Happy 50th Birthday Intel 4004

[Stephen Fuld]

Today marks the 50th anniversary of the introduction of the Intel 4004.

My, how its grown up! :-)

https://www.npr.org/2021/11/15/1055767733/5-decades-ago-intel-unveiled-the-first-commercially-available-microprocessor


--
- Stephen Fuld
(e-mail address disguised to prevent spam)

[Terje Mathisen]

Stephen Fuld wrote:
> Today marks the 50th anniversary of the introduction of the Intel 4004.
>
> My, how its grown up!  :-)
>
> https://www.npr.org/2021/11/15/1055767733/5-decades-ago-intel-unveiled-the-first-commercially-available-microprocessor

I'm very happy and also proud that Stan Mazor once invited me to hold a
conference talk about Microprosessor Architecture, which I did by
talking about how "invisible" (i.e. micro-architectural) implementation
details impacts writing fast/optimal code.

I'll admit to having to google his name when the email turned up, at
which point I started getting nervous. :-(

Terje

--
- <Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no>
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

[Quadibloc]

On Monday, November 15, 2021 at 9:34:22 AM UTC-7, Stephen Fuld wrote:
> Today marks the 50th anniversary of the introduction of the Intel 4004.

This, of course, makes me feel old. I am young enough not to have
lived in a time without powerful computers with reliable random-access
memory, having been born after May 7, 1954, the date on which the IBM
704 was announced... but the microprocessor was a new-fangled thing
that came out well after I graduated from high school, and so to hear that
it has been around for over 50 years now, thus leading to a large proportion
of this world's young whipper-snappers never having known a time without
one... is disturbing.

John Savard

[gareth evans]

I remember being in the library in my final year at Essex Uni and
drooling over them in the various electronic enginneering magazines.

[John Levine]

According to gareth evans <headst...@yahoo.com>:

>I remember being in the library in my final year at Essex Uni and
>drooling over them in the various electronic enginneering magazines.

Was this back in the era when the ads had models in bikinis lounging
on the equipment, or later than that?

--
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

[Quadibloc]

On Tuesday, November 16, 2021 at 11:53:01 AM UTC-7, John Levine wrote:
> According to gareth evans <headst...@yahoo.com>:

> >I remember being in the library in my final year at Essex Uni and
> >drooling over them in the various electronic enginneering magazines.

> Was this back in the era when the ads had models in bikinis lounging
> on the equipment, or later than that?

1971 would definitely *not* have been "later than that", but that does not mean
that's what he was drooling over.

John Savard

[BGB]

I may be missing something, but... What exactly to models wearing
bikinis have to do with electronics, to where it would make sense to
have both things in the same magazine?...


Though, FWIW, I was born during the early part of the x86 era...
Technically, both x86 Protected Mode and MS-DOS are older than I am.

> John Savard
>

[Joe Pfeiffer]

BGB <cr8...@gmail.com> writes:

> On 11/16/2021 1:19 PM, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 16, 2021 at 11:53:01 AM UTC-7, John Levine wrote:
>>> According to gareth evans <headst...@yahoo.com>:
>>
>>>> I remember being in the library in my final year at Essex Uni and
>>>> drooling over them in the various electronic enginneering magazines.
>>
>>> Was this back in the era when the ads had models in bikinis lounging
>>> on the equipment, or later than that?
>> 1971 would definitely *not* have been "later than that", but that
>> does not mean
>> that's what he was drooling over.
>>
>
> I may be missing something, but... What exactly to models wearing
> bikinis have to do with electronics, to where it would make sense to
> have both things in the same magazine?...

Trying to lure nerdy engineers to the ad (note the tacit assumption that
all engineers are male).

[Thomas Koenig]

BGB <cr8...@gmail.com> schrieb:

> On 11/16/2021 1:19 PM, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 16, 2021 at 11:53:01 AM UTC-7, John Levine wrote:
>>> According to gareth evans <headst...@yahoo.com>:
>>
>>>> I remember being in the library in my final year at Essex Uni and
>>>> drooling over them in the various electronic enginneering magazines.
>>
>>> Was this back in the era when the ads had models in bikinis lounging
>>> on the equipment, or later than that?
>>
>> 1971 would definitely *not* have been "later than that", but that does not mean
>> that's what he was drooling over.
>>
>
> I may be missing something, but... What exactly to models wearing
> bikinis have to do with electronics, to where it would make sense to
> have both things in the same magazine?...

