Power On Self Test Failure - Please see manual!

After my exercise bike ride, I showered and crashed for a nap. (Not only did I ride, I was up way too late last night ...)

Alas, we had a fire drill here at the hobbit hole in the form of broken drinking glasses, with cats needing immediate herding by yours truly. This got me up, dressed, and moving, no doubt with a free shot of adrenaline. The cats weren't interested in being herded, so it took more effort and cat treats than I expected, but finally they were confined. I paused ... and realized I was sweating with a serious power shortage.

I grabbed the nearest prepared food (a pretty good éclair, actually), ate it, got a milk chaser, and then sat to for almost fifteen minutes. Then I went and napped for another three hours.

(And no, I'm not diabetic, due to other issues like low thyroid I get checked regularly).

Power has been restored. :-)

Reboot

Yea, I just turned around on some street paved with good intentions. I don't know which direction I'm headed in, let's try a side street...

More literally, it's been February since I rode the exercise bike, and while I continued dropping weight into March for a total of ~ 7 pounds, it all came back in April as I went deep focus on a project at work. How a deep a focus? My manager, who was not flogging me in the first place, told me to actually take my weekends off as I took vacation this past week.

So I did, and I rode today. So it begins again, actually a pound above where I started the year. Ah, well. Gotta start somewhere.

I Bad.

Rather than riding yesterday, I dived into (and never surfaced from) finishing a Python module and its associated tests for work. I also didn't ride for a week because of morning appointments, so even with my regular schedule of riding every other day I am barely at my goal of riding twice of a week.

Weight is down 3.5 pounds since New Years, which is also not where I want to be.

However, progress is being made on both fronts, so it's focus, not plan which needs a little work.

For My Next Trick ...

You heard it here first folks, my goal by April is to lose another 20 pounds.

Perhaps more important is my added goal to ride my exercise bike at least twice a week. This is up from a total of three days I claimed I got exercise after January last year.

(I keep great records, it's the execution that needs work.)

A Weighty Year End Review

My diet pace has slowed slightly, which is fine because I was actually losing more the recommended 2-3 pounds for a week or so. Since I started, I am down 13 pounds.

Year to year, I am down 8 pounds.

Here's looking down at a healthier 2008.

Closing the Books

The dual Pentium III server I retired early in the year has had a spare disk drive sent to a family member, its advanced SCSI cards pulled for accessing an external drive I kept, and the rest of the system with its CRT monitor given away to a co-worker today.

We do have a Mac Mini running in the living room for shared files and entertainment interface, but it's not the same as the big boys I had running first in my office, later in the kitchen, and finally in the basement for 17 years.

Remembering BITNET

I don't recall BITNET being IBM sponsored, it was just many schools had IBM Mainframes. The root nodes (think tree with two main trunks) were PSUVM and CUNYVM. Lose the PSU <--> CUNY link, and things backed up fast with BITNET basically split in two.

The original topology was odd due to telcom leased line costs at the time; for example, it was cheaper for Clarkson University (Potsdam, NY) to go to UCONN (in CT of course) than a third the distance to Syracuse University (also in NY).

Once sites started getting NSFNet (Internet) connections and a RSCS line driver was written to run encapsulated on TCP/IP, the topology of the network was strengthened with sites connecting to whomever they wanted.

Using UREP (Unix RSCS emulation program) from PSU or a VMS based third party package, UNIX and VMS systems could also join the BITNET.

Likewise IBM MVS systems could join, although VM RSCS was more better suited to the task. For example, to allow TSO users to send remote messages, it required a system hack to have users effectively issue a JES2 remote $DM command. MVS systems were also prone to drop things on the floor if they didn't know how to route a source node even if it knew the receiver location; VM was more gracious, with better error messages and later default routes.

The BITNET core application protocols were standard IBM NJE messages and files. Those protocols supported simple user at node addresses, where both were simple eight character tokens. Transmission was NJE oriented store and forward; if you had notify enabled for a file, you would see a message for every hop a file took from your host to the remote receiver.

(Messages were dispatched over the links at a higher priority than files. This drove system programmers nuts, because file transmission notifications, one-on-one chatting and the original RELAY could cause resource starvation for files. I think CUNY hacked their RSCS to eat file notify messages because of the bandwidth, and more than one node disallowed access to RELAY.)

Mail on Bitnet itself was either NOTE (based on SENDFILE) or simple TEXT format, both with simple user at node syntax.

With any BITNET to off network addressing, the user software (such as UCLA's mail client, I think) would send do a sendfile to a batch SMTP (BSMTP) gateway, such as SMTP at WISCVM.

Mail from remote networks such as ARPANET to BITNET generally used (depending on the sender and gateways) user%node.BITNET@gateway.domain.name The gateway of course received it and forwarded it to user at node. Some Internet sites hacked their mailer so a user could specify simply user@site.BITNET, but it still went through a gateway.

Of course, as campuses got the internet locally, they would install a local SMTP gateway and generally talk to the Internet that way. TCP/IP connectivity killed most WAN applications of both NJE and UUCP, although they each took time to fade.

Note: Written this morning in response to a comment about BITNET on a retro software forum.