I thought the same thing. I wonder what they think of it? They may not be best pleased. Quote from the album sleeve of OK Computer: "Lyrics used by kind permission even though we wrote them."
So Snopes admit that people have used both thawed AND frozen chickens in the past, yet totally refuse to believe that there might be any merit in the story whatsoever?
The Scottish qualifications authority's powerful IBM Numa-Q computer "went up in smoke", according to insiders, when a contractor wired it directly into a high voltage three stage mains electricity supply instead of a normal 240 volt circuit.
Presumably they meant "three-phase"?
The simple but catastrophic error - akin to getting the wires the wrong way round in a household plug - caused a surge of power that "fried" the computer's sophisticated electronics.
Considering this article came from Education Guardian, I'm rather depressed about it. Presumably Arts Education only...:-(
You're probably thinking about the Commodore PET home computer. On early models (with calculator-style keyboard, built-in cassette deck and usually labelled "Commodore PET 2001 series") there was a POKE code that made writing to the screen a lot faster at the expense of having "snow" on the video output, by allowing the CPU to write to the screen RAM any time it liked rather than having to wait for the screen refresh hardware to finish.
On later models (with proper keyboard, outboard cassette deck, and usually labelled "Commodore PET 30xx", where xx was "08", "16" or "32" according to the RAM size in K) the very same POKE code used to set up two ICs in contention with each other, resulting in the screen raster shrinking to four lines high and, if you didn't quickly set it back the way it was or turn the power-off, smoking chips.
Quite a few people damaged/destroyed the hardware in their newer PETs by trying out that "cool" POKE code...
Re:SCO still packs a punch?
on
SCO SCO SCO!
·
· Score: 1
> Thank you for the definitive illustration of why that ficticious turd of prescriptive snobbery is such a foolish waste of time.
I'm not as prescriptive as you think. I have no problem with ending sentences with prepositions if it reads O.K. To take another example, I myself regularly moan at idiots who tell other people off for splitting infinitives. "To go boldly where no man has gone before"? I think not. The original is better, and sod the 19th-century schoolmarms.
In my opinion the sentence in the SCO statement doesn't read very well. You think it does. Oh well, that's life, we all differ. I prefer my re-wording, because to me (but apparently not to you) it scans better and is easier to read. No more than that, and no less.
Ironically, YOU gave a far better illustration than I did. I have no problem with "clearly easier to read and to make sense of", whereas "easier to read and of which to make sense" is just silly, as you say. In that case I agree with you. In the case of the SCO statement, I don't. In any case it seemed inappropriate language for an official company statement.
As I said, I'm not as prescriptive as you think. I never mentioned the "don't end a sentence with a preposition" rule myself, I was just rewording it in what was to me a pleasing and readable fashion. Please don't ascribe motives to me that I don't have.
Oh, and I do get sex. Regularly. With a real live woman. Honest.;-)
> Contracts are what you use against parties you have relationships with.
Uh? The moral position of this aside, the English is appalling for an official statement. Surely it should be
"Contracts are what you use against parties with which you have relationships."? or better still
"A contract is what one party uses against another with which it has a relationship."? or even
"A contract is an instrument that one party uses against another with which it has a relationship."? if you want to be anal about it.
In fact the whole of that paragraph is just ludicrously written. As someone else, said, just who the hell wrote it? Whoever it was, they were obviously in a panic...
Anyway, kudos to Novell for panicking them in the first place!:-)
and petrol stations ban them so they can charge you a ridiculous amount of money to uh, oh wait....
and petrol stations ban them because they can upset the pump electronics and cause you to get seriously undercharged for the fuel, actually. That's the real reason. Used to happen with CB burners too, just key the mike to interfere with the pulses from the meter's shaft-encoder to the pump-head electronics.
All the stuff about induced sparks between nozzle and car is 99.99% bollocks, it can just possibly happen yes, but it's far MORE likely to happen due to good old static build up on the vehicle. Vauxhall (GM) had a big problem with this on one of their models a few years ago, IIRC.
