The more they overthink the plumbing,
the easier it is to stop up the drain.
9611 publicly visible posts • joined 11 Sep 2009
How do I know that I'm thinking? Or even that this is itself a thought?
How do I know that what I hear in my mind is me thinking?
How do I even know that that is a question?
And who asked it?
Perhaps I only think I'm being asked questions... when the men in my mind come and I think they're asking me questions, what do you hear in your mind, puss? Do you hear them asking me questions?
Perhaps you think they're just singing to you, and that I'm only interpreting their singing as them asking me questions?
Perhaps they are just singing to you and I only think that I'm hearing them ask me questions?
Though it seems to me to be very strange behaviour to come all that way just for the privilege of bringing me whisky and singing to my cat.
Or at least it appears to me to be strange behaviour.
Or at least I *think* it appears to be strange to me...
Can you prove to me that you know what feelings are and that you have them?
As far as I can tell the only way that you can prove that you have feelings is to find a common frame of reference rooted in the nature of a common biology.
Except... does it prove that I love you (and feel love) if I sacrifice my life to save yours (and it isn't a case of either "the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the few or the one" or genetic altruism)?
I had an argument with an audiophile once about my use of a graphic equaliser. They said that it was altering the original intention of the person who mixed it. I said that the person who mixed it wasn't listening to it whilst sat in my front room with all the acoustic vagaries of that environment.
Better or different? You have to qualify that.
I have Bat Out Of Hell in four different formats:
Vinyl, AAC, CD and tape. All bought at different times, for different reasons.
Tape was first, as I wanted it for my Walkman. Then vinyl because I wanted to hear it better than the old portable could manage. CD was for when I was at university and didn't want to cart fragile vinyl around. Finally, as a comparison, I bought it on iTunes.
And I prefer the vinyl copy. It's got the odd pop and it means you have to get up to flip sides, but it just sounds like it was intended to. The AAC version is too clean, the bass is not as organic or warm. The CD version has a bit of quantisation error in the upper frequencies, which is why I guess they remastered it for iTunes a few years ago. The cassette version, I can't really check as my tape deck needs a good servicing and I can't be arsed lugging it into London to put it on the scope - besides it's hard to get the right calibration tapes nowadays.
Sharepoint *is* a fileserver. In the same way that Word is word processor. Microsoft cannot help themselves when it comes to feature bloat. Sharepoint does serve files, but it does so through a web browser and can squeeze those files through a whole raft of different meat grinders. What's worse, the way it serves those files is itself based on files. So you can use it to create webpages, list files, show images, graphs, meta graphs, share files... it's a Swiss Army knife of a collection of applications that have functions that overlap with each other and with other applications.
The five-day course will be a basic introduction.
They're not meant for posters or drawing illustrations either, but some people use them for it all the same!
If a word processor is not meant for large book, what good IS it? OK, most page layout software will have the ability to or a plug-in for chapterising, indexing, referencing across chapters, numbering of figures, tables of illustrations, appendices etc. but who can afford £400 for Quark Xpress now? Or £800 for one of the really decent plug-ins? The point is that Word *used* to be able to do all of this quite happily. OK, Word didn't do imposition, and it makes a royal fuck up of images, text flow, hyphenation etc, BUT it does reduce the amount of interfacing required between an author and a publisher for things like indexing and bibliography. I don't know who on here would even realise that there is a specific job for people who go through a text building up an index of significant words, terms, sub terms etc. OK, everyone on here probably knows it happens, because they'll all have read text books. If they stop for a second to think about HOW their text books at uni had a bit at the back that said "Operating Systems" with a sub list of subjects like Apple Macintosh, Microsoft / Windows, DOS, Unix & derivatives, DEOS, DEC, Chromium etc and all the page numbers on. Someone has to draw up a list of terms, tag them, understand their context and use, understand what people may be using the text for etc.
I've lost my thread of thought...
Anyway, yes, there needs to be someone to do it, and it seems a shame that Word has now lost the ability to do things like this in any sensible or efficient fashion.
Which is what I just said. The size of the space is proportional to the requirement. OK, depending on what's available the typesetter may use more than one slug, BUT conceptually and even physically, it's ONE SPACE of variable size. Just the same as a paragraph mark should be one paragraph mark, not a sequence of three in order to get a double spaced blank line.
Which is precisely the point. In the days of typesetting by hand there was only one space after all punctuation. It's just that the one space was of variable size. Typewriters minimised the numbers of keys due to the complexity of mechanical linkages, hence l for 1 and O for 0 etc. Very few had multiple space bars - usually only the typewriters derived from keyboard typesetters. The double space thing was a kludge that produced the same appearance as a typeset document.
Word now flags period-double space as an error.
Researchers found that period-double space speeds up reading, but they used a fixed width typeface for their study - it turns out that if you use a proportional typeface the reading speed remains the same.
When they submitted their paper to the journal, however, they did so with period-double spacing and the sub-eds changed them all to single spaces.
Other researchers in the past have found it makes reading faster, slower and makes no difference.
One of the last hold outs for that style, the APA, has recently updated its style guidelines to single space.
Oh my god. The options for doing that kind of thing in Word have just evaporated into thin air nowadays. It used to be the way that you would write a long book... they taught that. Break it up into Chapters, create a master document to manage the style sheets, link the individual chapter documents through the master so that page numbering, indexing, contents, references etc could be handled. I presume it was something to do with fitting the files onto floppies or providing some kind of safety against file corruption taking out a 40 chapter book.
Anyway, nowadays they'd teach you to do the whole thing in one document I expect, because I could find NONE of those options in the most recent versions of Word.
I had one of those fancy schmancy jobs. It would stop clicking the daisy wheel once you reached about 75% of the way across the page, then as you reached just beyond the right margin of the page it would work out where the spaces were and fill the words in going backwards along the line before moving the paper up and putting the remainder on the next line.
It could also do fully, centre and right justified the same way but it would hold a whole line and for fully justified it would adjust the inter-character spacing too.
I'm always perplexed by the amount of time and effort people put into documents when they don't use the full power of a word processor. I mean, even Word. AND I've even seen lecturers teaching this incorrectly. Things like not using the Paragraph formatting tools to keep a heading with the next paragraph and relying on carriage returns to adjust the pagination. They change a sentence around near the front of the document and spend the next half hour going through correcting the pagination by adding and deleting carriage returns, which they can't see because they type with non-printing characters set to invisible.
And then doing things like adjusting the number of pages to bring it into a page count limit by shrinking the typeface one paragraph at a time instead of using styles.
And using commas instead of full-stops.
It makes me want to weep - really, it does.
I used to do Quark as well... transferring a word document into a page layout programme and imposing it for plate-making... there are automated plug-ins for importing, but there's a limit to how much Word dross they can tolerate.
Health and mental well-being are seeing a resurgence as corporate cap feathers. But benefits are of course strictly for current employees I expect. No doubt someone trendy gave a good economic case for looking after the people who actively contribute to your revenue stream's viability.