Thinking of a scanner
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Iphoto 08 to iPhoto 09
Next: Apple Tech Support?
From: Woody on 3 Mar 2010 11:00 Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > On 2010-03-03, Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > > > > Did you see that thing about the original JPL scans of the moon to > > prepare for the moon landings? All the data was held on tapes for a > > really expensive machine, and nasa through it all out after apollo was > > scrapped. One woman hung onto the data and one of the machines in her > > garage, then 20 years later when they realised they needed the data she > > had it all, and the only machine to read it > > Imagine their dismay when they found out she'd recorded 12 episodes of > 'Dallas' over it... I think if it included the one where you found out who shot JR, it would be worth more! -- Woody
From: Rowland McDonnell on 3 Mar 2010 11:03 Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > > A lot of it was junked because it is > > > really costly and expensive to store it. > > > > Old explosive film is a special case - admittedly, there's a lot of it. > > Modern safety film stock (came in during the 1930s, didn't it?) does a > > lot better. > > No; nitrate stock is a special, dreadful case, very expensive to store > because of the requirement for special vaults and the fact that if not > stored very carefully it deteriorates on its own- and incidentally > smells horrid when it does. Wot? No, the old stock does take special storage as I indicated. You are simply agreeing with what I wrote, although you seem to have failed to understand my very plain and clear point. I think you did that because you enjoy making posts that say I'm wrong because you like destroying my reputation. > But I'm thinking of modern safety stock. I referred to both sorts - the old sort and the new sort, and I made that very plain using clear unambigious plain English. Have you lost the ability to read carefully, Peter? Is senility setting in so fast? No, that's not abusive, not if you think it's okay for you to make the allegations about me that you do make in this newsgroup. > I've seen skips full of cans of > stories being junked- and this was by the BBC, who are more motivated > towards archive storage than most organisations. Yes, because they had no room: we both know what the reason for that is, not enough space in the warehouse. > I know that there was > stuff in those skips- I worked on the programmes involved- that would > have been priceless to social historians in a few years, but there > simply wasn't the storage space for it, nor the money to build any. Quite - they just needed another warehouse, that would have done, but they couldn't justify the expense. You're being outright dishonest, now, aren't you Peter? Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Woody on 3 Mar 2010 11:36 Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > Did you see that thing about the original JPL scans of the moon to > prepare for the moon landings? All the data was held on tapes for a > really expensive machine, and nasa through it all out after apollo was > scrapped. One woman hung onto the data and one of the machines in her > garage, then 20 years later when they realised they needed the data she > had it all, and the only machine to read it <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/22/destination_moon/> -- Woody
From: D.M. Procida on 3 Mar 2010 12:32 Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > I will happily stop making personal remarks about you as soon as you > learn how to stop doing it to others. James, is that you? I'd be really pleased if everyone here who was actually able to resist making personal remarks did so. Daniele
From: Woody on 3 Mar 2010 12:42
D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > > > I will happily stop making personal remarks about you as soon as you > > learn how to stop doing it to others. > > James, is that you? > > I'd be really pleased if everyone here who was actually able to resist > making personal remarks did so. I have already decided to do so earlier on, apologies to all for breaking my new years resolution! -- Woody |