pentium 4, despite having twice the clock speed of the 1.6GHz Pentium M, is just 25% faster on integer (useful work) and 75% faster on floating point (games).

And - here's the tricky bit, and the cause of Intel's recent and dramatic change in direction - the Pentium 4 uses four times as much power as the Pentium M. So if, instead of putting one Pentium 4 onto a chip, you put four Pentium Ms, it would use the same amount of power and produce the same amount of heat, but it would run up to three times as fast... Overall.

Which is great and wonderfuly if you can use four processors at once. I can, quite happily, and more than that. A word processor can't, not easily, but then word processors already run pretty well. Games, and other graphics-intensive stuff like Photoshop or 3D animation software certainly can, though most games haven't been written to do so. Not yet.

But they will. That's the next paradigm shift for programming, by necessity: Everything will be multithreaded. And it won't stop at two threads, or four. AMD has just announced the new Geode NX. It's a 1GHz processor that runs on just 6 watts of power, around a tenth as much the power-hungry monsters inside today's high-end desktops... Which run at around 3GHz, and would be stomped into the dirt, aggregate-performance-wise, by a chip with ten Geode NX cores on it.**

Apart from more cores, we can also expect cores that do more in one cycle. We've already started to see this with Intel's MMX and SSE, Motorola's Altivec and AMD's 3DNow, all of which are designed to take a 64-bit or 128-bit register and use it to perform multiple 8-bit, 16-bit, or 32-bit operations in one go.

The advantage of these instructions is that many DSP algorithms for video and audio applications - like MP3 files, or DVD video - only require 8 or 16 bit values, but modern processors are designed with 64-bit registers for doing floating-point arithmetic. If you can subdivide that register and do eight 8-bit calculations at once, you can get through the work eight times as fast - or you can run at one eighth the clock speeed, and use a fraction of the power.

The Intrinsity Fastmath LP, like the Geode NX, runs at 1GHz and draws 6 watts of power. Unlike the Geode, it is a single-issue in-order core, which makes it smaller and simpler, but also slower.

On the other hand, it has a 4x4 matrix of 32-bit arithmetic units, each of which can hold two 16-bit elements. It can perform 16 billion multiply-and-add operations (the core of many DSP algorithms) per second - which puts it equal to a dual 2GHz G5 Macintosh. (And Intrinsity have a 2.5GHz version of the Fastmath too, only it uses more than 6 watts.)

I have a Sony Vaio mini-notebook; it has a 733MHz Transmeta Crusoe processor. It's kind of slow, and when I try to play the opening sequence of Jungle wa Itsumo Hale nochi Guu on it, it pretty much freezes up. That could be fixed by using a big, power-hungry Pentium 4 processor (like my desktop), but then I'd have a battery life of about five minutes. If instead Transmeta included a matrix processing unit like Intrinsity's - and someone wrote a video codec that used it - I could watch the whole video without dropping frames, and without being tethered to by desk by a power cord.

The chip for Sony's upcoming Playstation 3, known as the Cell, takes this even further - judging from the patent applications, anyway; little technical information has been released. It has four cores on the chip; four effectively independent processors. Each of these cours has eight vector units attached to it, and each of those vector units is capable of processing 128 bits at a time - four 32-bit calculations, or 8 16-bit ones, or 16 8-bit ones. And you can be pretty sure that it can multiply-and-add in one go. So in a single cycle, it can perform as many as 16 times 8 times 4 times 2 = 1024 operations.

Which is rather a lot.

What's more, it's called the Cell because it's designed to be hooked up to other Cells in large networks, all working together. Which should make Dead or Alive 5 visually impressive, to say the least.

There's an article on lithography in April's Scientific American, and it plots the trend for CPU speeds forwards as far as 2020... Assuming that the trend continues as it has. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem like it will happen any more, and we won't be seeing 50GHz processors after all, at least not from conventional silicon chips.

Which is bad news for the people making those conventional silicon chips. But it's good news for designers of unusual devices like the Fastmath. And it's good news for programmers, because all those single-threaded applications are going to have to be re-written.

