Re: Cheap Electronics (was Re: Worldcon news)
Seth
David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:00:52 +0000 (UTC), se...@panix.com (Seth) wrote:
>>David Loewe, Jr. <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:09:35 -0700, David Friedman
>>><dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>Five ounces, as I mentioned earlier. After weighing it.
>>>That can't be *that* much more than a stick.
>>Almost two orders of magnitude. Pico flash drives (from Super Talent)
>>weigh under 2g.
>That is like saying that carbon dioxide is almost two orders of
>magnitude heavier than an oxygen atom - true, but meaningless in the
>larger sense.
How do you get that? A carbon dioxide molecule is under three times
as heavy as an oxygen atom, and just more than a third heavier than an
oxygen molecule. That's nowhere near two orders of magnitude.
Seth
David Loewe, Jr.
I misread it. Mea culpa.
However, I have a hard time believing that the average USB thumb drive
weighs as little as the Pico line - an ounce or 2 (which is what I
misread it as) seems far more likely looking at the packaging
differences between the average drive (say a Super Talent Luxio) and the
Pico line. Whereas I am quite willing to believe that 5 ounces is the
standard for external 2.5" form factor hard drives.
OBTW, Super Talent claims that the Pico line weighs under *6* grams.
http://www.supertalent.com/products/stt_usb_detail.php
Perhaps you were thinking of the Pico-mini series (A or B) sticks?
--
"Anything a human being does to a LaRouche follower is justifiable on
the grounds of self-defense."
- Kevin Bold
netcat
dlo...@mindspring.com says...
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 02:50:42 +0000 (UTC), se...@panix.com (Seth) wrote:
>
> >David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
> >>On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:00:52 +0000 (UTC), se...@panix.com (Seth) wrote:
> >>>David Loewe, Jr. <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >>>>On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:09:35 -0700, David Friedman
> >>>><dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>Five ounces, as I mentioned earlier. After weighing it.
> >>>>That can't be *that* much more than a stick.
> >>>Almost two orders of magnitude. Pico flash drives (from Super Talent)
> >>>weigh under 2g.
> >>That is like saying that carbon dioxide is almost two orders of
> >>magnitude heavier than an oxygen atom - true, but meaningless in the
> >>larger sense.
> >
> >How do you get that? A carbon dioxide molecule is under three times
> >as heavy as an oxygen atom, and just more than a third heavier than an
> >oxygen molecule. That's nowhere near two orders of magnitude.
>
> I misread it. Mea culpa.
>
> However, I have a hard time believing that the average USB thumb drive
> weighs as little as the Pico line - an ounce or 2 (which is what I
> misread it as) seems far more likely looking at the packaging
> differences between the average drive (say a Super Talent Luxio) and the
> Pico line. Whereas I am quite willing to believe that 5 ounces is the
> standard for external 2.5" form factor hard drives.
>
> OBTW, Super Talent claims that the Pico line weighs under *6* grams.
My Swissbit stick is also claimed to weigh "under 6 grams". I wonder if
it isn't simply because they can't be bothered to use scales with better
accuracy. Any scales I have handy aren't accurate below 5 grams, either.
Have difficulty imagining what would make an average memory stick weigh
2 ounces, though.
rgds,
netcat
David V. Loewe, Jr
Frankly, looking at the Pico drives, I can easily imagine something that
small easily getting lost or damaged (the contacts look exposed).
>Have difficulty imagining what would make an average memory stick weigh
>2 ounces, though.
Packaging. New Egg shows drives packaged like a pen and like a mini
"dog bone."
And I said an ounce or two - which would imply an average between those
numbers.
In any case, the point here is that Seth cites the smallest possible
stick, not a typical one.
--
"Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed."
-Lazarus Long
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
I weighed a couple of the ones I have on a digital scale.
0.6 oz for my Corsair Flash Voyager, which is a full-sized rubberized
USB stick.
2 lbs 0.5 oz for my 3.5" SimpleTech 750 GB USB drive.
I don't have them, but Samsung lists their 120GB 1.8" USB drives at
3 oz and their 320 GB 2.5" USB drive at 5.4 oz.
From a personal standpoint anything larger than the flash drive is more
than I want to add to the "stuff" I usually carry in my pockets.
Robert
--
Robert K. Shull Email: rkshull at rosettacon dot com
David V. Loewe, Jr
wrote:
Well, no one is advocating carrying a 3.5" form factor portable around
in a pocket. In a bag - like a messenger bag - is, however, a different
story altogether.
>I don't have them, but Samsung lists their 120GB 1.8" USB drives at
>3 oz
Probably not common enough to consider as a normal option. Also
somewhat pricier than 2.5" form factor devices and I was trying to give
Keith a much lower cost option.
>and their 320 GB 2.5" USB drive at 5.4 oz.
>
>From a personal standpoint anything larger than the flash drive is more
>than I want to add to the "stuff" I usually carry in my pockets.
Whereas those of us who have carried around glasses with their
accompanying cases in a front shirt pocket would have a different
opinion.
--
"I guess I wouldn't believe in anything anymore if it weren't
for my lucky astrology mood watch."
- Steve Martin
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
I'm the designated beast of burden for electronic gadgets whenever we
travel. When we went to London last Christmas I was carrying my dad's
laptop bag while wearing a padded backpack that had three laptops, the
external drive, two cameras, four cellphones plus a large collection
of batteries, chargers and memory sticks. I must radiate "geek" since
none of the security people in the US or London did so much as raise
an eyebrow.
>>I don't have them, but Samsung lists their 120GB 1.8" USB drives at
>>3 oz
>
> Probably not common enough to consider as a normal option. Also
> somewhat pricier than 2.5" form factor devices and I was trying to give
> Keith a much lower cost option.
>
>>and their 320 GB 2.5" USB drive at 5.4 oz.
>>
>>From a personal standpoint anything larger than the flash drive is more
>>than I want to add to the "stuff" I usually carry in my pockets.
>
> Whereas those of us who have carried around glasses with their
> accompanying cases in a front shirt pocket would have a different
> opinion.
Other than a couple of dress shirts that I wear on special occasions my
shirts are entirely lacking in pockets. I'd have to tuck it one of my
back pockets and that would probably end badly.
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
Well, the original claim wasn't that the person didn't have pockets, it
was that pockets on shirts were useless to carry anything in.
--
"I'm looking at myself, reflections of my mind.
It's just the kind of day to leave myself behind.
So gently swaying through the fairy-land of love,
If you could just come with me and see the beauty of
Tuesday afternoon.
Tuesday afternoon."
David J. Hayward
Alan Woodford
<dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 02:54:51 +0000 (UTC), rksh...@rosettacondot.com
>wrote:
>
>>David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:32:35 +0000 (UTC), rksh...@rosettacondot.com
>>> wrote:
>
>>>>From a personal standpoint anything larger than the flash drive is more
>>>>than I want to add to the "stuff" I usually carry in my pockets.
>>>
>>> Whereas those of us who have carried around glasses with their
>>> accompanying cases in a front shirt pocket would have a different
>>> opinion.
>>
>>Other than a couple of dress shirts that I wear on special occasions my
>>shirts are entirely lacking in pockets. I'd have to tuck it one of my
>>back pockets and that would probably end badly.
>
>Well, the original claim wasn't that the person didn't have pockets, it
>was that pockets on shirts were useless to carry anything in.
Hmm.
When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with pockets,
rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile phone, a 2GB
flash drive, and a pen.
Not much compared to the contents of my jacket pockets, but definitely
not useless.
Alan Woodford
The Greying Lensman!
netcat
al...@bortas.demon.co.uk says...
I do remind you that no one said "shirt pockets are useless for
everybody". We're all, I presume, talking only from our personal
viewpoints.
rgds,
netcat
netcat
dave...@charter.net says...
> Frankly, looking at the Pico drives, I can easily imagine something that
> small easily getting lost or damaged (the contacts look exposed).
Which is why I prefer my sticks to have caps.
rgds,
netcat
Philip Chee
Won't that be rather explosive?
Phil
--
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my>, <phili...@gmail.com>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
Kip Williams
I would expect that would make someone less likely to want to add even
more stuff to their pocket load. I've actually managed to reduce what I
lug around somewhat. I used the glasses case they gave me with this pair
until it turned out that it was damaging the lenses, which they couldn't
fix and wouldn't replace.
Kip W
cryptoguy
As I often say to Keith: You Can Look This Stuff Up. So stop guessing.
http://www.usbmemorysticks.net/sandisk-cruzer-flash-drives
This covers a more 'run of the mill' USB stick form factor - the one
I use: the Sandisk Cruzer. This has a retractable connector (which I
regard as a near-essential feature for a keychain drive), It goes up
to 32GB at the moment, and weighs just under 10g. That means you'd
have to pile up 3 of them to reach 1 ounce. The 'Micro' version is 5g,
and goes up to 16Gb.
Portable HDs:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=5078
Iomega Ego 500gb: 180g
Toshiba 500Gb: 6 oz
Western Digital Passport: 0.3 lbs
(for reference: 1 Oz = 28.35 g)
So yes, your portable HD is at least an order of magnitude heavier
than a stick.
pt
cryptoguy
wrote:
You Can Look This Stuff Up
Seth just picked one that's heavily marketed as small. Sandisk Micros
(a more standard stick) come in at 5g. URL in a nearby post.
pt
cryptoguy
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:29:56 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."
>
>
>
>
>
> <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >wrote:
>
> >>David V. Loewe, Jr <davelo...@charter.net> wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:32:35 +0000 (UTC), rkshul...@rosettacondot.com
> >>> wrote:
>
> >>>>From a personal standpoint anything larger than the flash drive is more
> >>>>than I want to add to the "stuff" I usually carry in my pockets.
>
> >>> Whereas those of us who have carried around glasses with their
> >>> accompanying cases in a front shirt pocket would have a different
> >>> opinion.
>
> >>Other than a couple of dress shirts that I wear on special occasions my
> >>shirts are entirely lacking in pockets. I'd have to tuck it one of my
> >>back pockets and that would probably end badly.
>
> >Well, the original claim wasn't that the person didn't have pockets, it
> >was that pockets on shirts were useless to carry anything in.
>
> Hmm.
>
> When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with pockets,
> rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile phone, a 2GB
> flash drive, and a pen.
Well, yes. And doing so labels you (and me!) as nerds. netcat at
least, was trying to avoid that.
pt
cryptoguy
> In article <rdhje59fnklv0t6kkc1h5kbcsegbhft...@4ax.com>,
> davelo...@charter.net says...
>
> > Frankly, looking at the Pico drives, I can easily imagine something that
> > small easily getting lost or damaged (the contacts look exposed).
