Sinclair vs Acorn Footsoldier Memoirs

Watching BBC Four's Micro Men last night took me back a few decades to when I was a lowly footsoldier for Sinclair in the 1980s. There's no doubt, the company rivalry that took place in Cambridge was mirrored in every schoolyard in the UK. And the drama was good, the BBC got the feel of the whole, crazy techwar down to a tee; from the seat-of-the-pants entrepreneurialism to the acceptability of smoking; to interspersing real 80s footage with the drama; to the personal obsessions of the rivals.

But what of the footsoldiers? Being only 12 to 15 at the time I was oblivious to the internal politics but well aware of the day-to-day conflict. There's no doubt, the rich kids got the Beebs and the scruffnecks got the Speccies. Worse still, school patronage of Acorn disadvantaged the more ordinary kids because schools often wouldn't let them do computer science homework and projects on their Speccies whereas the richer kids could do their homework on their computers - moreover, teachers would take school BBC micros home over the weekend so their middle-class kids could get extra time for free. We had to pay for our disadvantage!

OK, so how important was all this? For us, it meant something because we were developers and not just users. Our machines were platforms for our future careers where we learnt primarily problem-solving skills that would equip us for life. Consider how these 'toys' were the springboard for the British video games industry to the point where 80s kids still dominate these companies because modern children almost never learn to program. And consider how many of the younger generation of software developers still say, "yeah well I learnt to program on an old Amstrad CPC that was tossed to me in my teens..."

The true beauty and power of these machines was their simplicity - which is also what fuelled the tribalism so effectively. The Spectrum was a terrible computer, I went through 4 or 5 before I got one that worked! It had an awful keyboard; a slow BASIC language; a painful printer; chronic expansion potential and embarrassingly blocky colour. But at least it wasn't a BEEB with it's overpriced, snotty-nosed elitism; painful 6502 processor; weedy 32Kb RAM; boring motherboard and pebble-dashed casing. Yuk ;-)

If you really want to relive some of this you need more than an emulator - so why not check out Libby8dev : A spare-time tribute home micro built with A powerful Z80, RAM, Firmware and glue logic on Veroboard. Yep, I figured out how to do the entire glue logic with a single microcontroller! For only £9.99 I'll send you an AVR + firmware IC and it'll be a doddle to build. Then you can join the team and share in the world of shoe-string development with its crazy highs and lows; missed deadlines and geektastic experience full of wires, hacked circuits and solder-singed eyebrows. You also get the weekly project memoranda in courier 10-pitch!

iBook G3 Jaunty Jackalope Update!

As promised here's the update for the progress on my installation of Xubuntu Jaunty Jackalope on my G3 iBook.

The basic problem was this, I have an old 128Mb USB flash stick, but it won't mount on the computer. I had had the same problems when running an earlier version of Xubuntu on my iBook and I had thought it was to do with USB Flash disk support or FAT support on PowerPC / Apple hardware. But this time, because I really like Jaunty Jackalope, I really wanted to get it working.

It's possible you've found similar problems. You plug in a USB Flash drive and it doesn't mount. You can check what it should look like when you mount by sticking in your Xubuntu installation CD (I had to type eject at the terminal to get the tray to eject) - it should pop up in the Thunar file manager window.

But with my USB Flash drive that didn't happen. After some investigation I found that the program dmesg (which logs debugging messages from the kernel) had this log at the end:

[98622.283596] sd 1:0:0:0: [sda] 256000 512-byte hardware sectors: (131 MB/125 MiB)
[98622.293940] sd 1:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
[98622.293964] sd 1:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 00 00 00 00
[98622.293972] sd 1:0:0:0: [sda] Assuming drive cache: write through
[98622.345699] sd 1:0:0:0: [sda] 256000 512-byte hardware sectors: (131 MB/125 MiB)
[98622.362888] sd 1:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
[98622.362912] sd 1:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 00 00 00 00
[98622.362921] sd 1:0:0:0: [sda] Assuming drive cache: write through

The Mode Sense bit is where it first goes wrong. It wasn't to do with file system support, because it was never able to read even the first sector. I found out from some Linux bug lists that some USB Flash drives simply don't read in Linux. I've got a good hunch as to why. It's because the testing procedure for most Flash drives probably isn't that rigorous. They test the hardware with Windows (and maybe Mac OS X) and as long as it works there they're happy.

