Lunduke
Comedy • Gaming • News • Science & Tech
The Internet Archive's digital lending puts the entire service at risk
Archive.org distributed Copyrighted material, and it could bring the whole archive down.
December 18, 2023
post photo preview

There is, right now, a lawsuit going on which could have sweeping ramifications for The Internet Archive, content publishers (of all kinds), and the future of digital media archives.

Four book publishers -- Hachette, Wiley, Penguin Random House, & HarperCollins -- have sued The Internet Archive over the "Controlled Digital Lending" program.

As much as it pains me to say it, The Internet Archive is mostly likely going to lose this fight.  Not because The Internet Archive is fighting the unstoppable behemoth of corporate media... but because, quite simply, The Internet Archive is wrong.

And, as a result of their creation of the Controlled Digital Lending (CDL) program, there is a very real chance that the (extremely valuable and useful) services of The Internet Archive may be ultimately shut down.

Internet Archive Background (The Short Version)

The Internet Archive started back in 1996 -- with the simple goal of archiving web pages.  For multiple years, they created snapshots of absolutely massive numbers of websites (both personal and corporate), eventually leading to the public launch of "The Wayback Machine" (which allowed searching of how specific websites looked on specific dates) in 2001.

As the years went on, The Internet Archive dramatically expanded the type of material that they archived: including out of print newspapers, magazines, books, public domain music and movies, abandoned software, and more.

  • 832 Billion archived webpages.
  • 38 Million printed materials (magazines, books, etc.).
  • 2.6 Million pieces of software
  • 11.6 Million videos files.
  • 15 Million audio files.
  • 4.7 Million images.

And counting.  Absolutely massive amounts of storage and bandwidth -- not to mention the human effort put into archiving and cataloging that material.

In order to finance all of this, The Internet Archives operates on a budget that is a tiny fraction of that of other foundations -- bringing in between $20 and $30 Million per year.

From the 2021 IRS filings of The Internet Archive.

In other words: The Internet Archive, while well funded, is not a behemoth.  They don't have hundreds of Millions of dollars in monetary assets (like Wikimedia).  Comparatively, The Internet Archive, is practically on a shoestring budget.

The Legal Gray Area

All of which is important to bear in mind when you consider that much of the content hosted by The Internet Archive... is not, necessarily, completely legal to share publicly.

  • A huge quantity of the material archived is either clearly legal to share -- often within the Public Domain.
  • Yet, another large chunk of material falls distinctly into a legal gray area: stradling the line of Copyright Law and Fair Use.
  • And many other archived items (such as some software from the 1980s) is technically under copyright and, legally, should not be distributed -- but because of the fact that nobody is earning revenue from those older pieces of software, nobody objects to their availability on The Internet Archive (usually).

Could The Internet Archive be sued out of existence, should enough Copyright holders challenge the archiving and availability of some of those works?  You bet.  That is, absolutely, a very real possibility.

But, thankfully, that hasn't happened.  Thanks in large part to so much material being in that "gray area" of legality, combined with other material simply not being currently profitable for any Copyright holder.

In a way, it's a sort of stalemate.  The Internet Archive continues to publish and distribute Copyrighted works... and the Copyright holders allow it because most of those works tend to be non-profitable or out of print.

Then, in 2011, The Internet Archive began down a road that was destined to get them into legal trouble.

Enter: Controlled Digital Lending

The idea of "Controlled Digital Lending" (CDL) is simple: Take a physical book, scan it to create a digital version, then allow people to download that digital book.

We aren't just talking about extremely old, out of Copyright texts here.  Many of the books being scanned and distributed by The Internet Archive are currently being printed and sold, with authors and publishers who still retain the Copyright on them.

And this isn't simply a handful of Copyrighted books, either.  3.6 Million books, still under Copyright, are distributed digitally by The Internet Archive.

To help illustrate the problem here, imagine the following scenario:

  • You buy a DVD of a Marvel's "Avengers: Infinity War".
  • You then rip that DVD, and turn it into a digital file (such as an .MP4).
  • You then put up a website offering anyone who wants to watch it... to download it from you directly.