You're not serious, are you? Think of the target audience.

[Bill Findlay]

On 16 Nov 2021, Joe Pfeiffer wrote
(in article <1bzgq3l...@pfeifferfamily.net>):

And heterosexual.

--
Bill Findlay

[MitchAlsup]

Probably would fall into the "no workie" category today.
<
>
> --
> Bill Findlay

[Quadibloc]

On Tuesday, November 16, 2021 at 12:30:49 PM UTC-7, BGB wrote:

> I may be missing something, but... What exactly to models wearing
> bikinis have to do with electronics, to where it would make sense to
> have both things in the same magazine?...

Quite right. So here is a model not wearing a bikini.

http://standingwavegenerator.com/microdata-alumni/images/computer_design_march1972_micro-babe.jpg

John Savard

[Stefan Monnier]

>> Trying to lure nerdy engineers to the ad (note the tacit assumption that
>> all engineers are male).
> And heterosexual.

And not put off by objectification of female,


Stefan

[Quadibloc]

Further searching let me put it into some context...

http://standingwavegenerator.com/microdata-alumni/gallery_misc.htm

John Savard

[wolfgang kern]

now I feel really old ... :)
pretty girls dont make much sense today (we are too old already).
I couldn't official buy a 4004 back than because US had Austria on the
wrong political hemisphere (IIRC still wrong until 1980), so we had to
buy it way more expensive from other European countries.
The limited features of the 4004 were somehow disappointing, our own
DTL/RTL circuits performed better with less power and were cheaper too.
__
wolfgang

[BGB]

Hmm...

It would kinda make more sense for something like car ads, since females
rubbing up on cars seems to be fairly common in car ads.

Or a male holding up a can or bottle of beer while surrounded by a
circle of females. Well, excluding the Keystone commercials, which using
depict a male being ridiculed for "bitter beer face" while surrounded by
a group of bystanders that is usually ~ 3/4 female, ...

Well, then I guess there are ads for MMO games (and mobile games), which
often depict oddly human versions of the females of the various fantasy
races with minimal clothing.



But, this seems less common for things like electronics and dev-boards,
which are usually a lot more "cut and dry", ...

The Digi-Key stuff seems to have the Shawn Hymel, who is a guy who
dresses up like he was trying to play a character from "Revenge of the
Nerds" or similar, not quite figured out what is going on here; he comes
off like someone playing an obvious caricature, but seems to know what
he is talking about, so it is confusing...

For a while, there was also "The Ben Heck Show" which itself apparently
existed mostly as a way to promote Element14 (it ended, and got replaced
with "Element14 Presents", which kinda sucks in comparison, *1).

*1: Both shows did have Karen Corbeill; I haven't been able to figure
out her age (my guess is she is from the latter part of Gen X). Does
fabrication and electronics, not seen much to imply she does any coding.

...


Presumably, I would fall into the target demographic.

General demographic stats:
Male, 30s, single;
Aspergers / High-Functioning Autism;
Heterosexual (in theory, *2).
Asexual or Demisexual is probably more technically accurate.


*2: The main alternatives are not useful to me. In my case, it is all a
bit more of an abstraction anyways. I am not particularly a fan of the
over-complicated / word-soup definitions that have become popular in
recent years (well, and trying to classify my "identity" and/or "lack
thereof" in these areas seems like more effort than it is worth).


Granted, besides programming stuff, ..., I also watch some amount of
animated TV shows. A few notable past examples were things like "My
Little Pony" and "Steven Universe" and similar, but these shows have
ended. Watched a few other shows, but they got cancelled (eg, "Owl
House" and "Infinity Train"). This mostly just leaves "Miraculous
Ladybug" and similar at this point...

Well, and watched some older shows, eg: He-Man, Rainbow Brite, Mega-Man
(Ruby Spears), ...

Also, various Anime and similar as well.

...

Beyond this, not sure which exact demographic I fall into though.