The solution is to try another USB Flash Disk. I tried a friend's and hey presto, it worked!

So, I then tried connecting my Nokia N95 via USB and that worked, here's the image.

So, the moral of the story is: try another Flash Disk!

Jaunty Jackalope on an iBook G3

Well, I managed to get an Xubuntu edition of Jaunty Jackalope to go and in the end it was pretty easy! Moreover, the experience is fantastic, it runs at a decent speed and of course it gives me access to Firefox 3 (3.0.14 as I write); which is much better than FF 2!

It's certainly fun enough to use it right now to write this blog. At first I had been having problems with a blank screen and then some stupid messages in psychedelic colours about Xubuntu running in low resolution mode and the helps I'd seen on the internet only told me to edit my xorg.conf file and that didn't do the trick. So, here's my sumarised tutorial:

First, I obtained Xubuntu from here. In my case I downloaded the CD image using Feisty Fawn on my iBook; burned the CD and then burned another CD which contained all the documents in my home directory (as I'm too dumb to stick my home directory in a special partition :-S )!

Then I found a tutorial on getting Xubuntu running on an iBook.

The key thing was getting the boot process right. The correct thing is to boot from the CD (by holding down 'c' as it chimes until you see the message telling you it's booting from the live cd). Then you press TAB and you see a list of possible boot images. You can't select the list using tab or anything like that - it's just a text message. An iBook G3 should boot from a particular image "live-nosplash-powerpc" so I literally typed:

live-nosplash-powerpc

At the prompt, then and it (eventually) booted into the graphical desktop with a messed up resolution (as I expected). But the colours were right and text was readable. Then I followed the tutorial. After installing Jaunty onto the whole disk I found the mac would boot correctly into Xubuntu with the Splash screen and it all worked OK. It made me immediately install a whole bunch of updates and then I installed the JDK so I could play around with Java Swing development on this machine.

All in all, a major success! Before you can copy my success you might need to know the specs of my machine. It's an iBook 600MHz with 640Mb of RAM and a 60Gb HD. The initial install only required about 2.8Gb; I've installed a bit more since then.

There is still one gripe - I'll come to that in a new blog, but for now the old iBook has YET ANOTHER lease of life, life in abundance :-) !

(Updated 19/09/09: Although I used the right link, I provided the wrong link for the Xubuntu download, but I've corrected it now!)

On Being Moved By Resting Bodies

I took a walk round the graveyard of St. James' Anglican church in Didsbury on Sunday. Interesting place. Loads of chicken-wire type grating over most of the windows, which is a pity since the actual stained glass imagery behind would have looked so much nicer. And it seems like the place isn't totally well kempt.

I found a tomb. There's about 8 bodies resting in it and as I started to read it, it moved me. It tells a story of a 19th century family: the Bibbys from Levenshulme. It begins with Eliza, Thomas & Mary's 20 month-old toddler who died in 1803. Then there's the 1 day-old Edward who died 2 1/2 years later. And there's Daniel Burton (10) who died 15 years later aged 20 days and two other brothers: Thomas (10) and James (18) who died within 3 days of each other in 1927.

I started to think about how much grief this family had had to put up with. So many children they undoubtably loved and yet lost over such a long period. How did they carry on? Could we have done the same?

And it gets worse - Mary, their mother died in 1826; so Thomas had to endure the loss of two more sons only a year after the mother. And he himself only lasted another 9 years. I'm stunned. How did people hang on with such trauma?But then I noticed something else. Another name. At the end, Mary, another daughter (their only remaining one?): died in 1891 aged an incredible 87 years.

I think what it says is that these people had real faith in a way rarely seen today. They ploughed on when most of us would have given up. And it bore lasting fruit in the long-term - maybe Mary's descendents are around today. I was moved.

