Computers in Traveller
- Thread starter Elliot
- Start date
trader jim
SOC-14 1K
all my ships computers are submicro chipped females. highly skilled and trained - there are points around the ship so they can follow me around. i only have 7 of them now. holograms - they are also trained in fear tactics - scar the *****outta you!!! haunted.....goasts???? more later.......... 
OK you lot. Everyone has soemthing to say about computers... and I'm no different.
My first computer was TRS-80 model 1 with Green Screen, 16k of RAM and tape drive. WOW... This then progressed onto a TRS-80 Model 3 machine with all of 48k RAM, 2x 180k DS DD 5" floppy disks displaying to a 80x16 character display. Again WOW. Programmed (in BASIC) my first wordprocessor with it.
But, a lot of people are right ... in the whole Traveller realm, what quantifies the actually technology used to produce a computer of a particular computing power?
By way of example, one of the world's first computers (vacuum tubes and all) was the size of a standard family house and all it could do was basic four function calulations. When this computer was originally developed, how much did it cost? We can now purchase this same 'computer' from the local store with our spare change and it is the size of say the palm of our hand. The power of this 'computer' hasn't changed, but the technology base that produced it has.
Therefore, taking this one step further and using one's own interpretation of the Traveller rules (doesn't matter which era), the details of these computers are at a society's TL of first introduction. As the society's general TL rises, it is therefore assumed that this same computer can be produced for efficiently. (Smaller, lower power consumption, etc.)
A real life comparision: I'm sure that many people do not realise that the first landing on the moon in 1969 (the Eagle), the CPU chip for the onboard computer for the Eagle Lander was a Z-80. (My TRS-80 Model 3 was powered by a Z-80!) Most brand new cars that drive down our streets have more computing power in them than this first landing on the moon.
Now lets look at the flip side of all this. The technology used in these above examples have not changed one iota. It is the efficiency of this technology that has skyrocketted. The Eagle Lander on the moon used solid state technology for their computer system(s). 99% of all our PCs today are still solid state. The technology hasn't changed, just the efficiency. Everything is getting smaller and faster.
The world is now at a stage that we can not get solid state any smaller. We are now at the technology's limit for solid state operations. If we are to go forward, the world needs to change its technology base.
For a few years, I have been following the exploits for a small (I have been informed that it is Australian) company in the USA that has proven in the laboratory FRAM (Ferromagnetic Random Access Memory). It doesn't use solid state, it uses quantum mechanics. IE: It uses proteins.
Currently, RAM is volitile memory. (Turn off power, you loose memory.) As FRAM uses proteins, it is also non-volitile. It is also very much smaller than solid state. On a size comparison only, it has been projected that the standard 1.44 Meg 3.5" floppy of today can hold about 4 Terrabytes of FRAM.
If they can get this going commercially, the computer as we know it today will change forever. All currently known storage devices will become obselete. The physical space that a computer comsumes will reduce by about two thirds. And that is only the start of it.
One interesting thing is: Computer viruses will have a field day with non-volitile RAM. (On second thoughts, this may not be a good idea.)
Another comparison: They have forecasted that the supercomputers of today will be able to fit into the standard desktop machines of today, in about 12 years time. OUCH!!!
We buy a brand spanking new machine today ... it is out of date tomorrow.
In the Traveller universe, the usage of computers and their TL level of introduction are all subjective. (Yes ... I know. Some people are sticklers for the rules.) Also, if say a TL10 strength computer system is produced at a TL10 factory... this same strength TL10 computer system will be a lot smaller if produced at either a TL14 or TL15 production plant.
So, I have one last question: If we use Traveller as a guide, our current day technology is about a TL8. Correct? In relation to computer systems, what does this TL8 relate to? The average computer that can be produced by this society or does it relate to the best that this planet can currently offer?
Some food for thought.
Cheers, DJG
My first computer was TRS-80 model 1 with Green Screen, 16k of RAM and tape drive. WOW... This then progressed onto a TRS-80 Model 3 machine with all of 48k RAM, 2x 180k DS DD 5" floppy disks displaying to a 80x16 character display. Again WOW. Programmed (in BASIC) my first wordprocessor with it.
But, a lot of people are right ... in the whole Traveller realm, what quantifies the actually technology used to produce a computer of a particular computing power?
By way of example, one of the world's first computers (vacuum tubes and all) was the size of a standard family house and all it could do was basic four function calulations. When this computer was originally developed, how much did it cost? We can now purchase this same 'computer' from the local store with our spare change and it is the size of say the palm of our hand. The power of this 'computer' hasn't changed, but the technology base that produced it has.
Therefore, taking this one step further and using one's own interpretation of the Traveller rules (doesn't matter which era), the details of these computers are at a society's TL of first introduction. As the society's general TL rises, it is therefore assumed that this same computer can be produced for efficiently. (Smaller, lower power consumption, etc.)
A real life comparision: I'm sure that many people do not realise that the first landing on the moon in 1969 (the Eagle), the CPU chip for the onboard computer for the Eagle Lander was a Z-80. (My TRS-80 Model 3 was powered by a Z-80!) Most brand new cars that drive down our streets have more computing power in them than this first landing on the moon.
