Windows 93

[yogi]

Do you remember Windows 93?
I don't either.
Here's a link to it on the web: http://www.windows93.net/
seems to be fullly functional

[Kellemora]

Wow, they must have 20,000 midi files in there, and thousands of ASCII art images.
It did not have a couple of the midi files that Win95 had, so predates that version.
Probably never released if it even really existed, hi hi.

Somebody just had way too much time on their hands, hi hi.

[yogi]

I didn't do the research to find out if Micorsoft ever released a Windows 93, but I'm guessing it's unlikely. There was no Internet back then, so if there was a Win 93 it certainly didn't have website capability. It is an interesting site nonetheless and it does look plausible. It certainly captures the spirit of that era if not the actual binary coding. LOL

We have come a long way, baby.

[Kellemora]

A couple of years ago, I ran across a website that looked just like something out of around 1910 or 1920.
The guy probably got the idea from old newspaper ads of the era, and decided to duplicate them as a website.
It was very convincing also. The very first time I visited it, I thought it was an antique dealer, but then I noticed the prices.
It was very similar to what Amazon looks like today, with links to spec lists and the whole nine yards.
I tried to copy something from it, and all you ended up with was a blurry box image of which you couldn't tell what it was.
You could capture it using print screen but the quality was super poor, so they must have done something to make it not work right for anyone.
I did try every trick I knew to get a decent copy of the image I wanted. Nothing worked.
I don't remember what the item was, but I'm thinking it was something I've told folks about, but never saw a photo of one.

So, when are you getting Quantum Computer with AI Yogi? hi hi.

[yogi]

I doubt that quantum computers will be available for home use any time soon, if ever. AI, however, is here already. Windows 11 is using it and no doubt some of those online games you play have it built in as well. My Android clever phone brags about it, and when I do upgrade that it will be more Intelligent than I am. Fortunately it's intelligence will be artificial. Whatever that means.

The new ASUS laptop is what prevents me from upgrading the tower these days. The budget I intended to use on a new tower/desktop had to be expended on the laptop. I have to say I am becoming more impressed with it as time goes on, not all due to the operating system either. Windows is working well on that machine, but Windows can do way more than I have a need or ability to do. I'm debating whether or not I want to put Linux on the hard drive of the laptop. The Linux On A Stick versions seem to be working just as well as if they were installed on the SSD. The only problem there is I might need to use bigger memory sticks to accommodate some of those more resource intensive OS's. That's just a matter of buying a few 128GB sticks. Then I will have not just 2 versions of Linux running along side of Windows, but a dozen versions running separately.

Sad to say, however, the old laptop, that MSI machine with the sticky "L" key, might just end up as fodder for the recycle bin. I finally got one guy to inquire about the GPU, but the one in the laptop is a lower level than the one he already has. I guess he liked the price but didn't want to sacrifice quality. I'm pretty sure if I offered it with Windows 11 installed (instead of Linux Mint) and the "L" key was not broken, it would go in a flash. I'm not sure what I'll do with it at this point.


UPDATE:
Shortly after I posted the above comments I received a request from an interested party regarding the MSI I had advertised. The aberrant "L" key was not a problem for him and he came right over with a handful of cash for which I gave him the laptop. Personally I find this all hard to believe, but am very relieved to be rid of the old machine which apparently will bring happiness into the life of some kid.

[Kellemora]

If you have a Schmartz-Fone with a Flashlight. You can say LUMOS to turn it on and NOX to turn it off again.
I tested it on my wife's Schmartz-Fone and it worked. Then I researched it and found those come from the Occult aka Harry Potter, hi hi.

I think what they call AI is more or less what they call 3D, neither of which are the correct terms for either.
In fact, once REAL 3D is developed so we have monitors or devices that display same, since 3D has already been used for 2D animation, what are they going to call REAL 3D?