What do you think Disney / Marvel would have to say about that?  Would you get in some level of legal trouble?  You bet your tuchus you would!

If you purchase a physical work (such as a book or movie), that simply doesn't give you the right to make a digital copy and distribute it to others.  That, right there, is "Piracy".  And every adult knows that is going to get you into hot water.

Even if you stated -- as The Internet Archive has -- that you only allow as many people to download the digital file as you have physical copies.  Irrelevant.  You'd still get in trouble.

This was, quite possibly, the biggest example of "poking the beehive with a stick" I've seen in a long, long time.  The folks running The Internet Archive had to know, from day one, that this was going to get them sued.

Then The Internet Archive Made it Worse

On March 24, 2020, The Internet Archive launched the "National Emergency Library".

This program was launched, in response to the lockdowns during the COVID pandemic, with the stated goal of providing digital copies of books to people who couldn't get to a library.  It was, in essence, the "Controlled Digital Lending" system... but without the need to wait for your turn.

Want a book?  Grab it.  For free.  It's yours.  The author or copyright holder doesn't even need to know about it.

A sample search of the National Emergency Library.

The restrictions -- as vague and difficult to enforce as they were -- that existed within the Controlled Digital Lending system were gone.  And publisheres were, obviously, not happy.

The Inevitable Lawsuit

In 2020, four publishers (Hachette, Wiley, Penguin Random House, & HarperCollins) came together to file "Hachette v. Internet Archive" -- alleging that over 33,000 different titles, of theirs, were being distributed, without their permission, by The Internet Archive.

A claim that was easy to prove with a simple search on The Internet Archive's website.  Complete with details on the number of people who downloaded each book.  The end result?  The publishers claimed hundreds of millions in damages.

Which, again, The Internet Archive had to know was coming.  It was simply too obvious.  They built a website that, in essence, stated, "We pirated your books and distributed them to exactly this number of people".

On March 26th, 2023, the judge in this case (Judge John G. Koeltl of the U.S. District Court in Manhattan) handed down his judgement.  And it was exactly what you would expect:

“At bottom, [the Internet Archive’s] fair use defense rests on the notion that lawfully acquiring a copyrighted print book entitles the recipient to make an unauthorized copy and distribute it in place of the print book, so long as it does not simultaneously lend the print book.  But no case or legal principle supports that notion. Every authority points the other direction.”

This was a judgement that was destined, from the moment The Internet Archive started the Controlled Digital Lending system was started, to come to pass.

Just because you buy a book, you don't -- under the current laws -- have the rights to take copyrighted material, copy it, and distribute it however you wish.  The law is both clear and well understood by... just about everyone.

The Bizarre Response from The Internet Archive

On December 15th, 2023, The Internet Archive (being represented, in part, by the Electronic Frontier Foundation), filed a brief in their appeal of that judgement.  Of that appeal, the founder of The Internet Archive, Brewster Kahle, made the following statement:

"Why should everyone care about this lawsuit? Because it is about preserving the integrity of our published record, where the great books of our past meet the demands of our digital future. This is not merely an individual struggle; it is a collective endeavor for society and democracy struggling with our digital transition. We need secure access to the historical record. We need every tool that libraries have given us over the centuries to combat the manipulation and misinformation that has now become even easier."

They are fighting for "democracy" and against "misinformation".  None of which has any relevance to the court case.

Followed by:

"The stakes of the lower court decision are high. Publishers coordinated by the AAP (Association of American Publishers), have removed hundreds of thousands of books from controlled digital lending. The publishers have taken more than 500 banned books from our lending library, such as 1984, The Color Purple, and Maus. This is a devastating loss for digital learners everywhere."

The statement that "publishers have taken more than 500 banned books from our lending library" is more than a little misleading.  Not only are the books listed readily available in libraries and book stores across the entire country... but they were not removed from the Internet Archive's "Controlled Digital Lending" system because they were "banned" or objectionable in some way.

