Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #163292 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-06 02:04 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-05-17 20:05 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 268 — 43 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> - 2016-05-06 02:04 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-05-06 11:00 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-05-06 16:34 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-06 18:20 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-05-07 07:12 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-05-11 14:55 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-05-11 19:20 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-11 21:16 +0200
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-07 13:14 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-05-07 20:18 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-08 04:22 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-05-07 21:46 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-08 06:58 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-08 07:31 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-06 12:32 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-05-07 02:30 +1000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2016-05-06 17:19 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-05-06 19:41 +0200
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> - 2016-05-09 02:43 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-09 06:58 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-09 17:05 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-10 12:34 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-05-11 14:38 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-11 21:13 +0200
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2016-05-12 12:50 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-12 17:49 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2016-05-13 12:10 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-12 13:04 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-13 11:18 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-15 14:09 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-05-15 21:53 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-16 12:12 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-16 06:16 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-17 12:32 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-17 10:22 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-18 07:32 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-18 12:28 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-18 19:23 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-05-18 20:15 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-19 08:06 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-19 12:27 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-05-19 14:41 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-19 12:27 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-21 04:59 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-22 13:15 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-05-23 20:14 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2016-05-24 04:45 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-24 12:11 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-24 14:19 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-25 13:11 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 09:22 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-25 17:31 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 21:41 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-18 23:19 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-19 12:27 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-16 06:17 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-05-23 20:16 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-05-16 20:08 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-17 12:32 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-09 16:29 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 02:10 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-10 06:42 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 07:43 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 01:49 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-05-11 09:06 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-11 09:47 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-11 09:33 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 10:26 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-11 11:11 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-11 17:48 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-05-16 20:02 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 12:05 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-11 14:59 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 21:32 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-05-16 19:59 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 21:34 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-12 03:39 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-12 06:13 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-12 14:46 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-11 14:31 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-05-11 14:21 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-11 17:50 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-05-11 16:01 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 21:35 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-12 02:50 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-12 10:07 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-12 11:39 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-12 17:49 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-12 21:55 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-05-12 13:12 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Andy Burns <feb2017-usenet@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2016-05-12 00:20 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-11 21:40 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> - 2016-05-14 23:47 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-15 14:09 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-11 11:37 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-11 11:40 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-11 15:15 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-05-11 21:50 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-11 15:49 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-05-11 23:36 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-05-12 10:32 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-13 11:16 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-13 15:11 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 17:42 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-15 17:34 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 20:32 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-05-15 22:21 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-16 06:57 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-16 13:12 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-16 23:25 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-05-16 19:53 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 08:23 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-05-17 09:16 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-17 10:40 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-17 16:59 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-05-17 13:42 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-17 11:56 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-17 12:10 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-17 19:58 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-18 02:50 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-17 23:51 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-18 07:32 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-05-18 14:28 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-18 23:18 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? RJH <patchmoney@gmx.com> - 2016-05-19 11:07 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-19 10:00 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-19 12:53 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-05-23 10:56 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-23 12:59 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> - 2016-05-24 00:01 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-23 18:48 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-19 02:18 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-05-19 07:03 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-19 13:11 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-18 12:28 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-19 02:38 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-05-21 21:26 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-05-18 10:39 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-18 19:21 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-18 12:35 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-18 21:06 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-18 12:34 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-05-17 14:35 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 15:43 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-17 14:32 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-05-17 14:53 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-18 07:32 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-19 02:43 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-17 19:44 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-17 22:40 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-17 14:42 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-17 17:01 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-05-17 12:09 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-17 14:31 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-18 12:28 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 12:33 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-17 10:31 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-16 20:37 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-17 11:12 +0200
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-17 05:49 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 08:21 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-05-23 12:23 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-05-16 22:03 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-05-12 05:09 +1000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-05-23 09:39 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-05-23 09:48 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-23 13:51 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-23 13:49 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-11 11:34 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-05-11 14:06 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-11 17:49 +0200
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-11 16:53 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-12 03:11 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2016-05-14 16:59 +0800
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-14 10:48 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-14 15:53 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-05-14 09:37 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-05-14 12:09 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-15 14:09 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-11 17:22 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-05-11 12:59 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-21 00:56 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 22:17 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-22 05:53 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-22 11:26 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-22 07:13 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-21 00:56 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-22 06:43 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-22 11:22 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-22 07:14 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-22 13:35 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-22 07:29 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-22 08:35 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-23 06:41 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-23 16:11 +0200
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-23 16:43 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-23 16:50 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-24 01:50 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-24 12:11 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-24 13:40 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-24 19:33 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 21:33 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 08:54 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-24 16:38 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-24 20:04 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-05-24 22:24 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-05-25 12:45 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 17:15 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-24 11:55 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-24 18:18 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-05-24 13:26 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-24 11:59 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-05-24 17:03 -0300
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-26 17:55 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-24 11:53 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-10 17:47 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-05-11 14:41 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-10 12:34 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> - 2016-05-11 01:44 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-11 11:32 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-05-06 13:55 -0500
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-05-06 19:29 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-07 13:14 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-07 05:39 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-07 11:35 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-07 17:38 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-07 22:30 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-05-07 13:25 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-05-07 17:16 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-07 20:39 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-07 21:57 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-07 22:49 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-08 07:08 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-08 20:58 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-07 13:14 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-06 12:09 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-07 10:39 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-05-07 20:16 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-08 13:08 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-08 16:20 +0200
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-09 13:08 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Morten Reistad <first@last.name,invalid> - 2016-05-09 15:34 +0200
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-10 12:34 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-05-10 13:42 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-11 12:18 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-11 13:19 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-11 16:57 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-11 16:20 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-11 17:38 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-10 15:49 +0200
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-11 12:18 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-10 11:07 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-11 12:18 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-11 13:16 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-05-11 09:45 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-11 16:22 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-11 15:47 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-11 10:52 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-11 15:49 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-10 17:44 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-11 12:18 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-11 13:44 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-11 17:46 +0200