Now lets look at the flip side of all this. The technology used in these above examples have not changed one iota. It is the efficiency of this technology that has skyrocketted. The Eagle Lander on the moon used solid state technology for their computer system(s). 99% of all our PCs today are still solid state. The technology hasn't changed, just the efficiency. Everything is getting smaller and faster.
The world is now at a stage that we can not get solid state any smaller. We are now at the technology's limit for solid state operations. If we are to go forward, the world needs to change its technology base.
For a few years, I have been following the exploits for a small (I have been informed that it is Australian) company in the USA that has proven in the laboratory FRAM (Ferromagnetic Random Access Memory). It doesn't use solid state, it uses quantum mechanics. IE: It uses proteins.
Currently, RAM is volitile memory. (Turn off power, you loose memory.) As FRAM uses proteins, it is also non-volitile. It is also very much smaller than solid state. On a size comparison only, it has been projected that the standard 1.44 Meg 3.5" floppy of today can hold about 4 Terrabytes of FRAM.
If they can get this going commercially, the computer as we know it today will change forever. All currently known storage devices will become obselete. The physical space that a computer comsumes will reduce by about two thirds. And that is only the start of it.
One interesting thing is: Computer viruses will have a field day with non-volitile RAM. (On second thoughts, this may not be a good idea.)
Another comparison: They have forecasted that the supercomputers of today will be able to fit into the standard desktop machines of today, in about 12 years time. OUCH!!!
We buy a brand spanking new machine today ... it is out of date tomorrow.
In the Traveller universe, the usage of computers and their TL level of introduction are all subjective. (Yes ... I know. Some people are sticklers for the rules.) Also, if say a TL10 strength computer system is produced at a TL10 factory... this same strength TL10 computer system will be a lot smaller if produced at either a TL14 or TL15 production plant.
So, I have one last question: If we use Traveller as a guide, our current day technology is about a TL8. Correct? In relation to computer systems, what does this TL8 relate to? The average computer that can be produced by this society or does it relate to the best that this planet can currently offer?
Some food for thought.
Cheers, DJG
As an aside, the AGS (Apollo Guidance System) could not have used the Z-80 as it was not introduced until July 1976. A nice CPU and much better than the Intel 8080 it cloned, but not on Apollo.
OTOH, it (the AGS)was IIRC the first NASA system to use IC's rather than discrete logic.
For info on the Z-80:
http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/jbayko/cpu1.html#Sec1Part4
For info on the AGS:
http://hrst.mit.edu/hrs/apollo/public/
William
A description of apollo sets a good stage for disucssion. Also, can we say "fly-by-wire" designs:
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/computers/Part1.html
Here is the hardware---
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/computers/Ch2-5.html
I'm not certain any of the Travellersystems do a good job of describing "future computing technology". In my gaming group we've leaned towards describing it with I/O, infrastructure, and secondary systems (backup power supplies for example) within the same computer casing. Perhaps, part of the improvement is making the crews lives easier.
Also, note that Apollo has an Abort Guidance System for verifying navigation data. More than 1 computer.
By the time of the shuttle they're discussing multiple computers in a system. Sure in Traveller
we're loading the Navigation program. But it doesn't mean that an AGS isn't double checking data, environmental monitoring life support...
Savage
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/computers/Part1.html
Here is the hardware---
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/computers/Ch2-5.html
I'm not certain any of the Travellersystems do a good job of describing "future computing technology". In my gaming group we've leaned towards describing it with I/O, infrastructure, and secondary systems (backup power supplies for example) within the same computer casing. Perhaps, part of the improvement is making the crews lives easier.
Also, note that Apollo has an Abort Guidance System for verifying navigation data. More than 1 computer.
By the time of the shuttle they're discussing multiple computers in a system. Sure in Traveller
we're loading the Navigation program. But it doesn't mean that an AGS isn't double checking data, environmental monitoring life support...
Savage
FlightCommanderSolitude
SOC-13
I'd reckon that for 'shipboard computer' we should imagine a ship-wide computer system with bits of hardware here and there and lots of connecting cabling etc, instead of a big box sitting on the floor in some room.
when a ship's computer takes damage, we can imagine that some part of the whole system was damaged, like a stretch of cabling, and that the computer system now needs to route around that damage to get things done.
the internet might be a good analogy: the whole network doesn't really suffer if one of the nodes fails; it can route around that. but if enough nodes fail then the whole system's performance will really start to degrade.
By assuming the "Computer" is a distributed peer-to-peer network of computing units. If you've ever seen a beowulf cluster on a rack mount you'd get the picture. Scatter the computer units throughout the ship (they're small). If one or more is un-used (say the Jump Drive computer), other tasks (like the Gunnery program) can be run there. It's all automatic under the control of the ComputerOS.Originally posted by vegascat:
Next question - When computers take damage from weapons fire, they don't stop functioning, but just degrade. How can we account for this?
Similar threads