[David Schultz]

On 11/16/21 1:30 PM, BGB wrote:
> I may be missing something, but... What exactly to models wearing
> bikinis have to do with electronics, to where it would make sense to
> have both things in the same magazine?...

Nothing of course. Except it was a common marketing ploy.

I still have a 1978 calendar from Century Electronics featuring a woman
wearing only very short cutoff jeans (with a tube of IC's in one back
pocket). Carefully posed so you can see that she has no top on but
without revealing too much.


--
http://davesrocketworks.com
David Schultz

[BGB]

I generally consider myself to be heterosexual, but I have since
realized that asexual (and/or demisexual, *) is probably closer to accurate.

*: I might find someone more attractive if I have feelings for them, or
otherwise feel like I can relate to them. Otherwise, I have noted that I
don't really feel much attraction towards people even if they do match
up with traditional definitions of attractiveness (seems more
emotions-based than looks-based). For random people I don't know, I am
fairly neutral.


But, I guess this sort of advertising seems less common now...

Did decide to leave out my memories of a bunch of random stuff from
decades-old infomercials...

[BGB]

OK. I suspect this probably died off enough by the 2000s and 2010s,
enough so that I wasn't aware that it was a thing.


Sort of figured that it would have all been about "business stuff" or
something.

Like, some guy in a suit being like, "Now, lets talk about your payroll?
Are you still doing it on paper, like some kind of caveman? You *need*
our expensive business computer!". Company gets the guy a fancy suit,
fancy watch, fancy office, ...


Or, if it was 90s, maybe get some guy to do poorly sung hip-hop trying
to convince people about the superiority of PA-RISC or similar, for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLTh4uVJduI

Or, maybe something similar, but like "more 70s", like they replace the
hip-hop with Disco and have the singers try to imitate the Village
People or Elvis or something. Or, maybe some hippies smoking weed and
protesting "nam" or something.

Admittedly, my familiarity with the 70s is a little weak.

...

[MitchAlsup]

I am sitting around wondering whether anyone could program a 4004 to run BS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mnYf7L7Amw&ab_channel=SkillsMatter

[Thomas Koenig]

BGB <cr8...@gmail.com> schrieb:

> Or, if it was 90s, maybe get some guy to do poorly sung hip-hop trying
> to convince people about the superiority of PA-RISC or similar, for example:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLTh4uVJduI

Not so poorly sung for the time, styles have evolved since then.

Also, PA-RISC was a nice (and often forgotten) architecture, even
if it had delay slots.

I worked a lot on Series 700 workstations in my university days, the
computer center had them in clusters scattered around the campus. After
figuring out vi, these were a relevation compated to the MVS mainfraimes
I had used earlier. Still used them for accessing the vector computer
(which also ran an MVS variant), though.

[Quadibloc]

And actually bikinis weren't _that_ common in computer ads.

Women in miniskirts typing at a computer screen, yes.

But usually if there was something out of the ordinary, they needed
some excuse.

Like a woman wearing a paper bikini - that was a pattern for a bikini
drawn on a plotter. Or men and women in bathing suits for an ad
for air conditioning for computer rooms.

The Microdata Microprogramming Handbook ad had as its excuse
the fact that many computers that were implemented with microprogramming
kept information about how that worked as a proprietary secret.

This wasn't entirely true about IBM's 360 series, though. A book describing
how several models were microprogrammed - plus a couple of machines by
other manufacturers - Microprogramming: Principles and Practices by Samir
S. Husson - was published in 1970.

John Savard

[Terje Mathisen]

MitchAlsup wrote:
> I am sitting around wondering whether anyone could program a 4004 to run BS
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mnYf7L7Amw&ab_channel=SkillsMatter
>

That should be easy, as long as the 4004 could address enough memory.
Although intentionally awful, BS does not have many hard (impossible) to
implement corners, right?

Performance, or the lack thereof, would be more relevant...

[David Brown]

On 17/11/2021 02:35, BGB wrote:

>
> I generally consider myself to be

<snip>

I generally consider people's sexuality or attractions to be of little
relevance or interest. I cannot see how your preferences in that area
are any more relevant to others than your preferences in ice-cream
flavours or films you enjoy. Of course it can matter to /you/, and it
matters in situations where you are looking for or interacting with a
partner. But outside of that, it does not matter - we're all people,
whoever we like to spend time with.

