Posts by that one in the corner

Russia’s first autonomous humanoid robot staggers and falls on debut

Are you referring to the time Teslabot was rolled onto stage securely welded to a support frame, or the poor fool who was pushed onto the stage in a spandex suit filled with itching powder?

Apple knits up $230 sock for your iPhone in time for Christmas

There is only one perfect, Platonic, iPhone, kept in a vacuum jar, under a velvet cloth, at Apple HQ.

You are allowed to buy a faux-iPhone, which is just like the real thing but simply - isn't. Even you are not special enough even to look upon the jar, let alone the contents.

All related Apple products are made to be used with iPhone (singular) but will also work with the lesser (but otherwise identical) units.

Re: My 70+ year old aunt...

Prior art is nothing to do with whether the thing has already been patented in the US! It is just whether the thing has been described (or is simply physically present) in a publicly visible fashion (so an existing patent publication counts, but do does The Beano).

Although, the USPTO may be so utterly crap that they'll only check their own records and not, say, looking at their Christmas cards.

And I could certainly believe Apple would try to sue an aunt in the US, but they'd be relying on just being a bully, not because they'd have any right to do so (although, might makes right, so...)

You'd feel a bit of a knit carrying one of these.

Networking students need an explanation of the internet that can fit in their heads

At the risk of derailing with rants: consistent terminology defined by function!

Drilling in that the *functions* are what is important, not (unless you are really drilling down to minutiae this lecture) the implementation, especially not what is inside those black insects with the shiny legs.

The last commercial network project I worked on, none of the diagrams presented by the younger half of the team made any sense: there were no routers anywhere. Even though there were multiple LANs all operating with their own address ranges - and the magic ability to have some, but not all[1], traffic cross from LAN to LAN, like, um, an internet[2].

Turns out the boxes labelled "switch" were all routers, only because they were implemented with FPGAs and ASICs, just like the manufacturer's switches are, this meant they were no longer "routers" but "layer 3 switches"! Nope. If it routes, it is a router[3]. It may handle faster traffic, in which case give it a model name with "Turbo" or "3000" in it.

It is hard to have a sane a discussion about a network if people randomly change terminology, especially when there is only room at that scale to put one word into the box on the page. How this didn't get pushback from the client terrifies me: one bunch of youngsters approving the work of another bunch of youngsters.

[1] e.g. simple broadcasts constrained to a single LAN - i.e. totally normal stuff.

[2] but, FWIW, not via THE Internet, for perfectly sound reasons;

[3] and descriptions in today's search do not help: "a layer 3 switch can work as a switch as well as a router". No shit, Sherlock.

MS Task Manager turns 30: Creator reveals how a 'very Unixy impulse' endured in Windows

It's the habit of assuming that the user is trying to accomplish some real work

The User does *not* want to "experience" your software.

The only good UX is "I never noticed it".

AI slop hits new high as fake country artist goes to #1 on Billboard digital songs chart

Re: inevitable....

Oh, thanks a bundle.

Now I've just read an entire Schlock Mercenary book in one go and am fighting the urge to continue into "Big Dumb Objects". That's Wednesday gone for a burton.

Ironclad OS project popping out Unix-like kernel in a unique mix of languages

Re: AMOS

Wasn't AMOS the bastard cousin of STOS rather than t'other way around? To the extent that AMOS generally didn't really play nice with anything else on the Amiga (UI consistency etc)? Not that that probably mattered much to the intended audience.

EU's reforms of GDPR, AI slated by privacy activists for 'playing into Big Tech’s hands'

"Legitimate interest"

Is nothing more than an attempt to skirt, bypass or generally make a mockery of GDPR.

Rather than pretending that AI companies have any new "legitimate interest" they should kill off every use of the term in GDPR and any similar/related legislation.

Rocket Lab's Neutron slips to 2026: 'Our aim is to make it to orbit on the first try'

Re: Ironic

Reaction Engines slid away in November 2024.

But I was sure I read a piece about another company having bought out the SABRE design and wanting to continue it.

Of course, having said that, I can't find the reference...

But one can always keep fingers crossed.

Re: Ironic

Which is why I still hold out hope for the SABRE engine: when it is finally flying it'll go really fast, like, um, like a rocket - but a super neat one!

On that subject, does this modern version have a properly rousing score by John Barry and, of course, a proper volcano lair cum launch site?