Nah, a major computer manufacturer stated, No One will Ever Need more than 8K of memory, hi hi.
Heck, even 8 gigs is not enough anymore. I got by for years on 2 gigs, and then 4 gigs.
If I live long enough to need another computer, it will probably have to have 32 gigs, just in order to be able to run, hi hi.
But as far a SSD drives go. I think they will fade away fairly fast. Something better that lasts longer and can be reliable will come along. They may be fast, but not useful for permanent or archival storage. Also, the cloud is sounding less and less reliable now too. Glad I kept all of my old IDE drives, hi hi

Well, I'm glad you got rid of the laptop! Just curious, did you try it with an external keyboard to see if the L key worked then?
I see more and more people using keyboards with their laptops now, which is good health wise for them.

[yogi]

They tell me my new glasses (not shown in my avatar) are Harry Potter style. I got them because they reminded me of George Burns. Regardless, I never read any of Harry Potter and knew nothing about LUMOS nor NOX until you educated me right here in these forums. Of course I had to try out what you said and my Google Pixel, an android camera with a phone attachment, did in fact turn on the flashlight as predicted. Not only that, but I did not have to unlock the phone to get it to work. Thank you my friend for the illumination.

what are they going to call REAL 3D?

Currently it's referred to as holograms and Windows has an app for that. Their software is targeted at developers who like to use Windows and create 3D apparatus. Who would have thought?

I think the artificial part of AI is a reference to the fact that a silicon chip is doing the same kind of logical thinking as would an organic human being. One of the more interesting research projects I read about is a group at MIT is teaching its AI machine to have feelings and experience emotions. I can't imagine how a desktop would use that kind of ability, but I do know of people who would buy a female type robot that could love them. No, I'm not kidding.

Yeah, it's pretty funny to think 8K of memory was the cutting edge at one time. Then again, Bill Gates didn't think we would ever need more than 640k to run an operating system. Good thing he was flexible enough to change his mind at a later date.

[Kellemora]

The first time Debi tried it, she said Siri first, so it didn't work, just gave her the info about Harry Potter.
Once she knew those commands came from there, she don't use them.
She does have to turn on voice activation, but then it worked just fine saying just the one word.
Her screen showed a message, Torch On, or Torch Off, hi hi.
If it's a torch, you should be able to solder with it I would think, hi hi.

They have a REAL 3D display at ORNL. You can't get Real 3D on a 2D device.
Albeit you can scroll around 360 degrees, but all you are still seeing is a 2D image rotated, which is not 3D.
You can get the illusion of depth on a computer screen, or in a photo or painting for that matter.
But the 3D box at ORNL you can walk around climb a few steps and look down on it, etc.
They had several different things they could project in the box, some were quite interesting to see also.

You know the model T they have at Smithsonian all taken apart and suspended by wires?
They had nearly the same thing, only no wires, and all the parts were apart, and you could walk around it too and see things you don't see on the one at the Smithsonian.

I do know they are working on AI that can learn things by itself. It's amazing, but I hope it never gets out of hand!

Touring the computer facilities out at ORNL is really something to see.
But watching the video's and playing with experiments on the public computers is where the phun comes in.
Except you can't install your own programs, just select from the ones they have for visitors to see what they do.
For a while, they had a cartoon like display showing how data traveled through the system.
It showed a character scanning the keyboard for a key press, and when you did, you saw the channels it followed through the computer, through the CPU to the ways it is saved in memory and then displayed on the screen.
It took maybe five whole minutes to see it display "Welcome to ORNL" and it showed how different things on the screen were generated. Now in a computer, this is all instant. But in the video it had cartoon characters doing the work, hi hi.
Such as toting the signal, poking it into the CPU then running back to carry another letter signal, hi hi.
It was cute and informative at the same time.

[yogi]

I'm not certain what you mean by "real 3D" but I do know holograms allow for viewing from all angles with proper perspective and scale. The big thing these days is augmented reality which involves wearing something like ski goggles and interacting with what you see. The images are projected onto the lenses but the actions you take are true 3D. You can walk all the way around the object and it will respond to your interactions, such as pushing it, which holograms cannot do.

