1632 Series personnal comment

Eric Flint wrote:

> "Uri David Akavia" <uridavid RemoveThis @netvision.net.il> wrote in message
> news:pan.2004.05.09.19.47.23.75336@netvision.net.il...
>
>>On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 09:52:46 +0000, Hans wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Not to have collected all computers and computer equipment and supplies
>>>and secured them in a high security site is short sighted to the nth
>>>degree. This is non replaceable technology that was designed as
>>>throw-away goods!
>>
>>I've thought about this sentence and I have a question for the newsgroup.
>>
>>Let's ignore personal property laws.
>
>
> The problem is you can't. Hans' proposal might sound good for a videogame,
> but the idea that a town of West Virginians would agree to something as
> sweeping as the confiscation of all personal computers is... well, the word
> "ludicrous" comes to mind.

It might have been good for some comedic relief <G>.
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

Uri David Akavia wrote:

 > But what do you need computers for in 163x?

This basic question is hashed out in misc.survivalism often enough,
except post TEOTWAWKI. The conclusion seems to be "next to nothing"
for individuals, "moderately useful, not vital" for groups.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

Hans.RemoveThis@Kill-All-Spammers.com wrote:

 > And the notion the there should be a telegraph when there is knowledge
 > and parts to make AM band radio transmitters. Use the wire to make
 > hi-gain transmitter antennas and hi-gain directional receiving
 > antennas. Radio antennas can be protected... telegraph wires can't!

Some points there. Eric is not a tech geek. Not a slam, he probably
would not be able to handle the politics if he were. It does sound as
though he is getting good advice on radio now.

Although, using radio in that fashion (open to the public) would also
complicate security regarding what radios are able to do.

 > Not to have collected all computers and computer equipment and supplies
 > and secured them in a high security site is short sighted to the nth
 > degree. This is non replaceable technology that was designed as
 > throw-away goods!

Like, "put them all in the school library"? How many of those
computers do you think survived the Croation raid?<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

"accuracy" is not correct. Hand calculations, properly duplexed checked,
are entirely accurate for all 163x purposes, even if you do not go to the
extreme of Gauss, who in the early 19th century did his linear least
squares fits to 20 places.

"speed" is also open to question, until you identify something that needs
a calculation that quickly, which seems unlikely in 163x. Using one
computer to generate a good set of 5-place trig/log tables that can later
be reprinted would be useful, but that one computer is available.

Computers are a wonderful tool, but they legitimately park far behind,
e.g., a barbed wire making machine or a good Corliss engine in terms of
utility.

On Sun, 9 May 2004, Michelle Steiner wrote:

 > In article <pan.2004.05.09.19.47.23.75336.DeleteThis@netvision.net.il>,
 > Uri David Akavia <uridavid.DeleteThis@netvision.net.il> wrote:
 >
  > > But what do you need computers for in 163x?
 >
 > Speed and accuracy.
 >
 > --
 > Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Vote for John Kerry.
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

Eric & other Folk

"Eric Flint" <eflint RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Rs2dncOqHbPuewPdRVn-vg@comcast.com...
>
> "Uri David Akavia" <uridavid RemoveThis @netvision.net.il> wrote in message
> news:pan.2004.05.09.19.47.23.75336@netvision.net.il...
> > On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 09:52:46 +0000, Hans wrote:
> >
> > > Not to have collected all computers and computer equipment and
supplies
> > > and secured them in a high security site is short sighted to the nth
> > > degree. This is non replaceable technology that was designed as
> > > throw-away goods!
(snip)
> There is simply no way that Stearns' emergency committee could have gotten
> enough support for the idea -- even if they came up with it in the first
> place, which they wouldn't.
(snip)

You can't win, really - if you had "collected" all the computers in "1632",
instead of
Hans complaining you would instead be criticised by the same people who
criticised
Steve Stirling for having the guns "collected" in "Island in the Sea Of
Time".

Whichever way you could have gone on this, someone would disagree.

Humans, eh? Aggravating buggers at times.



Regards

Brian Rusten
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

<Hans.TakeThisOut@Kill-All-Spammers.com> wrote in message
news:FKRnc.65792$QV6.34055@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com...

> Boy you just don't get it! You got tech that was designed as throw away
devices
> with very limited useful power on life! You have unwritten CD-Rs and
fools who
> think that saving their porno collection is the only way to go! You have
non
> replaceable devices and media and you're going to let some red neck use
them for
> target practice.

The problem you talk about with CDs is rare, and applies mostly to burned
CDs; few pressed CDs have that problem.

A computer can, quite conceivably, last for the life of the user; case in
point, I have a working 8088 at home; it's old enough that I literally can't
remember it not being around, and I'm 24. The DMP even works, we just can't
get ribbons for it.