This is not a "don't ask, don't tell" attitude - it's a "I really don't
care one way or another, and knowing your sexuality will not influence
me in any way in how I relate to you" attitude.

I am also not at all convinced of the merits of applying labels to
different kinds of sexuality. It might be helpful sometimes to have
broad categories (hetro-, homo- and asexual), but since everyone is a
mix of different aspects (and the mix can change with time and
circumstance), categorising is always going to be inaccurate. (If /you/
find it helpful to pick a label for yourself, then that's fine of course
- but I don't like using labels for others.)

The important thing is you get to be yourself, and are happy with that,
and others should not get to impose their ideas, theories, or prejudices
on you. I don't care who you find attractive - but I /do/ care that you
have the right to decide for yourself.

>
>
> But, I guess this sort of advertising seems less common now...
>

Yes, thankfully - it is mostly a relic of the past. Scantily clad women
still turn up in some adverts, and not just for those where it could be
relevant to the product, but they are rare in technology adverts.

> Did decide to leave out my memories of a bunch of random stuff from
> decades-old infomercials...

It is a well-established principle of advertising that sex sells.

In the advertising industry joke, there are two kinds of adverts - those
aimed at men, and those aimed at women. Men are simple creatures, so
your advert should have one of two messages - "This product will help
you get a date with a bikini model", or "This product will save you time
and money so that you have more time and money left for trying to get a
date with a bikini model". Women are infinitely more sophisticated, so
your advert should have the message "This product will help you become a
bikini model".

[BGB]

On 11/17/2021 12:38 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> BGB <cr8...@gmail.com> schrieb:
>
>> Or, if it was 90s, maybe get some guy to do poorly sung hip-hop trying
>> to convince people about the superiority of PA-RISC or similar, for example:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLTh4uVJduI
>
> Not so poorly sung for the time, styles have evolved since then.
>

I rewatched it, then realized it wasn't so much that his performance was
bad, so much as the song was pretty bad to begin with and not even a
good performer could save it.

Then went and rewatched "Don't Copy That Floppy" again, followed by
videos where people were mixing various 90s Rap/Hip-Hop songs with the
"Thomas the Tank Engine" theme, which was an oddly amusing combination.

Eg, "Don't Copy That Floppy":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up863eQKGUI

> Also, PA-RISC was a nice (and often forgotten) architecture, even
> if it had delay slots.
>
> I worked a lot on Series 700 workstations in my university days, the
> computer center had them in clusters scattered around the campus. After
> figuring out vi, these were a relevation compated to the MVS mainfraimes
> I had used earlier. Still used them for accessing the vector computer
> (which also ran an MVS variant), though.
>

Never dealt with it first-hand.
My first real foray outside of x86 land was ARM11 on the Raspberry Pi.

My younger self was naive and thought that x86 would last into the
indefinite future; but as I see it, "the writing is already on the
wall". Though, my current prediction is that it will lose its dominance
in a gradual shift from x86 to ARM64, but that rather than it being
simply ARM as the "new ISA to rule them all", the landscape will likely
be unstable (potentially allowing RISC-V and similar to also gain a
foothold).

Though, I suspect that in some sense, excessive consolidation (such as a
"one true CPU architecture", "one true C compiler", "one true OS", ...),
is ultimately detrimental.

In some sense, standardization can be good, but the big problem seems to
be that many people mistake consolidation for standardization.

Well, also maybe need to bring an end to the era of "CPU architectures
which exist as intellectual property under the control of a single
corporation". When this happens, the whole "ecosystem" is ultimately
built around and bent to the will of whatever happens to be most
profitable for the corporation.

Better is when there is no single party that has the power or authority
to "take ones' toys away".

While Open Source is "better" in this sense, excessive consolidation
around particular artifacts itself is ultimately a problem.


But, then again, I guess thinking about it, despite its badness, "Don't
Copy That Floppy" sorta pointed out a great instability in the system;
and in effect this instability has been playing out for decades (namely,
that trying to apply models adapted for industrial production of
material goods to artificial scarcity and information which can be
readily copied, ultimately, does not work).

