Thinking of a scanner
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Iphoto 08 to iPhoto 09
Next: Apple Tech Support?
From: Pd on 5 Mar 2010 04:56 bella jonez <bellajonez(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Pd <peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid> wrote: > > Ben Shimmin <bas(a)llamaselector.com> wrote: > > > > > Oh, what a noble mind is here o'erthrown! [...] > > > And I [...] now see that noble and most sovereign reason > > > Like sweet bells jangled, out of tune and harsh; > > > That unmatched form and feature of blown youth > > > Blasted with ecstasy. > > > > I think this was written about that bloke who's swallowed something > > like > > 40,000 pills and has almost zero short-term memory left. Although I > > don't think his mind was all that noble before he started. > > Pd, you are an utter xhiy As in "sorted for..."? Um, thanks. I think. -- Pd
From: Pd on 5 Mar 2010 05:11 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 "She also had the forethought to request three Ampex 900 reel-to-reel tape machines that could read the Orbiter's data. This half-ton machine was already obsolete - most had been dumped at sea." This kind of thing is just appalling. Incomprehensible. They're not that big, why not dump them with a tarp over them at one of these airplane graveyards in the desert? They'd be barely a dot next to a bunch of B52s and Starlifters. -- Pd
From: zoara on 5 Mar 2010 05:45 Tim Streater <timstreater(a)waitrose.com> wrote: > Wikipaedia. Argh. -z- -- email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm
From: Pd on 5 Mar 2010 08:57 zoara <me18(a)privacy.net> wrote: > Tim Streater <timstreater(a)waitrose.com> wrote: > > > Wikipaedia. > > Argh. ColourSync. -- Pd
From: Rowland McDonnell on 5 Mar 2010 12:21
Tim Streater <timstreater(a)waitrose.com> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell wrote: > > Tim Streater<timstreater(a)waitrose.com> wrote: > > [snip] > > > <cough> Better than was /economically and techically practical in the > > time available/. `Possible' - umm, they could have done better back > > then, if they'd put the brains on to it. Applies to everything in > > practical engineering. They got images back that were up to the job in > > hand. > > > > But now I know. How come I'd missed all this? > > Just before you were born, perhaps? It's not like I didn't read up on moon exploration, you know. When I was /very/ young, there was an awful lot of stuff around the place talking about the moon programme. I started reading it when I was at infants' school, and just inhaled anything to do with rockets and space exploration by the time I started middle school. I remember that much. Always fascinating - and I never could understand why the dropped the X-15 line of development. Turns out to have been down to politics and inter-service rivalry and things like that, but I get the idea that the X-15 approach will be the one that delivers `man to orbit' in the most economical way until they get the space elevator working, or the teleport. > Also, the Orbiters were not so well > publicised as the later Apollos. But I was around 20 at the time and > quite interested, so I knew it was happening - but I didn't know > anything like the detail of how it worked. I'd hardly heard of them. 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 |