Those books, along with many others, are under Copyright.  And The Internet Archive violated that by copying the books, and disributing digital files without consent of the publisher or author.

The Internet Archive seems to be attempting to suggest that there are some sort of anti-book activists trying to ban books from The Internet Archive.  When the real truth is... authors and publishers are making the case that The Internet Archive is stealing their property and giving it to others (in exchange for donations).  No activists or book banning involved.

In fact, the statement from The Internet Archive does not actually address the core issue within the lawsuit.  Instead it makes a number of unrelated statements that appear designed to cause fear around some sort of nonexistant war on libraries.

Such as this odd closing line:

"In the face of challenges to truth, libraries are more vital than ever."

Truly bizarre.

Especially when you consider that The Internet Archive is not representing the libraries of America in this case -- many libraries offer digital lending services that they negotiate with publishers.  What The Internet Archive is doing is for The Internet Archive.

What Happens Now?

A judge has ruled on the case (against The Internet Archive) and an appeal has been filed.

So... what happens next?  What real, practical impact will this have on The Internet Archive, Digital media, Libraries, and the like?

  1. There is no reason to believe that the first judge's decision will be reversed on appeal.  Copyright law is pretty well established and tested -- and The Internet Archive was clearly in the wrong, from a legal perspective.
  2. The more The Internet Archive spends on failed lawsuits -- and programs that cause them to get sued -- the less money they have to run the rest of their programs (such as The Wayback Machine).
  3. Every lawsuit they lose -- dealing with illegal copying and distribution of Copyrighted material -- is going to increase the odds of more lawsuits being filed against them.  The Internet Archive is, in effect, opening the floodgates of potential lawsuits across the spectrum of archived material (including music, software, and more).
  4. Because the "Controlled Digital Lending" program is part of The Internet Archive, the entire organization is liable for any damages.  And, quite frankly, they don't have the money to spare to afford those damages.
  5. None of this will have much impact on libraries -- which have a variety of digital lending systems in place (working with a variety of publishers).

All of that is fairly obvious to any outside observer.  Even someone who is a big fan of The Internet Archive (as I am), can see how the current course being followed will lead to some significant negative outcomes.

Worst case scenario?

  • The Internet Archive (including The Wayback Machine, and the entire archive of software, music, and other cultural items) will be forced to shut down due to legal liabilities (and legal defense costs) from years of Copyright infringement.
  • Other people, foundations, and companies interested in archiving culturally significant material will be increasingly hesitant to do so (they don't want to get sued out of existence either).
  • Obtaining public domain and historical material will be significantly harder going forward.

All because of the Controlled Digital Lending program -- the Internet Archive simply pushed it too far.  Far beyond the "legal gray areas" they previously operated in.

If any of those items actually come to pass, that would truly be a shame.  The Internet Achive provides a valuable service for the world -- one which I use both personally and professionally. 

How likely do I think that "worse case scenario" is?  Pretty gosh darned likely.  In large part because The Internet Archive seems determined -- from day one -- to make it happen.

community logo
Join the Lunduke Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
6
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Mozilla: A Bully from the Very Beginning

The story of how "Firefox" was named.

Read the full article: https://lunduke.locals.com/post/5577706/why-is-firefox-called-firefox

00:19:45
The Lunduke Journal got it wrong about Wikipedia!

Facts are important. When we get them wrong, it must be announced.

Article about the error:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/5582689/critical-factual-error-found-in-lunduke-journals-coverage-of-wikipedia

Original "Wiki Piggy Bank" article:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4458111/the-wiki-piggy-bank

00:14:10
Let's talk about the GNOME Foundation being out of money.

The foundation behind the biggest Linux Desktop environment -- the one used by Red Hat, Ubuntu, & SUSE -- is in dire straights. Wild.

And their only known plan to fix it involves a "Professional Shaman" & "sustainability, diversity, and inclusion". Seriously.