Let's Play Remythology™

A facebook friend of mine: James Alden commented on a Independent article from March 7, 2009 where it said:

"when you sit around pretending your life is eternal and for ever, you use it casually and wastefully, like any other resource you imagine is not going to run out"

I didn't originally get why James pointed it out (he was referring to the reckless attitude within the financial sector), though the context of the original article seemed to be an Atheist take on the meaning of eternal life.

I've seen this kind of thinking before from Atheist writers; beginning with Dawkin's Guardian commentary on the 9/11 bombings. Since I've never seen anything like this idea in the Bible; nor any other Christian book or article; nor from any Christian talk; nor from my Christian friends, I'm somewhat at a loss for where the idea comes from.

Well, that's not quite true - I could see where the idea comes from if all you ever knew about Christianity was that Christians believe they have an automatic eternal life, regardless of their actual values. but it doesn't really make sense (to me) if you know even a smidgen more. If you believe God made the universe and it was a good thing, then obviously trashing his creation ain't going to thrill him too much. If you think God is serious with his commands about how to treat people with love and respect then wasting yours or others lives seems to me to be counter to his plans. If you read the Gospels you realise it's about your heart, not your excuses: signing up to Jesus isn't a licence for taking liberties which is why Paul in his letter to the Romans argues that God's grace isn't an excuse for doing wrong.

The point is, it's where your heart is and Jesus changes people's hearts. So I'm wondering what's going on here. What could it be if it's not a deliberate game of 'deconstructionism'?

My best answer is this: what if the two sides just aren't talking to each other? What if the majority of Christians have written off the Atheists because 'they'll never be able to see what the message is about' and the Atheists have given up on the Christians, because they are beyond reason? What if we're mostly just listening to ourselves imagining what the other thinks, but not actually communicating?

What if we're all playing Remythology™?

[I'll blog this for the moment and put the links in place when I can.]

Global Crunch

This piece is intended to be a short essay on the current global crunch as I see it. I'm writing at this point, because current wisdom says that the Global Crunch won't be as bad as the Great Depression of the 1930s. Here I'm going to do a comparison between market collapses in the 20th century and the current situation. I won't say much about any predictions.

The Global Crunch is a long-term global financial crisis of whose signs had been in evidence since around 2005 and came to an obvious head in the summer of 2008. It is a direct product of unsustainable financial control; war and increasing competition for fossil fuels. Here we look at the following factors:

• What to call the Global Crunch.
• A Comparison with the Crash of 1929.
• A Comparison with the Recession in the late 1980s.
• Factors affecting the crunch.

I think inevitably, this crisis will become known as "The Global Crunch"; at the time of writing, it's variously referred to as "The Credit Crunch" or the particularly lame "The Downturn" used by BBC News.

Many of my references are taken from the Wikipedia. The 1929 Crash was a culmination of 5 years of massive stock market growth which was ultimately boosted by heavy speculative investment. The market initially recovered over the next several months of 1930, but this was not enough to prevent the subsequent Great Depression and corresponding global recessions in Britain and more importantly in Germany (where the economic (and social) instability lead directly to the the rise in power of extreme political parties and subsequently the Nazi dictatorship and World War II).

The Great Depression was exacerbated by nationalistic protectionist measures following the crash; hyper-inflation in Germany; and the road to recovery was only initiated by the implementation of Keynsian Economics in Japan; the US (the New Deal) and later in the UK to some extent. Note: Keynsian economics works on the basis that it is the flow of cash which produces wealth not the amount of it in anyone's possession. Ironically it was the World War II which propelled the US into the industrial leadership it maintained at least until the early 21st century.

The Great Depression was followed by several decades where national economics were heavily regulated by Government.

The 1987 Crash. Again, the crash of late 1980s (and the subsequent 1990s recession) can be seen as a product of market deregulation that began in the early 1980s with the Reagan/Thatcher free-market era. In this case, the UK changed its laws to allow less heavily regulated stock markets; which lead to London re-emerging as a global financial centre as financial interests moved from Europe and the US to the UK. The US subsequently started to change its regulation.

