Jump to content

John Titor and the IBM 5100


d28_2012
 Share

Recommended Posts

Pro7 wrote:

 

<font color="pink">

 

really? I must have missed that part. I naturally thought he needed it for the unix problem. [/color]

Hmmmmm.....

 

Please read:

 

Quoted John regarding IBM machine:

 

"JOHN: On my worldline, it is known that the 5100 series is capable of

 

reading all the IBM code written before the widespread use of APL and Basic.

 

JOHN: In 2036, it was discovered (or at least known after testing) that the

 

5100 computer was capable of reading and changing all of the legacy code

 

written by IBM before the release of that system and still be able to create

 

new code in APL and basic. That is the reason we need it in 2036. However,

 

IBM never published that information because it would have probably

 

destroyed a large part of their business infrastructure in the early 70s. In

 

fact, I would bet the engineers were probably told to keep their mouths

 

shut.

 

JOHN: Therefore, if I were not here now telling you this, that information

 

would not be discovered for another 36 years. Yet, I would bet there is

 

someone out there who can do the research and discover I am telling the

 

truth. There must be an old IBM engineer out there someplace that worked on

 

the 5100. They just might not have ever asked if I hadn't pointed it out.

 

JOHN: The 5100 has the ability to easily translate between the old IBM code,

 

APL, BASIC and (with a few tweaks in 1975) UNIX. This may seem insignificant but the fact that the 5100 is portable means I can easily take it back to 2036. I do expect they will create some sort of emulation system to use in multiple locations."

 

end quoted John Titor

 

Then, we already know about the "Friday the Thirteenth Bug", and because the end bit indicating positive/negative integer may flip over, some systems may revert the date to 20:45:52, Friday, December 13 others could even result in a system time of December 32, 1969

 

Some code to quick check the computers...

 

#!/usr/bin/perl

 

#

 

# I've seen a few versions of this algorithm

 

# online, I don't know who to credit. I assume

 

# this code to by GPL unless proven otherwise.

 

# Comments provided by William Porquet, February 2004.

 

# You may need to change the line above to

 

# reflect the location of your Perl binary

 

# (e.g. "#!/usr/local/bin/perl").

 

# Also change this file's name to '2038.pl'.

 

# Don't forget to make this file +x with "chmod".

 

# On Linux, you can run this from a command line like this:

 

# ./2038.pl

 

use POSIX;

 

# Use POSIX (Portable Operating System Interface),

 

# a set of standard operating system interfaces.

 

$ENV{'TZ'} = "GMT";

 

# Set the Time Zone to GMT (Greenwich Mean Time) for date calculations.

 

for ($clock = 2147483641; $clock < 2147483651; $clock++)

 

{

 

print ctime($clock);

 

}

 

# Count up in seconds of Epoch time just before and after the critical event.

 

# Print out the corresponding date in Gregorian calendar for each result.

 

# Are the date and time outputs correct after the critical event second?

 

Quoted:

 

"Windows 2000 Professional with ActivePerl 5.8.3.809 fails in such a manner that it stops displaying the date after the critical second:

 

C:\>perl 2038.pl

 

Mon Jan 18 22:14:01 2038

 

Mon Jan 18 22:14:02 2038

 

Mon Jan 18 22:14:03 2038

 

Mon Jan 18 22:14:04 2038

 

Mon Jan 18 22:14:05 2038

 

Mon Jan 18 22:14:06 2038

 

Mon Jan 18 22:14:07 2038

 

-crunch-

 

Many Intel x86 platforms have BIOS date issues as well. The Linux BIOS time utility hwclock has issues around the critical second in 2038 too (DO NOT try this on a production system unless you REALLY know what you're doing):

 

[[email protected] root]# hwclock --set --date="1/18/2038 22:14:06"

 

[[email protected] root]# hwclock --set --date="1/18/2038 22:14:07"

 

RTC_SET_TIME: Invalid argument

 

ioctl() to /dev/rtc to set the time failed.

 

[[email protected] root]# hwclock --set --date="1/18/2038 22:14:08"

 

date: invalid date `1/18/2038 22:14:08'

 

The date command issued by hwclock returned unexpected results.