The full article:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/5572069/is-the-gnome-foundation-going-to-go-bankrupt-in-1-year

00:40:32
November 22, 2023
The futility of Ad-Blockers

Ads are filling the entirety of the Web -- websites, podcasts, YouTube videos, etc. -- at an increasing rate. Prices for those ad placements are plummeting. Consumers are desperate to use ad-blockers to make the web palatable. Google (and others) are desperate to break and block ad-blockers. All of which results in... more ads and lower pay for creators.

It's a fascinatingly annoying cycle. And there's only one viable way out of it.

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links? Check here:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

The futility of Ad-Blockers
November 21, 2023
openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"

Those in power with openSUSE make it clear they will not allow me anywhere near anything related to the openSUSE project. Ever. For any reason.

Well, that settles that, then! Guess I won't be contributing to openSUSE! 🤣

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links?
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"
September 13, 2023
"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

This episode is free for all to enjoy and share.

Be sure to subscribe here at Lunduke.Locals.com to get all shows & articles (including interviews with other amazing nerds).

"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044
post photo preview
post photo preview

If you have a Windows machine or a classic Mac you can try running the Dartmouth Time Sharing System emulator, which includes the very first version of BASIC.

http://dtss.dartmouth.edu/

#BASICWeekEventually

post photo preview
The Definitive History of Screensavers: 1961 - 1990
Sci-Fi Novels, CRT Screens, & Flying Toasters

Screensaver’s were all the rage in the 1990s. From Flying Toasters to 3D Mazes, screensavers were found on every major operating system across the land.

Screensavers are a fun, and loved, part of the 1990s (and onward) computing experience. But what was the very first one created? What is the story behind the early screensavers? Inquiring minds want to know!

Let’s dive into the glorious early history of… the Screensaver.

The Dreaded Screen Burn-in

Leave any CRT screen (be it a standard television , computer monitor, or even an oscilloscope) on for too long — with the same, non-moving image — and you’ll eventually give your CRT something known as “Burn-in”.

PLEASE WAIT

Burn-in is caused by the way CRT’s work: The phosphors which produce the light on the screen tend to lose their luminance over time. Over-use of specific areas will, eventually, cause a dramatic enough change that ghost images can appear.

Screensavers were created to reduce this problem. By making sure that no single portion of the screen could sit, displaying the exact same image, for too long of a period.

1961

The first known reference to something akin to a screensaver is in Robert Heinlein’s Sci-Fi novel, “Stranger in a Strange Land”.

“They went to the living room; Jill sat at his feet and they applied themselves to martinis. Opposite his chair was a stereovision tank disguised as an aquarium; he switched it on, guppies and tetras gave way to the face of the well-known Winchell Augustus Greaves.”

A fish aquarium screensaver (or something very close to it), talked about all the way back in 1961. Pretty cool.

This was, of course, merely a casual reference in a work of fiction. Still… fun to note where Sci-Fi predicts reality.

Many years passed without any actual screensaver being produced. Until…

1977

In 1977, a handful of games for the new Atari Video Computer System (later named the Atari 2600), included simple color cycling effects in order to prevent screen burn-in.

The Atari VCS 2600

Were these full fledged “screensavers” as we know them nowadays? Not exactly. But they did serve to “save the screen”.

1979

Then, in 1979, Atari released two computer systems: The Atari 400 and 800. Much like the Atari 2600, these Atari computers used a color cycling effect in order to limit screen burn-in. In this case, the effect kicked in after the computer sat idle for a number of minutes.

The Atari 800

Not exactly a "Screensaver" -- at least not as we know them today.  But it's the early steps in that direction.

1983

A few years later, in January of 1983, the Apple Lisa (the precursor to the Macintosh) was released. Within it was a system wide Preferences application that allowed the user to set the Lisa to “dim” the display after a definable amount of time.

Apple Lisa Preferences

Note the non-specific amount of time to wait before the screen dims. “I would like the screen to dim between, say, 15 and 30 minutes after I stop using it.”