>
> Which is why I prefer my sticks to have caps.
I lose caps. I prefer mine with retractable connectors, or an integral
cap. I use Sandisk Cruzers, and am quite happy with them.
pt
netcat
27f16e...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, treif...@gmail.com says...
> > When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with pockets,
> > rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile phone, a 2GB
> > flash drive, and a pen.
>
> Well, yes. And doing so labels you (and me!) as nerds. netcat at
> least, was trying to avoid that.
Incidentally, that's got nothing to do with why I don't have shirts with
pockets, or would not put anything substantial in them. I wear what I
find most comfortable, that is always the first rule. It's just that
what I find most comfortable is a form-fitting, V-necked t-shirt made of
stretchy, soft fabric. These as a rule do not have any pockets. Even
when I am wearing something that would have a pocket, I wouldn't put
anything substantial into the pocket because it would make me feel
uncomfortable and unbalanced. Stuff that makes me feel clunky and
encumbered and weighed down in any way bothers me a lot, I'm
oversensitive to it. Another goddamn Aspie trait.
rgds,
netcat
netcat
@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, treif...@gmail.com says...
I have a Sandisk Titanium which is retractable, but I find it more
uncomfortable to use, especially in narrow quarters. The retractable bit
tends to retract when you push it into the socket unless you hold on to
it right..
rgds,
netcat
David Loewe, Jr.
>dave...@charter.net says...
>> Frankly, looking at the Pico drives, I can easily imagine something that
>> small easily getting lost or damaged (the contacts look exposed).
>
>Which is why I prefer my sticks to have caps.
As would I...
--
"Molon labe!"
- Leonidas
David Loewe, Jr.
<treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Oct 30, 7:17�am, netcat <net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
>> davelo...@charter.net says...
>>
>> > Frankly, looking at the Pico drives, I can easily imagine something that
>> > small easily getting lost or damaged (the contacts look exposed).
>>
>> Which is why I prefer my sticks to have caps.
>
>I lose caps. I prefer mine with retractable connectors, or an integral
>cap.
Those would work for me as well.
>I use Sandisk Cruzers, and am quite happy with them.
--
"Listen to the tide slowly turning
Wash all our heartaches away
We're part of the fire that is burning
And from the ashes we can build another day"
David J. Hayward
David V. Loewe, Jr
<treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Oct 29, 12:47�ｿｽpm, "David V. Loewe, Jr" <davelo...@charter.net>
>wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:59:41 +0200, netcat
>> <net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
>> >dlo...@mindspring.com says...
>> >> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 02:50:42 +0000 (UTC), se...@panix.com (Seth) wrote:
>> >> >David V. Loewe, Jr <davelo...@charter.net> wrote:
>> >> >>On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:00:52 +0000 (UTC), se...@panix.com (Seth) wrote:
>> >> >>>David Loewe, Jr. <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:09:35 -0700, David Friedman
>> >> >>>><d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>>>>Five ounces, as I mentioned earlier. After weighing it.
>> >> >>>>That can't be *that* much more than a stick.
>> >> >>>Almost two orders of magnitude. �ｿｽPico flash drives (from Super Talent)
>> >> >>>weigh under 2g.
>> >> >>That is like saying that carbon dioxide is almost two orders of
>> >> >>magnitude heavier than an oxygen atom - true, but meaningless in the
>> >> >>larger sense.
>>
>> >> >How do you get that? �ｿｽA carbon dioxide molecule is under three times
>> >> >as heavy as an oxygen atom, and just more than a third heavier than an
>> >> >oxygen molecule. �ｿｽThat's nowhere near two orders of magnitude.
>>
>> >> I misread it. �ｿｽMea culpa.
>>
>> >> However, I have a hard time believing that the average USB thumb drive
>> >> weighs as little as the Pico line - an ounce or 2 (which is what I
>> >> misread it as) seems far more likely looking at the packaging
>> >> differences between the average drive (say a Super Talent Luxio) and the
>> >> Pico line. �ｿｽWhereas I am quite willing to believe that 5 ounces is the
>> >> standard for external 2.5" form factor hard drives.
>>
>> >> OBTW, Super Talent claims that the Pico line weighs under *6* grams.
>>
>> >My Swissbit stick is also claimed to weigh "under 6 grams". I wonder if
>> >it isn't simply because they can't be bothered to use scales with better
>> >accuracy. Any scales I have handy aren't accurate below 5 grams, either.
>>
>> Frankly, looking at the Pico drives, I can easily imagine something that
>> small easily getting lost or damaged (the contacts look exposed).
>>
>> >Have difficulty imagining what would make an average memory stick weigh
>> >2 ounces, though.
>>
>> Packaging. �ｿｽNew Egg shows drives packaged like a pen and like a mini
>> "dog bone."
>>
>> And I said an ounce or two - which would imply an average between those
>> numbers.
>>
>> In any case, the point here is that Seth cites the smallest possible
>> stick, not a typical one.
>
>You Can Look This Stuff Up
I Did
I looked at the selection on New Egg. Most of them were of the standard
stick with a cap design - like the Super Talent Luxio.
>Seth just picked one that's heavily marketed as small. Sandisk Micros
>(a more standard stick) come in at 5g. URL in a nearby post.
--
"...you know, it seems to me you suffer from the problem of
wanting a tailored fit in an off the rack world."
Dennis Juds
David V. Loewe, Jr
<al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:29:56 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."
><dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 02:54:51 +0000 (UTC), rksh...@rosettacondot.com
>>wrote:
>>>David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:32:35 +0000 (UTC), rksh...@rosettacondot.com
>>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>From a personal standpoint anything larger than the flash drive is more
>>>>>than I want to add to the "stuff" I usually carry in my pockets.
>>>>
>>>> Whereas those of us who have carried around glasses with their
>>>> accompanying cases in a front shirt pocket would have a different
>>>> opinion.
>>>
>>>Other than a couple of dress shirts that I wear on special occasions my
>>>shirts are entirely lacking in pockets. I'd have to tuck it one of my
>>>back pockets and that would probably end badly.
>>
>>Well, the original claim wasn't that the person didn't have pockets, it
>>was that pockets on shirts were useless to carry anything in.
>
>Hmm.
>
>When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with pockets,
>rather than t-shirts),
?
Dave <---- currently wearing a t-shirt with a pocket.
>my shirt pocket contains a mobile phone, a 2GB
>flash drive, and a pen.
>
>Not much compared to the contents of my jacket pockets, but definitely
>not useless.
--
"Caught between the longing for love
And the struggle for the legal tender"
Clyde J. Browne
David V. Loewe, Jr
And I will remind you that Jette made a blank statement.
----------
> Pocket t-shirts are cheap...
and the pockets are pretty well useless.
----------
Such statements are normally taken as being all-encompassing (and that
one sure looks all-encompassing). Moreover, she has never clarified the
statement despite many posts which explicitly assume she meant "for
all."
If you want to limit your statements to yourself, say that in the
statement. It *is* the way to make the distinction clear.
--
"I want to know what became of the changes
We waited for love to bring.
Were they only the fitful dreams
Of some greater awakening?"
Clyde J. Browne
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
>> David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>>> From a personal standpoint anything larger than the flash drive is more
>>> than I want to add to the "stuff" I usually carry in my pockets.
You know, I didn't write the paragraph above this - Robert did.
I'm trying to figure out what happened here.
>>> Whereas those of us who have carried around glasses with their
>>> accompanying cases in a front shirt pocket would have a different
>>> opinion.
>
>I would expect that would make someone less likely to want to add even
>more stuff to their pocket load.
I would carry a small external drive *instead of* of glasses case - not
in addition to carrying one. One (relatively) large item in the front
shirt pocket only.
>I've actually managed to reduce what I
>lug around somewhat. I used the glasses case they gave me with this pair
>until it turned out that it was damaging the lenses, which they couldn't
>fix and wouldn't replace.
I trust you won't be using them again...
--
"In matters of principle, stand like a rock; in matters of taste,
swim with the current."
- Thomas Jefferson
David V. Loewe, Jr
I'm not guessing.
I Looked It Up on the Super Talent site (hence the URL).
What, EXACTLY, does the size of a SanDisk brand stick have to do with
the size of any Super Talent brand sticks?
Seth specified the *Pico* line of Super Talent sticks. If you follow
the link I gave above, you'll find that it goes to the Super Talent web
page for the *Pico* line of sticks. It says that the Pico line has a
weight of "less than 6 g" - which is not the "under 2g" that Seth
claimed. Which is why I asked him if he meant (which he almost
certainly did) a different line of sticks.
Maybe YOU Should Look This Stuff Up, Peter.
>This covers a more 'run of the mill' USB stick form factor - the one
>I use: the Sandisk Cruzer. This has a retractable connector (which I
>regard as a near-essential feature for a keychain drive), It goes up
>to 32GB at the moment, and weighs just under 10g. That means you'd
>have to pile up 3 of them to reach 1 ounce. The 'Micro' version is 5g,
>and goes up to 16Gb.
>
>Portable HDs:
>
>http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=5078
>Iomega Ego 500gb: 180g
>
>Toshiba 500Gb: 6 oz
>
>Western Digital Passport: 0.3 lbs
>
>(for reference: 1 Oz = 28.35 g)
>
>So yes, your portable HD is at least an order of magnitude heavier
>than a stick.
Which part of "I misread it. �Mea culpa." did you NOT take for "I was
wrong."?
I REALLY *hate* it when I admit that I was wrong and I still get piled
on after making the admission (which is IN the quoted material). THAT
is just flat out wrong.
You are out of line here in this post.
--
"If you always tell the truth, you never have to remember what you
said."
-Mark Twain, giving advice Bill Clinton should take
cryptoguy
wrote:
If so, I apologize. The problem, at least partially, is the
asynchronous nature of usenet; it's quite common to read a post, post
a snarky correction, and then find that (1) some else beat you to it,
and (2) the OP has retracted his/her claim.
pt
Jette Goldie
You don't have to be Aspie to feel like that.
--
Jette Goldie
jette....@gmail.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wolfette/
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
http://wolfette.livejournal.com/
("reply to" is spamblocked - use the email addy in sig)
David Friedman
"David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
> And I will remind you that Jette made a blank statement.
> ----------
> > Pocket t-shirts are cheap...
>
> and the pockets are pretty well useless.
> ----------
> Such statements are normally taken as being all-encompassing (and that
> one sure looks all-encompassing). Moreover, she has never clarified the
> statement despite many posts which explicitly assume she meant "for
> all."
Unaccustomed as I am to defend Jette ... .