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Thomas Lake <tomlake07@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 10:47 -0700
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-10 18:36 +0000
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-05-16 19:45 -0400
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-17 06:35 +0100
Re: What Would Be Your Ultimate Computer? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-05-17 20:05 -0400
Page 8 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 14 Next page →
| From | mausg@mail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-18 21:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnjpmaj.231.mausg@Smaus.org> |
| In reply to | #163774 |
On 2016-05-18, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: > On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 1:21:38 PM UTC-6, ma...@mail.com wrote: > >> There are people now who want to drink milk as it comes from the >> cow, without it been Pasteurized. I think they are crazy > > They may well be. A woman who posts interesting videos of herself doing > interviews claims she cured her breast cancer by drinking raw milk. > > John Savard Some people get better by going to Lourdes. -- greymaus . . ... Ireland, Republic of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-18 12:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <048bf4df-bf4e-42cc-8d6c-79e69d228142@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #163769 |
On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 9:39:56 AM UTC-6, Lawrence Statton NK1G wrote: > I remember thinking that we had "illegal" milk in our fridge, and The > Govm'nt was going to throw us (and our milk man) into jail for flaunting > the Legal Standards for Milk. But when you got older, you learned that it's _flouting_ legal standards that might get you into trouble. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 14:35 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dq1a3qFsvqgU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #163751 |
"Quadibloc" wrote: > On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 12:42:21 PM UTC-6, Osmium wrote: > >> Furthermore, if you take half the fat out of milk it is no longer milk, >> fat >> is an intrinsic part of the substance. > > Well, if you take the cream out of milk, you get "skim milk" or "2% milk" > depending on how much you have removed, so removing some of the fat from > the milk > by the expedient of removing the more fat-rich cream and still calling it > milk > afterwards seems to have been legitimized by tradition. > > In fact, I think that whole milk used to be 3.56% cream, and they recently > changed the standards to reduce the cream content in what can be sold as > whole > milk, for the sake of making us slimmer. But they didn't take some of the fat out, they took it *all* out, as in "Fat Free". ISTM the main thing needed to make this stuff is a good supply of city water and a tank truck full of corn sweetener.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 15:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <gj0njbt48slqrc34iciu7mt4v357fg9r7h@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #163754 |
On Tue, 17 May 2016 14:35:21 -0500, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >"Quadibloc" wrote: > >> On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 12:42:21 PM UTC-6, Osmium wrote: >> >>> Furthermore, if you take half the fat out of milk it is no longer milk, >>> fat >>> is an intrinsic part of the substance. >> >> Well, if you take the cream out of milk, you get "skim milk" or "2% milk" >> depending on how much you have removed, so removing some of the fat from >> the milk >> by the expedient of removing the more fat-rich cream and still calling it >> milk >> afterwards seems to have been legitimized by tradition. >> >> In fact, I think that whole milk used to be 3.56% cream, and they recently >> changed the standards to reduce the cream content in what can be sold as >> whole >> milk, for the sake of making us slimmer. > >But they didn't take some of the fat out, they took it *all* out, as in "Fat >Free". ISTM the main thing needed to make this stuff is a good supply of >city water and a tank truck full of corn sweetener. Maybe its soy milk ? Well, liquid from soy beans. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 14:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nhfref$9d9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #163750 |
On 5/17/2016 1:42 PM, Osmium wrote: > "Scott Lurndal" writes: > >> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>> "JimP" wrote: >> >>>> Depends on where you buy it. I've bought potato salad by the pint in >>>> some stores, and by the pound in other stores. >>> >>> It's a mistake to try to discuss food in a rational way because the >>> government intercedes in ways that defy common sense. >>> >>> Just one example, look for a product called "Fat free half & half." >> >> How, exactly, does this illustrate government intervention? > > This substance is sold in grocery stores for human consumption, > therefore it is subject to food labeling requirements. People seeing > "half & half" on a label in the dairy section expect half cream and > half milk. If one sells half water and half something else and the > consumer expects half & half, the vendor committed fraud and that > vendor would be sued by vendors that sold the legitimate product. The > fact that no such suits happen proves to me that the government > *explicitly* allows such fraudulent labeling. But how has the government "interceded" there? Or are you arguing that the government _should_have_ interceded? Anyhow, it's not "half water" unless you're saying that milk is "mostly water", which would be true, I expect an analysis will show >50% H2O. The 3 main ingredients are milk, corn syrup, and cream, other than a handful of ingredients that are <0.5%. If you're saying "it sounds nasty", I'd agree with that. But IMHO all milk does. (I use nonfat dry milk in cooking, sometimes with a little butter added.) > > Furthermore, if you take half the fat out of milk it is no longer > milk, fat is an intrinsic part of the substance. Not true in US usage, see "skim milk" and "nonfat dry milk".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 14:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dq1b5pFt71rU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #163753 |
"Dave Garland" wrote:
> On 5/17/2016 1:42 PM, Osmium wrote:
>> "Scott Lurndal" writes:
>>
>>> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes:
>>>> "JimP" wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Depends on where you buy it. I've bought potato salad by the pint in
>>>>> some stores, and by the pound in other stores.
>>>>
>>>> It's a mistake to try to discuss food in a rational way because the
>>>> government intercedes in ways that defy common sense.
>>>>
>>>> Just one example, look for a product called "Fat free half & half."
>>>
>>> How, exactly, does this illustrate government intervention?
>>
>> This substance is sold in grocery stores for human consumption,
>> therefore it is subject to food labeling requirements. People seeing
>> "half & half" on a label in the dairy section expect half cream and
>> half milk. If one sells half water and half something else and the
>> consumer expects half & half, the vendor committed fraud and that
>> vendor would be sued by vendors that sold the legitimate product. The
>> fact that no such suits happen proves to me that the government
>> *explicitly* allows such fraudulent labeling.
>
> But how has the government "interceded" there? Or are you arguing that the
> government _should_have_ interceded?
As I said, I believe there must be an express permission to falsify the
label, else the suits I mentioned. I haven't been able to find it. I did
find their charter:
"The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible
for assuring that foods sold in the United States are safe,
wholesome and properly labeled."
As a matter of fact they do the exact opposite, they permit "improperly
labelled" food to be sold. Does this sound like proper labelling to you?
> Anyhow, it's not "half water" unless you're saying that milk is "mostly
> water", which would be true, I expect an analysis will show
> >50% H2O. The 3 main ingredients are milk, corn syrup, and cream,
> other than a handful of ingredients that are <0.5%.
>
> If you're saying "it sounds nasty", I'd agree with that. But IMHO all milk
> does. (I use nonfat dry milk in cooking, sometimes with a little butter
> added.)
>
>>
>> Furthermore, if you take half the fat out of milk it is no longer
>> milk, fat is an intrinsic part of the substance.
>
> Not true in US usage, see "skim milk" and "nonfat dry milk".
But they don't call it milk! They call it skim milk.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/LabelingNutrition/ucm2006828.htm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-18 07:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <944204840.485263368.406922.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #163753 |
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote: > On 5/17/2016 1:42 PM, Osmium wrote: >> "Scott Lurndal" writes: >> >>> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >>>> "JimP" wrote: >>> >>>>> Depends on where you buy it. I've bought potato salad by the pint in >>>>> some stores, and by the pound in other stores. >>>> >>>> It's a mistake to try to discuss food in a rational way because the >>>> government intercedes in ways that defy common sense. >>>> >>>> Just one example, look for a product called "Fat free half & half." >>> >>> How, exactly, does this illustrate government intervention? >> >> This substance is sold in grocery stores for human consumption, >> therefore it is subject to food labeling requirements. People seeing >> "half & half" on a label in the dairy section expect half cream and >> half milk. If one sells half water and half something else and the >> consumer expects half & half, the vendor committed fraud and that >> vendor would be sued by vendors that sold the legitimate product. The >> fact that no such suits happen proves to me that the government >> *explicitly* allows such fraudulent labeling. > > But how has the government "interceded" there? Or are you arguing that > the government _should_have_ interceded? > > Anyhow, it's not "half water" unless you're saying that milk is > "mostly water", which would be true, I expect an analysis will show >> 50% H2O. The 3 main ingredients are milk, corn syrup, and cream, > other than a handful of ingredients that are <0.5%. > > If you're saying "it sounds nasty", I'd agree with that. But IMHO all > milk does. (I use nonfat dry milk in cooking, sometimes with a little > butter added.) > >> >> Furthermore, if you take half the fat out of milk it is no longer >> milk, fat is an intrinsic part of the substance. > > Not true in US usage, see "skim milk" and "nonfat dry milk". > > Skim milk is water with a whiteish color. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-19 02:43 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <87shxevbzs.fsf@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> |
| In reply to | #163763 |
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > Skim milk is water with a whiteish color. Skim milk *is* milk with the butter fat removed. It *tastes* like water with a whitish color. :-) -- Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 19:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qwK_y.3$TN3.2@fx39.iad> |
| In reply to | #163750 |
"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >"Scott Lurndal" writes: >Furthermore, if you take half the fat out of milk it is no longer milk, fat >is an intrinsic part of the substance. Nonsense, I've been drinking skim (fat-free) milk for my entire life - even on the farm, where we had a separator for the cream.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 22:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhg6km02m1c@news6.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #163750 |
On 2016-05-17, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: > "Scott Lurndal" writes: > >> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: >> >>> "JimP" wrote: >>> >>>> Depends on where you buy it. I've bought potato salad by the pint in >>>> some stores, and by the pound in other stores. >>> >>> It's a mistake to try to discuss food in a rational way because the >>> government intercedes in ways that defy common sense. >>> >>> Just one example, look for a product called "Fat free half & half." >> >> How, exactly, does this illustrate government intervention? > > This substance is sold in grocery stores for human consumption, therefore it > is subject to food labeling requirements. People seeing "half & half" on a > label in the dairy section expect half cream and half milk. If one sells > half water and half something else and the consumer expects half & half, the > vendor committed fraud and that vendor would be sued by vendors that sold > the legitimate product. The fact that no such suits happen proves to me that > the government *explicitly* allows such fraudulent labeling. Either that or the vendor's lawyers successfully argued that "half and half" could mean half of anything combined with half of anything else. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 14:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhfala02q60@news7.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #163739 |