 

The command was:

 

date --date="1/18/2038 22:14:08" +seconds-into-epoch=%s

 

"

 

More at:

 

Project 2038 FAQ

 

then imagine a world whitout Java Applets...thanks to the bug...

 

--

 

Regards

 

Comet 17p Holmes Online Petition

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 199
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

qflux,

 

You know what's really amazing? John never said he needed the 5100 for the Unix problem. He only said there was one.

Technically you're correct. On Post-2-Post (Art Bell's site - "I Am From 2036") Titor never directly stated the purpose for obtaining the 5100/5110. People have assumed that the intent was related to the Y2K38 issue based on the context of the following post that he made on 8-FEB-2001:

 

As you are probably aware, UNIX will have a timeout error in 2038 and many of the mainframe systems that ran a large part of the infrastructure were based on very old IBM computer code. The 5100 has the ability to easily translate between the old IBM code, APL, BASIC and (with a few tweaks in 1975) UNIX. This may seem insignificant but the fact that the 5100 is portable means I can easily take it back to 2036. I do expect they will create some sort of emulation system to use in multiple locations.

But on this site in the original "Time-Travel Paradoxes" he said:

 

TimeTravel_0

 

unregistered posted 15 November 2000 14:41

 

.

 

The first "leg" of my trip was from 2036 to 1975. After two VGL checks, the divergance was estimated at about 2.5% (from my 2036). I was "sent" to get an IBM computer system called the 5100. It was one the first portable computers made and it has the ability to read the older IBM programming langages in addition to APL and Basic. We need the system to "debug" various lagacy computer programs in 2036. UNIX has a problem in 2038.

So on this site he was more specific. Again, the context indicates that the "bug" in the legacy code relates to the Y2K38 problem even though his post didn't directly say that the "bug" was Y2K38.

 

On 3-JAN-2001 on "Topic Limited to 11 Pages?" (P2P) he said:

 

I also haven't heard anyone take me up on my 'information experiment' on the IBM 5100 or check out the information I've given you about the UNIX failure in 2038.

Again it's indirect but in the context of the post the 5100/5110 is related to Y2K38. The "information experiment" that he refers to was the challenge to verify the undocumented "tweak" in the 5100/5110.

 

On 11-JAN-2001, again on "Topic Limited to 11 Pages?" he said:

 

I don't believe I ever said I came back looking for a UNIX bug fix. I came back for a computer system. Don't you find UNIX usefull now?

Which is what you originally stated. And he was correct, as the above quoted posts indicate. He never actually said that he needed the computer to fix UNIX. The context seemed to indicate that that was his meaning, he just never said it directly.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im pretty convinced that john titor knew what he was talking about. From what i have seen, its pretty darn accurate according to titor's claims. What he didnt say was the real reason why "he has to take the portable computer back with him" without considering "hardware code ripping" from the IBM 5100. Its quite easy to rip codes from a old machine like that, however specific code wouldnt function on our modern computers, according to what i have seen, the old emulations does work on modern machines but not the original coding which is hardware based alone, not in software design.

 

you see where im getting at? The only reason that a person would need to bring that machine with him is because it is hardware wired. Otherwise our modern computers do not have that specific original hardware compatitability.

 

What I would lovvvveeeee to know.. is just how in the heck he knew about this. If he is a true time traveller, that would definetely make sense, but in most cases we are hardnosed skeptics who do not believe in time travel because its not possible today. If he isnt a real time traveller, then how did he get that info? .. he did say he was a relative of a programmer who worked on it. Maybe, just maybe he found notes on this machine hidden somewhere in his grampa's basement?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darby,

 

there you go! ... specific "tweak" is the answer. :)

 

" undocumented "tweak" in the 5100/5110."

 

update:

 

sigh.. i just got word that i am to be terminated from position sometimes this morning. The company wants me to sign some papers regarding the 5100 project. If I see a non-disclosure agreement I dont know what I am going to do because I just already posted infos and emailed infos regarding it.