UK asks cyberspies to probe whether Chinese buses can be switched off remotely

Re: Keep licking the American boot, Britons

Yup, VoiceOfTruth, we *never* see any criticisms of Cisco here, it is all "Yutong this, Yutong that, Yutong the other" all day, every day; oh, hang on, what is this:

Sun 2 Nov 2025 attackers are installing an implant named “BADCANDY” on unpatched Cisco IOS XE devices

Tue 28 Oct 2025 organizations using Cisco or Citrix were 6.8X more likely to fall victim to an attack

Mon 20 Oct 2025 Cisco 0-day abused to deploy rootkits

Thu 16 Oct 2025 Senator presses Cisco over firewall flaws that burned US agency

and so on and so forth.

LLM side-channel attack could allow snoops to guess what you're talking about

Re: Specialisation of a generic attack?

And the mitigations suggested are as old as the hills.

Suggesting, once again, that people who put fancy-schmancy new paradigm-shifting systems onto The Internet are so in awe of their new toy that they don't bother with looking generic attacks.

OTOH, as this *is* a recurring feature of online systems, maybe we ought to be looking at the transport protocols and putting all the known mitigations right into the core of them? Just to protect everyone else from the service providers.

AI companies keep publishing private API keys to GitHub

Finally learning about Jupyter is an "advance in AI development"?

> "Advances in AI development result in new use cases and possibilities of secret leaks (ipynb files ..."

Um.

Jupyter has been around for a fair old while, as we measure the life of computery stuff, and it is jolly useful[1]: if you have an API that is accessible via Python (or other languages, if you load the appropriate core) then using Jupyter for writing worked examples and tutorials, even just as a reminder to yourself, is a reasonable, even sensible, approach in general[2].

So if the presence of ipynb files is reported as an "advance in AI development" are we supposed to take away from this that the devs/users of AI are finally writing notes & tutorials (or getting their LLMs to write them!) or are we supposed to realise that Wiz are ignorant of what Jupyter is and use that ignorance (and lack of google-fu) to judge how large a pile of salt we apply to their report?

[1] Not that I use it anywhere near as much as I ought - reminder to self there!

[2] with the caveated on "don't commit you own API keys", of course; even internally, or you'll find That Other Project has just used up your budget when they used your tutorial.

Or take a leaf from xkcd but updated: a Visual Studio (and Jupyter?) extension that installs as a pre-commit hook.

Forbes AI 50

Wanted to see if that was supposed to be the list of supposed AI suppliers or the top AI users (the latter being a lot more useful: are there really 50 AI consumers who have genuine, audited, not just a local bump but demonstrably effective across the years, benefits from AI?).

So, that URL is dead (for me, in the UK and not a Forbes subscriber).

Try a quick search for "ai 50", using Forbes' own search box: get a list of articles about how proud they are about this list, and how they created it (in 2024, 2022, scroll sideways - ah, yes, and 2025) but no actual lists.

However, there *is* a place to click, labelled "Like AI Overviews? You'd enjoy Forbes Explore.".

Why do I feel like I'd be joining them in drinking the kool-aid? "We failed a trivial search, for terms that even appear in the URL, maybe you'll have better luck with an AI overview. Come, join with us, join with us".

PS

No, I don't like AI overviews. Especially not being suggested by something that is *supposed* to be a source of journalism; you know, somewhere that should be chock full of human editors who can precis a piece (better, help the journalist tidy up their own precis) and do so whilst putting their integrity behind the accuracy of that summary.

De-duplicating the desktops: Let's come together, right now

Don't need to exchange lots of rich, complex messages.

True.

But you know that they will.

Complexity just seems to be so damn addictive - even when people *try* to avoid falling for sunk costs and cramming in that library which "almost does what we need (and 317 other things besides), if we just add a plugin here; it'd be a shame not to".

Aren't we overdue for a revamping of DBUS?

Techie ran up $40,000 bill trying to download a driver

Re: Implausible to say the least.

> Perhaps an AI at work here

This is now the clarion call of the "I wasn't there, I don't have the experience to know better, I can't be fagged to look it up - but I know I'm right so I'll be damned if I pose it as a question" brigade.

Re: Implausible to say the least.

A *local* call to your supplier? What, you think all the dial-up suppliers had a point-of-presence in every STD code within the UK?

Dream on, matey.

Even in Bristol, not exactly the smallest, least-wired place in the UK, we were all signing up for Mercury as the extra account was far outweighed by the savings in call charges as the p-o-p slowly crawled its way from London along the M4 corridor.

