Oh, so this list was a bunch of nutters and Buffy fans the whole time
and no-one told me?
Martin
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 09:23:15PM +0100, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
> >
> > Oh, so this list was a bunch of nutters and Buffy fans the whole time
> > and no-one told me?
>
> YOu havent been around here very long have you :)
Indeed, that was just my observation on a few posts' worth. Who *knows*
what
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 10:28:24PM +0100, Dean S Wilson wrote:
>
> Stick with drunks, it'll save time. And the meetings on Thursday so
> you announced yourself just in time! ;)
I'm not sure I'll be able to make it though - I've got things to prepare
for this talk at GLLUG on Saturday.
Martin
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 11:05:17PM -0400, Alex Page wrote:
>
> But where would we find a camping ground with a fast net connection
> and wireless LAN connections?
The bit of park that the Laurie bros' consume nodes cover?
Martin
On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 10:14:28AM +0100, Dean wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure I'll be able to make it though - I've got things to prepare
> > for this talk at GLLUG on Saturday.
>
> Which is on a subject a lot of people on the list are interested in,
> wireless networking and the Consume.net project
On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 12:12:56PM +0100, Neil Ford wrote:
> >
> > Which reminds me of the time someone shorted out a mains socket with a
> > paper clip "to see what happened".
>
> Or the case of taking the wire from inside a scalextric hand controller,
> attaching on end to a sucker, affixing
On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 12:52:32PM +0100, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
>
> On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Dean wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 11:14:48AM +0100, Dean wrote:
> > Lonix is normally pub, pub, food, pub maybe club. It covers as much Linux
> > as the London PM social nights do Perl ;)
>
> Last
On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 06:19:46PM +0100, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
>
> On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Dean wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 12:52:32PM +0100, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> > > Last time I went to Lonix, it was full of w4r3z d00dz. :( The kind of
> > > people who only used linux because
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 02:54:25PM +0100, wrote:
>
> All this said, there were an obscene number of people at Lonix last
> night, who once again I have no idea about other than that they were
> being given advice by the people I steer clear of for asking long, slow
> and stupid questions.
>
> Gr
On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 12:29:13AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> nah you didn't say something weird like Willow (or Riley) is the
> sexiest in BtVS.
But but...
Martin
On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 12:57:38AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
> Greg McCarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > ooh .. that reminds me .. the Census man has just dropped a form in .. I
> > > didn't reallise it was this year .. excellent .. now dont forget .. your
> > > religion is 'Jedi' ok ?
On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 12:42:21AM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 12:04:15AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> > ooh .. that reminds me .. the Census man has just dropped a form in .. I
> > didn't reallise it was this year .. excellent .. now dont forget .. your
> > religion i
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:55:58PM +0100, Struan Donald wrote:
> >
> > Dean (Cordelia fan)
>
> heresy is all very well and good but surely there are limits?
Hmm. I know someone who quite fancies Anya.
Martin
$willow++;
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 05:54:46PM +0100, Struan Donald wrote:
>
> ah, the curse of the TNG generation. I imagine there'll be a real dearth
> of wesleys for the next 10 to 20 years.
Not to mention Buffys. And probably some more, but I'm really rather out
of touch with any $TV ne 'Buffy'...
Mar
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 10:11:40AM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
>
> Ho ho, you should have heard the stick that support got from that little
> prank. Have you been sent a green CD, sir? We'd better send you an
> orange one to recover your system... It went on for *weeks*.
I take it this pre
>
> > As a side note, when we do get it together, would it be alright to come
> > along as an ordinary paying zoo entrant? Or does being a camelite
> > confer extraordinary priviliges within the confines of the zoo?
>
> Yes, we get to ride the camel and take it to conferences!
... m/convent
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 05:30:02PM +0100, Robert Price wrote:
>
> Maybe we should send him the London pm review copy of the new Learning Perl
> when it arrives. I'm sure he'll appreciate this goodwill jesture,
> especially if a certain few take the trouble to autograph it for him.
And our master
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 05:33:16PM +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
>
> On or about Fri, May 04, 2001 at 05:29:10PM +0100, Martin Ling typed:
>
> >And our masterful social engineering strategy for getting his address
> >is...?
>
> Tell him he's gay if he doesn&#
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 09:21:41AM +0100, Dean wrote:
>
> > I'll see what they cost. It might be prohibitively expensive to get
> > anyone who's cute.
>
> Get Willow then ;)
It's big, slippery, and is frequently sighted in rivers and IRC. And
it's comin right atcha...
Martin
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 09:25:23AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> and while i'm on a roll, how about the fact that TV license vans
> are actually mind control devices sent by the government which is
> in fact controlled by scientologists who are using the vans to
> reduce peoples IQ to the poin
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 11:32:15AM +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
>
> ObRant: computers and OSes in their current state are not consumer devices.
ObRantContinuation:
It goes a little further than that. Cars are now consumer devices; but
if you were deploying a fleet of new company vans, you wo
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 04:05:21PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
>
> The average bottom rung mechanic knows as much about cars as the average
> bottom rung tech support guy knows about computers.
Okay. I know very little of the vehicle maintenance industry, so it was
a poor choice of analogy,
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 04:22:04PM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
>
> How many things do you have on top of your monitor?
Deja vu, I had this thread elsewhere recently (although it was 'things
behind'...)
Here I have nowt, what with it being a laptop and all. At home, er...
more monitors?
http
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 05:18:14PM +0100, Lucy McWilliam wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 11 May 2001, Barbie wrote:
>
> > Currently just Tux, who thankfully doesn't get used as Nerf gun target
> > practice since leaving tw2.
>
> Heh. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~siona/captions/january.html
Sugges
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 09:20:59AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> London.pm - the Movie! What a great idea!
As I was saying to someone only yesterday, movies made by a bunch of
crazy geeks would be an absolute riot. Go for it.
Martin
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 04:08:27PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> Somehow I see b-movie horror mixed with independence day style
> computer geek saves the world.
ObRant (sigh, becoming a habit again):
'Oh, hey! Like, I saw that Antitrust movie! I remember you're one of
those Linux guys, so yo
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 04:38:08PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 04:08:27PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > Aha - some dark evil force creates a website (BIG FONTS) that attracts young
> > people from the world and has lots of flashy stuff on it (ok it would be
> > flash
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 08:01:26PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> Evil Dead - the Language of Darkness.
>
> > Or some kind of bizzaro martial arts fest pitching the Heretics
> > against the True London.pm'ers (tm)...
>
> And has someone stolen our Illustrious Leader's Secret Manual?
Y'know,
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 12:42:56AM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
>
> Totally. I mean, if they can make Antitrust.. :)
>
> :still laughs at: "I've fixed our bottleneck!" "What, you realised that you've
> been writing Java?"..
Hmm. Now, am I really sad enough to sit down and do a complete
bastardisati
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 12:37:43AM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 08:06:48PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> > > Snow Crash, essentially.
> >
> > I was thinking recently about how well it would work as a film.
>
> You're obviously not t
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 06:56:51PM +1000, Brad Bowman wrote:
>
> I was inspired by a high ranking Andersen Consulting type
> who had skate boarding stickers on his laptop.
Ah, they're cool when they have geek meaning too. I have a 'backbone'
one stuck on a router.
I've done spray jobs on laptop
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:42:00PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:35:24PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> > Do the Lib Dems think along these lines? No-one knows cos the LDs have
> > never seemed to have any policies ever.
>
> Actually, I like the idea of parties which
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:38:45PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> Democracy is overrated. I think a meritocracy is needed. Perhaps measured by
> Perl competence.
It's a fairly well-arguable stance that *any* form of meritocracy is a
reasonable system - certainly an improvement on, for example, a
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:44:07PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> > Hey, what if we had a system where we just elected a *candidate* we
> > liked, like one for each local area or something? Pretty crazy, huh?
>
> It'll never work remember the people outside the M25 get a vote as well,
> and we
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 12:00:54PM +0100, Matthew Jones wrote:
>
> What's in the box?
...
NOTHING!
STPPPIDD!
Youre so STUUUPPIID!
