www/philosophy stallman-kth.html

[Karl Berry]

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Karl Berry <karl>       10/06/13 21:30:50

Modified files:
        philosophy     : stallman-kth.html 

Log message:
        typos, approved by rms (#583095)

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/stallman-kth.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.11&r2=1.12

Patches:
Index: stallman-kth.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/stallman-kth.html,v
retrieving revision 1.11
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -b -r1.11 -r1.12
--- stallman-kth.html   22 Jun 2009 15:04:06 -0000      1.11
+++ stallman-kth.html   13 Jun 2010 21:30:25 -0000      1.12
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@
 <p>It seems that there are three things that people would like me to
 talk about.  On the one hand I thought that the best thing to talk
 about here for a club of hackers, was what it was like at the
-<acronym title="Massachusettes Institute of Technology">MIT</acronym>
+<acronym title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</acronym>
 in the old days.  What made the Artificial Intelligence Lab such a
 special place.  But people tell me also that since these are totally
 different people from the ones who were at the conference Monday and
@@ -199,7 +199,7 @@
 so feasible to add instructions to your machines.</p>
 
 <p>The PDP-1 also had a very interesting feature, which is that it was
-possible to interesting programs in very few instructions.  Fewer than
+possible to write interesting programs in very few instructions.  Fewer than
 any other machine since then.  I believe for example that the famous
 display hack &ldquo;munching squares&rdquo; which made squares that
 get bigger and break up into lots of smaller squares which gets bigger
@@ -257,7 +257,7 @@
 
 <p>That was exactly when a new KL-10 system was supposed to arrive,
 and the question was, would it run the Incompatible Timesharing System
-or would it run digital's Twenex system.  Once the hackers were gone
+or would it run Digital's Twenex system.  Once the hackers were gone
 who probably would have supported using ITS, the academic types chose
 to run the commercial software, and this had several immediate
 effects.  Some of them weren't actually so immediate but they followed
@@ -291,7 +291,7 @@
 be strict security in effect and only the bosses were going to have
 the power to do them.  So they didn't put in any other mechanism to
 make it hard to do by accident.  The result of this is that you can't
-just take Twenex and turn of the security and have what you'd really
+just take Twenex and turn off the security and have what you'd really
 like to have, and there were no longer the hackers to make the changes
 to put in those other mechanisms, so people were forced to use the
 security.  And about six months after the machine was there they
@@ -313,7 +313,7 @@
 people's wheel bits and posted a system message.  I have to explain
 that the name of this machine was OZ, so I posted a system message
 saying: &ldquo;There was another attempt to seize power.  So far the
-aristocratic forces have been defeated &mdash; Radio Free OZ&rdquo;.
+aristocratic forces have been defeated&mdash;Radio Free OZ&rdquo;.
 Later I discovered that &ldquo;Radio Free OZ&rdquo; is one of the
 things used by Firesign Theater.  I didn't know that at the time.</p>
 
@@ -407,10 +407,10 @@
 was to hard to change.  That system was much harder to understand,
 because it was to poorly written, and of course, Digital wouldn't do
 these things, so their ideas that a commercial system would
-essentially maintain it self, proved to be mistaken.  They had just as
+essentially maintain itself, proved to be mistaken.  They had just as
 much need for system hackers, but they had no longer the means to
 entice system hackers.  And nowadays at MIT there are more people
-interested in hacking on ITS, than there are interested in hacking on
+interested in hacking on ITS than there are interested in hacking on
 Twenex.</p>
 
 <p>And the final reason why this is so, is that Twenex can't be
@@ -802,7 +802,7 @@
 interesting idea was to handle many different kinds of machines by
 generating simple instructions, and then combining several simple
 instructions into a complicated instruction when the target machine
-permits it.  In order to do this uniformly, they represent they
+permits it.  In order to do this uniformly, they
 represent the instructions in algebraic notation.  For example, an ADD
 instruction might be represented like this:</p>
 