I would be disappointed if ORNL didn't have something spectacular for it's visitors to interact with. They are the showcase of our nation after all. I have a fair understanding of what goes on inside a computer, but as they say a picture is worth a thousand words. A cartoon can say it all even better. Since I've been to places like Argonne and Fermi, I don't know if ORNL would be any more interesting. Then, too, it's been dozens of years since I did those visits. It might we worth a trip to see what they are up to these days.

[Kellemora]

Anything displayed on view screen is only a 2D image.
Now you can take an 8mm camera and record a roll of images on 2D film, while walking around the object you are filming.
But that film is still 2D and the screen you project it on is also 2D.
You watch the movie the guy made being projected on the 2D screen.
Even though he filmed a circle around the 3D object, doesn't make the image you are seeing projected on the screen 3D.
In the case of computers, you can have control over the 360 degrees of the 2D image so you are viewing it from a different side, top, or bottom, but it is still a 2D image.

I had a fellow I knew who made etchings inside of glass blocks using lasers.
Where two laser lines crossed, it shattered the glass in a small pin point size spot.
By focusing those laser lines to different depths into the glass block, he could create what looks like a 3D image inside the glass.
You can pick up the object, and turn it around to view it from any angle, so in essence, this is a 3D creation.
Much like a hologram inside that big box over at ORNL. It is so clear it looks real. But like the glass block, it is fixed inside the glass box which is probably filled with some type of gas the holds the image for just long enough that the lasers can redraw it 60 times a second or faster.

[yogi]

Well, I knew all along what you are getting at by claiming there is no such thing as 3D imaging, but I beg to differ with you on the point that all we have is 2D imaging. The "D" refers to dimension as a factor. All images have three(3) dimensions. What you are looking at here, for example, looks flat to you but the photons and LED or phosphor luminescence (whatever you have there) is in reality 3 dimensional. The surface of your monitor screen has depth as well as length and breath. Admittedly it's not very deep, but it's not strictly 2D in a physical sense either. Thus what you are talking about is perception and not dimensional attributes. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[Kellemora]

Well, I do have to agree with you on those points, because even a pencil line on a sheet of paper has depth, the thickness of the graphite on the page.
A sheet of paper is a 3 dimensional object, because it has height, width, and thickness.
However, an image projected onto the paper, although it can penetrate the pores of the paper, is still considered 2D.
And so are physical drawings on the paper, even though we know the marks made by a writing device does have some depth.

We can only see in 2 dimensions, our second eye aids in depth perception and seeing if an item is flat or a spherical shape, so in a way, that is partly like 3D, but you can't see the back unless you walk around the object to do so.

When I was a draftsman, we often drew the top view, bottom view, the main view, the right side view, and a projection.
The projection is what gave the appearance of a cube, or whatever. But it was never called 3D, hi hi.

[yogi]

We frequently have different definitions for the same concept, and I think that is what's happening here. Dimensions are theoretical phenomena which is why sci-fi authors get away with going well beyond the normal three. I recall some discussion in a physics class regarding time. Should it be considered part the standard dimensions, in addition to the original three? I think the physics teacher thought it should, but as you pointed out above, it's all in the mind, or the mind's eye. The truth in the matter is the brain processes concepts and puts them together to give us a sense of the world around us. It has no way to process a single dimension, which would be a point in space, nor a line for that matter. We can represent such things on paper, but us humans have no way to deal with dimensions unless there are at least three.

Holograms and augmented reality give the brain all the inputs it needs to perceive what we are looking at as having depth and form. But all those things are just particles of light floating around in an organized system that we recognize as familiar. It's the perception of depth in these forms of projection that prompt people to call it 3D. Well, even 2D is a perception because what we are looking at requires 3 dimensions for us to see it. I think we agree on the common usage of the terms 3D and 2D. We both know what they are intended to mean. The reality of it all is quite different, but from what I can tell the brain seldom deals with reality.

[Kellemora]

Hmm, had to log-in again this morning to get to the chat room.

Our brains no nothing of reality, hi hi.

Since I was a Ham Radio Operator, I'm one of those who see the entirety of our Universe and Planet as an enormous amount of frequencies. And everything vibrates at it's own frequency, regardless of what it is.
What has me concerned right now is they have picked up like a heartbeat on planet earth. A steady pulse emanating from the core of our planet. We wonder what it could mean?

