I'm trying to figure out the video part, there is a demo screen that is showing pretty high res in color, and this says 1024x600 and 256 colours- that is mighty impressive for a 6502, that is driving way more pixels that I ever saw in that era, so I was expecting there was some other chip being used as a screen buffer and graphics chip...
but it looks like the LCD has to be bit banged by the CPU data bus directly? I see the 8 bit data bus is going straight to the LCD thru a buffer IC.
I don't see where in the memory map there would even be enough space for a screen buffer that large to be located, so I take it you have to write you own graphics handling yourself and pick a spot in memory for it all?
> RA8889 is a low power TFT controller with powerful display functions and build-in internal SDRAM memory. In order to quickly refresh the screen content with the display memory, RA8889 provides not only parallel, 8080/6800 8/16-bit MCU interface, but also 3/4 wire SPI and IIC serial interface. Plenty powerful functions are provides from RA8889, such as multiple display buffers, Picture-in-Picture, transparency control, display with rotation & mirror, and build-in JPEG and AVI decoder.
I wondered the same thing, and it looks like it uses this CMOS-compatible high level TFT driver: https://www.raio.com.tw/en/RA8889.html with a character generator, geometry primitives, etc.
> I don't see where in the memory map there would even be enough space for a screen buffer that large to be located
1024 × 600 with 256 colours is 600 kB. Even in monochrome, it would be over 64 kB.
> but it looks like the LCD has to be bit banged by the CPU data bus directly?
Even at 20 Hz, that would involve writing over a ten million pixels per second, giving you about 1 CPU cycle per pixel ⇒ there’s no way to do that with this CPU.
These sorts of project should be using the 68000 or the 65816 which both give a 24 bit address bus. Meaning they get 16 MB of address space to work with. They can make directly addressable frame buffers at high resolutions and reasonable color depths, and still have lots of memory available for programs and data.
Theres a scene there that's one of my favorite comedy bits in any film, the breakfast scene where you see a buzzer and light going off repeatedly, like they have some sort of computer system to indicate it is breakfast time... but then it cuts to Wallace in bed and he is just repeatedly pressing a button next the the bed, with the same specific cadence, to make the buzzer sound. I don't know why I find that so hilarious.
...which is echoed in the final shot of Feathers McGraw grasping the bars on the window of his cell, which zooms out to reveal that it's set in a mural
In singular online communities (like this website) I've seen this referred to as the 'Goomba fallacy' [0].
But I can't help but wonder if it isn't some socially apparent phenomenon stemming from Simpson's Reversal [1] as applied to group sentiment analysis / polling of opinions.
Even if perfectly held still in a sealed box with perfect conditions, hard disk drives need controllers; they need the chipset to drive them, which has ROM and other stored microcode that is susceptible to bit flips due to cosmic ray impingement. I've traced faults in a few 20+ year old HDD's due to failed controllers likely due to such loss (either in the main controller fail, a ROM/BIOS chip fail, or less likely but still possible the cache IC, or motor controller). The data is there on the spinning rust, you just won't have a way to access it.
The failure of SSD's you warn of and the way the HDD's fail due to a dead controller aren't that different.
This won't happen with a physically written media like a CD, DVD, or Blu Ray disc. With physical media, you're separating out the media from the reader (the drive). If your disc reader dies or you cant find it, etc, you can go find any another one on ebay even decades from now, very likely.
Doing surgery on an HDD controller PCB to replace a dead controller, while possible, sucks, and may be incredibly difficult if not impossible to source parts for in the future.
"sarcastic meme posting channels on russian Telegram"
That phrase.
I think these people and how they are using tech and memes are part of the current problem of this world. A large part of the problem, in my opinion. It's may be just coping, dark humor for most but it is deep psychosis for others and it's giving them ideas and power over the rest of us. I'd strive to be better than falling into such meme sharing sociopathy.
Travel to Spain and they will not give you a room key until they can take your passport and make a scan of it, often times on an old flatbed print/scanner combo, that they print out a copy on paper to staple to their copy of the invoice and put god knows where. It's been like that for about 6-8 years. No more showing up and paying cash for a hotel room.
You can try to say no, but I don't think you can anymore. I go through this a dozen times a year on my travels there.
For the interested; the saying I believe you are referencing in regards to writing code / debugging is from Brian Kernighan, specifically:
Everyone knows that debugging is twice as hard as writing a program in the first place. So if you're as clever as you can be when you write it, how will you ever debug it?
How this biomass expands?! I don't think this happens anywhere else on earth. Usually tress downed into the water simply become bare trunks in the water.
The article states that it grows on driftwood so it is buoyant and mentions it is not that rare (not explicitly but it talks about it happening before)
but it looks like the LCD has to be bit banged by the CPU data bus directly? I see the 8 bit data bus is going straight to the LCD thru a buffer IC.
I don't see where in the memory map there would even be enough space for a screen buffer that large to be located, so I take it you have to write you own graphics handling yourself and pick a spot in memory for it all?
reply