On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 11:05:38 -0500 Chris Huff <chr### [at] maccom> wrote:

>Still, it is newer than my (incomplete) set of Encyclopedia Britannica, 
>which is from 1959.

  Try to hold on to that Britannica set. It will be quite a novelty
someday, when people will marvel at an encyclopedia that isn't on some
sort of magnetic or optical storage medium <s>. It's more interesting to
see what *isn't* contained within the text, as technology has yielded a
heckuva lot of changes since 1959.

-- 
Alan - ako### [at] povrayorg - a k o n g <at> p o v r a y <dot> o r g
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer

Post a reply to this message