I find the large time windows highly amusing.  Could the Apple Lisa not handle specific amounts of time?  Fascinating.

Just the same, this is notable as it is the first time an easily configurable “screensaver” like utility is provided on a computer.

Later that same year — in the December, 1983 issue of Softalk Magazine, a young programmer named John Socha published the source code for a small piece of software he dubbed “SCRNSAVE.COM”.

Save Your Monitor Screen!

That first PC screensaver was pretty darn simple — it made the screen go blank after an amount of time set in the source code. And, because this was the early 1980’s, you typed the whole thing in by hand from the pages of a magazine.

Want to change how long your computer would wait until the screen went blank? Modify the source code and re-compile.

Side note: Many claim that John Socha’s SCRNSAVE.COM was the first screen saver. Clearly the Apple Lisa shipped first (as did the Atari 400/800). But it very well may be the first screensaver for the IBM PC, which is already a very cool badge of honor. Also worth noting that its author, John Socha (who is also the creator of Norton Commander), would go on to significant things in the screensaver world.

1988

Every attempt at "saving screens", up until now, had been pretty... dull.  Black screens.  Color cycling.  Just enough to pevent screen burn.  That was about to change.

The first publicly released screensaver package which contained distinct, configurable displays… was the “Magic ScreenSaver” for Windows 2.0, first released in 1988 by Bill Stewart and Ian Macdonald as a piece of shareware.

Passwords!  Sleep area!  All the basics of screensavers are here!

The early versions of Windows did not contain any built-in screensaver functionality. Magic ScreenSaver added that. And it looked like this:

Oooooooh.  So many lines.

This was it.  Magic ScreenSaver in 1988.  This was the turning point when "Screensavers" became "Screensavers" as we know them today.

1989

Remember how the Apple Lisa had a built-in screen dimming functionality? Strangely, just like early Windows, the Macintosh did not have anything like that.

Enter: After Dark.

Originally developed by James Eastman, After Dark was a screen saver package for the Macintosh. It was initially an un-named hobby project which, after it was shared with a friend at Berkeley Systems, was acquired and renamed “After Dark”.

The first version of After Dark.

The first release of After Dark used no bitmap artwork (relying entirely on programmatically generated graphics) and was not anticipated to be a big hit. But it was. And the crew at Berkeley then scrambled to polish it up and release a new version.

1990

Berkeley Systems pushed ahead on adding a new artistic flair to After Dark as they worked on the 2.0 release for Macintosh.

To bring a Windows version to market, they contacted the makers of Magic ScreenSaver to modify and enhance their shareware software… thus morphing it into “After Dark for Windows”.

The 2.0 release brought with it a small pile of new screen saver animations…

Welcome to Windows, After Dark.

But the real breakout hit was “Flying Toasters”.

Fly!  Fly you toasters!

In a 2007 interview with LowEndMac, the creator of After Dark (James Eastman) recalls the birth of those flying toasters:

“For 2.0 we needed to build more personality into it – really engage. We thought this over in the abstract for quite a while. My wife’s a doctor – she was doing her residency then and was frequently gone overnight. So I’d sit up late programming. Very late.

 

I had a Mac II with a color screen – $5,000 computer in those days.

One of those late nights I was thinking about the artistry problem – how to do something really fun for 2.0.

 

I was wandering around the house. I drifted into the kitchen, and the toaster caught my eye. My sleep-deprived brain put wings on it.

 

I went upstairs and drew some animation frames – I used the development system’s icon editor. Little white outline toasters on a black background with little stubby plucked-chicken wings speed lines and a flapping electrical cord. I coded up the animation that night and brought it to Berkeley Systems the next day.

 

Everybody thought it was hilarious and everybody agreed it needed to be redrawn.

Wes brought in an artist to re-render the toasters, and Patrick re-coded the module in C. The modules all had a little control panel – I insisted on having a slider that controlled the doneness of the toast.”

The result was an instant hit — and an enduring classic.

The "doneness" of the toast was, indeed, a nice touch.