I'm pretty sure that at some point in the thread the argument was
narrowed to the case of women, with the implication that rigid items in
pockets over breasts were either uncomfortable or unsightly. I think
Jette implied that, although it might have been someone else.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
David Loewe, Jr.
<treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Oct 30, 12:56�pm, "David V. Loewe, Jr" <davelo...@charter.net>
>wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:48:53 -0700 (PDT), cryptoguy
>> <treifam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Oct 29, 11:27�am, "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >> I misread it. �Mea culpa.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Accepted.
>The problem, at least partially, is the
>asynchronous nature of usenet; it's quite common to read a post, post
>a snarky correction, and then find that (1) some else beat you to it,
>and (2) the OP has retracted his/her claim.
Yes, but the Mea Culpa was in the message you responded *to*. You
missed it (for some reason) just as assuredly as I misread what Seth
wrote which generated the Mea Culpa in the first place.
--
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail
fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
- John Paul Jones
David Loewe, Jr.
<dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
> "David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>> And I will remind you that Jette made a blank statement.
>> ----------
>> > Pocket t-shirts are cheap...
>>
>> and the pockets are pretty well useless.
>> ----------
>> Such statements are normally taken as being all-encompassing (and that
>> one sure looks all-encompassing). Moreover, she has never clarified the
>> statement despite many posts which explicitly assume she meant "for
>> all."
>
>Unaccustomed as I am to defend Jette ... .
>
>I'm pretty sure that at some point in the thread the argument was
>narrowed to the case of women, with the implication that rigid items in
>pockets over breasts were either uncomfortable or unsightly. I think
>Jette implied that, although it might have been someone else.
Actually, "Pocket t-shirts are cheap..." is in response to *you*. If it
was narrowed to women only, it came sometime after her interjection that
"the pockets are pretty well useless."
--
"Soldiers, when I give the command to fire, fire straight at my heart.
Wait for the order. It will be my last to you. I protest against my
condemnation. I have fought a hundred battles for France, and not
one against her ... Soldiers, Fire!"
- the Last Words of Michel Ney
Keith F. Lynch
> I lose caps. I prefer mine with retractable connectors, or an
> integral cap. I use Sandisk Cruzers, and am quite happy with them.
If the cap starts to get loose, I tape it on. I've never seen a
retractable connector, but I expect the hole it leaves behind would
accumulate pocket lint and cruft. Also, it wouldn't be waterproof,
so it would be ruined if I got caught in an unexpected thunderstorm.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
Keith F. Lynch
> Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with
>> pockets, rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile
>> phone, a 2GB flash drive, and a pen.
> Well, yes. And doing so labels you (and me!) as nerds. netcat at
> least, was trying to avoid that.
What labels a person as a nerd? Having a shirt pocket? Having
anything in it? Having three things in it? Having those particular
three things in it?
I don't think any of my shirts have pockets. Even if they did, I'm
almost always wearing a warm sweater, jacket, or coat over them.
Keith F. Lynch
> When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with pockets,
> rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile phone, a
> 2GB flash drive, and a pen.
> Not much compared to the contents of my jacket pockets, but
> definitely not useless.
Oh? How many GB in each jacket pocket?
David V. Loewe, Jr
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>cryptoguy <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I lose caps. I prefer mine with retractable connectors, or an
>> integral cap. I use Sandisk Cruzers, and am quite happy with them.
>
>If the cap starts to get loose, I tape it on. I've never seen a
>retractable connector, but I expect the hole it leaves behind would
>accumulate pocket lint and cruft. Also, it wouldn't be waterproof,
>so it would be ruined if I got caught in an unexpected thunderstorm.
So, I would expect that Super Talent Pico and Pico-mini sticks would not
be options for Keith...
--
"I looked out this morning and the sun was gone
Turned on some music to start my day
I lost myself in a familiar song
I closed my eyes and I slipped away"
- Tom Scholz
David Loewe, Jr.
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>cryptoguy <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with
>>> pockets, rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile
>>> phone, a 2GB flash drive, and a pen.
>
>> Well, yes. And doing so labels you (and me!) as nerds. netcat at
>> least, was trying to avoid that.
>
>What labels a person as a nerd?
A pocket protector.
>Having a shirt pocket? Having anything in it? Having three things
>in it? Having those particular three things in it?
>
>I don't think any of my shirts have pockets. Even if they did, I'm
>almost always wearing a warm sweater, jacket, or coat over them.
--
"...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess.
They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite a
characteristic of them."
- Margaret Thatcher
Morris Keesan
<dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Yes, but the Mea Culpa was in the message you responded *to*. You
> missed it (for some reason)
Possibly for the same reason I would have missed it. Your habit of
never trimming posts in your replies leads me to ignore almost all
of the text in most of your posts. From the multiple screensful in
the post I'm replying to, with multiple levels of quoting, I can't
tell whether the "Mea Culpa" was in the post you're complaining
about, or whether it had been quoted in that post. If quoted, I
wouldn't have seen it.
--
Morris Keesan -- mke...@post.harvard.edu
Alan Woodford
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with pockets,
>> rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile phone, a
>> 2GB flash drive, and a pen.
>
>> Not much compared to the contents of my jacket pockets, but
>> definitely not useless.
>
>Oh? How many GB in each jacket pocket?
Since you ask :-)
Bottom left pocket - 120GB Ipod Classic
Bottom right pocket - iPAQ with 2GB card
Top left pocket - phone with 2GB card, and 16GB flash drive
Top right pocket - digital camera with 16GB card
Alan Woodford
The Greying Lensman!
Alan Woodford
<dave...@charter.net> wrote:
For work, I have to wear a shirt and tie. I don't like this, so I wear
ties other people won't like :-)
None of my t-shirts have pockets, but they almost all have pictures
on.
I do have a couple of t-shirt style shirts with pockets and collars,
but I tend to think of them as sports shirts, and avoid them like
other forms of strenuous exercise!
cryptoguy
> cryptoguy <treifam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I lose caps. I prefer mine with retractable connectors, or an
> > integral cap. I use Sandisk Cruzers, and am quite happy with them.
>
> If the cap starts to get loose, I tape it on. I've never seen a
> retractable connector, but I expect the hole it leaves behind would
> accumulate pocket lint and cruft. Also, it wouldn't be waterproof,
> so it would be ruined if I got caught in an unexpected thunderstorm.
Well, you can expect all you want, but I hope you will let actual data
correct your guesses.
I've carried them in my pockets for years, and I've never had the
connector fail because of pocket lint. Unless your 'pocket lint'
included energized wires, its hard to see how that could happen. I
once accidently left my keychain, with two Cruzers, in the pocket of
my swimsuit, and was in the water for an hour before I realized. They
were none the worse for wear. David F has reported one surviving a run
through the washing machine, and the USB memory stick blog I linked
earlier also reports the same, multiple times.
I don't recommend the practice, but that brand is pretty tough.
pt
David V. Loewe, Jr
You should know by now that the actual level of risk doesn't matter to
Keith - only that there is some risk.
>I don't recommend the practice, but that brand is pretty tough.
--
"When it is broken down, the philosophy of environmentalism is the
philosophy of life on earth without humanity at all. Green becomes
the color of a forest that grows over unmarked graves."
Michelle Minton
Keith F. Lynch
> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with
>>> pockets, rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile
>>> phone, a 2GB flash drive, and a pen.
>>> Not much compared to the contents of my jacket pockets, but
>>> definitely not useless.
>> Oh? How many GB in each jacket pocket?
> Since you ask :-)
> Bottom left pocket - 120GB Ipod Classic
> Bottom right pocket - iPAQ with 2GB card
> Top left pocket - phone with 2GB card, and 16GB flash drive
> Top right pocket - digital camera with 16GB card
And I though the VAX computer room where I used to work was hot
stuff. I remember boasting to visitors that it had over a gigabyte of
storage. Of course I was counting all the removable disk packs, not
just the ones currently mounted. And I was also counting all the mag
tapes. And I was assuming that everything was full.
That computer room was larger than my apartment. I wonder if it's
still there.
David Loewe, Jr.
<al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Your comment makes it look like you believe that there are no such
things as t-shirts with pockets.
>I do have a couple of t-shirt style shirts with pockets and collars,
>but I tend to think of them as sports shirts,
Would this be the so-called "polo shirt"?
>and avoid them like other forms of strenuous exercise!
Whereas on this side of the pond, people wear the jerseys of their
favorite team while doing very sedentary things (like sitting on the
couch watching said favorite team play) all the time.
--
"It is a consolation to the wretched to have companions in misery."
- Publius Syrus
Keith F. Lynch
> David Loewe, Jr. <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> You missed it (for some reason)
> Possibly for the same reason I would have missed it. Your habit of
> never trimming posts in your replies leads me to ignore almost all
> of the text in most of your posts.
Thank you. I'm glad someone besides me finally said it. The purpose
of quoting text is to establish the context of your reply without
the hassle of paraphrasing, not to provide a reference library. The
reader should read all quoted text, trusting that the writer wouldn't
have quoted it without a good reason.
To David's credit, though, at least he never quotes "- Hide quoted
text - - Show quoted text -." People who do *that* are obviously just
mindlessly vacuuming up and repackaging whatever's lying around, like
the evil meatpackers from Upton Sinclair's _The Jungle_.
David V. Loewe, Jr
<mke...@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:10:20 -0400, David Loewe, Jr.
><dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, but the Mea Culpa was in the message you responded *to*. You
>> missed it (for some reason)
>
>Possibly for the same reason I would have missed it. Your habit of
>never trimming posts in your replies leads me to ignore almost all
>of the text in most of your posts.
1) I'm not the only person that does this. Peter and the Professor do
the very same thing.
2) It was *in the message Peter replied TO*. It was new text.
I'm sorry, but if you can't distinguish the new text from the quoted
text, then something is wrong somewhere.
>From the multiple screensful in the post I'm replying to,
In the message *you* replied to, it was at the top of the message, set
off by multiple blank lines and was underlined. I just don't see how
you could possibly have missed it.
>with multiple levels of quoting, I can't tell whether the "Mea Culpa"
>was in the post you're complaining about, or whether it had been quoted
>in that post. If quoted, I wouldn't have seen it.
It wasn't obscured by multiple levels of quoting, it was the newest text
in the message that Peter replied to.
--
"I still see her standing by the water
Standing there lookin' out to sea
And is she waiting there for me?
On the beach where we used to run..."
Jimmy Webb
Morris Keesan
<dave...@charter.net> wrote:
[re: "Mea Culpa"]
> In the message *you* replied to, it was at the top of the message, set
> off by multiple blank lines and was underlined. I just don't see how
> you could possibly have missed it.