One of the regulars on the newsgroup comp.arch noted some time ago that even if Moore's Law failed tomorrow, we'd still have a factor of ten in performance improvements up our sleeve, because today's processors are designed to make it easy for programs to run fairly quickly, rather than to simply deliver the maximum theoretical performance. It's a trade-off, and it's been the right choice until now.

And now it's time to roll up our sleeves.

* That's dedicated disk; we'll set aside the terabyte or so living in the file server.
** And the Geode NX is a full Athlon core too, so you're not losing anything: It's still packed with 3-issue out-of-order-execution goodness.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 08:12 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 3494 words, total size 22 kb.

Laughing Wolf, Laughing Wolf, where have you been?
Trapped in my spam filter? Languished unseen?
Sprung free from the trap, he sinks his jaws -
Not into me, but the Old Media, of course.

Alas, poor Helen,
I know her well.
What happened to her entry
Only Mozilla can tell.

And whatever her name is,
And who she might be,
Is for her to decide -
Not the phone company.

(And from 2:01 to 2:03
She can call Malaysia for a pound a minute.
Sounds like a good deal to me
I doubt there's any money in it.)

At the bottom of the garden, down behind the rusty shed,
Is a spamtrap made entirely out of glass.
It mostly does its job and leaves the spam completely dead,
But every now and then it bites me in the arse.

The Watcher of Weasels was stuck in the trap,
Whence I'd already pulled Laughing Wolf out,
His post takes on people with minds full of nonsense,
Who ought to be slapped with a large fish.

King of Fools brings us the sad story
Of a marine, two reporters, and 7% diversity.

Dissecting Leftism takes on a difficult word,
Greenie Watch says 7 billion will now go unheard,
And PC Watch reports something yet more absurd.

Northstar reports on a maritime disaster...
Only he slept through the whole thing and didn't find out about it until after.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 06:07 AM | No Comments | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 285 words, total size 3 kb.

Now, I'm a shallow sort of guy, and I read Shirow's work mainly for the hot anime chicks, but in GitS (as it is known) he does raise some important questions. In a not so distant future where people are often part machine and part computer, what does it mean to be human?

And beyond that, what does it mean to be a thinking being, and what does it mean to be alive? As a mechanistic atheist engineer, Den Beste finds these questions important, and difficult, and troubling.

I'm also a mechanistic atheist engineer* and I also find these questions important - but not difficult or troubling. That's because I've worked out what the answers are. And that's because I've argued the point with a number of people who aren't mechanistic atheist engineers. Of course, they think I'm wrong, and I think they're crazy, but that's not the main point here.

Den Beste asks, Is a virus alive?, and confesses he doesn't know. To me there is one obvious, clear, simple, and comprehensive answer, and it is sort of.

A virus is sort of alive. For any useful definition of life, salt, for example, pure sodium chloride, or, say, hydrogen gas in its ground state, are not alive. For any useful definition of life, people, cows, cats** and fish are alive.

I'm quite comfortable with saying that amoebas are alive, and bacteria too. Individual isolated proteins aren't alive, not really. And viruses are sort of alive.

It's the argument from utility really; as Den Beste himself has put it, It is what it does. Does a virus act like life? Well, it does, sort of. So it is sort of alive.

Some people don't like this; they want a yes/no answer, a knife-edge division between life and unlife. To them, I say: Tough. Neither life nor the Universe owes you an easy answer. Why should life be a binary property, any more than, for example, intelligence, or complexity?

The same argument also solves*** the even trickier questions of the conscious mind. Is there actually an identifiable self with continuity of existence which is typing these words? asks the engineer. Well, yes, there is. In the same sense that the surface of this table is solid, Steven Den Beste is a real, identifiable, continuous entity.

Of course, at an atomic and subatomic scale the table is mostly empty space. And at a low enough level, consciousness is just Physics. But that doesn't matter, because it still works. This keyboard is not going to fall through the table, and the fact that it is a big blob of atoms doing the thinking in my head does not contradict Descartes' Cogito ergo sum.