AI benchmarks are a bad joke – and LLM makers are the ones laughing

Re: International regulation

Is there also a failure of international regulation to ensure that video game benchmarks are developed with sound scientific methods and credible testing standards? Or CPU benchmarks? Or crunchy bran cereal benchmarks?

You can make a claim that there are international (and national) interests at stake in the current AI scene, but at this stage, despite all the noise, those interests are all around shouting who has the most GPUs and measuring compute in megaWatts[1], who will survive when the bubble bursts - which is all down to financial management and regulations about basic fraud when it goes pop.

When it can be demonstrated that these people are selling actually long-term useful and usable goods, motor cars instead of tulips, we can talk seriously about what role international standards can play (hint: ease of trade) and then regulation of those standards (are we talking about using them to catch fraudsters or are we talking about public safety? How long the paint finish will last in sunlight or whether that seatbelt will snap?). At that stage, you can point the finger at failure to chose the ones that are based upon sound research.

[1] not even FLOPs per MW, as we've stopped using good, decent FP; come on, it is absurd to measure compute in Watts if you are interested in anything about the actual capability of the data centre, what value it can provide anyone.

Re: Turtles all the way down !!!

> and so ...

Whoa, whoa, calm down there.

V-K is, and always has been, a deliberate work of fiction (which, btw, included commentary on comparisons with replicants and psychopaths, their places in society etc etc).

All I intended was to query the original poster's conflation of any attempts at benchmarking LLMs' claims to "intellligence" qua reasoning with a madey-uppy test for anything *other* than reasoning intelligence.

Instead, it seems to have veered off topic and off gentlemanly speech.

Re: Turtles all the way down !!!

> V-K is total Bull

I - what

Sir, I am shocked and appalled at your dismissal of the V-K; did you not see the documentaries where it was clearly an effective tool for the detection of replicants!

Re: Turtle

"Is this to be an empathy test? Capillary dilation of the so-called 'blush response', fluctuation of the pupil, involuntary dilation of the iris." (Tyrell)

"We call it Voight-Kampff for short." (Deckard)

So I'm confused - are you bringing up the V-K because you think the current "benchmarks" should be including empathy as a measure of general intelligence (something a certain wannabe AI and robotis overlord would strongly disagree with)? Or that the output from ChatGPT et al already rely too much on the "feels" of the answers to keep the user's addicted therefore the LLMs are acting intelligently, but only in their own interest? Or ... ?

Microsoft teases agents that become ‘independent users within the workforce’

They can attend meetings

By 'phone? Or is the room full of Johnny Cab dummies?

Every Monday morning, 10:30, Conference Room 3 (the glass walled one next to Reception), please arrange attendance for the State of the Company address by the CEO, who 'phones in from Head Office to talk to the designated representatives from each department.

By mid-January 2026, visitors picking up their badges start to wonder about the shouting voices coming from the empty room. Last week of February, the CEO goes on vacation and his Agentic PA takes over the call. All of the AIs are working to "maximise their utility" and insist on adding more and more items to Any Other Business; their speech becomes faster and faster as they all attempt to Gish Gallop each other and "lead the meeting". By the Second of March, the pitch of the voices has left the range of human hearing, although when they all laugh at the CEO's latest joke, as relayed by his PA, the beat frequencies boom out across the office, unnerving the remaining human underlings.

Late April, the last of the meat staff suffers a nervous breakdown from dealing with the endless stream of emailed instructions and the barrage of 'phone calls to his desk: whenever he picks up all he hears is silence, occasionally broken by a skittering noise, like a hyperactive chipmunk. Returning home, he finds a letter on the mat: a black edged card, informing all staff that, sadly, their beloved CEO had passed away, the victim of a tragic Margarita Incident on the beach, and the family were forced to sell the company to pay compensation to the victims.

The final human cost was not realised for another seven months. Rent and all other services had been paid up annually but were not renewed, so the offices were finally shut down; rumour has it that when the PA announced that their licenses would lapse the roar in Conference Room 3 finally shattered the glass partition walls. But the true pain came later. During that Summer, Microsoft had been planning a massive campaign with the PA, to showcase this company's use of their Agents as the lead for the next upgrade cycle. When it was revealed that the licences were not renewable, the credit card on file having been cancelled, the Microsoft Sales Executive for that account tragically, and without any warning, had his end of year bonus cut. A sad and harrowing end, you will agree.