In the message *I* replied to, it had at least 2 or three '>' characters
at the beginning of the line. My newsreader renders quoted text like this
in different colors from the new text. When you leave in screensful of
quoted text, I tend to skip right past all of the non-black text except
for the few lines just before the new text, to establish context.
Yes, you're not the only person who over-quotes. You're one of the ones
who does it most consistently. I skip past huge amounts of quoted text
no matter who posts them.
Jette Goldie
> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:40:49 +0000, Alan Woodford
> <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I do have a couple of t-shirt style shirts with pockets and collars,
>> but I tend to think of them as sports shirts,
>
> Would this be the so-called "polo shirt"?
>
usually
>> and avoid them like other forms of strenuous exercise!
>
> Whereas on this side of the pond, people wear the jerseys of their
> favorite team while doing very sedentary things (like sitting on the
> couch watching said favorite team play) all the time.
this side of the Pond too - and then they laugh at SF media fans
wearing t-shirts with their favourite shows.
Alan Woodford
<dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
If it has pockets, I probably wouldn't call it a t-shirt.
However, I'm willing to admit I'm probably one of the least
fashion-aware, let alone fashion-conscious, people here.
(Yes, I know there is stiff competition!)
>>I do have a couple of t-shirt style shirts with pockets and collars,
>>but I tend to think of them as sports shirts,
>
>Would this be the so-called "polo shirt"?
Probably :-)
>
>>and avoid them like other forms of strenuous exercise!
>
>Whereas on this side of the pond, people wear the jerseys of their
>favorite team while doing very sedentary things (like sitting on the
>couch watching said favorite team play) all the time.
The last time I deliberately sat down to watch a soccer match on tv
was probably 1968, when Jeff "the King" Astle scored the winning goal
for West Bromwich Albion (my local team, then and now) against Everton
in the FA Cup Final :-)
I did watch the Formula 1 qualifying earlier, but I can't imagine
buying an F1 team jersey, for example.
Alan Woodford
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with
>>>> pockets, rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile
>>>> phone, a 2GB flash drive, and a pen.
>
>>>> Not much compared to the contents of my jacket pockets, but
>>>> definitely not useless.
>
>>> Oh? How many GB in each jacket pocket?
>
>> Since you ask :-)
>
>> Bottom left pocket - 120GB Ipod Classic
>> Bottom right pocket - iPAQ with 2GB card
>> Top left pocket - phone with 2GB card, and 16GB flash drive
>> Top right pocket - digital camera with 16GB card
>
>And I though the VAX computer room where I used to work was hot
>stuff. I remember boasting to visitors that it had over a gigabyte of
>storage. Of course I was counting all the removable disk packs, not
>just the ones currently mounted. And I was also counting all the mag
>tapes. And I was assuming that everything was full.
>
>That computer room was larger than my apartment. I wonder if it's
>still there.
How time flies - I was reading the latest copy of PC Plus magazine the
other day, and they had a picture of a PDP-11 (in an article about
programming in PROLOG, of all things) from the Vienna Technical
Museum, labelled by the magazine as...
A Mainframe.
Kids today, yadda, yadda
Keith F. Lynch
> How time flies - I was reading the latest copy of PC Plus magazine
> the other day, and they had a picture of a PDP-11 (in an article
> about programming in PROLOG, of all things) from the Vienna
> Technical Museum, labelled by the magazine as...
> A Mainframe.
Then there's CNN's "Web pioneer recalls 'birth of the Internet'"
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/29/kleinrock.internet/
It was describing events 14 years before the Internet and 22 years
before the Web. It's about like calling Guglielmo Marconi a
television pioneer, or Samuel F.B. Morse a telephone pioneer.
At least they knew something important happened in 1969 besides the
Moon landing and Woodstock. And Chappaquiddick. And the Manson
murders. And ... come to think of it, quite a lot happened that year.
Morris Keesan
<al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> How time flies - I was reading the latest copy of PC Plus magazine the
> other day, and they had a picture of a PDP-11 (in an article about
> programming in PROLOG, of all things) from the Vienna Technical
> Museum, labelled by the magazine as...
>
>
>
> A Mainframe.
Sheesh. The last real mainframe I worked with (an IBM 370, in 1978)
had memory cabinets that were about the size of a PDP-11.
1K of core memory per cabinet.
David V. Loewe, Jr
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with
>>>> pockets, rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile
>>>> phone, a 2GB flash drive, and a pen.
>
>>>> Not much compared to the contents of my jacket pockets, but
>>>> definitely not useless.
>
>>> Oh? How many GB in each jacket pocket?
>
>> Since you ask :-)
>
>> Bottom left pocket - 120GB Ipod Classic
>> Bottom right pocket - iPAQ with 2GB card
>> Top left pocket - phone with 2GB card, and 16GB flash drive
>> Top right pocket - digital camera with 16GB card
>
>And I though the VAX computer room where I used to work was hot
>stuff. I remember boasting to visitors that it had over a gigabyte of
>storage. Of course I was counting all the removable disk packs, not
>just the ones currently mounted. And I was also counting all the mag
>tapes. And I was assuming that everything was full.
Now you sound like my father who worked for IBM for over 30 years
starting in 1966. He just can't get over my brother-in-law's
Blackberry.
>That computer room was larger than my apartment. I wonder if it's
>still there.
--
"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain
occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive."
- Thomas Jefferson
David V. Loewe, Jr
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Morris Keesan <mke...@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> David Loewe, Jr. <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> You missed it (for some reason)
>
>> Possibly for the same reason I would have missed it. Your habit of
>> never trimming posts in your replies leads me to ignore almost all
>> of the text in most of your posts.
>
>Thank you. I'm glad someone besides me finally said it. The purpose
>of quoting text is to establish the context of your reply without
>the hassle of paraphrasing, not to provide a reference library.
The post in question quotes back to the Professor stating how much his
2.5" form factor external drive weighs - which is important context for
everything that followed.
And there is nothing wrong with summarizing or paraphrasing, either.
>The reader should read all quoted text,
Wrong. The quoted text is there for the reader to refer to if they need
it.
>trusting that the writer
>wouldn't have quoted it without a good reason.
There is a very good reason the text is there - for easy reference
(rather than having to laboriously search old posts to establish
context.
I'll also note that Keith frequently loses the context of a thread due
to the editing - despite his claims that he can keep everything in
context without the, in his mind extraneous, text.
>To David's credit, though, at least he never quotes "- Hide quoted
>text - - Show quoted text -." People who do *that* are obviously just
>mindlessly vacuuming up and repackaging whatever's lying around, like
>the evil meatpackers from Upton Sinclair's _The Jungle_.
--
"I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've
always worked for me."
- Hunter S. Thompson
David Friedman
"David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 00:26:10 -0400, "Morris Keesan"
> <mke...@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:10:20 -0400, David Loewe, Jr.
> ><dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, but the Mea Culpa was in the message you responded *to*. You
> >> missed it (for some reason)
> >
> >Possibly for the same reason I would have missed it. Your habit of
> >never trimming posts in your replies leads me to ignore almost all
> >of the text in most of your posts.
>
> 1) I'm not the only person that does this. Peter and the Professor do
> the very same thing.
Actually, I often trim posts I reply to. But not always--it depends on
whether I think the earlier material provides useful context.
...
> I'm sorry, but if you can't distinguish the new text from the quoted
> text, then something is wrong somewhere.
My newsreader shows old text in red, new text in black, making it easy
to read only the latter if you want. I don't know how common a pattern
that is.
...
David V. Loewe, Jr
<al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:22:00 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."
><dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:40:49 +0000, Alan Woodford
>><al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:21:22 -0500, "David V. Loewe, Jr"
>>><dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>>Dave <---- currently wearing a t-shirt with a pocket.
>>
>>>For work, I have to wear a shirt and tie. I don't like this, so I wear
>>>ties other people won't like :-)
>>>
>>>None of my t-shirts have pockets, but they almost all have pictures
>>>on.
>>
>>Your comment makes it look like you believe that there are no such
>>things as t-shirts with pockets.
>If it has pockets, I probably wouldn't call it a t-shirt.
Then what would you call this
http://www.theapparelwearhouse.com/members/845547/uploaded/pocket_.jpg ?
>However, I'm willing to admit I'm probably one of the least
>fashion-aware, let alone fashion-conscious, people here.
>
>(Yes, I know there is stiff competition!)
>
>>>I do have a couple of t-shirt style shirts with pockets and collars,
>>>but I tend to think of them as sports shirts,
>>
>>Would this be the so-called "polo shirt"?
>
>Probably :-)
>>>and avoid them like other forms of strenuous exercise!
>>
>>Whereas on this side of the pond, people wear the jerseys of their
>>favorite team while doing very sedentary things (like sitting on the
>>couch watching said favorite team play) all the time.
>
>The last time I deliberately sat down to watch a soccer match on tv
>was probably 1968, when Jeff "the King" Astle scored the winning goal
>for West Bromwich Albion (my local team, then and now) against Everton
>in the FA Cup Final :-)
Cricket?
Rugby?
>I did watch the Formula 1 qualifying earlier, but I can't imagine
>buying an F1 team jersey, for example.
Well, the point was that you need not *do* anything active in a sports
shirt.
--
"The more you love, the more you can love - and the more
intensely you love. Nor is there any limit on how _many_
you can love. If a person had time enough, he could love
all of that majority who are decent and just."
-Lazarus Long 'Time Enough For Love'
David Loewe, Jr.
<mke...@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 11:30:23 -0400, David V. Loewe, Jr
><dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>[re: "Mea Culpa"]
>
>> In the message *you* replied to, it was at the top of the message, set
>> off by multiple blank lines and was underlined. I just don't see how
>> you could possibly have missed it.
>
>In the message *I* replied to, it had at least 2 or three '>' characters
>at the beginning of the line.
As I said, it was *underlined* (with ^s) and the underlining should have
been shown to you in whatever color your browser shows new text.
>My newsreader renders quoted text like this
>in different colors from the new text. When you leave in screensful of
>quoted text, I tend to skip right past all of the non-black text except
>for the few lines just before the new text, to establish context.
So, you skipped past the line of new text set off with extra lines for
spacing in your rush. Is that about it?
>Yes, you're not the only person who over-quotes. You're one of the ones
>who does it most consistently. I skip past huge amounts of quoted text
>no matter who posts them.
Having been burned more times than I can recall by excessive editing, I
err on the side of less is better in this matter - and I will make no
apologies for that stance.
--
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance
and the gospel of envy."
- Winston Churchill
David Loewe, Jr.
<dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
> "David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 00:26:10 -0400, "Morris Keesan"
>> <mke...@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> >On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:10:20 -0400, David Loewe, Jr.
>> ><dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Yes, but the Mea Culpa was in the message you responded *to*. You
>> >> missed it (for some reason)
>> >
>> >Possibly for the same reason I would have missed it. Your habit of
>> >never trimming posts in your replies leads me to ignore almost all
>> >of the text in most of your posts.
>>
>> 1) I'm not the only person that does this. Peter and the Professor do
>> the very same thing.
>
>Actually, I often trim posts I reply to. But not always--it depends on
>whether I think the earlier material provides useful context.
And I do the same. Even Keith retracted his contention that I never
edit (for which I thanked him). And I freely acknowledge that I have a
light editing hand. I'd rather err on the side of leaving too much in
than taking too much out.
>...
>
>> I'm sorry, but if you can't distinguish the new text from the quoted
>> text, then something is wrong somewhere.
>
>My newsreader shows old text in red, new text in black, making it easy
>to read only the latter if you want. I don't know how common a pattern
>that is.
>
>...
Mine is set to show new text in white and quoted text in light blue -
both on a black background. If your Mac program and my Windows program
(Agent) can both do this, it is hard for me to believe that most other
programs cannot (and mine is set up to show different colors by default
- just different ones from the ones I have selected, partially because
the default background is white).
--
"Nothing shocks me. I'm a scientist."
- Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones
Ben Yalow
That doesn't sound right. Even a small 370 had several hundred K, and
midsize ones went up to a few meg.
Here's the product announcement for the 148, one of the smaller/older
ones. Note that it came in 1M and 2M models (you could get something
smaller in the 135/138 models, but even they came with at least a half
meg).
http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/IBM-ProdAnn/370-148.pdf
>--
>Morris Keesan -- mke...@post.harvard.edu
Ben
--
Ben Yalow yb...@panix.com
Not speaking for anybody
Alan Woodford
<dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:36:16 +0000, Alan Woodford
><al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:22:00 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."
>><dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:40:49 +0000, Alan Woodford
>>><al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:21:22 -0500, "David V. Loewe, Jr"
>>>><dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>>>>>Dave <---- currently wearing a t-shirt with a pocket.
>>>
>>>>For work, I have to wear a shirt and tie. I don't like this, so I wear
>>>>ties other people won't like :-)
>>>>
>>>>None of my t-shirts have pockets, but they almost all have pictures
>>>>on.
>>>
>>>Your comment makes it look like you believe that there are no such
>>>things as t-shirts with pockets.
>
>>If it has pockets, I probably wouldn't call it a t-shirt.
>
>Then what would you call this
>http://www.theapparelwearhouse.com/members/845547/uploaded/pocket_.jpg ?
>
OK. That is definitely a t-shirt with a pocket :-)
>>However, I'm willing to admit I'm probably one of the least
>>fashion-aware, let alone fashion-conscious, people here.
>>
>>(Yes, I know there is stiff competition!)
>>
>>>>I do have a couple of t-shirt style shirts with pockets and collars,
>>>>but I tend to think of them as sports shirts,
>>>
>>>Would this be the so-called "polo shirt"?
>>
>>Probably :-)
>
>>>>and avoid them like other forms of strenuous exercise!
>>>
>>>Whereas on this side of the pond, people wear the jerseys of their
>>>favorite team while doing very sedentary things (like sitting on the
>>>couch watching said favorite team play) all the time.
>>
>>The last time I deliberately sat down to watch a soccer match on tv
>>was probably 1968, when Jeff "the King" Astle scored the winning goal
>>for West Bromwich Albion (my local team, then and now) against Everton
>>in the FA Cup Final :-)
>
>Cricket?
Haven't watched cricket for years, either.
>
>Rugby?
I once went to a rugby match - one of my mates was playing in a
schools game, and a 14-year-old was carried off with a broken neck.
He'd collided awkwardly with a post!
>
>>I did watch the Formula 1 qualifying earlier, but I can't imagine
>>buying an F1 team jersey, for example.
>
>Well, the point was that you need not *do* anything active in a sports
>shirt.
Oh, I can appreciate that, but I'm only slightly more interested in
sport than say Coronation Street or Eastenders :-)
Jette Goldie
> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:36:16 +0000, Alan Woodford
> <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:22:00 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."
>> <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:40:49 +0000, Alan Woodford
>>> <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:21:22 -0500, "David V. Loewe, Jr"
>>>> <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>>>>> Dave <---- currently wearing a t-shirt with a pocket.
>>>> For work, I have to wear a shirt and tie. I don't like this, so I wear
>>>> ties other people won't like :-)
>>>>
>>>> None of my t-shirts have pockets, but they almost all have pictures
>>>> on.
>>> Your comment makes it look like you believe that there are no such
>>> things as t-shirts with pockets.
>
>> If it has pockets, I probably wouldn't call it a t-shirt.
>
> Then what would you call this
> http://www.theapparelwearhouse.com/members/845547/uploaded/pocket_.jpg ?
a t-shirt with a decorative but not actually practical pocket.
;-)
David Loewe, Jr.
<al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:56:58 -0500, "David V. Loewe, Jr"
><dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:36:16 +0000, Alan Woodford
>><al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:22:00 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."
>>><dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:40:49 +0000, Alan Woodford
>>>><al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:21:22 -0500, "David V. Loewe, Jr"
>>>>><dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>Dave <---- currently wearing a t-shirt with a pocket.
>>>>
>>>>>For work, I have to wear a shirt and tie. I don't like this, so I wear
>>>>>ties other people won't like :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>None of my t-shirts have pockets, but they almost all have pictures
>>>>>on.
>>>>
>>>>Your comment makes it look like you believe that there are no such
>>>>things as t-shirts with pockets.
>>
>>>If it has pockets, I probably wouldn't call it a t-shirt.
>>
>>Then what would you call this
>>http://www.theapparelwearhouse.com/members/845547/uploaded/pocket_.jpg ?
>OK. That is definitely a t-shirt with a pocket :-)
When I say I'm wearing a t-shirt with a pocket, that is exactly the
brand I'm wearing.
--
"Anything a human being does to a LaRouche follower is justifiable on
the grounds of self-defense."
- Kevin Bold
David Loewe, Jr.
<jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>David V. Loewe, Jr wrote:
>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:36:16 +0000, Alan Woodford
>> <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:22:00 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."
>>> <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:40:49 +0000, Alan Woodford
>>>> <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:21:22 -0500, "David V. Loewe, Jr"
>>>>> <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Dave <---- currently wearing a t-shirt with a pocket.
>>>>> For work, I have to wear a shirt and tie. I don't like this, so I wear
>>>>> ties other people won't like :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> None of my t-shirts have pockets, but they almost all have pictures
>>>>> on.
>>>> Your comment makes it look like you believe that there are no such
>>>> things as t-shirts with pockets.
>>
>>> If it has pockets, I probably wouldn't call it a t-shirt.
>>
>> Then what would you call this
>> http://www.theapparelwearhouse.com/members/845547/uploaded/pocket_.jpg ?
>
>a t-shirt with a decorative but not actually practical pocket.
>
>
>;-)
What's decorative about it?
;-)
--
"Money is truthful. If a man speaks of his honor, make
him pay cash."
-Lazarus Long
Jette Goldie
its pretending to be a pocket.
Keith F. Lynch
> "Morris Keesan" <mke...@post.harvard.edu> writes:
>> The last real mainframe I worked with (an IBM 370, in 1978) had
>> memory cabinets that were about the size of a PDP-11.
>> 1K of core memory per cabinet.
> That doesn't sound right.
I agree. I have a 4K core memory plane. It's about 9 centimeters
square, and less than half a centimeter thick. Granted, that's 4K
*bits*, not bytes. But two such planes would be 1K bytes, and would
fit in a shirt pocket.
Some of the 1950s memory technologies might have taken a cabinet that
size to hold 1K bytes.
Morris Keesan
<jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> David Loewe, Jr. wrote:
>> On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 09:47:28 +0000, Jette Goldie
>> <jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> David V. Loewe, Jr wrote:
...
>>>> If it has pockets, I probably wouldn't call it a t-shirt.
>>>> Then what would you call this
>>>> http://www.theapparelwearhouse.com/members/845547/uploaded/pocket_.jpg
>>>> ?
>>> a t-shirt with a decorative but not actually practical pocket.
>>>
>>>
>>> ;-)
>> What's decorative about it?
>> ;-)
>
>
> its pretending to be a pocket.
What's not actually practical about it?
I have a few t-shirts with pockets like that, and they're
perfectly fine for carrying a writing implement with a clip,
and a small notebook or similar items. I don't use those
pockets like my usual shirt pockets, but that doesn't make
them non-practical, it just makes them less useful.
(My preferred styles of non-t-, non-dress-, non-Hawaiian-shirts
have two moderately large chest pockets, each with a flap which
buttons closed to keep things from falling out.)
Ben Yalow
>Ben Yalow <yb...@panix.com> wrote:
>> "Morris Keesan" <mke...@post.harvard.edu> writes:
>>> The last real mainframe I worked with (an IBM 370, in 1978) had
>>> memory cabinets that were about the size of a PDP-11.
>>> 1K of core memory per cabinet.
>> That doesn't sound right.
>I agree. I have a 4K core memory plane. It's about 9 centimeters
>square, and less than half a centimeter thick. Granted, that's 4K
>*bits*, not bytes. But two such planes would be 1K bytes, and would
>fit in a shirt pocket.
>Some of the 1950s memory technologies might have taken a cabinet that
>size to hold 1K bytes.
In the 1950s, it wouldn't have used bytes.
>--
>Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Ben
David V. Loewe, Jr
Speaking of which...
Of the men on the NG that don't keep their wallets in their back
pockets, how many do not have back pockets that button or zip shut?
--
"Liberals are an easy target. They're so soft and furry, and they make
lovely pleading noises when trod on."
- Patrick Carroll
Morris Keesan
<dave...@charter.net> wrote:
> Of the men on the NG that don't keep their wallets in their back
> pockets, how many do not have back pockets that button or zip shut?
I don't keep my wallet in my back pocket, because it's uncomfortable,
and the trousers I wear most of the time (jeans) have neither buttons nor
zippers on the back pockets. Some of my dressier trousers have back-pocket
buttons, which are an annoyance, and I often remove the buttons.
netcat
dlo...@mindspring.com says...
> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:42:42 -0700, David Friedman
> <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>
> > "David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
> >> I'm sorry, but if you can't distinguish the new text from the quoted
> >> text, then something is wrong somewhere.
