Re: computers

Eric the Finn writes:
> For example the CPU times of human use programs (like library data
> and anti-hijack ) shold me zero. The relative amount of time for the
> computer to bring up a file for a person to read is minimal, and
> Anti Hijack only has to be called when someone want's to open
> a door. The door probably has all the hardware required to scan
> all the computer has to do is fetch a file from "hard" storage
> and compare it to the input. These computers are certainantly
> large multi processor jobs so all the computer does is hold the
> door untill a processor is free and then speeds the verification
> through.

Awwww, you can't do that!  It would make it nearly impossible to hijack
a ship!  Consider this, as the hardware gets better, programmers constantly
push the machine to the edges of it's ability.  It is quite likely that
as happens now, the machine is operating on the verge of overload.  When
one is about to jump, one turns off programs extraneous to performing the
jump so that one has spare capacity.  Of course, you could defeat this
problem by buying a large computer, and 'smaller' more efficient programs
to run on it.

How's that?

- --
...!hadron\   "Who?... Me?... WHAT opinions?!?" | Edwin Wiles
  ...!sundc\   Schedule: (n.) An ever changing	| NetExpress Comm., Inc.
   ...!pyrdc\			  nightmare.	[address removed]