But, rather than bringing an end to computing, rather open-source just
sorta gradually takes over instead, being in some ways much better
suited to the overall constraints of the system (though, not necessarily
to FOSS developers being able to have any sort of income, which is sadly
still tied up with the older models).

...

[chris]

Selling works best by appealing to the most basic drives in humanity
and sex has always been high on that list, next to food and shelter.
Scantily clad young ladies were often used draped across the front
of cars in the old days, but that's considered sexist nowadays.
Tv advertising pretends to be oh so innocent, but the number of
adverts featuring tight buttshot in the opening frame gets ever more
common. Again, appealing to the most basic drives in humanity.
Probably appeals to all persuasions and choices as well...

[MitchAlsup]

On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 2:35:23 AM UTC-6, Terje Mathisen wrote:
> MitchAlsup wrote:
> > I am sitting around wondering whether anyone could program a 4004 to run BS
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mnYf7L7Amw&ab_channel=SkillsMatter
> >
> That should be easy, as long as the 4004 could address enough memory.
> Although intentionally awful, BS does not have many hard (impossible) to
> implement corners, right?
>
> Performance, or the lack thereof, would be more relevant...
<

I especially liked the macro facility !! Vi edit commands !!

[BGB]

Admittedly, I don't watch (actual / broadcast) TV much anymore, apart
from occasionally shows like NOVA or similar (on PBS), so dunno...

But, I guess the issue may be that a (potentially significant) number of
people have in-effect lost interest in these sorts of activities, and
have gotten kinda tired of it (both in its portrayal in the media; or
the expectation / implication that people do these sorts of things IRL;
...).

Like, culturally, one of expected to "find someone", "have a
relationship", ..., but doesn't help when one is kinda burnt out about
it (and there is no one around that one has any real interest in).

But, yeah, it may have been an oversight that not everyone is this way.


Granted, character ships in TV shows are sort of their own category
(though it does start to get kinda old when a show drags it out for too
many seasons). Or, in some series, it is hard to get much investment
when they have been dragging out the same dynamics with the same
characters for like the past 25 years or so.

But, real-life is more awkward, it is like a character ship where one of
the characters is themselves. Still pretty much immaterial though.

Not sure as much how other people relate to this, or if they (also) in
these contexts end up thinking in the 3rd person (like if oneself were a
character in a TV show).

...

[MitchAlsup]

I tried to have that discussion with my youngest brother several decades ago::
His business is advertising, and his question was "what do I have to do to get
engineers to read the advertisements" ??
<
I told him of the efforts of engineers to eliminate all advertisements from
even arriving on their screens so they would never have to even bother to
move their eyes in that direction.
<
I related how if there was anything blinking or moving on the ad that it would
not be read and often the window on which the ad was displayed, moved to
the edge of the screen so as to not bother the engineer.
<
After a couple of hours explaining how engineers go out of their way to avoid
ads--he had still not gotten the point--"do not waste time or effort in trying
to put ads in front of engineers. "Like putting lipstick on a big"...........

>
> Like, culturally, one of expected to "find someone", "have a
> relationship", ..., but doesn't help when one is kinda burnt out about
> it (and there is no one around that one has any real interest in).
<

Sometimes I think women and advertising people come from the same
island.........global warming cannot come soon enough........

>
> But, yeah, it may have been an oversight that not everyone is this way.
>

Crap loads of people do not understand the relationship between ads
and "the poor", or adds, and "mental illness" {Witness SkyBuck}, or the
relationship between the number of ads and the number of murders
going on..............or the relationship between more TV channels and
crappier programming en-the-large.......

>
> Granted, character ships in TV shows are sort of their own category
> (though it does start to get kinda old when a show drags it out for too
> many seasons). Or, in some series, it is hard to get much investment
> when they have been dragging out the same dynamics with the same
> characters for like the past 25 years or so.
<

Soap Operas anyone--the plot never gets anywhere.........

>
> But, real-life is more awkward, it is like a character ship where one of
> the characters is themselves. Still pretty much immaterial though.
<

If you are an engineer, the women will still ignore you because you
a) don't have the look of royalty, b) the adornments of the rich and famous,
c) street smarts of a lizard,............

