20 Feb
2007
20 Feb
'07
10:32 p.m.
On 20 Feb 2007 at 23:23, Jim Battle wrote: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...
My guess is that this might well be a test pattern. One obvious clue
is that there are too many '1' bits for code--either 8086 or
8080/Z80.Even complementing the data doesn't produce anything more
useful.
Cheers,
Chuck