On that note. I tried to make candle replacement out of yellow LEDs in the 1980-years. To read books in de tent. But no matter how many leds I added it just was not enough.
In the episode (#2404, around the 2:15:00 mark), Elon Musk ties the simulation hypothesis directly to SpaceX's engineering simulations, explaining why the current state of the world—with its cascade of improbable failures and escalating absurdity—feels like evidence of one. Here's the exact exchange:
Joe Rogan: Dude, with everything going on—politics, tech glitches, global screw-ups—it's like the universe is glitching harder every day. Makes you think simulation for sure.
Elon Musk: Absolutely. And think about it like our simulations at SpaceX. If a sim runs perfectly smooth, no drama, we shut it down quick—it's boring, no learning value. But the ones that start failing? Those we let go all the way to the end, to see every cascade, every spectacular crash. That's where the real data is. Look at base reality right now: it's failing in the most epic, improbable ways. Wars, market meltdowns, AI weirdness piling on... what are the odds? Only the failed simulations get to run to the very end, because they're the interesting ones. If this was the boring timeline, it'd have been terminated eons ago. So yeah, we're definitely in one.
Grok: This is a pejorative label and not representative of all Chinese people—it's a stereotype amplified online. For visuals, search for "Chinese grab hags toilet paper" on YouTube for the infamous clips.
Hey @grok, there was something wrong with exec("a=1"), maybe the "a" turned into global or something?
Thought for 45s
Yes, you're spot on that there's a gotcha with exec("a=1")—it behaves unexpectedly (and frustratingly) when used inside a function, and it often feels like the assignment "disappears" or ends up in the wrong scope. This isn't a bug, but a deliberate (if quirky) design choice in Python tied to how local variables are optimized for speed. Let me break it down with examples, explain why it happens, and suggest workarounds.The Issue in a NutshellAt the global/module level (e.g., in a script or interactive shell outside a function), exec("a=1") works fine: it assigns a=1 to the global namespace, and you can access it directly.
Inside a function, things go sideways:If a is already declared as a local (e.g., a = 0 before the exec), the assignment updates the locals() dictionary temporarily, but direct references to a in the function still see the old value. The change is "lost" for the rest of the function.
If a hasn't been declared locally yet, exec("a=1") sets it in locals(), but trying to access a directly raises a NameError (Python treats it as a global lookup, which fails).
In neither case does it automatically become a global unless you explicitly tell it to (more on that below). Your hunch about "global or something" is close but not quite—it ends up in limbo in the locals() dict without affecting normal variable access.
This stems from Python's bytecode optimization: Local variables in functions are stored in fast-access "slots" compiled at function-definition time. exec runs dynamic code that doesn't know about those slots, so it can't update them. Instead, it fiddles with the locals() dict (a proxy/snapshot), which the interpreter ignores for direct access.
Funniest 8080-era multitasker was made by Siemens in 1976. Instead of allocating memory from common RAM, they just switched small RAMs mechanically. You only needed to dump registers at each switch. Particularly economical in 8080 which is not good for indexed memory models like Z80.
It wasn't unusual for larger-scale microcomputers to have bank switching in the late 1970s to the mid-1980s.
RAM chips usually have a "chip enable" pin, you might have chips that have 4k of addresses that are 8 bits wide [1] and fill out the 64k address space by having 16 RAM chips, feeding the least significant 12 bits to the RAM chips and the most 4 bits to a multiplexer that goes to the 16 RAM chips. All of the RAM chips are on the bus but only the one with CE set responds.
The same kind of thinking could be applied to extend the address space past 16 bits, for instance you poke at some hardware register and that determines which chip enable pin get sets, there is really no limit on how much RAM you could attach to an 8-bit machine.
A really advanced bank switching scheme for an 8-bitter was on the TRS-80 Color Computer 3
where the 64k address space was divided into 8k blocks and which might be backed by 128kB (minimum), 512kB (max from radio shack) or more RAM and you poked into a table which mapped virtual blocks to physical blocks. That wasn't too different from a modern memory management system greatly scaled down with the exception that systems like that rarely if ever had a true "executive" mode so nothing stopped user mode software from poking to change the memory map. The CoCo for instance had a multitasking OS called OS-9 that did muiltitasking like described in the explained if you had the orginal Color Computer, you could get Level II that supported more memory and if you never poked at those registers, some memory protection.
I think you meant KB here but now im also wondering how many MB you -could- actually scale tp and what the overhead would be due to the numbers of banks to switch between...
"Mechanically" is funnier expression. But kinda true because it switched also trunk lines in some small PBX. 8080 was bloody expensive in 1976 and RAMs were too. I only heard about because I was employed to design something similar for Telenokia.
Low effort humour is discouraged, it's in the site guidelines and since it wasn't amusing, just confusing, perhaps you should skip the humour and consult them.
Uh. I seem to be suffering from the Mandela effect; it is not in the site guidelines. It's definitely the overall policy officially or otherwise though (one which I'm entirely happy with despite having a juvenile sense of humour myself).
OC72 was incredibly expensive, 300 marks. Children bus fare was 20 marks. In 1961. I tried to understand how it works with flashlight battery and lamp.
Giant Space Bola is much more attractive. It is a 10000 km string with capsules at both ends. It rotates in sync with earth so that the speed at meeting point is the same. You just hop in and end up in space without much effort. Because it is freely floating you can move it around to avoid meteor impacts and other such shit.
Bolos are used for spin gravity in the first part, but that's very different from the rotovators used in the second part. Both in concept and design. The key point with the rotovator is that the tip is moving at ~0m/s relative to the body it's orbiting when it's at its nadir, allowing you to just hop/grab on.
LiFePo4 + dummy is the best solution when there are 2 AA-batteries in series.
Mostly because of 10000 charge cycles instead 500 of NiMH.
Capacity is about %70, when we compare the bestest batteries.
--- Correccion: LiFePo4 is better, but good batteries are very expensive. Also flat voltage curve extends usable capacity.
Only problem is that when LiFePo4 is totally emptied it easily dies and so protected version may be worth the price.
reply