Which brings us to the end of 1990… the popularity of the screensaver was about to explode.

And, wouldn't you know it, the release of After Dark 2.0 brough with it a Screensaver module named "Aquatic Realm".  A virtual fish tank.

Just like Robert Heinlein wrote about way back in 1961.

After Dark's "Aquatic Realm"

From Sci-Fi novel to reality.  Only took us 29 years to get there.

Not too darn shabby.

Read full Article
post photo preview
1950s Sci-Fi Style Computers, Powered by a Z80, Built in Holland
Remembering the (very) funky Holborn computers of the early 1980s

Between 1980 and 1983, a little company in The Netherlands built the “Holborn” series of computers… which can best be described as “1950s sci-fi… powered by a Z80”.

Note: The “Holborn” name is to signify that these computers were “Born in Holland”.  Hol.  Born.

While the company only lasted for a few years — and they only produced a handful of models — their distinctive designs (for both their cases and their hardware & software choices) are worthy of being remembered.

Just to give you a good example… this is the Holborn 9100 (and connected terminals):

I mean. Wow! Just look at that monitor! That distinctive neck just screams “1950s futurism”… and I absolutely love it.

Ok. Let’s back up a moment.

The company was founded in Hengelo (a town in The Netherlands, near the German border). This is their first office space:

Pictured below are the founders of the company — Dick Gerdzen (left) and Hans Polak (right) — surrounded by a bunch of Holborn computers and terminals.

Now. The computers. Let’s tackle them in chronological order.

The Holborn 9100

The first computer from Holborn was the 9100 (and the accompanying 9120 terminal). Pictured on the left in the picture below.

Photo Courtesy: Hack42 Museum
 

Note that the 9100 computer portion (where the CPU, drives, etc. were contained) is the size of a mini-fridge or a low profile filing cabinet (with the 9120 terminal sitting on top).

Yeah. The big filing cabinet thing on the floor? That’s the primary computer unit.

The specs of this system were as follows:

  • Zilog Z80 CPU @ 3.5 MHz

  • 72 KB of RAM (expandable to 220 KB)

  • 8 inch floppy drives

Which brings us to the Operating System… it was 100% custom and in-house developed. The Holborn OS was a multi-user system, booted entirely from ROM, which allowed multiple Holborn 9120 terminals to connect to a single Holborn 9100 computer (“Server”).

One extra (and optional) feature of the 9100… it had a photosensitive light pen which could be used as a pointing device. Not a mouse, but a light pen.

What did the Holborn Operating System look like in practice? How did it work? How, exactly, did the light pen work with the included software?

Those are questions I’ve had for many years… yet, despite hunting high and low, have never found so much as a single picture showcasing the Holborn OS in any readable way. Due to the Holborn OS only being available in ROM on the 9100 itself… no known digital archival copy exists.

In the end, only roughly 200 Holborn 9100 units were sold. (Though that number is debated… more on that in a moment.)

The Holborn 7100

This was a simplified (and cheaper) version of the 9100. Instead of supporting a whole office worth of connected terminals (as with the 9100), the 7100 only supported two connected terminals (users) at once.

It looked like the 9100. Acted like the 9100. Just with… less.

It is unknown how well this model sold. It is assumed that it did not sell well.

The Holborn 6100

In 1982, the Holborn Computer company had to make some tough decisions.

Their Holborn OS (booted from ROM), was not proving popular. And the CP/M operating system (from Gary Kildall’s Digital Research in Pacific Grove, California) was rapidly gaining in popularity.

Luckily the architecture already in use by Holborn computers (the Z80) had a native version of CP/M.

Thus the lower priced, and smaller footprint, Holborn 6100 line was born. Same Z80 CPU, and now with a maximum 192 KB of RAM (slightly less than the 9100)… but, this time, booting the CP/M operating system off disk.

No more booting from ROM. No more in-house developed operating system.

This is the Holborn 6140 with the connected 6110 terminal. See? Much smaller than that gigantic 9100 mini-fridge. But still retained that fantastically interesting terminal design.