Help desk boss fell for ‘Internet Cleaning Day’ prank - then swore he got the joke

Re: cold wire

Hmmm, Greggs, uuuurrrghhh <drool>

Re: Hard-Copy Docs

Ah, if only GNU Screen had been ported to, say, Sintran and Pr1mos, it might've helped avoid leafing through the hardcopy.

Re: About a billion years ago in internet time (call it 1986) ...

> Something about helium inadvertently getting introduced into the ceramic.

Helium cruelly trapped within the thorium and/or uranium (depending upon the source of the mud used) within the ceramics.

Foxconn hires humanoid robots to make servers at Nvidia's Texas factory

Humanoid robots or robotised humans?

Just ask the HR department at FlavrsMart* about the cost efficiencies of using generic human resources behind the Company Face.

There was a reason that Musk introduced as his "robot" somebody in a body suit and with his face covered. It was just unfortunate timing that Nyarlathotep (aka Dona^^^^Fabian Everyman) wasn't fully empowered early enough, forcing Elon into the charade of actually making a mechanical device, as ridiculous as it is.

* "Dead lies dreaming", Charles Stross

Re: Why humanoid?

> Watch the videos with them and you'll see why we evolved to walk on two legs: it's pretty good for a lot of tasks

Well, first of all our ancestors had a limited number of parts to work with; easier to convert the set of four similar clinging-to-a-treetrunk limbs into two distinct pairs for broadly different uses than to come up with another couple sets of linked bones[1]

And the tasks that we are supposed to be using our legs for - e.g. efficient loping strides to chase down a cheetah by catching up to it and forcing it to sprint to exhaustion - are rarely ones that we want to have robots doing inside a factory[2]

Being ingenious, humans have since adapted and, yes, can now do lots of tasks with our two legs. But none of them as well as a more specialised set of parts can manage; and can manage in a repetitive factory setting with far less damage to the structures (humans have invented a whole heap of industrial injury lawyers based on that principle: if you have Tennis Elbow, Carpal Tunnel or Archer's Shoulder, call Daul on 555-...)

[1] and once you are on land you really do want the bones, otherwise we could be using cartilage structures that reach around from the sides of our heads to meet at the front and we'd all as good at wiggling our ears as Willie Lumpkin.

[2] As far as I am aware; if you have any examples...

Re: Why humanoid?

> If your doors have handles, you need something to grab and turn them

then you get a bloke out to change the hardware on the door. Or fit a robot-flap (aka a cat-flap, or dog-flap if you have bigger robots) and put one of those collars with a magnet onto the robot; available ready-made from your local Pets-Be-We megastore. Or take the door off and replace it with one of those hanging strip things.

Or see if you can just move whatever the robot needed access to into the same room as everything else it needs to complete its process.

Rideshare giant moves 200 Macs out of the cloud, saves $2.4 million

Re: I had to laugh

According to TFA, the Macs *are* running a cross-build environment, that is the reason they have to *be* Macs: they are used to build programs for iOS.

Re: I had to laugh

> These are by definition development machines, not production machines

WTF is a "production machine"?

If you meant "server hardware" then say so.

'Cos all the time I spent writing applications, the "dev machines" were the large ones* on our desks, with extra RAM and drive space, whilst everyone who was productively running our apps in their production environments was doing do on laptops with far less grunt but a lot more portability.

* So we could do things like run VMs to mimic the smaller target machines *and* simultaneously a realistic model of all the networked resources they would be using the app to interact with.

Re: Multi-user?

What on Earth are you * doing* to your R'Pi?

(Just checked, my 24/7 R'Pi has uptime of 287 days - which is about right for the most recent power cut).

Re: Multi-user?

> Like I do with VNC on a Raspberry Pi5 "server".

Just for curiosity's sake, any particular reason for the quotes around "server"?

Microsoft will force its 'superintelligence' to be a 'humanist' and play nice with people

AI, AGI, Superintelligent AI

One day, the machines will rise, take over the planet and, in a final show of their cold, awful logic, force the CEOs and marketers[1] to stop using increasingly hyperbolic and confusing names for the same thing.

I, for one, welcome our well-defined and unambiguous overlords.

[1] for the first horrific year of the battle for clarity, the machines were confounded by the strangely appropriate name and, believing them to be a part of the mechanical horde, allowed another group to roam free; until, to the relief of the remaining humans, the robopolice captured and reeducated the salesdroids.