 

The only way is to run and hide I guess... These guys are being forced by the government to sign certain paperwork. I asked one of my friends working there about the 5100 machine, they have already shipped the entire machine to some air force lab...

 

aww well this is probably the last you will hear from me on this forum.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pro7,

 

however specific code wouldnt function on our modern computers, according to what i have seen, the old emulations does work on modern machines but not the original coding which is hardware based alone, not in software design.

This is not true. Hardware emulation is a fairly trivial problem, especially for an older (and MUCH slower) target hardware system. Since today's processors run so much (blazingly!) faster than systems like the old IBM 5100, it is simple to program a dedicated hardware emulator that simply takes the old machine code instructions and remaps them to the new (expanded) instruction set. The software in the modern computer is fast enough to be able to fool any old hardware into thinking it is installed in its old system.

 

you see where im getting at? The only reason that a person would need to bring that machine with him is because it is hardware wired. Otherwise our modern computers do not have that specific original hardware compatitability.

Nope. See above. All you would need is a drawing of the hardware, not the hardware itself, and you could adequately emulate it to run the native software. In fact, this is how IBM made money in the early 80s with terminal emulation programs that ran on PCs... they could emulate the mainframe HW so the SW would run on the PC.

 

RMT

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darby and Pro,

 

I saw this post regarding "Winux"...

 

There is a "MISCONCEPTION" about Windows, Windows NT and Windows XP...

 

People believe it to be an "operating system"

 

It is not really...

 

It's a Graphical User Interface... A GUI... On top of various version of DOS and "Unix"... I believe "NT" was a "microsoft secret unix" project... :)

 

"Windows Programming" is ONLY ACHIEVED via "C" calls to a "DLL LIBRARY"...

 

And Linux is an open source version of Unix.. as I understand it.

 

Or so I'm told...

 

What is the context of this message? Curious... I wasn't following the thread...

 

TheCigMan

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get what all the fuss is about the old IBM 5100 is all about.

 

Don't you think by now the government and private sector would

 

have already by 2000 have upgraded all there active databases by now

 

to Linux, Unix or Windows and obsolete the IBM 5100. And

 

for the files that were not upgraded would probably have no useful use

 

anyhow so this issue should be really dead. To my view of things these

 

critical program should all have been rewritten by now if they desired

 

to continue using them.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pro,

 

I can't really take any credit for using the term "undocumented tweak". I was just using the term, slightly paraphrased, that Titor used on P2P.

 

Posted by John Titor on 02-01-2001 08:36 AM

 

The 5100 had a very simple and unique feature that IBM did not account for and decided it was not in their best interest to advertise (which in hindsight was not very smart). This accidental feature was thus removed from any future desktop computers. In order to take advantage of this feature, the 5100 I have now required a couple of special 'tweaks' that had to be done by one of the software engineers in 1975.

 

Anyone who is familiar with this feature and was told to keep their mouth shut about it will be able to tell you what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Designer,

 

I don't get what all the fuss is about the old IBM 5100 is all about. Don't you think by now the government and private sector would have already by 2000 have upgraded all there active databases by now to Linux, Unix or Windows and obsolete the IBM 5100. And for the files that were not upgraded would probably have no useful use anyhow so this issue should be really dead. To my view of things these critical program should all have been rewritten by now if they desired to continue using them.

Exactly.

 

The Y2K38 "issue" won't jump up and bite everyone in the butt on 19-JAN-2038 all at once (again assuming that it is an issue).

 

If there are date rollover issues some would have already been evident. Many would become evident on 19-JAN-2008...three months from now.

 

Billions of dollars in mortgages, bonds and other 30-year debt instruments that have maturity dayes "over the Y2K38 horizon" will have date rollover problems on that date as future values and interest payments are computed.

 

So far I haven't seen any mad dash out to the programming world for people to rush in and "fix" the problem during the next 12 weeks.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RainTime,

 

Yes you are correct about the "Hardware Emulation" issue from that point of view. We can endlessly debate over this because there are two sides to it.