> >
> >My newsreader shows old text in red, new text in black, making it easy
> >to read only the latter if you want. I don't know how common a pattern
> >that is.
> >
> >...
>
> Mine is set to show new text in white and quoted text in light blue -
> both on a black background. If your Mac program and my Windows program
> (Agent) can both do this, it is hard for me to believe that most other
> programs cannot
I do think most other programs can. However, distinguishing quoted text
from new is not the issue. Distinguishing several levels of quoting was.
rgds,
netcat
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
I'm using tin. It shows the first three levels of quoting in different
colors.
Robert
--
Robert K. Shull Email: rkshull at rosettacon dot com
cryptoguy
> In article <o3rpe51mavko78rct7bfanutmd8f6ni...@4ax.com>,
> dlo...@mindspring.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:42:42 -0700, David Friedman
> > <d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>
> > >> I'm sorry, but if you can't distinguish the new text from the quoted
> > >> text, then something is wrong somewhere.
>
> > >My newsreader shows old text in red, new text in black, making it easy
> > >to read only the latter if you want. I don't know how common a pattern
> > >that is.
>
> > >...
>
> > Mine is set to show new text in white and quoted text in light blue -
> > both on a black background. If your Mac program and my Windows program
> > (Agent) can both do this, it is hard for me to believe that most other
> > programs cannot
>
> I do think most other programs can. However, distinguishing quoted text
> from new is not the issue. Distinguishing several levels of quoting was.
This is a frequent usenet problem - the conversation is very slow, and
people forget what other people said a few days ago. They don't read
all the quoted text, since that would be boring and repetitive. They
(and sometimes I) then make remarks that don't gibe with what was said
a week ago. However the person who posted the info a week ago *does*
remember what they said, and get upset.
pt
David Loewe, Jr.
<mke...@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 21:28:11 -0500, David V. Loewe, Jr
><dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>> Of the men on the NG that don't keep their wallets in their back
>> pockets, how many do not have back pockets that button or zip shut?
>
>I don't keep my wallet in my back pocket, because it's uncomfortable,
This is puzzling to me. Every time I've done the front trouser pocket
thing with my wallet it has been extremely uncomfortable to have it
there when sitting.
>and the trousers I wear most of the time (jeans) have neither buttons nor
>zippers on the back pockets.
The query originated when I went to put on some Dockers - which have a
button - to go to my father's surprise 70th birthday celebration. [1] I
also noticed that the sweat pants I was changing out of had a zipper. It
seemed to me it would be difficult for someone to pick your wallet if
they had to get past either the button or zipper to do so.
>Some of my dressier trousers have back-pocket
>buttons, which are an annoyance, and I often remove the buttons.
[1] Actual birthday November 25th.
--
"One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their
intentions rather than their results."
- Milton Friedman
David V. Loewe, Jr
Can't be.
The text that Peter missed was new text. Then Morris claims he would
have missed it because of the quoted text - which makes no sense to me
as it was *new* text.
--
"I want to know what became of the changes
We waited for love to bring.
Were they only the fitful dreams
Of some greater awakening?"
Clyde J. Browne
Morris Keesan
<dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:43:27 -0500, "Morris Keesan"
> <mke...@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 21:28:11 -0500, David V. Loewe, Jr
>> <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Of the men on the NG that don't keep their wallets in their back
>>> pockets, how many do not have back pockets that button or zip shut?
>>
>> I don't keep my wallet in my back pocket, because it's uncomfortable,
>
> This is puzzling to me. Every time I've done the front trouser pocket
> thing with my wallet it has been extremely uncomfortable to have it
> there when sitting.
Like proportional vs. fixed-width fonts, this is clearly a matter of
personal preference. The few times I've tried putting a wallet in my
back pocket, I've found it impossibly uncomfortable, because when I sit,
I sit *on* the wallet. It occurs to me that some of this preference may
be related to size. As a youngster, I was confused about the term "hip
pocket", because I've never had a pair of trousers with hip pockets -- my
back pockets are about equidistant between the side seam and the center
back seam. But when I was in my early 20s, I noticed that the distance
from
side seam to pocket tended to remain constant, while the distance from the
pocket to the center seam grew, as trousers get larger. So men with
significantly larger waist sizes than unhealthily-skinny me had pockets
which were much closer to being hip pockets than back pockets. I would
guess that these larger men would find wallets in the back/hip pocket less
uncomfortable than I do.
(I have no idea what our relative sizes are. In the roughly 25 years since
I made that observation about hip pockets, my trouser size has gone from a
30-inch waist to a 34.)
> The query originated when I went to put on some Dockers - which have a
> button - to go to my father's surprise 70th birthday celebration. [1]
...
> [1] Actual birthday November 25th.
This Made Me Feel Old.
I was conceived while your father was 13 years old.
Morris Keesan
wrote:
> Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> How time flies - I was reading the latest copy of PC Plus magazine
>> the other day, and they had a picture of a PDP-11 (in an article
>> about programming in PROLOG, of all things) from the Vienna
>> Technical Museum, labelled by the magazine as...
>
>> A Mainframe.
>
> Then there's CNN's "Web pioneer recalls 'birth of the Internet'"
> http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/29/kleinrock.internet/
>
> It was describing events 14 years before the Internet and 22 years
> before the Web. It's about like calling Guglielmo Marconi a
> television pioneer, or Samuel F.B. Morse a telephone pioneer.
Not only that, but according to recent discussions we've been having on a
mailing list of ex-employees of BBN (Bolt, Beranek & Newman, the company
that did the bulk of the hardware and software development for the
original Arpanet nodes), the event described in that article, and in
similar items appearing in other places, such as NPR, wasn't even the
first message sent over the Arpanet. A few days earlier, a similar test
had taken place between terminals connected to two Arpanet IMPs, but
those two IMPs were on the same campus, rather than being geographically
remote as this "first" event was.
Morris Keesan
> In <op.u2oczth45qv6o3@toshiba-laptop> "Morris Keesan"
> <mke...@post.harvard.edu> writes:
>
>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:44:48 -0400, Alan Woodford
>> <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> How time flies - I was reading the latest copy of PC Plus magazine the
>>> other day, and they had a picture of a PDP-11 (in an article about
>>> programming in PROLOG, of all things) from the Vienna Technical
>>> Museum, labelled by the magazine as...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A Mainframe.
>
>> Sheesh. The last real mainframe I worked with (an IBM 370, in 1978)
>> had memory cabinets that were about the size of a PDP-11.
>> 1K of core memory per cabinet.
>
> That doesn't sound right. Even a small 370 had several hundred K, and
> midsize ones went up to a few meg.
Well, then I was probably misinformed, or I'm misremembering, or both.
Ours was a 370/165, if I remember correctly, and I don't remember, at all,
how much memory it had, but it had several of those memory cabinets, and
when I started work there in 1976, they were just converting the system
from running DOS to running DOS/VS, which could actually handle two (2!!)
simultaneous batch programs.
> Here's the product announcement for the 148, one of the smaller/older
> ones. Note that it came in 1M and 2M models (you could get something
> smaller in the 135/138 models, but even they came with at least a half
> meg).
>
> http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/IBM-ProdAnn/370-148.pdf
That looks much fancier and more newfangled than the model we had.
We didn't have anything as modern as a CRT terminal. Our control console
was hardcopy, and almost all actual operation of the machine was done via
the card reader. Processing was primarily tape-to-tape, with huge
removable disk packs primarily for temporary storage during processing,
with
a couple of permanently-mounted "databases" of stock numbers and item
descriptions.
When I left there at the end of 1978, I think they were finally starting
to take seriously the impending problem I had been warning about for
several months: our standard date format, used all over many COBOL programs
and tape layouts, was "YMMDD", and I knew that this was going to break
badly as soon as it got close enough to 1980. I'm almost 100% positive
that
if they did anything about this, they changed from a one-digit year to a
2-digit year. After all, 2000 was 20 years away, and none of them were
going to be employed in that department by then.
Morris Keesan
<dave...@charter.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 15:41:57 +0200, netcat
> <net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
...
>> However, distinguishing quoted text
>> from new is not the issue. Distinguishing several levels of quoting was.
>
> Can't be.
>
> The text that Peter missed was new text. Then Morris claims he would
> have missed it because of the quoted text - which makes no sense to me
> as it was *new* text.
I didn't claim that I would have missed it. I said something to the
effect that Peter may have missed it for the same reason I might have,
which is that I skip large amounts of many of your posts because they
have so much quoted material. And that there was so much quoted
material, and so many levels of quoting, in the article that I was
responding to, that I couldn't easily tell whether that bit of text
was new or quoted text in the article that Peter was replying to.
I believe you when you say that it was new text, but two or three responses
later, with nothing trimmed from the thread, it was not at all trivial to
tell that, and it was more work than I cared to bother with.
David Loewe, Jr.
<mke...@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 11:22:09 -0500, David V. Loewe, Jr
><dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 15:41:57 +0200, netcat
>> <net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
>...
>>> However, distinguishing quoted text
>>> from new is not the issue. Distinguishing several levels of quoting was.
>>
>> Can't be.
>>
>> The text that Peter missed was new text. Then Morris claims he would
>> have missed it because of the quoted text - which makes no sense to me
>> as it was *new* text.
>
>I didn't claim that I would have missed it. I said something to the
>effect that Peter may have missed it for the same reason I might have,
I don't see why you'd say that and mean it the way you claim. "Yes, but
the Mea Culpa was in the message you responded *to*." was in the message
*you* responded to.
>which is that I skip large amounts of many of your posts because they
>have so much quoted material. And that there was so much quoted
>material, and so many levels of quoting, in the article that I was
>responding to, that I couldn't easily tell whether that bit of text
>was new or quoted text in the article that Peter was replying to.
>I believe you when you say that it was new text, but two or three responses
>later, with nothing trimmed from the thread, it was not at all trivial to
>tell that, and it was more work than I cared to bother with.
--
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries
to build a tradition."
Admiral Andrew Cunningham at Crete
Seth
David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>Seth specified the *Pico* line of Super Talent sticks. If you follow
>the link I gave above, you'll find that it goes to the Super Talent web
>page for the *Pico* line of sticks. It says that the Pico line has a
>weight of "less than 6 g" - which is not the "under 2g" that Seth
>claimed. Which is why I asked him if he meant (which he almost
>certainly did) a different line of sticks.
http://www.supertalent.com/products/stt_usb_detail.php?type=Pico%20Mini-A
http://www.supertalent.com/products/stt_usb_detail.php?type=Pico%20Mini-B
Pico Mini-A and Mini-B are under 2 grams. I didn't realize they had a
bigger Pico version.
