 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26/06/2012 11:12 AM, Warp wrote:
> Reminds me of this:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRgRaxiTBaU
Which in turn reminds me of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9O6pCYyelA
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:51:39 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>> Let’s just say they sound false to my ears, worse than canned
>>> laughter.
>>
>> It sounds pretty genuine to me.
>>
>>
> Must be a cultural and/or age thing. Falser than Audrey Hepburn’s bra.
Doesn't seem like it to me most of the time. <shrug>
>>> Damn! I missed ISIHAC. :-(
>>
>> Time to grab the ep from the BBC site. :)
>>
>>
> Get iPlayer cannot find it ATM but I have 7 days to listen.
get_iplayer worked for me. The number was 11182.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26/06/2012 6:22 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:51:39 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>> Must be a cultural and/or age thing. Falser than Audrey Hepburn’s bra.
>
> Doesn't seem like it to me most of the time.<shrug>
That is why I said it is probably a cultural and/or age thing.
It sounds so: "I have got to ooh and ah" o_O"
>
>
> get_iplayer worked for me. The number was 11182.
>
Got it now. :-D
It seems to take ages to update. :-(
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 19:24:58 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 26/06/2012 6:22 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:51:39 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>>> Must be a cultural and/or age thing. Falser than Audrey Hepburn’s bra.
>>
>> Doesn't seem like it to me most of the time.<shrug>
>
> That is why I said it is probably a cultural and/or age thing.
> It sounds so: "I have got to ooh and ah" o_O"
Thinking about it, I wonder if perhaps they loop the reactions in some
cases.
>>
>> get_iplayer worked for me. The number was 11182.
>>
>>
> Got it now. :-D It seems to take ages to update. :-(
We listened last night - Jeremy was in particularly scintillating form. :)
But we wondered where Graeme was. We were so looking forward to hearing
some Hamish & Dougal.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/25/2012 11:56 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 23:40:15 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>
>> On 6/24/2012 8:50 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> The absurdity of not having heard of Mythbusters ranks up there with
>>> someone who works in the technology business not knowing what Wired
>>> magazine is or what an RSS feed is or how it might be beneficial.
>>>
>>>
>> Don't know. Wired went a bit south for a while, and I cancelled my
>> subscription. Had I never had one, I probably would be going, "Never
>> heard of them, but have you seen the one called Make:?" Yeah, haven't
>> read Wired in years...
>
> I had a subscription that I didn't ask for for Wired, actually. I had
> subscribed to "Maximum Linux" and when the magazine was canceled, instead
> of refunding the undelivered portion of the subscription or providing the
> inconvenienced subscribers with a choice, they just automatically decided
> that filling with any subscription would be fine, so why not Wired?
>
> It was OK. Not great, but it was OK.
>
> Jim
It was actually pretty good, for the first year or so. Tended to be
edgy, didn't necessarily pull punches. Tried to actually tell you what
the next up an coming tech was. Had articles by actually interesting
people. Then... it started to become more and more like a version of PC
Magazine, with slightly better paper. I.e., all corporatized, shallow,
low information, talking about the latest thing from their advertisers,
etc. The shift really pissed a lot of people off, but, sort of like half
the "science" channels on TV today, when the morons outnumber the smart
people 10:1, you can afford to lose 50% of the people that actually care
if the information is at all useful, or interesting, or even
not-gibberish, while gaining 4-5 from the clueless masses, in the
process of dumbing it all down.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I managed to find the time to listen to it tonight.
On 26/06/2012 7:44 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> We listened last night - Jeremy was in particularly scintillating form.:)
>
That was Jeremy? I thought it was Bob Dillon. ;-)
I really liked Uptown Top Ranking to the tune of Scotland the brave. :-)
> But we wondered where Graeme was. We were so looking forward to hearing
> some Hamish& Dougal.
He'll be having his tea.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 22:03:26 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 26/06/2012 7:44 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> We listened last night - Jeremy was in particularly scintillating
>> form.:)
>>
>>
> That was Jeremy? I thought it was Bob Dillon. ;-)
LOL
> I really liked Uptown Top Ranking to the tune of Scotland the brave. :-)
Yes, that was a good one. :)
>> But we wondered where Graeme was. We were so looking forward to
>> hearing some Hamish& Dougal.
>
> He'll be having his tea
LOL - that's a good one. I take it you've heard the Hamish & Dougal
series?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29/06/2012 11:25 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> LOL - that's a good one. I take it you've heard the Hamish& Dougal
> series?
Yes, I have recordings. :-D
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 08:48:04 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 29/06/2012 11:25 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> LOL - that's a good one. I take it you've heard the Hamish& Dougal
>> series?
>
> Yes, I have recordings. :-D
Somehow I'm not surprised. :)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 30/06/2012 8:08 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 08:48:04 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I have recordings. :-D
>
> Somehow I'm not surprised. :)
Think of Mrs Naughtie performing her Dance of the Seven Voles. :-D
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