Here is a shot of the Holborn 6100’s screen, running CP/M.

Image courtesy Technisch museum
 

How many of these machines shipped? Reports put it somewhere in the ballpark of around 100.  Total.

Though the lack of information makes this fact difficult to confirm. Regardless, it was not exactly selling like hotcakes.

The Holborn 6500

The final computer designed by Holborn was the ill-fated 6500.

In the 6500, Holborn removed the keyboard from the terminal body (making it a detached keyboard), and filled the base of the terminal with the computer guts (thus eliminating the need for the separate computer housing used in earlier models). As shown in this advertisement for the “not yet released” 6500:

And here is a shot of the inside of the Holborn 6500, with the top of the case lifted up to show the internals.

Image courtesy: Inexhibit

Unfortunately Holborn Computers declared bankruptcy in April of 1983… before shipping the 6500.

The End of Holborn

And here is where things become increasingly sad for the company.

When Holborn went bankrupt, investigators determined that only 50 units were sold of the 9100 and 7100 combined. And that the company had over 3.5 million guilders in debt. (Guilders were the currency in use in The Netherlands prior to changing to the Euro. Some quick math tells us that 3.5 Million guilders would be roughly equal to $7 Million USD.)

Would the 6500 model have been enough to save the company? Who knows. Considering the poor sales up till then, and the relatively massive debt (when compared to sales), it seems unlikely.

But one thing is for certain… those are some seriously funky (and awesome) looking machines. So I’m sure glad they tried.

If you ever run across a Holborn, count yourself lucky.  These are some of the hardest computers to find nowadays. Considering that only a few hundred were ever sold, you aren’t likely to stumble across them at a flea market or eBay.

With that, I leave you with some pictures of Holborn computers in action.  Because they're just so darned cool looking.

Read full Article
post photo preview
Funny Programming Pictures Part XXXVIII
Go ahead. Call them "memes". I dare ya.

Blah blah blah.  There's too much serious Tech News.  Here's some funny pictures that I definitely did not copy and paste from The Inter-Tubes.

 

Classic.

 

It's funny because CSS is terrible.

 

My favorite part about this is how much I'm crying inside.

 

Around 20 years ago, a fellow Dev Manager and I were interviewing a guy for a senior level programmer job.  We asked him to code a simple function, in C, on the whiteboard.  Something that takes a single parameter and loops on it.  He walked up to the whiteboard and picked up the marker.  At which point you could visibly see -- from the back of his head -- as he had an epic brain fart.  He stood there in silence for a moment, turned around, pale as a ghost, and announced, "I forgot".  He then -- and this was brilliant -- handed me the marker and asked me to do it.  At which point my brain short circuited and I couldn't -- for the life of me -- remember how to do it either.  I start laughing and hand the marker to the other Dev Manager.  He just puts up his hands and shakes his head as if to say, "I can't remember either".  That guy got the job.  True story.

 

WARNING!  WARNING!  UNUSED VARIABLE!  WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!

 

I know, I know.  I have issues with this picture too.  I mean.  Seriously.  Rust would obviously be the toilet.

 

Code reviews are just the worst.

 

I don't get it.

 

I'm not saying "Arrays start at 1" is correct... it is merely the only non-insane option.

 

Some of my projects have more commented out lines of code than not.

 

This is correct.

 

By posting this picture, we have accidentally summoned 1,000 Rust programmers.  We're all doomed.

 

Let that be a lesson: Always set an "Out of Office" autoresponce before pushing to production.  Noob.

 

It's has a calculator in it, so this picture is allowed.  You're welcome.

 

Semi-related note: I miss when heavily used compiled code, in CGI-Bin, on webservers.  Those were the days.

 

I like this picture, because it caused me to have 17 contradictory "Well, actually..." responses in the span of 30 seconds.

 

Malloc!  Malloc, like the wind!

 

"I've come here to program with wishy thinking and bubble gum.  And I'm all out of bubble gum."
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals