Science and Technology news... :: View topic - Postings to sci.geo.satellite-nav

Peter W. Meek · Guest

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 21:37:13 GMT, Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com>
wrote:

[quote]I wonder if the lack of postings and participation is a general USENET
phenomenon, a shift in technical use of GPS, or something else. Most people
I know that use computers, don>t even know what USENET it.
[/quote]
Well, Comcast (a major provider of broadband access) is
shutting off its usenet feed (once in-house, currently
subcontracted to giganews.com). When I complained, they
said that vanishingly few of their customers took advantage
of the service, preferring to get information elsewhere
on the Internet. As a BIG DEAL, giganews will give any
current Comcast/giganews user 20% off for the first few
months if they want to subscribe directly to giganews.
--Pete
Peter W. Meek <pwmeek@mail.msen.com>
http://www.msen.com/~pwmeek/

Harald Hanche-Olsen · Guest

+ Nicholas <Nicholas@nowhere.net>:

[quote]So, if I get this right, you yourself REPOST the entire message,
whilst criticizing us for doing the same. As for costing anybody
anything, I>ve paid my monthly fee for using this service.

Surely, this was meant to be a joke.
[/quote]
As a joke it fell sorta flat, I agree. But he has a point. I am not sure
the cost-of-transmission argument is as sound as it used to be in the
childhood years of usenet (long before the Internet), when phone lines
were the most common transmission medium. But it is annoying when you
have to scroll through piles of text that you most likely read (or
scrolled over) mere seconds ago to get to the new contribution. It
wastes time and, more importantly, it breaks the flow of the
conversation - to the extent that there is a flow to break in the first
place. (And don>t get me started on top posting.)

--
* Harald Hanche-Olsen <URL:http://www.math.ntnu.no/~hanche/>
- It is undesirable to believe a proposition
when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true.
-- Bertrand Russell

Nicholas · Guest

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:47:59 +0200, Harald Hanche-Olsen
<hanche@math.ntnu.no> wrote:

[quote]+ Nicholas <Nicholas@nowhere.net>:

So, if I get this right, you yourself REPOST the entire message,
whilst criticizing us for doing the same. As for costing anybody
anything, I>ve paid my monthly fee for using this service.

Surely, this was meant to be a joke.

As a joke it fell sorta flat, I agree. But he has a point. I am not sure
the cost-of-transmission argument is as sound as it used to be in the
childhood years of usenet (long before the Internet), when phone lines
were the most common transmission medium. But it is annoying when you
have to scroll through piles of text that you most likely read (or
scrolled over) mere seconds ago to get to the new contribution. It
wastes time and, more importantly, it breaks the flow of the
conversation - to the extent that there is a flow to break in the first
place. (And don>t get me started on top posting.)
[/quote]
And by the same token, I>ve been chastised over and over again for
snipping for brevity.

IOW, I removed what -I- thought wasn>t germane to the discussion, only
to be criticized for avoiding answering what somebody else thought was
important.

So here is the way I look at it. If I am going to make a 1 sentence
reply, I don>t need to quote the tome that led to it. But at the same
time, some people will disagree no matter whether I snip for brevity
or toss the entire thread into a single post.

I can tell you that no matter which choice you make, someone is not
going to be pleased with it. So where do you go from there?

The argument if you snip is that some people don>t want to go up 20
posts to find out what someone else said.

The argument to not snip is it wastes bandwidth or clutters the
message.

No matter which choice you make, you lose. Sort of like the up-coming
elections in the US.

Nick

A · Guest

On 11/10/08 20:24, Nicholas wrote:
[quote]Did neither of you ever learn to snip?

So, if I get this right, you yourself REPOST the entire message,
whilst criticizing us for doing the same.

Surely, this was meant to be a joke.
[/quote]
Correct.

Roy Lewallen · Guest

There>s no need to abandon Usenet if your ISP quits carrying it. For a
relatively small fee you can subscribe to a service that>ll provide it.
I found one list of providers at
http://www.exit109.com/~jeremy/news/providers/providers.html.

A few years ago, my ISP>s Usenet service got flaky, so I subscribed to
Supernews for a few months. Service was flawless.

What I miss is the easy search of Usenet group archives that used to be
available at groups.google.com. I think that sort of search capability
is available somewhere but I haven>t taken the time to chase it down.

Roy Lewallen

Richard Owlett · Guest

Roy Lewallen wrote:
[quote]There>s no need to abandon Usenet if your ISP quits carrying it. For a
relatively small fee you can subscribe to a service that>ll provide it.
I found one list of providers at
http://www.exit109.com/~jeremy/news/providers/providers.html.

A few years ago, my ISP>s Usenet service got flaky, so I subscribed to
Supernews for a few months. Service was flawless.

What I miss is the easy search of Usenet group archives that used to be
available at groups.google.com. I think that sort of search capability
is available somewhere but I haven>t taken the time to chase it down.

Roy Lewallen
[/quote]
It>s still there. They just took it off their menus.
http://groups.google.com/advanced_search?q=&

Guest

[quote]
I wonder if the lack of postings and participation is a general USENET
phenomenon, a shift in technical use of GPS, or something else. Most people
I know that use computers, don>t even know what USENET it.

-Sam
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
[/quote]
I believe the problem is with usenet as a whole, rather than any
specific group. I know I used to be active in a number of usenet
groups; but over the last few years I>ve drifted away from them, for a
number of reasons.
First the signal to noise ratio has declined beyond all reason. The
spammers have won. When I do look in newsgroups, it>s too unwieldy to
fire up a newsreader and download zillions of garbage posts in order
to find a few useful items. Google Groups has a nice interface for
finding the gems, and allows posting when I need to ask a question.
Second, most of what I>ve looked for (TV commentary, computer hardware
discussions, car care, GPS) has migrated to the web. Web forums have
many annoying drawbacks (over-use of HTML, graphics, and multiple
registrations, for instance) but they do tend to have busier
communities, and they>re less likely to mutate into off-topic
nightmares or be deluged with spam.
Third, my ISP, like some others, has dropped newsgroups from their
standard offerings. I don>t want to pay extra to subscribe to a
dedicated newsgroup service.

Happy Trails · Guest

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 23:38:15 -0500, Nicholas <Nicholas@nowhere.net>
wrote:
[quote]
I had a few close calls. Broke my neck (C7), back (L4 compression
fracture) left arm (ulna at wrist snapped in two like a broomstick
handle), and had to have an AICD/PM installed because I have a lethal
heart rhythm. I have sustained Ventrucular Tachycardia.

A lack of blood supply to my brain caused a fall from 2 stories high.
They had me on life support in Trauma and ICU. It took TWO YEARS in
braces and casts and then physical therapy to get back some of my
functions, but I still have severe cervical stenosis and my spinal
cord is getting pinched off in my neck. 1 blow to the head and I am a
quadraplegic, if I survive it at all. I can email you the MRI scan if
you want.

Later, doctors told me I was going to die if I went home for the
weekend before I got the implant. So I have a Medtronic defibrillator
with anti-tachycardia pacing screwed into the bottom of my right
ventricle.

So...I =was= dead twice. Once after the fall, and the 2nd time when
they fibrillated my heart in the OR to see if the AICD worked
properly. For a guy who has been dead twice already, I feel pretty
good ! 8-)

AICD= automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator
PM = pacemaker
ICU= intensive care unit
cervical stenosis = spinal cord column too narrow for spinal cord
tissue.
defibrillation= 35 joules directly into the myocardium to stop the
heart, in hopes that when it restarts itself it will do so with
*normal* rhythm.

Note: trans-throacic topical defibrillation requires about 400
joules, but since I>m wired directly into the heart, a lot less energy
is necessary.

Lg
Risen from the Dead
[/quote]

2 questions:

1) Why are you Nicholas?

2) How>s your fucking cat?


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Geology - Satellite Navigation Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2