* Well, more or less. I'm a computer programmer, so I have aspirations towards engineering, and try to apply the principles of engineering to my craft.
** Most cats. Not Schroedinger's, and not dead ones.
*** For a sufficiently small value of "solves".

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 05:39 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 526 words, total size 3 kb.

I still buy New Scientist because, although the information is available online, I'd have to spend a great deal of time digging it out. It's worth the few dollars I spend to have the staff of New Scientist to seek out the latest news and compile the magazine for me. I pay them to be editors, really, rather than writers.

Which is why it's particularly galling when their editors run off the rails. They're generally pretty good with science, a little weaker on environmental matters - there's a clear bias there that assumes that bad news is intrinsically more reliable than good news, and pretty much hopeless on politics, being a bunch of unreconstructed lefties.

But I still don't expect them to be pushing the hokey old line from Frankenstein that there are some things Man is not meant to know. And yet, this weeks editorial on choosing the gender of your baby, titled Boy or girl? Best leave it to chance, sums up as follows:

Increasingly, reproductive science is taking us beyond the limits of nature. On the grounds of safetey and the unknown societal impact such novel technologies could have, governments surely have a responsibility to regulate. Needless meddling is never good, but in this case drawing the line as to who can use the technology might be the least intrusive move of all.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 12:10 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 315 words, total size 2 kb.

The place to send your submissions is carnival@jessicaswell.com. Neatest correct entry wins a prize!

Well, and all the other entries too.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 07:18 PM | No Comments | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 51 words, total size 1 kb.

From far across the Blogosphere
The finest work we've deftly pluck'd;
(While we left for the Bonfire here
The posts that we thought, frankly, were not quite good enough to be worthy of bringing to your attention.)
The words are music to your ear;
(The ones that weren't, you'll note, we chucked.)
We hunted far, we hunted near,
A finer showcase to construct.

These shining jewels we bring to you;
The Web we scoured for rarities -
Despite a dose of Martian Flu
And RAID-5's failing parities.
Here's unicorns! And mermaids too!
No donkeys now, nor manatees.
So let's begin; without ado
The Carnival of the Vanities!

Jeff Doolittle (dot com)
Seeks ubiquitous high speed connection;
With a little spectral freedom
He sees a positive economic inflection.

Ann is at the Fuse Box
Studying labour statistics,
She looks at the numbers (as does Fox)
And reports on Kerry's poor twist tricks.¹

My favourite Canadian ethereal insect
Would have to be Ghost of a Flea;
When I visit his blog I never know quite what to expect
Which is exactly how it should be.

Today he offers us maxims
For surviving converse on the 'Net;
Built from undeniable axioms,
I'm sure they'll be proved, but not yet.

Kevin at the Smallest Minority
Asks are we headed for Civil War?
I sure hope not, but I²
Think some people have a lot to answer for.

Answerman remembers Ronald Reagan
Actor, governor, president;
Anyone but a hippy neo-pagan
Should admire what the man represents.

Karol of Spot On (yes I know the URL says Alarming News)
Talks to us of Girls, Girls, Girls.
Now pay attention to her views -
Because sometimes blogging is like casting swine before pearls.

And over at Patriot Paradox
Nick comes out of the starting box,
With a post comparing Liberals and Conservatives.
I personally prefer Liberals because they contain only natural ingredients and no preservatives.

Quibbles-N-Bits! Quibbles-N-Bits!
Alas, it's a blog not a cereal;
Reports that Harvey has cashed in his chits³
But I somehow suspect it's not real.

Jon of QandO has a report
That the wedding party was nothing of the sort.
No bride? No dancing? No Hava Nagila?
No half-empty bottles of cut-price tequila?

Susie, Susie, a lithium smoothie
Has never tasted sweeter;
She's just so groovy, she can screen us a movie
Using nothing more than a flashlight, an old bedsheet, two pie plates, half a dozen coathangers, and a broken egg-beater.
She tells us her woes, makes Harvey propose
With her wicked sense of humour.
Then nails Evil Glenn, yet again, yet again,
With the latest scurrilous rumour.