On 2016-05-17, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, 16 May 2016 19:53:36 -0400, Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> > wrote: > >> In article <nhdktv01g3q@news6.newsguy.com>, >> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: >> >>> On 2016-05-16, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 5/16/2016 5:57 AM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>> >>>>> Depends on the circumstances. "A third" has a specific meaning. You >>>>> seem determined to discard it. >>>> >>>> To a mathematician, it has a specific meaning. In common usage, the >>>> small-denominator fractions are understood to be approximations, >>>> though such may depend on context. If I back the truck up and say >>>> "give me half a load", nobody expects sophisticated measurements will >>>> be used, the important measurement will happen at the scale. Likewise >>>> in the deli if I ask for "half a pint" of potato salad no elaborate >>>> volumetric measurements will be made. >>> >>> On the other hand, if I asked for half a dozen eggs, I'd be unhappy >>> if I was only given five. >> >> And in the potato salad case, it will be sold by the pound and >> calculated as such. > > Depends on where you buy it. I've bought potato salad by the pint in > some stores, and by the pound in other stores. "A pint's a pound the world round." :-) -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 17:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <y7I_y.2$Un.0@fx21.iad> |
| In reply to | #163741 |
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes: >On 2016-05-17, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Depends on where you buy it. I've bought potato salad by the pint in >> some stores, and by the pound in other stores. > >"A pint's a pound the world round." :-) Unless you're in england, where a pint is a pound-and-a-quarter in weight, and likely three pounds in cost.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 12:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <87wpmslige.fsf@senguio.mx> |
| In reply to | #163746 |
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: > Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes: >>On 2016-05-17, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >>> Depends on where you buy it. I've bought potato salad by the pint in >>> some stores, and by the pound in other stores. >> >>"A pint's a pound the world round." :-) > > Unless you're in england, where a pint is a pound-and-a-quarter > in weight, and likely three pounds in cost. Right - that's what makes the saying so wrong -- a pint of (water) is a pound exactly NOWHERE. In the UK where the imperial fluid ounce (of water at some specified temperature and at some specified atmospheric pressure) weighs an ounce avoirdupois, their pints are 20 of them, as you pointed out. In the US the US fluid ounce weighs (at some conditions similar to, but different from the UK defininition) One 128th of eight and a third pounds. (Look - a third! Did I mean "cut a pound into roughly three pieces and give me one, or did I mean the ration of 1:3 ?) Eureka -- therein lies the entire seed of the argument upthread -- the word 'one third' can have to subtly different meanings, depending on context.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 14:31 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <87vb2cy4jm.fsf@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> |
| In reply to | #163746 |
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: > Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes: >> On 2016-05-17, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Depends on where you buy it. I've bought potato salad by the pint in >>> some stores, and by the pound in other stores. >> >> "A pint's a pound the world round." :-) > > Unless you're in england, where a pint is a pound-and-a-quarter > in weight, and likely three pounds in cost. Or in Cananada, where a pint was roughly a pound-and-a-quarter until pints ceased officially to exist about 30 years ago. We've also lost the penny. Transactions conducted in cash are rounded up or down to the nearest nickel (5-cent piece) so "A penny for your thoughts" is now resolves to soliciting a gratuity. -- Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-18 12:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0005331CEB9A11B6@aca414ec.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #163746 |
Scott Lurndal wrote: > Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes: >>On 2016-05-17, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >>> Depends on where you buy it. I've bought potato salad by the pint in >>> some stores, and by the pound in other stores. >> >>"A pint's a pound the world round." :-) > > Unless you're in england, where a pint is a pound-and-a-quarter > in weight, and likely three pounds in cost. I used the saying to remember base 16. a pound is 16 oz and so is a pint. 2 pints is a quart which 32 ounces. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 12:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <belmjbl5eubruib5ot9u01h06ar2np7vga@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #163741 |