>
> Not sure as much how other people relate to this, or if they (also) in
> these contexts end up thinking in the 3rd person (like if oneself were a
> character in a TV show).
<

Thinking in the 3rd person, except as an experiment, is a sign that you have
already lost something that people who watch ads have--and you either never
did or do not currently have.........
>
> ...

[Thomas Koenig]

MitchAlsup <Mitch...@aol.com> schrieb:

> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 4:01:07 AM UTC-6, BGB wrote:
>> But, I guess the issue may be that a (potentially significant) number of
>> people have in-effect lost interest in these sorts of activities, and
>> have gotten kinda tired of it (both in its portrayal in the media; or
>> the expectation / implication that people do these sorts of things IRL;
>> ...).
><
><
> I tried to have that discussion with my youngest brother several decades ago::
> His business is advertising, and his question was "what do I have to do to get
> engineers to read the advertisements" ??

Add enough technical details to make it interesting. About the
only (print) ads I still look at are in technical magazines.
It can be intresting to see what they have to say about their
newest temperature sensors, reactors or pumps.

Companies advertising about big data etc tend to have much
less details in their ads. I wonder why...

><
> I told him of the efforts of engineers to eliminate all advertisements from
> even arriving on their screens so they would never have to even bother to
> move their eyes in that direction.

Several decades ago, your brother was in online advertising?
Early adopter, then.

[BGB]

Yeah. I was also writing about "the other thing", but yeah, this applies
to ads as well. Most ads just kinda suck and anymore are just sort of
noise in the background that I tend to ignore.

Some of the mobile-games ads get particularly obnoxious, where they sort
of pin themselves to the page and display endless flashing and jumpy
animations. Does little more than being annoying when one isn't really
the sort of person who has any real interest in "free to play" mobile games.

>>
>> Like, culturally, one of expected to "find someone", "have a
>> relationship", ..., but doesn't help when one is kinda burnt out about
>> it (and there is no one around that one has any real interest in).
> <
> Sometimes I think women and advertising people come from the same
> island.........global warming cannot come soon enough........

Kinda agreed. To me, trying to interact with someone who can't relate to
the world in a similar way to myself, or where it is seemingly
impossible to have a meaningful conversation about much of anything I am
interested in, seems kinda pointless.

I "could" try to seem more normal, except:
This wouldn't work out long term;
I have no real interest in "flings".

So, this favors a strategy of, rather than trying to be "charming" or to
"woo" them, instead trying to optimize for determining whether or not
they are potentially compatible, and if not, they can go on their way.
Getting caught up in something that wont work is not ideal for either party.
And, if they are the type that expects to be wooed, or for the guy to
start throwing money at them to try to win them over, well then, I want
nothing to do with them.

>>
>> But, yeah, it may have been an oversight that not everyone is this way.
>>
> Crap loads of people do not understand the relationship between ads
> and "the poor", or adds, and "mental illness" {Witness SkyBuck}, or the
> relationship between the number of ads and the number of murders
> going on..............or the relationship between more TV channels and
> crappier programming en-the-large.......

I have little idea what is going in most "skybuck" posts, they tend come
off more like incoherent rambling.


One thing with commercials is its effect on episode length, which seems
to have become fairly standardized:
30 minute block: 22 minutes of show (leaving 8 minutes for ads);
60 minute block: 44 minutes of show (leaving 16 minutes for ads).


One notable exception for a lot of Cartoon Network shows is them using
an 11 minute episode format.

I think their programming blocks vary (between being based on a 15 and
30 minute structure). Though, not much actual motivation to watch the
channel itself (well, if I still had access to it) because it was
basically an endless stream of commercials and "Teen Titans Go" (wasn't
a fan of this show, but it was apparently the "got the highest ratings"
show).


Though, generally, the 11 minute episode format is fairly limiting in
terms of how much they can do with it.

Though, can note that Adventure Time managed to do surprisingly well
within the limits of 11 minute episodes. The episodes managed to both
tell a story and not feel overly rushed.

Partial contrast with Miraculous Ladybug where they use a 22 minute
episode format and the episodes still often feel rushed.