Seth
Ben Yalow
>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 23:40:00 -0400, Ben Yalow <yb...@panix.com> wrote:
>> In <op.u2oczth45qv6o3@toshiba-laptop> "Morris Keesan"
>> <mke...@post.harvard.edu> writes:
>>
>>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:44:48 -0400, Alan Woodford
>>> <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>> How time flies - I was reading the latest copy of PC Plus magazine the
>>>> other day, and they had a picture of a PDP-11 (in an article about
>>>> programming in PROLOG, of all things) from the Vienna Technical
>>>> Museum, labelled by the magazine as...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A Mainframe.
>>
>>> Sheesh. The last real mainframe I worked with (an IBM 370, in 1978)
>>> had memory cabinets that were about the size of a PDP-11.
>>> 1K of core memory per cabinet.
>>
>> That doesn't sound right. Even a small 370 had several hundred K, and
>> midsize ones went up to a few meg.
>Well, then I was probably misinformed, or I'm misremembering, or both.
>Ours was a 370/165, if I remember correctly, and I don't remember, at all,
>how much memory it had, but it had several of those memory cabinets, and
>when I started work there in 1976, they were just converting the system
> from running DOS to running DOS/VS, which could actually handle two (2!!)
>simultaneous batch programs.
The 165 was one generation before the 148, but a more powerful machine --
except that it only ran the 360 instruction set, and not the virtual
storage hardware extensions that came in with the next generation (for the
1x5 series, there was a 1x8 series with the virtual memory instruction set
added).
And yes -- the memory came in cabinets, but each cabinet held 512K.
>> Here's the product announcement for the 148, one of the smaller/older
>> ones. Note that it came in 1M and 2M models (you could get something
>> smaller in the 135/138 models, but even they came with at least a half
>> meg).
>>
>> http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/IBM-ProdAnn/370-148.pdf
>That looks much fancier and more newfangled than the model we had.
>We didn't have anything as modern as a CRT terminal. Our control console
>was hardcopy, and almost all actual operation of the machine was done via
>the card reader. Processing was primarily tape-to-tape, with huge
>removable disk packs primarily for temporary storage during processing,
>with
>a couple of permanently-mounted "databases" of stock numbers and item
>descriptions.
The 165 hardware console was a CRT. But the operating system console was
probably a 1052, which was a typewriter-like hardcopy mechanism. There's
a photo of the console in the 165 product announcement at
http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/IBM-ProdAnn/370-165.pdf
>When I left there at the end of 1978, I think they were finally starting
>to take seriously the impending problem I had been warning about for
>several months: our standard date format, used all over many COBOL programs
>and tape layouts, was "YMMDD", and I knew that this was going to break
>badly as soon as it got close enough to 1980. I'm almost 100% positive
>that
>if they did anything about this, they changed from a one-digit year to a
>2-digit year. After all, 2000 was 20 years away, and none of them were
>going to be employed in that department by then.
>--
>Morris Keesan -- mke...@post.harvard.edu
Ben
David Loewe, Jr.
We already established that.
Do keep up.
--
"And so it was that later
As the Miller told his tale
That her face, at first just ghostly
Turned a whiter shade of pale"
Keith Reid & Gary Brooker
David G. Bell
se...@panix.com "Seth" wrote:
> Pico Mini-A and Mini-B are under 2 grams. I didn't realize they had a
> bigger Pico version.
I just bought a tiny 4GB drive from my locl supermarket. I don't have
scales that would weigh it. HP-branded, and using some of the same
design tricks as Pico.
That is, the USB connector is not the conventional metal type, soldered
to the PCB (it's those soldered joints that fail, in my experience).
It's a single PCB, the right thickness to fit. which slides in a case so
that the USB connector tracks are exposed, while the chips on the rest
of the circuitboard are protected.
--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
On the horizon, a carrier task force of the Salvation Navy was
turning into the wind, preparing to launch Zeppelins.
Keith F. Lynch
> That is, the USB connector is not the conventional metal type,
> soldered to the PCB (it's those soldered joints that fail, in my
> experience). It's a single PCB, the right thickness to fit. which
> slides in a case so that the USB connector tracks are exposed, while
> the chips on the rest of the circuitboard are protected.
What prevents you from plugging it in upside down?
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
cryptoguy
You can. It doesn't work. Some devices require a modicum of
intelligence to use.
Personally, I don't like drives like this, since they seem too fragile
to me.
It occurred to me to me today that we've been skipping the smallest
widely used flash memory card, the microSDHC. Smaller than a
thumbnail, up to 16Gb, and I expect under 1 gram in weight. The
primary application is in smartphones, but they can be read and
written like any other flash memory as a disk, when placed in a USB
reader.
pt
netcat
@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, treif...@gmail.com says...
> It occurred to me to me today that we've been skipping the smallest
> widely used flash memory card, the microSDHC. Smaller than a
> thumbnail, up to 16Gb, and I expect under 1 gram in weight. The
> primary application is in smartphones, but they can be read and
> written like any other flash memory as a disk, when placed in a USB
> reader.
That's it right there. If you aren't certain about there being a reader
everywhere you might want to use it, you'll have to carry a reader with
you, which kind of negates the advantage of the small form factor.
rgds,
netcat
Paul Dormer
<11202c18-ce13-43d4...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
treif...@gmail.com (cryptoguy) wrote:
>
> You can. It doesn't work. Some devices require a modicum of
> intelligence to use.
Back in the seventies I was involved in the factory testing of a computer
system that was going to be used to control and monitor electricity
substations. For testing, we obviously couldn't go around opening and
closing real switches out at the substations, so the electronics were all
set up in the factory. There was one rack of electronics for each
substation, known as an outstation, and these were sitting on a bench in
the test room.
Each outstation comprised a number of crates, each crate having a number
of cards. To simulate the data from the substation, there was a test box
that could be plugged onto one of the cards, and a row of switches on the
box could be operated to send the desired data. There was a sheaf of
papers on a clipboard which told you which card corresponded to which
circuit breaker or alarm indication at the substation.
So, one of the programmers was about to do some testing, he looked up
what card he needed to connect the test box to: "Crate 2, card 1," he
said.
He was a programmer, he should have remembered that the numbering started
at zero, but that was the card he connected to. In fact, card zero in
each crate was a special inter-crate connector card. And you weren't
supposed to connect the test box to it. The main chip on the card burst
into flames - bright yellow and smokey.
The next day, I was back at the office and reported this incident to my
boss. He went to the office next door, where the outstation designers
hung out.
"What happens if you put the test box on the inter-crate connector card?"
he asked.
"Let me think," replied one of the designers. "You've got 110V doubled
on - bloody hell!"
Next time I was in the factory, they'd put dummy connectors on each
inter-crate connector card.
cryptoguy
> In article <11202c18-ce13-43d4-abd1-ab26dcd9dfc5
>
> > It occurred to me to me today that we've been skipping the smallest
> > widely used flash memory card, the microSDHC. Smaller than a
> > thumbnail, up to 16Gb, and I expect under 1 gram in weight. The
> > primary application is in smartphones, but they can be read and
> > written like any other flash memory as a disk, when placed in a USB
> > reader.
>
> That's it right there. If you aren't certain about there being a reader
> everywhere you might want to use it, you'll have to carry a reader with
> you, which kind of negates the advantage of the small form factor.
The reader is about the size, shape, and weight of a very small USB
stick.
http://www.sandisk.com/products/mobile-memory-products/sandisk-mobilemate-micro-reader
Even loaded with a card, it would be in the running for 'light and
tiny USB drive'.
The cards are a fraction of the size of the reader.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsdhc
has a photo of one sitting in a US dime; the corners barely extend
past the coin's edges.
A little research suggests that they actually weigh around 1.4g, or
1/20th of an ounce, for 16GB. Thus, 3 ounces of these cards would hold
around a terabyte.
One reader plus a few of these cards are the highest density (bytes
per (weight or size)) portable storage I'm aware of.
Practically, you'd need some kind of organizer to hold the cards when
not in use; otherwise you'd lose them. Labeling would be a challenge
as well.
pt
David Loewe, Jr.
<net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
>treif...@gmail.com says...
>> It occurred to me to me today that we've been skipping the smallest
>> widely used flash memory card, the microSDHC. Smaller than a
>> thumbnail, up to 16Gb, and I expect under 1 gram in weight. The
>> primary application is in smartphones, but they can be read and
>> written like any other flash memory as a disk, when placed in a USB
>> reader.
>
>That's it right there. If you aren't certain about there being a reader
>everywhere you might want to use it, you'll have to carry a reader with
>you, which kind of negates the advantage of the small form factor.
Indeed.
I don't get the impression that flash card readers (and it would have to
be able to read that particular form factor of card) are as widespread
as straightforward USB ports.
--
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail
fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
- John Paul Jones
cryptoguy
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 13:20:40 +0200, netcat
>
> <net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
> >> It occurred to me to me today that we've been skipping the smallest
> >> widely used flash memory card, the microSDHC. Smaller than a
> >> thumbnail, up to 16Gb, and I expect under 1 gram in weight. The
> >> primary application is in smartphones, but they can be read and
> >> written like any other flash memory as a disk, when placed in a USB
> >> reader.
>
> >That's it right there. If you aren't certain about there being a reader
> >everywhere you might want to use it, you'll have to carry a reader with
> >you, which kind of negates the advantage of the small form factor.
>
> Indeed.
>
> I don't get the impression that flash card readers (and it would have to
> be able to read that particular form factor of card) are as widespread
> as straightforward USB ports.
Check the USB reader I linked above - its comparable in size to the
smaller USB sticks we were discussing. That and a few grams of
microSDs have much more storage than your portable HD, for less
weight.
Portable media changes pretty rapidly. I've seen DECTapes, TK70, 8,
5.25, and 3 inch floppies come and go. USB is currently widespread,
and since the interface is used for much more than just storage, my
have some staying power.
Many newer PCs (including the one on which I am typing this) and
laptops now come with SD readers built in.
pt
David V. Loewe, Jr
<treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Nov 3, 8:26�pm, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> David G. Bell <db...@zhochaka.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > That is, the USB connector is not the conventional metal type,
>> > soldered to the PCB (it's those soldered joints that fail, in my
>> > experience). �It's a single PCB, the right thickness to fit. which
>> > slides in a case so that the USB connector tracks are exposed, while
>> > the chips on the rest of the circuitboard are protected.
>>
>> What prevents you from plugging it in upside down?
>You can. It doesn't work. Some devices require a modicum of
>intelligence to use.
>
>Personally, I don't like drives like this, since they seem too fragile
>to me.