Martin
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:57:59AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> I appoint Greg as my Culture Adviser and as head of the church. Any
> volunteers for my other minions? Even if you don't want a cabinet
> post, please feel free to volunteer as a Henchman. You'll get 25 days
> holiday a year,
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 12:27:20PM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
>
> OoOoOoh, Red Snapper! Very tasty!
>
>
Heh. It's *so* good, and has even managed to remain obscure. This is
probably because you can't get it anywhere any more, of course...
Martin
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 12:50:27PM +0100, duncan wrote:
>
> its rumoured to be released on dvd at the end of the year. one of my
> favorite films ever... "badgers? we dont need no stinking badgers!"
*Show Me This Rumour*
I have still not seen the bits cut out of the Conan the Librarian scene
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 02:56:03PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> So how, pray, do I opt out of the international oil companies' cartel?
With a drill.
Martin
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 02:56:03PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> So how, pray, do I opt out of the international oil companies' cartel?
With a solar panel and some batteries.
Martin
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 02:56:03PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> So how, pray, do I opt out of the international oil companies' cartel?
Adapt that gas-guzzling beast of yours to run on rape seed oil.
Martin
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 01:30:42PM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
>
> That's genius! I know, I'll call it.. Charismatic Leadership Theory.
>
> Wait. Someone already did, rather a long time ago now.. :)
Don't start me on all the stating-the-obviousness in psychology.
Martin
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 05:45:05PM +0200, Philip Newton wrote:
>
> Or what happens fairly frequently over here: companies which have
> http://www.company.de/ but their email address is company@$NATIONALISP or,
> worse, company@$FREE_EMAIL_SERVICE. Looks pretty stupid to me.
There's a (now unsurp
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 05:54:26PM +0200, Niklas Nordebo wrote:
>
> Isn't that more of a Microsoft Driving License?
To be fair to it - I would have expected so, but a quick inspection
seems to show it is entirely generic. Utterly basic too, yes, but one
less class of stupid question would always
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 06:02:41PM +0200, Philip Newton wrote:
>
> > There's a (now unsurprisingly defunct) computer shop just up the road
> > from me with a www..freeserve.co.uk address - up in
> > three-inch letterrs on a huge full-length sign. Classic.
>
> :) Especially since some free servi
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 05:09:32PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> I have some obvious theories about psychology - such as why psychologists
> never get invited to parties.
You know, I think there might actually have been a study on those lines.
Some of the metapsychology stuff is great though
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 05:14:21PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> What do you mean `naked'? As in one of those freaky hairless ones? Or
> are you in the habit of dressing your cats up in little outfits? Do lots
> of people dress their cats up? Is there a GAP for cats? Complete with
> irritating
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 07:23:48PM +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 02:10:56PM -0400, Piers Cawley wrote:
> >
> > And while I'm about it, can I please kill anyone who complains that
> > our universities are 'too elitist?'. Excuse me? I thought that was the
> > whole poi
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:10:23AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> a delightfully Heath-Robinson mechanical whatsit which will clip on to
> the inside of your letter box, and will reject spam with GREAT VENGEANCE
> and FURY.
But you're missing a critical feature. If the thoughtful Spam M[oi]nge
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 11:33:07AM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:10:23AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> > we are considering funding the development of a procmail-a-like for
> > snail-mail.
>
> I want a procphone.
Now that's reasonably feasible. Tap the incoming audi
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:04:24PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
>
> Heh, don't forget to have a RBL-like list of source telephone numbers.
Definitely. A whitelist too, of course.
> And if it's withheld, answer with a terse message and disconnect.
No; many people withhold automatically, it a legi
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:22:35PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> > Definitely. A whitelist too, of course.
>
> Now *this* is why I want programmable mobile phones.
The particularly (interesting|annoying) bit is that recent phones have
hardware capabilities sufficent for a procphone - same code
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:30:59PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
>
> The particularly (interesting|annoying) bit is that recent phones have
> hardware capabilities sufficent for a procphone - same code as does the
> voice dialling.
Ho hmm... Nokia appealing to Linux coders to hel
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:38:16PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> > Now *this* is why I want programmable mobile phones.
>
> nokia 9210
Bleh, wearable and a GSM card.
Martin
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:48:26PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
>
> > No; many people withhold automatically, it a legitimate privacy concern.