@@ -869,7 +869,7 @@
 initially generate this code, and when I do the combination and all
 those things, for every variable that conceivably go into a register,
 I allocate what I call a pseudo register number, which is a number
-starting at sixteen or whatever is to high to be a real register for
+starting at sixteen or whatever is too high to be a real register for
 your target machine.  So the real registers are numbered zero to
 fifteen or whatever and above that comes pseudo registers.  And then
 one of the last parts of the compiler consists of going through and
@@ -1110,7 +1110,7 @@
 program.  I have not received a copy of it yet, and I don't know how
 much work I'll have to do on it.  Also many other utilities exists.  A
 MAKE exists, LS, there's a YACC replacement called BISON which is
-being distributed.  Something pretty close to a LEX exits, but it's
+being distributed.  Something pretty close to a LEX exsits, but it's
 not totally compatible, it needs some work.  And, in general what
 remains to be done is much less that what's been done, but we still
 need lots of people to help out.</p>
@@ -1183,8 +1183,8 @@
 <p>When I entered the field, when I started working at MIT in 1971,
 the idea that programs we developed might not be shared was not even
 discussed.  And the same was Stanford and CMU, and everyone, and even
-DIGITAL.  The operating system from DIGITAL at that time was free.
-And every so often I got pieces of program from DIGITAL system such as
+Digital.  The operating system from Digital at that time was free.
+And every so often I got pieces of program from Digital system such as
 a PDP-11 cross assembler, and I ported it to run on ITS, and added
 lots of features.  It was no copyright on that program.</p>
 
@@ -1238,7 +1238,7 @@
 <p>The first level is just that it discourages the use of the program,
 it causes fewer people to use the program, but in fact it takes no
 less work to make a program for fewer people to use.  When you have a
-price on the use of a program this an incentive, that's the word these
+price on the use of a program this is an incentive, that's the word these
 software hoarders love to use, the price is an incentive for people
 not to use the program, and this is a waste.  If for example only half
 as many people use the program because it has a price on it, the
@@ -1353,7 +1353,7 @@
 like and redo only the part that you have an inspiration for, you
 could have a system that's better in all ways, with much less work
 than it now takes to write a completely new system.  And we all know
-that system can often benefit from being completely rewritten, but
+that a system can often benefit from being completely rewritten, but
 that's only if you can read the old one first.</p>
 
 <p>Thus, the people in the programming field have evolved a way of
@@ -1447,7 +1447,7 @@
 possible money, not because it's the only way anyone can ever come up
 with money to support a system development effort.  In fact, even as
 recently as ten and fifteen years ago it was common to support
-software development in other ways.  For example, those DIGITAL
+software development in other ways.  For example, those Digital
 operating systems that were free, even in the early seventies, were
 developed by people who were paid for their work.  Many useful
 programs has been developed at universities.  Nowadays those programs
@@ -1649,7 +1649,7 @@
 and copy it.  And if you took away the chair, it wouldn't be producing
 anything, so there's no excuse. I somebody says: &ldquo;I did the work
 to make this one chair, and only one person can have this chair, it
-might as well me&rdquo;, we might as well say: &ldquo;Yeah, that makes
+might as well be me&rdquo;, we might as well say: &ldquo;Yeah, that makes
 sense&rdquo;.  When a person says: &ldquo;I carved the bits on this
 disk, only one person can have this disk, so don't you dare take it
 away from me&rdquo;, well that also make sense.  If only one person is
@@ -1659,14 +1659,14 @@
 <p>But when somebody else comes up and says: &ldquo;I'm not going to
 hurt your disk, I'm just gonna magically make another one just like it
 and then I'll take it away and then you can go on using this disk just
-the same as before&rdquo;, well it's the same as if somebody said:
+the same as before&rdquo;, well, it's the same as if somebody said:
 &ldquo;I've got a magic chair copier.  You can keep on enjoying your
 chair, sitting in it, having it always there when you want it, but
 I'll have a chair too&rdquo;.  That's good.</p>
 
 <p>If people don't have to build, they can just snap their fingers and
 duplicate them, that's wonderful.  But this change in technology
-doesn't suit the people who wants to be able to own individual copies
+doesn't suit the people who want to be able to own individual copies
 and can get money for individual copies.  That's an idea that only
 fits conserved objects.  So they do their best to render programs like
 material objects.  Have you wondered why, when you go to the software
@@ -1680,7 +1680,7 @@
 imitate any other machine.  The reason a universal machine is so good
 is because you can make it imitate any other machine and the
 directions can be copied and changed, exactly the things you can't do
-with a material object.  And those are is exactly what the software
+with a material object.  And those are exactly what the software
 hoarders want to stop the public from doing.  They want to have the
 benefit of the change in technology, to universal machines, but they
 don't want the public to get that benefit.</p>
@@ -1731,7 +1731,7 @@
 </p>
 
 <p>
-Copyright &copy; 1987 Richard Stallman and Bjrn Remseth
+Copyright &copy; 1987, 2009, 2010 Richard Stallman and Bjrn Remseth
 </p>
 <p>
 Permission is granted to make and distribute verbatim copies of this
@@ -1741,7 +1741,7 @@
 <p>
 Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2009/06/22 15:04:06 $
+$Date: 2010/06/13 21:30:25 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>