There's no reason to suppose that, with a modicum of maintenance, the
computers in Grantville won't last longer than the life of the people who
bought them. You're right; we tend to treat computers as disposable. But
that's not really because of cost; computers cost a hell of a lot, when you
think about it; it's because if you buy a computer today, it's virtually
obsolete in 2 years; Grantville isn't going to have that problem for some
time.

If it tells you something, mom ported the house accounts from the 8088 to
her new computer (my old Athlon Thunderbird 1.2GHz) because she's addicted
to the MS Natural keyboard I got her a couple years ago, not because there
was any particular problem with the computer itself. Until about 2002, it
ran pretty much 18 hours a day, every day. If that were only 10 years,
that's about 70,000 hours, and MTBF for most parts is 300,000 hours (more,
for enterprise and high grade parts). Running 24/7, that's a smidge over 34
years, and that's a generally conservative number for failure rates.

A computer, despite most people's use habits, is designed to run for _years_
on end; there are businesses out there that are running quite happily on
computers older than most of the students at Texas A&M University this year.

And thanks very much, but rednecks aren't as bad as most about rampant
consumerism; we learn from the cradle that if something's useful, use it.

Andrew L.
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

BS! Their running for their lives! They would not have deployed boats for
rescue missions! For the simple fact that to do so the ships have to be dead in
the water in order for the boats to get back to them. Also there is the need
for ALL hands for rigging during maneuvers.

The story falls flat on its face!


George D. Phillies wrote:


>
> This is not quite accurate for the simple reason that prior to leaving
> the area it was necessary for the Danish Fleet to turn around. Depending
> on bearings relative to the winds thiw would require either turning across
> the wind and possible being left in irons or making a very large turn in
> the other direction, with a need to rest the sails every 45 degrees or
> so. Square riggers do ot turn like modern small sailboats. Now, the
> Danes were better than the 18th century Turks, who had at least one major
> ship capsize while trying to reverse course--or so I have read--but we are
> talking the better fraction of an hour, during which time putting boats
> over to rescue survivors would have occurred.
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

<Hans.TakeThisOut@Kill-All-Spammers.com> wrote in message
news:3%Qnc.65786$RI6.49845@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com...
> BS! Their running for their lives! They would not have deployed boats
for
> rescue missions! For the simple fact that to do so the ships have to be
dead in
> the water in order for the boats to get back to them. Also there is the
need
> for ALL hands for rigging during maneuvers.
>
> The story falls flat on its face!

Very nice...refutation by abject denial.

On a more civil note, they very probably would have deployed boats; in that
age, a large part of the crew of warships _couldn't_ work the rigging;
riggers rigged, gunners gunned, and officers gave orders. However, it's
rather easier to run an oar then a topgallant, and the martial customs of
the era called for at least a nod at honorable treatment of enemies. That,
and they probably desperately wanted to know what the hell just demolished
their fleet.

And remember that we're talking old-fashioned sailing ships, and IIRC
square-rigged ones at that. They probably dropped boats to look for
survivors (or salvage), the fleet heeled around (taking the better part of
an hour to do it), picked the boats up, and left. I don't recall the
baddies being under fire at the time, so there's no particular threat of
someone shooting their pinnaces.

Andrew L.
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

As it happens, my grandfather was an officer in the Royal and Imperial
Army of Austria-Hungary during the First World War, and had an actual
description of what happened on the first occasion in that Army's history
in what was interpreted as an aerial attack was made on several battalions
in march formation. These were also people who had never seen an
aircraft, and whose officers training in air warfare went to two
sentences, approximately "It is possible that in this war aircraft will be
used in combat. However, no one has any idea how."

Furthermore these were conscripts, not volunteers whose training made them
far more afraid of their officers than of the enemy.

On the other hand, they did not have the authorial golden BB.

They were ordered to go to massed fire.

They did.

They shot the aircraft down.

No panic, no running in circles.

Sorry, your guess does not meet with history, even against conscripts.

On Mon, 10 May 2004 Hans.TakeThisOut@Kill-All-Spammers.com wrote:

 > Hello Eric
 >
 > Normally I don't argue with authors either...
 >
 > But in this case we have gone way too far! You have a fleet of ships that are
 > under attack from small power boats that are running circles around them.
 > (watch the PANIC in the sailors on board the ships!) You have aircraft buzzing
 > the ships and shooting at them... (in mass you'd have had BROWN and YELLOW decks
 > throughout the fleet!) I can't see a single musketeer trying to shoot one of
 > these boats or planes! I can see a lot of sailors diving overboard to get away
 > from the HELL SPAWN that is attacking them. I see the rest of the crews in mass
 > hysteria including their leaders!
 >
 > What I do see is that you have applied 20th century thinking to your 17th
 > century characters.
 >
 >
 > BTW I really like your "The Course of Empire", "Crown of Slaves", and of course
 > "1632" it had such promise.
 >
 >
 >
 > Eric Flint wrote:
 >
   > >><Hans.TakeThisOut@Kill-All-Spammers.com> wrote:
   > >>
   > >>
   > >>>You're right! ... Sorta! Actually everything is crap... first Big Bang
   > >>>crap and then super nova crap ... several super nova craps actually.
   > >>>
   > >>>However as far and the 1632 series is concerned... It has proven to be
   > >>>thoughtless to an unbelievable extreme!
   > >>>
   > >>>It is totally unbelievable that you have someone who SHOULD have died
  > >
  > > from
  > >
   > >>>hypothermia resurrected and acting as a spy. (Get this straight! There
   > >>>were NO boats in the area after the sea battle that could have rescued
   > >>>anyone as ALL ships had been scared off and headed south!
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > > I normally stay out of these discussions, because I think people have the
  > > right to express their dislike for something I write without me trying to
  > > argue with them about it. I do, however, get annoyed when a critic claims
  > > something is a "fact" which is nothing of the sort. With regard to the
  > > specific issue of whether Eddie could have been rescued, the novel
  > > specifically and clearly establishes that most of the Danish ships remained
  > > in the area for some time after the Outlaw collided with the one Danish
  > > warship, and some of them were engaging in rescue operations. I've copied
  > > below the relevant passage from chapter 47.
  > >
  > > Someone can still argue that it's highly unlikely that Eddie would survive
  > > the episode, and I would not argue the point -- in fact, the novel ALSO
  > > makes that quite clear. Simpson is astonished when he discovers that Eddie
  > > survived, since the odds against that happening were extremely high.
  > >
  > > So what? War is _full_ of things happening against the odds. And while
  > > history books normally don't concentrate on all the oddball stuff, that is
  > > in fact typically what _fiction_ about wars concentrates on. That's
  > > inherent in the nature of story-telling, for Pete's sake. People usually
  > > aren't interested in hearing about humdrum routine events when they want to
  > > be entertained.
  > >
  > > Eric
  > >
  > > PS. My critic can't even keep his points of the compass straight. Even if
  > > it were true that all the Danish ships had been immediately "scared off" --
  > > which it isn't, as the passage quoted below makes crystal clear -- they
  > > certainly wouldn't have "headed south." South was... Wismar, where they
  > > just got driven off from. They retreated where they came from, which was to
  > > the northwest.
  > >
  > > "Hans! Hans, damn it-talk to me!" Jesse half-shouted into the
  > > microphone as he pushed his own aircraft as hard as he could towards the
  > > clouds of smoke rising from the sea.
  > >
  > > There was no answer, and Jesse's jaw clenched tight.
  > >
  > > He didn't have a complete picture of what was happening, but the
  > > radioed reports from Louie Tillman had told him enough. Eddie and Larry's
  > > initial strike had been far more successful than Jesse had ever allowed
  > > himself to hope... only to disintegrate into disaster. The Outlaw was
  > > gone-that much Tillman knew for certain-and with it both of the boys. But
  > > that wasn't what frightened Jesse, because there was nothing he could do
  > > about it. It was too late for that. But Louie had also reported Hans'
  > > insane, low-level attack on the Danish ship which had destroyed the Outlaw.
  > > Hans hadn't reported. In fact, he had yet to transmit a single word.
  > >
  > > "Hans, I know you can fucking well hear me!" Jesse snapped. "Now answer
  > > me!"
  > >
  > > Silence. But he was close enough now to see the smoke and wreckage to
  > > which the invasion force had been reduced. Some of the Danes had already put
  > > about, clawing back towards Luebeck and away from the demons which had
  > > ravaged them. Others looked as if they were trying to continue towards
  > > Wismar, and a few of them were engaged in frantic rescue operations, trying
  > > to snatch men from the icy waters before hypothermia killed them. But most
  > > of them seemed to be milling around in confusion, still shocked and confused
  > > by what had happened. He could see the remaining speedboats hovering between
  > > the invaders and Wismar, and even as he watched one of the brigs which had
  > > been holding its course turned away rather than face them.
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

 > You can't create consistent precision parts without computer control!

Let me urge you find out what machine shops did 40 years ago. Or 140 years
ago.

 > And then there is what started the computer revolution in the first place...
 > gunnery tables for your cannons. Range is derived from: Elevation,
 > configuration of shot, type and amount of powder... for each cannon design.

Cannon do not need range tables. Modern artillery had precalculated range
tables, done by hand.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment 

  > > 5. Mike fails to promote RADIO as the communications base over the
  > > telegraph!
 >
 > Radio requires tubes, and/or transistors; what happens when there are no
 > more of them? telegraph requires only electricity and a mechanical key.

No, radio does not require either tubes or transistors.

And I am old enough to have met an electrical engineer who had--as a
much younger man--worked with the gain device that preceded
them.

The 163x crowd can given directions build excellent tuned circuits,
excellent high voltage sources--those were available in 1800, and, of
course, the coherers I note in the prior paragraph.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 1632 Series personnal comment