>>
>> Granted, character ships in TV shows are sort of their own category
>> (though it does start to get kinda old when a show drags it out for too
>> many seasons). Or, in some series, it is hard to get much investment
>> when they have been dragging out the same dynamics with the same
>> characters for like the past 25 years or so.
> <
> Soap Operas anyone--the plot never gets anywhere.........

Partly I was thinking some about things like "Sonic the Hedgehog" and
similar, where they had been trying to "milk it" for roughly 25 years
(in particular, the one-sided romance between Amy Rose and Sonic).

There are a few characters that had (plot wise) been in such a "ship"
for much of a century, but this aspect was mostly relegated as they in
effect got promoted to the level of deity-like corporate mascots.


Newer shows, such as Miraculous Ladybug, seem to be trying to pull the
same trick. Though, Ladybug tends to get fairly convoluted with it, and
most episodes (thus far) which tried to explore the romance going
further, were also in the form of time-travel plots which create
alternate timelines which then erase themselves at the end.

However, I am left to suspect that due to the way time-travel seems to
work in-show, that they are not dealing with a single timeline but
rather each instance of time travel in effect forks the timeline
(otherwise, they would have gotten "completely wrecked" by all the
paradoxes).

More so when several characters seem to use time travel in ways which
have different properties (so, in effect, whether or not paradoxes apply
seems to depend on who it is that is doing the time travel). Would be
kinda funny if they then introduced a character who could jump between
timelines "Rick and Morty" style, maybe showing the continued existence
of some of the other timelines.

>>
>> But, real-life is more awkward, it is like a character ship where one of
>> the characters is themselves. Still pretty much immaterial though.
> <
> If you are an engineer, the women will still ignore you because you
> a) don't have the look of royalty, b) the adornments of the rich and famous,
> c) street smarts of a lizard,............

Well, one can use their imagination, and ship themselves with people
they will likely never meet IRL, and where things wouldn't work out even
if they did meet them.


But, yeah, the vast majority of females around fall into the category where:
I have no reason to be interested in them;
They have no reason to be interested in me either.

Like, it is a case where neither side has anything the other side will
find useful, so there isn't much reason to pursue anything.

Longer range, still nothing.

Most of the ones I would have much of anything in common with are:
Too far away;
Wouldn't likely be interested for other reasons;
...


So, the combination of:
Sufficiently nearby;
Sufficiently nerdy;
Sufficiently intelligent;
Various other constraints line up;
...

Yeah, basically no one, it seems.

>>
>> Not sure as much how other people relate to this, or if they (also) in
>> these contexts end up thinking in the 3rd person (like if oneself were a
>> character in a TV show).
> <
> Thinking in the 3rd person, except as an experiment, is a sign that you have
> already lost something that people who watch ads have--and you either never
> did or do not currently have.........

I am not entirely sure I follow...


Actually, how I see myself is probably a topic in itself, but I am not
feeling particularly inclined to go that much into it (there is not much
I can find in terms of writings about psychology which seems to match up
with my experience of my own existence; but in any case I suspect it may
be atypical based on what I can gather).

But, in terms of thinking about interpersonal stuff in general, I
usually end up thinking about myself in the third person. So, it is sort
of like if one has control over a TV show they are watching. They can
choose what to say, or bring in other characters (they can be people I
know, people I have never met, or characters who are entirely fictional;
I can also pull in scenarios or events from TV shows, ...).

I can either control what is said actively, or let scenarios play out
and take more of an observer role.


In this mode, I am generally better able to figure out how chains of
events will turn out, or how people will respond, compared with
interacting with them in real-time (also in real-life interactions, one
can't change out the setting or characters).

This is also sort of useful for writing fiction, since it isn't so much
like I am actively trying to come up with what the characters say and
do, but rather building the scene, adding the characters; then one
watches the events play out in their mind and writes down what they see
happening.

Though, this does run into the limitation that I can't really add
characters who are smarter than myself, or who know things that I don't
know.

Or, events happen which I feel less inclined to write about, say for
example, a character in a story set in the 2070s watches an ill-advised
2030s era "Deliverance" remake followed by an ill-advised sequel (sorta
imagined in terms of a collection of action movie tropes mixed with the
character "finding themselves" by "going back to where it all began",
...). So, these imagined worlds can sort of exist recursively to some
extent (the sub-worlds are spatially disjoint from the world that
contains them).