I spent eight years writing embedded software for petrol filling stations (albeit not for the pump-heads themselves) and that's what we heard from inside the industry...
I don't *think* he did, but I could be wrong. I think he said that he'd wished he'd patented it, but that ultimately it wouldn't have made any difference because of the 25-year thing. Or something like that.
Nice call! Not quite right though I think...they were half-working 64k chips, eight of them giving a working memory of 32K. Adding that to the basic 16K supplied by the eight 4116s gave you the 48K.
They were made by Texas, and if memory serves they were marked TMS4532H and TMS4532L - the "H" or "L" said (surprise!) which half of the chip was working. The expansion board carried eight of the same type, and a link on the PCB set which half to address.
I'm not sure what you mean about getting the extra 16K, as there wouldn't be enough address space to hold it. (However a mate of mine did fit real 4564s to his with some kind of bank-switching circuit, but obviously only software he wrote himself could use it.)
Bear in mind though that my Speccy knowledge ran out after the Issue 3 boards, so maybe the Issue 4s were different. Still don't see how you'd fit it in the address space though without bank-switching as used on the Spectrum 128.
(Pauses to remember when 4116s were *IT*, and cost something like GBP12.99 each... =8^) )
Being from (and living in) the U.K. I wouldn't describe that advert as "very provocative". I largely agree with the ASA on that one: not on a billboard or a newspaper, but OK in a specialist magazine.
Maybe we have different standards over here - I've heard that visitors from the USA are often surprised by the amount of sexual content in our media (although we have nothing compared to most of Europe), whereas we get surprised by the amount of violence in yours, especially during the daytime.
Where are you that you have ATMs that pull in your card?
In 18 years of using ATMs here in the U.K., I have ***never*** seen an ATM that *didn't* pull in your card. They all do here.
Amazed to hear of ones that don't, as I believe they tend to write back to the card a lot of the time (as a method of enforcing your daily limit offline), which isn't possible on a simple swipe machine.
That's why to this day, the 1" videotape format still rules in broadcasting
8-| It may do in your part of the world, but in the U.K. 1" has been more-or-less dead for many years. It's all Digital Betacam now (with some D3 & D5), and before that there was a *lot* of Betacam SP (which caught on more in 625-line countries than 525, I think, but I could be wrong). Betacam-without-the-SP never really caught on over here because it wasn't good enough for 625-line broadcast use (which is one reason they came out with SP).
You think so? Then why was our old betamax vcr able to play studio tapes of the late 1980s?
Assuming this isn't a troll, then either your "old betamax vcr" was an "old semi-professional betacam vcr", or your studio was a VERY small and VERY rural one that used Betamax. This I doubt, it's more likely the former - second-hand Betacam (not Betacam SP!) machines can be picked up for a few hundred pounds/dollars these days.
A Betamax machine couldn't possibly play a Betacam tape as although the tape shell may be the same, the way the picture information is laid down on it is entirely different (Max = composite colour-under, Cam = component YPbPr) not to mention at a different speed.
As someone else mentioned on this or another thread, you might get some linear audio six times too slow though.
Not very much though - really only as far as the name of the manufacturer and the cassette shell (which you did say).
The composite colour-under system with (sort of) separated luma and chroma, which you claim for Betacam, is not used on it. It's only used on Betamax, VHS and U-Matic (and probably other more obscure formats).
Betacam & Betacam SP are component (YPbPr) machines that record Luma, Blue Colour Difference and Red Colour Difference separately (like RGB but with the benefit of single-channel monochrome compatibility). Very very different and MUCH better quality.
Re:Not this crap again. - FAST FORWARD better VHS
on
Why VHS Was Better
·
· Score: 1
If Beta was unsuited to Video Cameras then why was it the defacto standard for profession use video cameras (Reporters & such) up until recently.
No it wasn't. Betacam SP was. Betacam != Betamax. Do not confuse the two. Betacam is a semi-professional format, later upgraded to fully professional/broadcast Betacam SP. Betamax shares some physical similarities with Betacam but the former was a home system from the word go.