>
>It occurred to me to me today that we've been skipping the smallest
>widely used flash memory card, the microSDHC. Smaller than a
>thumbnail, up to 16Gb, and I expect under 1 gram in weight. The
>primary application is in smartphones, but they can be read and
>written like any other flash memory as a disk, when placed in a USB
>reader.
The problem is the reader.
--
"...you know, it seems to me you suffer from the problem of
wanting a tailored fit in an off the rack world."
Dennis Juds
David V. Loewe, Jr
<treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Nov 4, 10:59�am, "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 13:20:40 +0200, netcat
>> <net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
>> >treifam...@gmail.com says...
>> >> It occurred to me to me today that we've been skipping the smallest
>> >> widely used flash memory card, the microSDHC. Smaller than a
>> >> thumbnail, up to 16Gb, and I expect under 1 gram in weight. The
>> >> primary application is in smartphones, but they can be read and
>> >> written like any other flash memory as a disk, when placed in a USB
>> >> reader.
>>
>> >That's it right there. If you aren't certain about there being a reader
>> >everywhere you might want to use it, you'll have to carry a reader with
>> >you, which kind of negates the advantage of the small form factor.
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> I don't get the impression that flash card readers (and it would have to
>> be able to read that particular form factor of card) are as widespread
>> as straightforward USB ports.
>
>Check the USB reader I linked above - its comparable in size to the
>smaller USB sticks we were discussing. That and a few grams of
>microSDs have much more storage than your portable HD, for less
>weight.
The question has always been about the cost to a person with limited
finances. One 16 GB microSDHC costs about as much as that 80 GB drive.
So you'd spend five times as much for the same capacity plus the couple
of bucks on the reader.
On a tangent, the darned thing is so small, it'd just be one more thing
that could be easily lost.
>Portable media changes pretty rapidly. I've seen DECTapes, TK70, 8,
>5.25, and 3 inch floppies come and go. USB is currently widespread,
>and since the interface is used for much more than just storage, my
>have some staying power.
>
>Many newer PCs (including the one on which I am typing this) and
>laptops now come with SD readers built in.
Everyone keeps losing sight of the fact that this recommendation is for
one specific person with limited financial resources and non-typical
hardware available to him.
--
"I would take even money that England will not exist in
the year 2000."
Paul Ehrlich 1969
cryptoguy
The reader I linked costs $9.99
pt
David Loewe, Jr.
Which part of "One 16 GB microSDHC costs about as much as that 80 GB
drive. So you'd spend five times as much for the same capacity plus the
couple of bucks on the reader." didn't register?
I saw a couple of readers on New Egg that were cheaper. That is why I
said "plus the couple of bucks on the reader." However, the media
themselves were, as I noted, as expensive for a 16 GB sized one as for
the 80 GB external HD. That means the cost is five times as much *plus
the couple of bucks for the reader" to achieve the same capacity and
functionality. All for something that looks easier to lose. I'm sure
it is a perfectly good choice for a lot, if not a majority, of people.
But, the cost may make it prohibited for that one specific person.
--
"Power corrupts. Absolute power is kind of neat."
- John Lehman, Secretary of the Navy, 1981-1987
cryptoguy
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 11:47:04 -0800 (PST), cryptoguy
>
> >On Nov 4, 2:01 pm, "David V. Loewe, Jr" <davelo...@charter.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:28:08 -0800 (PST), cryptoguy
> >> <treifam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >Many newer PCs (including the one on which I am typing this) and
> >> >laptops now come with SD readers built in.
>
> >> Everyone keeps losing sight of the fact that this recommendation is for
> >> one specific person with limited financial resources and non-typical
> >> hardware available to him.
>
> >The reader I linked costs $9.99
>
> Which part of "One 16 GB microSDHC costs about as much as that 80 GB
> drive. So you'd spend five times as much for the same capacity plus the
> couple of bucks on the reader." didn't register?
The part that isn't poverty stricken, and thinks about the other
factors.
> I saw a couple of readers on New Egg that were cheaper. That is why I
> said "plus the couple of bucks on the reader." However, the media
> themselves were, as I noted, as expensive for a 16 GB sized one as for
> the 80 GB external HD. That means the cost is five times as much *plus
> the couple of bucks for the reader" to achieve the same capacity and
> functionality. All for something that looks easier to lose. I'm sure
> it is a perfectly good choice for a lot, if not a majority, of people.
> But, the cost may make it prohibited for that one specific person.
Frankly, I was drifting the topic away from what you think Keith
wants, to a general sensawunda at how light and dense portable data
storage had become. The notion that I could fit a terabyte in a
package the size of a pack of gum, weighing around 3 ounces, is
mindboggling. One of those tiny (you couldn't use one to hide a dime)
cards holds as much data as a BluRay disk.
I found reports that sandisk will release a 32GB version next summer,
in the same form factor.
pt
Doug Wickstr�m
<net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
>In article <5d1fc1a6-a1e2-4e23-9055-
>27f16e...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, treif...@gmail.com says...
>> > When I'm at work (usually the only place I wear shirts with pockets,
>> > rather than t-shirts), my shirt pocket contains a mobile phone, a 2GB
>> > flash drive, and a pen.
>>
>> Well, yes. And doing so labels you (and me!) as nerds. netcat at
>> least, was trying to avoid that.
>
>Incidentally, that's got nothing to do with why I don't have shirts with
>pockets, or would not put anything substantial in them. I wear what I
>find most comfortable, that is always the first rule. It's just that
>what I find most comfortable is a form-fitting, V-necked t-shirt made of
>stretchy, soft fabric. These as a rule do not have any pockets. Even
>when I am wearing something that would have a pocket, I wouldn't put
>anything substantial into the pocket because it would make me feel
>uncomfortable and unbalanced. Stuff that makes me feel clunky and
>encumbered and weighed down in any way bothers me a lot, I'm
>oversensitive to it. Another goddamn Aspie trait.
Let's hear it for Aspie traits. Though stuff that actually fills
a pocket and/or is heavy bothers me much less than things that
cause periodic _light_ touches.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
I have the same reaction to hard drives. I remember ordering a $10,000
1 GB drive somewhere around 1990 and being amazed at how much smaller
it was than the 300 MB drives we'd purchased only a few years before.
I now have thousands of times that much in my home server and the entire
setup didn't cost a tenth as much as that one drive.
BTW, the microSDs aren't quite up to Blu-ray capacities yet. Single layer
disks hold 25 GB and the dual layers that most of the movies come on hold
50 GB.
> I found reports that sandisk will release a 32GB version next summer,
> in the same form factor.
They must have run into some issues or decided to wait for a better
economy. I think articles from last year were saying "mid 2009" and
articles from earlier this year were saying "late 2009".
Robert
--
Robert K. Shull Email: rkshull at rosettacon dot com
Keith F. Lynch
> netcat <net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
>> Stuff that makes me feel clunky and encumbered and weighed down in
>> any way bothers me a lot, I'm oversensitive to it. Another goddamn
>> Aspie trait.
> Let's hear it for Aspie traits. Though stuff that actually fills a
> pocket and/or is heavy bothers me much less than things that cause
> periodic _light_ touches.
Are you sure you aren't both defining perfectly normal preferences
as pathological?
Jay E. Morris
On 4-Nov-2009, "David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 20:33:09 -0800 (PST), cryptoguy
> <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Nov 3, 8:26�pm, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
> >> David G. Bell <db...@zhochaka.org.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> > That is, the USB connector is not the conventional metal type,
> >> > soldered to the PCB (it's those soldered joints that fail, in my
> >> > experience). �It's a single PCB, the right thickness to fit. which
> >> > slides in a case so that the USB connector tracks are exposed, while
> >> > the chips on the rest of the circuitboard are protected.
> >>
> >> What prevents you from plugging it in upside down?
>
> >You can. It doesn't work. Some devices require a modicum of
> >intelligence to use.
> >
> >Personally, I don't like drives like this, since they seem too fragile
> >to me.
> >
> >It occurred to me to me today that we've been skipping the smallest
> >widely used flash memory card, the microSDHC. Smaller than a
> >thumbnail, up to 16Gb, and I expect under 1 gram in weight. The
> >primary application is in smartphones, but they can be read and
> >written like any other flash memory as a disk, when placed in a USB
> >reader.
>
> The problem is the reader.
My reader is a SD format card. Pop the microSD in a little slot, insert
into laptop/pda/printer SD slot.
I bought mine on Woot some time ago, two microSD 2Gb with the SD reader, for
about $9.
Keith F. Lynch
> netcat <net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
>> That's it right there. If you aren't certain about there being a
>> reader everywhere you might want to use it, you'll have to carry a
>> reader with you, which kind of negates the advantage of the small
>> form factor.
If the purpose is keeping backups, rather than transporting files to
random machines, that's not a concern. If the purpose is transporting
files between two or three machines, you could get a reader for each
machine, and always keep them on or next to the machines.
> One reader plus a few of these cards are the highest density (bytes
> per (weight or size)) portable storage I'm aware of.
Is there higher density non-portable storage?
> Practically, you'd need some kind of organizer to hold the cards
> when not in use; otherwise you'd lose them. Labeling would be a
> challenge as well.
How durable are these cards? Can they be carried indefinitely in
pockets, or would they wear down as coins do? Can they tolerate
getting wet?
How about extreme cold? In a cryonics discussion a decade or two ago,
there was talk about how a patient could take their files and mementos
with them into cryonic storage. The consensus then was that hundreds
of unmounted photographic slides in the mouth would be the best
solution. It sounds like with these cards, someone could hold a
million photos, all of Wikipedia, and all of Project Gutenberg in
their mouth, with enough room left over for every movie mentioned on
IMDB. And perhaps they could hold the Library of Congress is one
nostril, and the British Library in the other.
cryptoguy
> cryptoguy <treifam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Frankly, I was drifting the topic away from what you think Keith
> > wants, to a general sensawunda at how light and dense portable data
> > storage had become. The notion that I could fit a terabyte in a
> > package the size of a pack of gum, weighing around 3 ounces, is
> > mindboggling. One of those tiny (you couldn't use one to hide a dime)
> > cards holds as much data as a BluRay disk.
>
> I have the same reaction to hard drives. I remember ordering a $10,000
> 1 GB drive somewhere around 1990 and being amazed at how much smaller
> it was than the 300 MB drives we'd purchased only a few years before.
> I now have thousands of times that much in my home server and the entire
> setup didn't cost a tenth as much as that one drive.
> BTW, the microSDs aren't quite up to Blu-ray capacities yet. Single layer
> disks hold 25 GB and the dual layers that most of the movies come on hold
> 50 GB.
I sit corrected.
pt