I had noted that this space is in many ways very similar to the world I
experience in dreams, and I sorta suspect it is actually the same space
(just it is able to run in parallel with the external world, just off in
its own space). Generally it is fully 3D, but visually simplified (*).

*: Because seemingly my imagination is too lazy to run much faster than
around 4 frames per second or so, or with much beyond a fairly limited
color palette, ...


If interacting with someone in real-life, stuff can sorta fall apart if
they go "off script" and respond in a way which falls outside the range
of responses I was expecting; but usually I can predict things well
enough that this is infrequent.

Sometimes, real-life conversation is a challenge as then one has to go
on a mental search and come up with responses fast enough that there
isn't any obvious breaks.

[David Brown]

On 19/11/2021 01:54, MitchAlsup wrote:

> If you are an engineer, the women will still ignore you because you
> a) don't have the look of royalty, b) the adornments of the rich and famous,
> c) street smarts of a lizard,............

If that is the way you think of women, with such misogynist,
patronizing, prejudice and sweeping generalisations, then it is perhaps
not surprising you find it difficult to find a partner.

Treat people with respect, openness and friendship with a disregard for
minor details such as gender, appearance, etc. Maybe you'll make a
friend, and maybe you'll get a partner for life - but that's never going
to happen if you assume any women you talk to would only be interested
in you for your money or your looks.

[Thomas Koenig]

MitchAlsup <Mitch...@aol.com> schrieb:

> If you are an engineer, the women will still ignore you because you
> a) don't have the look of royalty, b) the adornments of the rich and famous,
> c) street smarts of a lizard,............

I can't confirm that. Looking around at the engineers and chemists
and physicists and ... I work with, most of them (>90%, I'd say)
are married or in a stable relationship (both men and the women).

[BGB]

On 11/19/2021 10:37 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 19/11/2021 01:54, MitchAlsup wrote:
>
>> If you are an engineer, the women will still ignore you because you
>> a) don't have the look of royalty, b) the adornments of the rich and famous,
>> c) street smarts of a lizard,............
>
> If that is the way you think of women, with such misogynist,
> patronizing, prejudice and sweeping generalisations, then it is perhaps
> not surprising you find it difficult to find a partner.
>

I don't know about Mitch's case.

> Treat people with respect, openness and friendship with a disregard for
> minor details such as gender, appearance, etc. Maybe you'll make a
> friend, and maybe you'll get a partner for life - but that's never going
> to happen if you assume any women you talk to would only be interested
> in you for your money or your looks.
>

In my case, I try to avoid those who do seem to fit this pattern.

Ultimately better for both people involved.

Though, there are lots of other factors at play, eg:
Their views on various aspects of religion;
If they are hardline conservative, it probably wont work;
If they are one of the "raging atheist" types, it also wont work;
...
Emotional disposition, thought / feeling balance, ...
If they are positive leaning and emotional, it likely wont work;
If they are negative leaning and emotional, they are unstable;
I am "not particularly emotional", they will need to deal with this.
I suspect I am neutral-leaning and thinking-oriented.
...

Requirements for a potential romantic partner would need to be a bit
more strict than for a friend though.


Things I am less concerned about:
Race, though would prefer to avoid someone too similar to myself here
(both Scots and Ashkenazim have relatively poor genetic diversity, so
preferably someone from outside these groups);
Looks, though "within reason", and someone two far outside "a healthy
weight range" is also not ideal.

Then other factors:
Need to be within a reasonable age range;
Need to be "actually female";
...


Though, the "hard part" is more in trying to find someone I can
"actually talk to".

Like, if it is a scenario where one has to put undue effort in using
"simple words and simple concepts" to speak with them, and if one is
like "you have yet to see my true form!" and they run away in terror.
Yeah, that wont work...


Sometimes, it seems like the best one can do (for mutual benefit) is to
try to avoid those who are unlikely to be compatible (then they are more
free to find someone else who is a better match for themselves, which
for most of them is "pretty much anyone else").

...