The broadcast standard nowadays tends to be Digital Betacam. Mini-DV tends to be only used by semi-pros, and I would guess that SVHS is nearly dead now as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Close, but no cigar. It was red/cyan, then yellow/blue.
(wishing I'd seen this story when it first came out)
Amazing! They pick one Blue Oyster Cult song and it's NOT "(Don't Fear) The Reaper"!!
I thought the same thing. I wonder what they think of it? They may not be best pleased. Quote from the album sleeve of OK Computer: "Lyrics used by kind permission even though we wrote them."
> America's bankrupt.
Morally or economically?
So Snopes admit that people have used both thawed AND frozen chickens in the past, yet totally refuse to believe that there might be any merit in the story whatsoever?
The Scottish qualifications authority's powerful IBM Numa-Q computer "went up in smoke", according to insiders, when a contractor wired it directly into a high voltage three stage mains electricity supply instead of a normal 240 volt circuit.
Presumably they meant "three-phase"?
The simple but catastrophic error - akin to getting the wires the wrong way round in a household plug - caused a surge of power that "fried" the computer's sophisticated electronics.
Considering this article came from Education Guardian, I'm rather depressed about it. Presumably Arts Education only... :-(
On later models (with proper keyboard, outboard cassette deck, and usually labelled "Commodore PET 30xx", where xx was "08", "16" or "32" according to the RAM size in K) the very same POKE code used to set up two ICs in contention with each other, resulting in the screen raster shrinking to four lines high and, if you didn't quickly set it back the way it was or turn the power-off, smoking chips.
Quite a few people damaged/destroyed the hardware in their newer PETs by trying out that "cool" POKE code...
That be exceedingly good! :-)
I'm not as prescriptive as you think. I have no problem with ending sentences with prepositions if it reads O.K. To take another example, I myself regularly moan at idiots who tell other people off for splitting infinitives. "To go boldly where no man has gone before"? I think not. The original is better, and sod the 19th-century schoolmarms.
In my opinion the sentence in the SCO statement doesn't read very well. You think it does. Oh well, that's life, we all differ. I prefer my re-wording, because to me (but apparently not to you) it scans better and is easier to read. No more than that, and no less.
Ironically, YOU gave a far better illustration than I did. I have no problem with "clearly easier to read and to make sense of", whereas "easier to read and of which to make sense" is just silly, as you say. In that case I agree with you. In the case of the SCO statement, I don't. In any case it seemed inappropriate language for an official company statement.
As I said, I'm not as prescriptive as you think. I never mentioned the "don't end a sentence with a preposition" rule myself, I was just rewording it in what was to me a pleasing and readable fashion. Please don't ascribe motives to me that I don't have.
Oh, and I do get sex. Regularly. With a real live woman. Honest. ;-)
> Contracts are what you use against parties you have relationships with.
Uh? The moral position of this aside, the English is appalling for an official statement. Surely it should be
"Contracts are what you use against parties with which you have relationships."?
or better still
"A contract is what one party uses against another with which it has a relationship."?
or even
"A contract is an instrument that one party uses against another with which it has a relationship."?
if you want to be anal about it.
In fact the whole of that paragraph is just ludicrously written. As someone else, said, just who the hell wrote it? Whoever it was, they were obviously in a panic...
Anyway, kudos to Novell for panicking them in the first place! :-)
He makes a very good point, and one to which I'd like to see if anyone knows the answer.
Mind you, usually it IS a big conspiracy, just not this time IMHO. ;-)
and petrol stations ban them because they can upset the pump electronics and cause you to get seriously undercharged for the fuel, actually. That's the real reason. Used to happen with CB burners too, just key the mike to interfere with the pulses from the meter's shaft-encoder to the pump-head electronics.
All the stuff about induced sparks between nozzle and car is 99.99% bollocks, it can just possibly happen yes, but it's far MORE likely to happen due to good old static build up on the vehicle. Vauxhall (GM) had a big problem with this on one of their models a few years ago, IIRC.