 

However when the original coding were to be put on a modernized machine, it fails to function. (Im talking about the code itself) In this case, it does not matter how fast the central processing unit are in modern machines. When I worked on the 5100 at the time, i realized that it does not matter what the speed is in a modern machine. The only reason we have fast machines nowadays is to increase the speed of "installation" parameters of softwares and to run graphicing units to match higher frequencies of such graphic user interface.

 

John Titor called it the "legacy code". I call it "Binarial programming". There is a significant difference between a Hardware Emulator and a Hardware Emulation. We have to be very careful how we define "legacy code". "Legacy code" means "no longer supported".

 

What code is on the IBM 5100? That is my point. I call it "RBP" as in Reversable Binary Programming because it has the capability to reverse binary input. In fact, it doesnt matter what name I use for it, but it just does that. This is why its being sent to a air force laboratory because our modern computers simply do not have the technical ability to do a such thing.

 

As we were all taught in school or universities about computer science, we all learned about binary programming. right? ... as computer scientists, we all know by heart, that binary CANNOT be reversed

 

as it has to be in proper order to define code. (dont misunderstand this part)

 

Well guess what.. the IBM 5100 has the capability to reverse binary programming. Yea I know that some of you will think this is BS!, because of your experience and knowledge in everything there is about computer science. All of us has never been taught in school about reversing the very fundamental universal computer language. (as in actual reality to do it)

 

"Legacy Code"--"Source Code"--"Binarial Programming" what ever name we use for this code, there is no misunderstanding that this IBM 5100 machine is unique. I wish I could prove this technology to the world, however the company that I used to work for, got it shipped out and hidden, perhaps to be buried in the bunkers under the pentagon. I am quite sure they will probably develop new computers, starting from stratch (new mainboard parts, new cpu, etc) to support that "reversable binary programming"..

 

Do you know why the military got this machine in their hands? do you know what "reversable binary programming" does to modern computers? Think about it.. to give you a hint, hackers would loovvveeee this machine. I didnt believe this crap coming from the company. They then turned the 5100 project around into a possible national security threat.

 

Now.... I dont really care what people think of what I just wrote here. I know that some of you will rebel against this because you had many years of computing and science experience, perhaps more experience than I do. At least I am no longer employed by the stupid company and am no longer under their idiotic control regarding non disclosures, I am moving away to another state as fast as I can. I have to hide for a while.

 

This is my last post here, luckily I still got internet connection until it gets disconnected tommorrow, good luck guys..

 

Think about what i have said on here in general.. please.. really think about it.. you will find out that I am right.

 

Here is a link that may help you understand about this alittle.. even though it gives out examples but make a general view of it... (just to get an idea what i went through)

 

http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/WorkingEffectivelyWithLegacyCode.pdf

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

by the way

 

just a note not intended to the users of this forum:

 

to the some of u who are reading this forum about this, I know damm well that some of you are from either the company or the military, you will not be able to track me down. I have used another IP address, user name and background computer infos that isnt real in some sense. Dont even try to find me because you will not be able to find me. I am smarter than you think I am.

 

bye.

 

(again, please do not take this seriously, as it is not directed at the users of the time travel institute, it is directed to the anonymous users.. thanks)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh boy... (shakes his head)... I think I may let my friend bogz have some fun with this one. But let me at least have one go at it:

 

As we were all taught in school or universities about computer science, we all learned about binary programming. right? ... as computer scientists, we all know by heart, that binary CANNOT be reversed

 

as it has to be in proper order to define code. (dont misunderstand this part)

I am trying not to misunderstand. But perhaps you need to explain it a little better so we can understand, before we have the possibility to misunderstand.

 

Are you, perhaps, talking about "Endianness"... as in:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endianness

 

It sure sounds like that is what you are talking about (if not, please clarify). And you should note one of the entries in this wiki:

 

Some architectures (including ARM, PowerPC (but not the PPC970/G5), DEC Alpha, SPARC V9, MIPS, PA-RISC and IA64) feature switchable endianness. This feature can improve performance or simplify the logic of networking devices and software. The word bi-endian, said of hardware, denotes the capability to compute or pass data in either of two different endian formats.

In fact, I have worked on an embedded flight control system where the flight control computer had to be bi-endian because it used two different network interface standards which were implemented with opposite endianness. Big Endian and Little Endian.