>
> ??? ... its simple. If they choose to withhold their number I choose to
> reject their call.
Okay, whatever, I don't, it's an *option*.
Martin
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 02:08:31PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> But, you see, if a call ID is withheld, you can't tell whether they're
> international calls with non-working caller detect or domestic calls from
> ex-directory/paranoid numbers. So filtering on withheldness is BAD BAD BAD.
No -
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 05:43:52PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> > nokia 9210
>
> Which is still, AFAIK, unobtainium.
I know someone who knows someone who has a test model - I'll prod on
programmability.
Martin
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 11:01:11AM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
>
> find / -name "*your_base*" -exec chown us:us {} \;
If I had a penny for every variation on this sig I'd seen, I'd... er,
well, I might have a cheap Mars bar. But still.
Martin
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 02:41:06PM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
>
> > > find / -name "*your_base*" -exec chown us:us {} \;
> >
> > If I had a penny for every variation on this sig I'd seen, I'd... er,
> > well, I might have a cheap Mars bar. But still.
>
> *mumble* xargs(1) *mumble*
find / -
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 03:42:43PM -0500, will wrote:
>
> rm -f zig
>
> ?
No!
for GREAT_JUSTICE in $WAY_TO_DESTRUCTION; do mv zig $WHAT_YOU_DOING; done
Martin
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 07:36:12PM +0100, Neil Ford wrote:
>
> Just picked up the latest FHM to check out the above mentioned list...
>
> The interesting bits are as follows;
>
> At no. 11, Sarah Michelle Geller
>
> At no. 10, Alyson Hannigan!!!
>
> Nuff said :-)
Oh, you bastards. You utter,
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 09:04:15PM +0100, Neil Ford wrote:
>
> If you're getting it for the piccies, I would suggest you don't bother.
> Whilst SMG gets a full page, the picture of Miss Hannigan is small and a
> reprint of one of the ones from the photo shoot she did for FHM last year.
Give me a
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 10:47:43AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
>
> I suspect the current 'Lad's' magazines phase is a backlash against the
> crazy political correctness of the 80's .. hopefully the whole thing will
> settle down eventually. I don't particularly care that much about it. The
> wome
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 09:19:08PM -0400, David H. Adler wrote:
>
> [Cordelia]
>
> And how, exactly, is this off topic?
It's not about Willow.
Martin
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 12:49:48PM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 03:19:20PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> > 1. For some unknown reason it doesn't let you use mail filters on IMAP
> > messages, thereby rendering it completely unsuited to my needs
>
> The Mac version
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:25:36PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> Thanks, that's going in my sigfile.
Your sigfile is a mighty repository of evil.
Martin
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 11:11:23AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
>
> I *loathe* Exchange.
>
> But they fixed references in 6.0! No, wait, they just introduced a
> load of Thread-* headers :-( Fucking morons.
They just innovated threading!
Tell me you're joking.
Martin
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 02:06:13PM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
>
> > > But they fixed references in 6.0! No, wait, they just introduced a
> > > load of Thread-* headers :-( Fucking morons.
> >
> > They just innovated threading!
> >
> > Tell me you're joking.
>
> If I was joking I wouldn't hav
Ressurect the RIP flames, why not.
I doubt I need to give you any encouragement.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/vote2001/hi/english/forum/newsid_1325000/1325687.stm
Martin
--
-[ Martin J. Ling ]-[ http://www.nodezero.org.uk ]-
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 04:08:49PM +0100, will wrote:
>
> > Ressurect the RIP flames, why not.
>
> "Jack Straw will be answering your questions on 24 May, live at 1645 BST.
> Use the form below to send them so they can be logged and we will then know
> who you are and what your opinions you have
In tribute to Douglas Adams, today is Towel Day.
http://towelday.org/
Still time to pick up yours and come to drink at the Captain's Cabin
tonight:
http://greatzarquon.tripod.com/
Martin
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 11:22:43AM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
>
> > Apparently my reputation on the list as a paragon of reason and
> > eloquence isn't as widespread as I had assumed. I threw caution to the
> > wind my ommitting a "this post is ironical" smiley to the end of my
> > post. Alas
72 matches
Mail list logo