Linda talks of separation
And how painful it can be,
And how there's two sides to every situation
And sometimes even three.

CD isn't semi-intelligent -
That's just the name of his blog
This is satire at its most relevant:
ACLU's 'bout as smart as a log.

A change of pace, to fill some space,
Madfish Willie presents his Ultimate Salsa
Don't eat it all at once, it makes 15 gallons, you dunce!
And with five pounds of Jalapeno Poppers⁴ you'd probably end up with an ulcer.

Wally from Irreconcilable Musings
Is back from California,
Where he has been visiting his grandmother
And for some reason my electronic rhyming dictionary seems to have crashed.⁵

Bussorah Merchant
Has a Wicked Thought
About a government
Cat what don't behave as it ought.

Pietro of The Smarter Cup Cop
Notes that others seriously need to grow up.

Sorge, a new blogger, at Total War
Explains to us what freedom's for.

By night the Cheesemistress of Chaos
But by day she's the Candyfloss Fairy.
Her cow-orkers don't know Lesotho from Laos,
And they couldn't spell "irony" with the help of a Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.

Jennifer, Jennifer, trolls should beware of her,
How does your history grow?
With notable quotes and the choicest bon motes
And dead presidents all in a row.

Bill Adams comes from Idler Yet
With a detailed and enlightened post
On links between the Saudi set
And those people whom we count on most.

Peaktalk too bids sad farewell
To Ronald Reagan, 93,
Where e'er he's gone, we wish him well;
A finer man you rarely see.

Jim comes to us from Snoozebutton Dreams
Where nothing whatever is quite what it seems.
The Bestofme Symphony strains at the seams -
Don't touch it lest you end up covered in memes!

At Zero Intelligence
School Knows Best
You'd think before they became teachers
These people would have to pass some kind of test.

Chicken is as chicken does
Cranial Cavity takes off the gloves.
(After all, you can't lick your fingers if you're wearing gloves.)

Last but not least, from DCGI
Thoughts on life without electricity
No computer! No modem! No internet too!
I'll just save this post before something goes p

At Quantico, Virginia,
Is another National Cemetary
Ted from Rocket Jones reports to us,
Our cultural emissary.

John Moore of Useful Fools
Shows us some dangerous political operatives
Dangerous at least to those far-left tools,
Who really could do with a sedative.

And Simon returns from his travels,
With a review of the movie Cold Mountain,
Not so bad that his brain quite unravels,
But I'll stick with Three Coins in the Fountain.

And whatever her name is,
And who she might be,
Is for her to decide -
Not the phone company.

(And from 2:01 to 2:03
She can call Malaysia for a pound a minute.
Sounds like a good deal to me
I doubt there's any money in it.⁷)

The Watcher of Weasels was stuck in the trap,
Whence I'd already pulled Laughing Wolf out,
His post takes on people with minds full of nonsense,
And who ought to be slapped with a large fish.

Dissecting Leftism takes on a difficult word,
Greenie Watch says 7 billion will now go unheard,
And PC Watch reports something yet more absurd.

Northstar reports on a maritime disaster...
Only he slept through the whole thing and didn't find out about it until after.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 10:46 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 1352 words, total size 12 kb.

Update: Still working on it. Darn you Tiger, it's your fault for setting such a high standard!

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 06:10 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 01:23 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 7 words, total size 1 kb.

A niggling suspicion and a quick Google gave me the answer: The machines are using EBCDIC. EBCDIC! In 2004! Anyway, this handy chart shows that an O in EBCDIC is binary 11010110, whereas an F is 11000110. So if that fourth line is broken, Os turn into Fs.

Now, the display normally alternates between OPEN and NO CONCESSIONS when it's not actually in use, so instead this morning it read FPEG and FG CGFCESSIGFS.

This brightened my day immeasurably.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 06:16 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 139 words, total size 1 kb.

Send them to carnival@pixymisa.com and I'll make sure that something good happens to them.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 07:47 PM | No Comments | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.