 

Too many chiefs and not enough endians??? :D

 

RMT

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have used another IP address, user name and background computer infos that isnt real in some sense. Dont even try to find me because you will not be able to find me. I am smarter than you think I am.

Considering that

 

<ul type="square"> [*]You seem to have been fired [*]You posted the information about the project here [*]Your company, according to your story, is now involved with DoD contracts [*]The DoD would obviously know what those contracts are [*]The disgruntled ex-employee is always the suspect

 

The "lurkers" don't need to track you down. A phone call to your former employer is all it would take. Or a phone call from your former employer to a corporate security company. It wouldn't take very long for them to be knocking on your door.

 

BTW: Better re-read your company non-disclosure agreement (assuming that what you said was true... ;) ). Non-disclosure agreements remain in effect for up to several years after one leaves the company. Otherwise they're nonsense. All one needs to do is get a job, learn about the company's trade secrets, quit (or get fired) and sell the information.

 

Military-government non-disclosures usually continue for at least 10 years after seperation from service or retirement, depending on the level of classification of the information.

 

One last note about military contracting. If you were involved with classified projects then you had to receive a clearance that specified what level of information you could have access to. That required an SBI - Special Background Investigation. A DoD investigator would have given you a ~40 page background investigation form that you had to fill out. It required information about your entire life - residences (no gaps), education from day one (no gaps), employment (no gaps), financial, friends, relatives. And it would have involved a tertiary order of verification. That means, for instance, you gave a friend's name as a reference. That friend gave both another name of a friend (one that you didn't give) as a further reference and gave personal references for him/herself. This went three levels deep (a friend of a friend of a friend so to speak).

 

The investigator then verified all of that information. In other words, the investigator might actually know more about you, your friends and their friends than you know.

 

You might run, but its pretty hard to hide.

 

I'm pretty sure that Rainman is familiar with SBI's, mil contracts and non-disclosure agreements.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yup.

 

That is the main reason for refusing to sign anything relating to DOD, hence my termination. That is why I mentioned that they are forcing the issue on employees of the company. If they do not follow procedures, they are to be immediately terminated.

 

According to my previous confidentiality nondisclosure agreement with the company, then, it does indicate that it expires immediately if another entity besides the NSF and other orgs decides to have the company switch to federal funding. The project was not classified until it was made classified recently.

 

Hard to hide? nahhh not really. There are ways to start a new life.

 

Raintime,

 

The source of the ibm5100 is not biendian. It is the source that is within itself. Shake your head all you want lol. (yea i know its hard to believe)

 

:)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is why I mentioned that they are forcing the issue on employees of the company. If they do not follow procedures, they are to be immediately terminated

As they should be.

 

Hard to hide? nahhh not really. There are ways to start a new life.

So I guess going back onto SSI is out of the question.

 

It's probably out of the question in any case. You have recently demonstrated that you have the ability to "engage in substantial gainful activity" without expecting such activity to "result in death".

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol

 

I read the other forum. Yep its what I expected. "pure bs through and through". People think they know better than the other.(in which ways I dont really blame them, from everything they have been conditioned through school.)

 

Just guessing we all have to wait. Besides, the current coding in the computer systems world wide is already beginning to collaspe.

 

Well I tried...

 

I just wish someone who has a 5100 machine, take a serious look at it and ponder why I would say these "pure bs through and through" statements.

 

oh well.

 

See ya around sometimes. :)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mechnor!!!

 

whoa ok..

 

To make this more interesting you can take the "3rd board" out and look on the under side of the board. Remove the thin yellow dielectric material carefully and on the top right corner of the board you will see a inscription printed on it. (make sure you put that material back so it wont make contact with the frame and other boards) Research the inscription on google and you will find out more interesting stuff especially where that piece came from.

 

Ill be moving out of state sometimes today and I will not have internet access for a while since it also getting disconnected anytime today. I noticed from your IP address that you are from austria. If you are not further interested in keeping that 5100 I can offer you a sum at your price for it. Ill be sending you email through this forum.. please keep in contact!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...