Re: Must be my age
And of course Purdy.
Pah, modern new-fangled rubbish, that was the New Avengers.
What about Cathy Gale (Honor Blackman)?
3215 posts • joined 19 May 2010
Dear Reg: You could pioneer some common sense in the name of scientific accuracy. How about linking every instance of the term "AI" to a couple of paras explaining why it is actually nothing of the kind? You do a good enough service setting the record straight on "private" browsing in today's articles, after all.
I often disagree with your point of view on matters, but on this occasion, I can only endorse what you've said, and offer you this -------------->
'the safety record of a Corvair '
I suspect we are talking the Chevrolet Corvair which was identified by Ralph Nader as highly unsafe.
'It's got all the reliability of an NSU RO80'
Again, not an aircraft, and the rotary engine was renowned for the seals at the tips of the rotor failing.
'as popular with pilots as a clapped out Austin Ambassador'
...none where they complain about the window popping out when you jack it up and the steering wheel being square.
I'm sure it's only a matter of time.
Thanks to the Internet, I have the opportunity to be better informed about a wider range of subjects than has ever been possible hitherto. And so does everyone else, if they're prepared to take it. Is that a bad thing?
No, it's obviously not a bad thing, and I too am better informed about all sorts of subjects as a result of the internet.
But, I do believe that it discourages the individual retention of knowledge, because of its immediacy.
I'm in danger of revealing my grumpy-old-man status here, or even getting into a full blown rant, but it seems to me that the mental retention of literary allusions, cultural references etc is something older people do.
It is my perception that younger people, who have grown up with the ubiquitous use of computers and smartphones, and particularly the advent of Google and Wikipedia, make no effort to retain such things, as they can just go and look them up when needed, and then forget them again until next time.
I recently made the mistake of helping my daughter with her "A" level biology homework - which given I used to work in the medical profession I thought should be a doddle.
She had to describe in 'detail' the movement of blood through the circulatory system, so I started with the blood leaving the left ventricle through the semilunar valve into the aorta, and how it travels through arteries to the capillary beds and then back through the veins, through the inferior and superior vena cava, to the right atrium. (simplified)
She was sitting looking puzzled, so I asked what was wrong. She said "Oh, we don't need to know all that"
I was gobsmacked. How can you possibly learn human biology if you don't even need to know the names of the bits you are supposed to be talking about?
I've noticed this before though, that students seem to be actively discouraged from taking a wider interest in any aspect of a subject outside the strict focus of the coursework.
I see people are highlighting 999 calls, fear not, by the time this is done there won't be any police etc.. left due to cuts.
More immediately, the 999 services are going to be moving from TETRA radios to 4G on EE, so even if you could call the emergency services without a mobile signal, the controllers won't be able to talk to the fire engines or ambulances...
"Ah Simpkins, come in, stand at ease."
"Thank you sir"
"Now, as you know, I have to prepare a report for the Ministry about these five missing aircraft"
"So can you tell me what happened, exactly?"
"They were brought down by an overwhelming enemy force, sir"
"Really, Simkins? And why didn't the enemy squadron appear on our radar, exactly?"
"Uh, it wasn't exactly a squadron, sir... more of a flock, kind of thing..."
"A Flock, Simkins?"
"Yessir... But they were terrible, sir, mad staring eyes and great sharp beaks and everything, our aircraft didn't stand a chance!"
"I see... Just to clarify then, the enemy force was comprised of what, exactly?"
"Seagulls sir, a great flock of seagulls."
"Thank you Simkins, that will be all."
The registry for .uk, Nominet, for example, has long withheld the personal details of domain registrants and provides only technical information publicly.
This is not true. I've just done a quick blast round some of our company .uk domains and some of my personal .uk domains, and the full registration information is returned by whois.nic.uk.
With the recent investment in Reaction Engines Limited, this may stand a chance of becoming a reality
Hmm, whatever fraction of the £26M that was shared between Boeing and Rolls Royce. Not exactly a massive injection of cash, considering the size of either company, more an expression of polite interest.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018