> Auch an einem eher ungewöhnlichen Ort haben die Mitarbeiter der Behörde schon Messungen durchgeführt. Der U-Bahnhof Rosenthaler Platz rückte wegen seiner vielen orangefarbenen Kacheln ins Visier der Behörde. „Die Farbe wird mit dem Schwermetall Uran hergestellt, weil es beim Brennvorgang sehr hitzebeständig ist“, sagt Leps. Die Strahlung ist laut dem Experten jedoch belanglos. Auch für Menschen, die sich länger auf dem U-Bahnhof aufhalten, besteht keine Gefahr.
In short: "According to experts the radiation is trivial."
Obligatory comment that the Z3 was the world's first digital computer. Not sure what the "real" refers to in the headline, but it turns out that the Z3 was indeed Turing complete.
If you didn't know, you're been hell-banned for months. That's why so few people reply to your comments.
But anyway, keeping something secret doesn't mean it didn't happen. And it's now public knowledge for anyone who cares to look outside the history of the US.
You have to have a certain level of karma to be able to see shadow-banned people. Otherwise... yeah not knowing about it is kind of the point, isn't it?
Of course I'm banned on HN - I'm not a leftist, right dang?
Very unfair. As somebody who has regularly commented here against the excesses of the left, while sometimes the silent downvoting has often been telling as to the sympathies of some, the moderation has always been scrupulously fair.
> Well, Britain decided to hide everything behind the Official Secrets Act, which workers proudly maintained.
Fun fact: GCHQ still refuses to talk about some of the earliest computing work on Colossus and enigma decryption. I was quite surprised to hear this when I was on a tour of The National Museum of Computing at Bletchley Park[0].
I hope that if/when they do decide to declassify that information that they'll hand it over to TNMOC.
[0] https://www.tnmoc.org/ - It's well worth a visit so when they're open again post-COVID see if you can get down there.
It's... complicated. The title of first digital computer can be argued to be ABC, Z3, Colossus, or ENIAC, and which one you give it to is going to be decided on the basis of how precisely you define "first digital computer." Given that there is also an element of nationalism to the decision (is the first computer German, British, or American?), it's not entirely unreasonable to suppose that the criteria is partially determined by the desire of whom to crown.
Personally, I don't think the fact that the Z3 and the Colossus were discovered to be Turing-complete long after they were last used should really qualify them for a title based on "first Turing-complete machine." The long time it took to establish Turing-completeness indicates that they weren't designed to be Turing-complete, and that they are is more a reflection of just how low a bar it is to be Turing-complete than the capabilities of the machines themselves. In other words, I would submit that the phrase "first Turing-complete machine" should really be understood as "first intentionally Turing-complete machine."
Another framework that makes sense to understand is the role that the computers had on later development of the field. ENIAC clearly has a massive influence, since it's the one that spawned more recognizable computers as its progeny. The influence of ABC on ENIAC only came out much later (and is still somewhat debated). Z3 had little impact on the field later because it was on the wrong side of WW2. Colossus I believe did influence the Manchester machines, but this link was not known at the time because of the secrecy around Colossus.
Who knows, perhaps if the minds behind Paperclip had been a little more data-minded:
* today, Z3 might be considered "first real"
and
* today, we might be stuck writing code in a fossilized language lovingly called Plankalkül 58 by its inventors that had so much inertia back then that it stifled all further development in the 1960ies, with the result that all of our 2021 computing would be about as fresh as the 2021 B52.
Haha, got me, I was just picking any "year used to name a language version" suffix at random, without realizing what corner of computing history this one is associated with. Is there anbody from that era who didn't have their own ALGOL?
You’re on a slippery slope and don’t consider that this is an exceptional situation. The danger of losing civil liberties comes when the exception becomes the rule.
AFAIK, no amendments have been violated since YouTube is a private entity. They can editorialize what they, how they want. It’s is their liberty to make a choice here, the same as your liberty to not support that choice.
That's a slippery slope right there, a very dangerous one. In the US, spaces where one engages in political activities have moved from public (town square in front of City Hall) to private (the mall plus parking lot). That's a problem.
The other thing is monopolies. In the past, when you were on the fringes of the spectrum you'd publish with your fringe publisher and could at least get your message out. Nowadays Youtube suppresses the neonazis. That's nice and good, as long as it's nazis, but what if they don't like what you have to say? Big publishers and government have a symbiotic relationship, and there is always a sprachregelung.
That’s not a slippery slope but your point further on is valid. The privatization of the town square carries the potential to erode our civil liberties as these new public centers aren’t held to the same standards. The question here is then how do we protect that.
Which freedoms do we give up here? Freedom of the individual or freedom of enterprise? Imo if a corporate entity decides to act like a public space, then it should be treated like one and held accountable as such. Otherwise we’ve created a simple way of bypassing some constitutional liberties.
That still however doesn’t answer the question as to where we draw the line for freedom of expression. Nazis took over once in the public sphere and they can do it again. I will argue against moral relativism here and say yes it’s ok to suppress nazis so long as we don’t turn that around and become needlessly oppressive in other ways.
A reasonable point. But I am worried about the day that those who seek more power are able to convince people that we are in a sustained exceptional situation that is not really all that exceptional. And with private entities doing their bidding to clamp down on dissenting voices, that could become even more possible.
I don't think we are there yet, but we should be wary of that possibility.
> and don’t consider that this is an exceptional situation
exceptional situations are ripe for exploitation by corporations and governments and political parties. And indeed we've seen all of these try (and succeed) in taking advantage of the situation...
"Never let a good crisis go to waste" -- Winston Churchill
If anything that only proves the GP's point. During the mentioned time period the only solution was to infringe on civil liberties by imposing a strict quarantine, and yet the people of the day still decided that it was better to die free than to live oppressed.
Indeed they are liable... well, to a certain degree:
A prime example here is the DMCA — but there are also other existing laws that place restrictions on content, which Youtube (and other platforms/publishers) must adhere to.
You imply that traditional dashboards are too complicated. However, Tesla is merely hiding that complexity behind one or a few screens an a few buttons. I like the approach to minimalism, but in my opinion there has to be a balance between pragmatism and beauty. The learning curve and ease of access is just lower in German (or traditional) dashboards in general. I am not sure if Tesla found that particular balance. I hear a lot of hate towards the giant screen and no love, but that is just anecdotal.
I assume Tesla went so radical in the Model 3 to save costs, rather than to stay minimalistic.
I agree with the parent. The UX of the Tesla Model S seems like a cohesive design from a coordinated team. The 2018 Audi S4, lacks the cohesiveness and the UX is a bit overwhelming.