On 17 May 2016 14:42:50 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: >On 2016-05-17, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, 16 May 2016 19:53:36 -0400, Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> >> wrote: >> >>> In article <nhdktv01g3q@news6.newsguy.com>, >>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2016-05-16, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 5/16/2016 5:57 AM, J. Clarke wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Depends on the circumstances. "A third" has a specific meaning. You >>>>>> seem determined to discard it. >>>>> >>>>> To a mathematician, it has a specific meaning. In common usage, the >>>>> small-denominator fractions are understood to be approximations, >>>>> though such may depend on context. If I back the truck up and say >>>>> "give me half a load", nobody expects sophisticated measurements will >>>>> be used, the important measurement will happen at the scale. Likewise >>>>> in the deli if I ask for "half a pint" of potato salad no elaborate >>>>> volumetric measurements will be made. >>>> >>>> On the other hand, if I asked for half a dozen eggs, I'd be unhappy >>>> if I was only given five. >>> >>> And in the potato salad case, it will be sold by the pound and >>> calculated as such. >> >> Depends on where you buy it. I've bought potato salad by the pint in >> some stores, and by the pound in other stores. > >"A pint's a pound the world round." :-) I knew you would say that. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 10:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nhfdaq$eal$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #163721 |
On 5/16/2016 6:53 PM, Walter Bushell wrote: > In article <nhdktv01g3q@news6.newsguy.com>, > Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > >> On 2016-05-16, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote: >> >>> On 5/16/2016 5:57 AM, J. Clarke wrote: >>> >>>> Depends on the circumstances. "A third" has a specific meaning. You >>>> seem determined to discard it. >>> >>> To a mathematician, it has a specific meaning. In common usage, the >>> small-denominator fractions are understood to be approximations, >>> though such may depend on context. If I back the truck up and say >>> "give me half a load", nobody expects sophisticated measurements will >>> be used, the important measurement will happen at the scale. Likewise >>> in the deli if I ask for "half a pint" of potato salad no elaborate >>> volumetric measurements will be made. >> >> On the other hand, if I asked for half a dozen eggs, I'd be unhappy >> if I was only given five. > > And in the potato salad case, it will be sold by the pound and > calculated as such. > That's a different matter. Of course nobody wants to pay for stuff they didn't get. The accuracy of weights/measures for sales tends to be regulated by law. Until you get down to the +/- cents level, when the little pot of loose pennies appears for you to either take one or leave one to even out your payment.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-16 20:37 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1605162037290.7591@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #163718 |
On Mon, 16 May 2016, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2016-05-16, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote: > >> On 5/16/2016 5:57 AM, J. Clarke wrote: >> >>> Depends on the circumstances. "A third" has a specific meaning. You >>> seem determined to discard it. >> >> To a mathematician, it has a specific meaning. In common usage, the >> small-denominator fractions are understood to be approximations, >> though such may depend on context. If I back the truck up and say >> "give me half a load", nobody expects sophisticated measurements will >> be used, the important measurement will happen at the scale. Likewise >> in the deli if I ask for "half a pint" of potato salad no elaborate >> volumetric measurements will be made. > > On the other hand, if I asked for half a dozen eggs, I'd be unhappy > if I was only given five. > Isn't that evened out when other times you get a "baker's dozen" of eggs? Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 11:12 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1s3r0d-lr6.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #163726 |
In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1605162037290.7591@darkstar.example.org>, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >On Mon, 16 May 2016, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> On 2016-05-16, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote: >> >>> On 5/16/2016 5:57 AM, J. Clarke wrote: >>> >>>> Depends on the circumstances. "A third" has a specific meaning. You >>>> seem determined to discard it. >>> >>> To a mathematician, it has a specific meaning. In common usage, the >>> small-denominator fractions are understood to be approximations, >>> though such may depend on context. If I back the truck up and say >>> "give me half a load", nobody expects sophisticated measurements will >>> be used, the important measurement will happen at the scale. Likewise >>> in the deli if I ask for "half a pint" of potato salad no elaborate >>> volumetric measurements will be made. >> >> On the other hand, if I asked for half a dozen eggs, I'd be unhappy >> if I was only given five. >> >Isn't that evened out when other times you get a "baker's dozen" of eggs? It is evident none of you have seen the Edeka (Germany grocer's chain) commercials. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 05:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <059a789d-b2b7-416e-ae06-c3c82dc3fed1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #163731 |
On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 3:24:41 AM UTC-6, Morten Reistad wrote: > It is evident none of you have seen the Edeka (Germany grocer's chain) > commercials. That's hardly surprising. Who would have had a reason to look them up on YouTube? John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 14 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web