They seem also to be making great strides in quantum computers now too, using new materials from new technology.
I'll bet if we could come back in 50 years, we won't know how anything works at all anymore, since everything will have changed so much. Just look at how far technology has come in our lifetimes, and how fast it is escalating.

[yogi]

You probably have heard of physicists asking a profound question that sounds simple: "Is light a particle or is it a wave?" Since they can't define it they concluded that it's both. This is a commonly accepted theory of physics and supports your idea that everything in the universe is vibrating. It turns out that is intuitively obvious to the casual particle physicist observer. Anything with a temperature above absolute zero is vibrating. In essence it does not exist if it is at absolute zero.

I've not heard or read about the heartbeat of which you speak, but I have read some far out speculation about consciousness and exactly what it is. Nobody really knows at this point in time, but it can be described in such a way that inanimate objects can be shown to have a form of consciousness. If you kick a rock it moves, for example. The fact that it moves means it knows what to do. Somehow that relates to consciousness. There are folks that go even further and explain spirits this way. Our closest star, the sun, can be thought of as the embodiment of some kind of spirit. All the planets and other debris in our Solar System (whose cyclical orbits can be thought of as a kind of vibration) compose the body of the the spirit. Like your liver knowing what to do without being instructed, the earth, the moon, the planets, the asteroids, and all that other space junk know what to do to keep the spirit in tact. So, each star you see out there is potentially another spirit being.

I'll just let you think about that for a while without further comment.

[Kellemora]

Don't forget, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction!

Such as kicking a rock, causes a stubbed toe, hi hi.

I think everything we know about our planet, and the Universe as far as we can see it.
All resides in the corner of a shoebox in the top of some kids closet.
And someday, the kid will grow up and that shoebox will end up in the dumpster.
Come to think of it, we might already be in the dumpster, waiting for it to be picked up and compressed.
Or maybe we are already in the landfill, just biding our time, until the soup can above us rusts through.

[yogi]

Your speculation refers to my understanding of the concept of infinity. There is no end to the universe, for example. It continues to reduce in size to a point beyond which we can measure or sense. The same thing happens on a macro scale which is how people come to the notion that there are multiple universes. We can only see as far as light can travel during the time our present universe existed. Thus there are limits on the macro as well as the micro view. What is apparent in our limited view is the idea of hierarchy. There is always something bigger, and always something smaller. Where does it end? My answer is that it does not end. It's infinity.

By the way, that action reaction rule only applies to forces. And, from what we can tell it does not always apply on a quantum level.

[Kellemora]

I don't exactly study astronomy, but I read one heck of a lot about it.
Lots of interesting theories out there, that's for sure. Some of the have proof of what they cover.
I read about stuff, go sounds logical, then forget what I read 5 minutes later.

I think the word Quantum means: Not known even to scientists who say they are using it for this or that. They don't understand it either, but agree with it, hi hi.

[yogi]

The best understanding I have is that quantum physics does not deal in linear properties. It deals with quantum leaps.

When measuring something that is two feet long you are observing one of many possible outcomes of your measurement. The next measurement might show your object to be one foot long instead of two. There is nothing in between. The item can only exist in one foot increments making quantum leaps to the next level up or down. That is how we get from point A to point B without going through the middle. It also explains how something can be created out of nothing.

[Kellemora]

Did you know there is a bacteria on Antarctica that lives solely on the air, and it excretes water.
Scientists picked up on this and are looking at them very closely.
But I like the biomatter they found that creates electricity. Not just the electric that makes all of us work internally.
This new biomatter can actually generate usable electric. How they didn't say, and it is probably miniscule, like a trillionth of a watt, hi hi.

Quantum is more than just confusing to me! But they seem to be making great strides with it. Including traveling faster than the speed of light, and may remove time and distance from the equasion.
Who knows, some day we will get in a box, dial a knob, or push a button and be where we wanted to go instantly.

Then of course they will improve on this until you wear a watch, so when you finish eating breakfast, you push a button and boom, you are behind your desk at work.