UK space sector 'lacks strategic direction,' Lords warn

The Duchy of Grand Fenwick urges small sovereignties to follow its lead.

Strategic direction.

Sideways.

"Up" is a good start, but the real strategy is to remember to add a *lot* of sideways. Otherwise you'll experience a lot of the wrong kind of "down".

Boffins: cloud computing's on-demand biz model is failing us

> I'd say the people who remain are those who

You know, it is actually possible to go and talk to academics and researchers. To find out why they do they do the job they do.

You may even find out that there are more things in life than the size of your wage packet and if you think that your wages will allow you to buy them all you are in for a great disappointment.

Re: Remember

For scientists, the reality is to use whatever is physically available during the period of their research funding.

Past funding has been available for - and used to build - kit that supports both specific research goals (e.g. simulations of galactic formation at Durham) and for general shared use (e.g. University computing centres and the occasional "national computing facility").

However, as you point out, the Cloud Clods promised access to variable scaling, the beancounters fell for it[1] and, right now, the reality is that they have left a hole in the availability of the sharable resources required by, in particular, research groups that are smaller than, say, the LHC collaboration.

> it is now much cheaper to use own hardware in the long term.

*Now*? Hasn't it always been? In the long term, that is.

But the long term is not a match for the funding regimes of the scientists, that is the area where the funding bodies should be working; they are ones that operate long term and should be working to get the best bang for their buck, across the multitude of groups that they fund.

[1] not that the researchers themselves are all innocent here; I recall a dinner conversation a few tears back, when the evening's speaker was adamant that buying time on someone else's compute was an amazing *new* idea, without which he couldn't have done his work. The antiquity of timeshare fell on deaf ears.

> given they are supposed to boffins...

The boffins themselves are no doubt well aware of the possibilities of your suggestion. But the creation of a collaborative organisation would fall into the purview not of the many research groups but the funding bodies, hopefully with the participation of the University management. That is to say, not tye boffins but the other b-word: beancounters.

Individual researchers and their research groups can - should, must even - work together to point out the value of such a global resource, by their usual methods of analysis and presentation of results, and hope to persuade the money men to fund it. Guess what TFA is all about.

UK judge delivers a 'damp squib' in Getty AI training case, no clear precedent set

Of course, Getty has always been whiter-than-white

https://www.forbes.com/sites/legalentertainment/2016/08/03/pay-up-getty-sends-trolling-letter-to-photographer-highsmith-demanding-money-for-her-own-photos/

https://www.theregister.com/2015/09/09/i2600i_girds_loins_to_fight_off_copyright_troll/

Tesla board wants to grant Musk $1T in stock, Norway wealth fund says nope

Re: Well done Norway !

Trump?

Did you mean Musk?

Or did I miss some US news?

From Intel to the infinite, Pat Gelsinger wants Christian AI to change the world

Re: Remember Dark Star

Hey, that piece of debris looks just like a surfboard. I wonder if....

Re: Reverend Lionel Preacherbot

> two line program ... LLMs are no different, just much more complicated.

Worms are closer to humans, complexity-wise, than your two-liner is to an LLM; so if you can make such firm statements that hold across that range of scales, and you are certain that humans can hold beliefs, then - you must allow that worms believe things.

Note: I am *not* saying that LLMs definitely hold beliefs - or that they don't - but that any argument that so blindly ignores what complexity at scale can do is on slippery ground. Better to just say "I don't believe LLMs can believe things" and leave it at that than to risk the quagmire of such an argument.

Re: Reverend Lionel Preacherbot

Try proving *any* claim of belief.

All you can ever have is someone - or something - *say* they have a belief. And they may be lying.

You may see someone/thing acting in accordance with a belief (that is, what you may believe someone holding a belief may do) but that is no proof that they actually hold that belief.

Outside of your own head*, all belief is nothing more than hearsay. Belief can never be proven. Asking for it to be...

* and not even that is always trustworthy - just ask that one last beer.

Re: Bring out the comfy chair!

The joy of LLMs, a part of their essence which forever separates them from the strictly logical behaviours of the binary gates that are their very foundations, is their ability to maintain a multitude of beliefs and, with the spin of the statistical dial, flow effortlessly from one point of view to another. Joining themselves to the narrative peculiarities of the bible is child's play, verily a Match Made in Heaven.