In 1986 the UK chancellor Nigel Lawson further deregulated the markets which lead to the Boom of 1987. The 1987 Crash in both the UK and US was precipitated by the large number of stocks managed by simplistic computer programs which automatically sold their shares under certain conditions - therefore since the same programs were being used everywhere, it was possible for an extremely rapid crash (actually at a far greater rate than in 1929) to take place.

In the months proceeding the crash it looked inevitable that the country would head into a recession of some kind; though the government repeatedly asserted that this was not going to happen. Of course, this was not the case and a recession did indeed follow a few years later and at it's height in 1991-1992 was responsible for a high number of repossessions from unsustainable mortgages from the Conservative housing boom of the mid to late 1980s.

So, when we come to look at the Crunch we actually see the hallmarks of previous crashes all over again. We see deregulated markets leading to a financial boom and subsequent serious bust. We see the effect of housing and mortgages on the whole financial outlook (the deregulation of the housing market in the US: the Subprime market and in the UK being very similar to that of the 80s); excessive speculation and loans (where capital / loan ratios were increased). On top of that we have constraints due to fossil fuels becoming a constraint on the economy and the undermining of the western economies by a number of unnecessary wars.

What we can predict is that this is only the start of the problem. If the past is anything to go by we can see that market collapses usually impact people for at least the next 5 to 10 years - it's unlikely we'll be at 2006 - 2007 levels by 2013 (5 years from now); it's likely that, given that economic pundits are telling us that there will be a significant recession for a few years that in fact it will be worse than in 1987 (because then they said it wasn't going to happen at all)!

I'm publishing this the day after the Dow Jones fell to 7553.8 - a fall of 46% compared with its height of 13900 about a year ago (the 1929 crash was a fall of 43% compared with its height).

Dreamstate

On Tuesday November 5, it seemed like the US and in kind, many countries around the world entered a bit of Dreamstate akin to Britain's May 5 1997 moment, but more profound.

I know thousands of people have commented similarly, but the one thing that I am strongly reminded of is how much Obama's politics are influenced by the 60's American Civil Rights movement. In particular, MLK's (what can only be described as a literally prophetic) vision of a future America expressed in his "I have a dream" speech and book "Strength To Love".

For me, the image that most brilliantly captured the event in my mind is of the children of MLKs era: Barack & Michelle (Jan'64), Joe and Jill (June'51) holding hands at the Grant Park party.



But, it's not just the fact that he foresaw an America that looked beyond the racial stereotypes of the day to a time when "little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers"

It's not just that he was fighting against the gross injustices that stemmed directly from the civil war 102 years earlier.

But the many incidental details I think that are particularly poignant. Whether he says "we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt" or "It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment" he could have been speaking during the economic turmoil of last month and not over 45 years ago.

For MLK it wasn't only about the objectives, but the standard for attaining them "We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline... we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force". This strategy, followed almost entirely to the letter for 45 years has brought a result that could not have been achieved by any other means.

And the recognition that this is really a struggle for the whole of America: "many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. They have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone."

And not just a struggle in terms of skin colour; but the broadest possible sweep of God's intent. As a result MLK immerses his speech in rich Biblical themes: Mercy running like a river; Mountains being laid low* mediated through the magnificent (i.e. secular) Constitution of the United States; which he saw literally as a cheque written for all God's children, to be cashed in through faith in action.

I'm struck most of all by MLKs sense of timescale - which can only be described as pure prophecy. Despite the injustices he was campaigning against, injustices that spanned over 2 centuries he believed that although he might not get there, in fact his own children would: "my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character" From my research all four of his children are still alive (they are in their late 50s or early 60s).

No one should be under the illusion that Obama is any kind of messianic figure. Yet, Obama fits the bill as the man of the moment; being born during the rise of the civil rights movement and elected at just the right time. He certainly appears to be the right man when judged by character and merit; rather than privilege and position. He made it to the highest post in the land in living memory of The Dream at a time of national (international) crisis as a man of intelligence and faith.