I spent eight years writing embedded software for petrol filling stations (albeit not for the pump-heads themselves) and that's what we heard from inside the industry...
Isn't that a good thing? Gets you in the mood for a good fragging... ;-)
I don't *think* he did, but I could be wrong. I think he said that he'd wished he'd patented it, but that ultimately it wouldn't have made any difference because of the 25-year thing. Or something like that.
They were made by Texas, and if memory serves they were marked TMS4532H and TMS4532L - the "H" or "L" said (surprise!) which half of the chip was working. The expansion board carried eight of the same type, and a link on the PCB set which half to address.
I'm not sure what you mean about getting the extra 16K, as there wouldn't be enough address space to hold it. (However a mate of mine did fit real 4564s to his with some kind of bank-switching circuit, but obviously only software he wrote himself could use it.)
Bear in mind though that my Speccy knowledge ran out after the Issue 3 boards, so maybe the Issue 4s were different. Still don't see how you'd fit it in the address space though without bank-switching as used on the Spectrum 128.
(Pauses to remember when 4116s were *IT*, and cost something like GBP12.99 each... =8^) )
Being from (and living in) the U.K. I wouldn't describe that advert as "very provocative". I largely agree with the ASA on that one: not on a billboard or a newspaper, but OK in a specialist magazine. Maybe we have different standards over here - I've heard that visitors from the USA are often surprised by the amount of sexual content in our media (although we have nothing compared to most of Europe), whereas we get surprised by the amount of violence in yours, especially during the daytime.
Were you staying in the Alps? If so, then it may well have had a lot to do with a US Marine pilot mowing down a cable-car full of skiers a few years back, and then refusing to pay any compensation...
In 18 years of using ATMs here in the U.K., I have ***never*** seen an ATM that *didn't* pull in your card. They all do here.
Amazed to hear of ones that don't, as I believe they tend to write back to the card a lot of the time (as a method of enforcing your daily limit offline), which isn't possible on a simple swipe machine.
you're going to ask some astronauts that should be piloting the damn ship to sit down and do some modulo arithmatic
I rather think they mean an electronic one-time pad, silly!
8-| It may do in your part of the world, but in the U.K. 1" has been more-or-less dead for many years. It's all Digital Betacam now (with some D3 & D5), and before that there was a *lot* of Betacam SP (which caught on more in 625-line countries than 525, I think, but I could be wrong). Betacam-without-the-SP never really caught on over here because it wasn't good enough for 625-line broadcast use (which is one reason they came out with SP).
Assuming this isn't a troll, then either your "old betamax vcr" was an "old semi-professional betacam vcr", or your studio was a VERY small and VERY rural one that used Betamax. This I doubt, it's more likely the former - second-hand Betacam (not Betacam SP!) machines can be picked up for a few hundred pounds/dollars these days.
A Betamax machine couldn't possibly play a Betacam tape as although the tape shell may be the same, the way the picture information is laid down on it is entirely different (Max = composite colour-under, Cam = component YPbPr) not to mention at a different speed.
As someone else mentioned on this or another thread, you might get some linear audio six times too slow though.
Not very much though - really only as far as the name of the manufacturer and the cassette shell (which you did say).
The composite colour-under system with (sort of) separated luma and chroma, which you claim for Betacam, is not used on it. It's only used on Betamax, VHS and U-Matic (and probably other more obscure formats).
Betacam & Betacam SP are component (YPbPr) machines that record Luma, Blue Colour Difference and Red Colour Difference separately (like RGB but with the benefit of single-channel monochrome compatibility). Very very different and MUCH better quality.
No it wasn't. Betacam SP was. Betacam != Betamax. Do not confuse the two. Betacam is a semi-professional format, later upgraded to fully professional/broadcast Betacam SP. Betamax shares some physical similarities with Betacam but the former was a home system from the word go.
The broadcast standard nowadays tends to be Digital Betacam. Mini-DV tends to be only used by semi-pros, and I would guess that SVHS is nearly dead now as well.
But it sure as hell uses the original music!