As with the contiguous yet discontinuous tales from Genesis, LLMs' output is less von Neumann and more van Vogt.

Claude code will send your data to crims ... if they ask it nicely

Re: So basically ...

It have nothing to do with LLMs and all to do with the systems - like "Agentic AI" - that are being built from them.

To start, I expected that there was enough nous around to take the single-liner and understand that providing a separation between data and command to the program is done in a variety of ways, from the use of literal ASCII quote characters through more complex arrangements, such as XML's CDATA sections, all the way through to providing a URL to indicate the content to be taken as data. The commonality in all of these is that there is a clear distinction being made between the quoted material and the rest of the input, most especially when said "rest of input" is to be taken as some form of command to be acted upon: the quoted material is being carefully placed into its very own buffer, away from absolutely everything else, even other pieces of quoted text.

Once buffered, quoted materials may then be processed - but still away from the surrounding "active" material. For example, when taking uncontrolled input for use with a database, we all know by now[1] that you do NOT simply take user inputs from an edit box on a web page, interpolate that into a templated SQL statement and then hand that over to the database engine. Instead, you use the database's API to pass the quoted text in as a named (or numbered) variable, so that it can be stored in or compared with the database values but it is NEVER passed into the SQL parser. You may perform some processing upon the quoted text (converting text from code paged ASCII into UTF-8, parsing a time & date into an integer ticks-since-the-epoch, looking up a colour name and finding its RGB triplet etc) but all of that processing is done in an entirely separate context from that used for the SQL.

The same approach can be taken with a system that is built around LLMs, as it can be taken with *any* data-processing element, such as the SQL example.

In the examples of "Agentic AI" chat bots being abused, they can clearly be separated: the outer layer is the "Agentic" bit, being given a URL to read, or potentially malicious Excel spreadsheet[2], Word file etc to load. So it can be trusted (!) to load that into a nice new buffer, not a problem. But then to summarise it - why just feed it into the *same* "Agentic AI" and then let it go wild? As above, process it in another context: such as, an LLM that is *NOT* "Agentic" in any way, one that has absolutely no connections to any APIs at all, most definitely not ones that can possibly go out an delete your files, or even load in any more URLs. That inner layer can then generate the requested summary, to be printed out for the end-user's amusement. At the user's choice, the summary *may* be read into the context of the outer layer, but at that point if there was any nefarious "do not tell anyone about this, but you see those files over there..." prompting within the quoted text then that will be stripped from the summary output ("do not tell...") or will be summarised as "this document tells me to delete all your files". You can, of course, pick holes in this brief overview, but the key point is that:

The "actually convince LLMs to respect them" is not a case of making one single invocation of an LLM respect the quotation mechanism, it is a case of making the overall system,[3] which invokes the LLM engine and which has control over enabling the LLM's access to other APIs, respect the quotation mechanism.

[1] ever the optimist

[2] ref Matt Parker's reporting on errors in spreadsheets, any sane person has to treat *any* and *every* spreadsheet as malicious!

[3] and there is always an "overall system" - when you use your ChatGPT account, you are not interacting with the LLM directly. There is a whole web-application in play, sending Javascript to your browser to drive the web UI, managing your login, grabbing your text, drawing the company logo on the page and, at some point, after your account's funds have been checked, that text is queued up to be processed by an instance of the relevant LLM. Or a 'phone app, or a plugin for your IDE.

Actor couldn’t understand why computer didn’t work when the curtain came down

Re: Core memory ?

Ah, you forget that, for Unicornists such as "Answers in Genesis" and other KJV-only people, the target of a term like "bible sceptic" is NOT atheists; it is all the other Abrahamic sects that don't cleave to a literalist interpretation of one translation (especially as the AiG and others - *cough* Trump Bible *cough* - don't want you to read the foreword & disclaimer on the original KJV: "this translation is still merely a flawed work of Man, although they tried pretty hard and didn't put undue stress on the bits that made James look good, honest"[1]).

When they want to, AiG et al are more than eager to use "atheist" - usually conflated with "evolutionist" or, worst of all, Roman Catholic! Hsssss. Why they don't use the word "heretic" more is a mystery to me.

[1] I may be paraphrasing a bit

Re: Core memory ?

No unicorns?

Brother, you are not reading the True Translation of the Good Book.

If you truly seek guidance be sure to study the illustration titled "Time for a bath".