Bits & Bobs XII

Malabelm · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 13:00

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

The E looks blue, for example.

Dodgy batch. Don't take it.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49232

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

Craster wrote:

OK. I've looked at that, and had a good zoom and things. Am I missing something fundamental, or is it not just impossible for those letters to be 3 pixels high?

It's using subpixel rendering to cram 9 pixels of information into 3 normal pixels of height.

It really isn't. I can see how in the horizontal axis they are using the colour to influence what the eye sees as bolder and weaker areas and hence affect the 'thin-ness' of those areas, but in the vertical axis it's five pixels, just as you'd expect it to be.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32619

Craster wrote:

It really isn't. I can see how in the horizontal axis they are using the colour to influence what the eye sees as bolder and weaker areas and hence affect the 'thin-ness' of those areas, but in the vertical axis it's five pixels, just as you'd expect it to be.

The subpixel rendering isn't going to work once you zoom it, mind. Unless you use a magnifying glass.

Edit -- no, wait. The x-height is the height of an X character, isn't it? Like M-dash. So if the x-height is 3px, you'd expect a capital E to have 5px. Which is what other people have been saying for several posts now. It seems a weekend of gluttony has made me dumb.

MaliA · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 13:08

Drove to park and ride.

Parked car.

Removed bike from car, cycled in.

I think I'll do this again.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49232

Doesn't matter. The subpixel rendering improves legability, it doesn't make anything smaller.

My point was that if they could get an alphabet into 3px, I'd be impressed. As it stands they can't, they can get lower case letters without woofers or tweeters into 3px, which is less impressive.

myp · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 13:10

No, YOU'RE shit.

Zardoz · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 13:12

Your monitor is shit Craster.

myp · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 13:13

It's like I'm some kind of oracle.

chinnyhill10 · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 15695

Craster wrote:

I've attached the letter 'E' from the site, zoomed (not resized). It is quite clearly 5 pixels high - so I don't understand.

Magic E!

MaliA · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 13:32

"Masterminded" is a bit strong given they all got caught and she lost the cash.

Malabelm · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 13:36

My sub woofer is making something in the room vibrate every so often, and I can't trace the culprit.

markg · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 16570

My sub woofer keeps making a loud humming when it's not meant to be making any sound at all. Also the sound drop outs from my 360 have become more frequent. I think I may need a new AV amp but they all seem to be about four fucking hundred fucking quid.

Zardoz · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 14:00

Malabar Front wrote:

My sub woofer is making something in the room vibrate every so often, and I can't trace the culprit.

Is Mrs Front around whn this happens? :hat:

Zardoz · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 14:02

markg wrote:

My sub woofer keeps making a loud humming when it's not meant to be making any sound at all. Also the sound drop outs from my 360 have become more frequent. I think I may need a new AV amp but they all seem to be about four fucking hundred fucking quid.

My sub will occasionally click/thump when the amp is on but nothing is playing from the selected source. Nothing at Richer Sounds on offer?

Bobbyaro · **Joined:** 18th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 11844

MaliA wrote:

"Masterminded" is a bit strong given they all got caught and she lost the cash.

Quote:

But one of her members of staff suspected something was wrong with the raid and called in the police.

As opposed to what, thinking it is all in a day's work and not calling the police?

Most importantly though

Quote:

The court was told the 21-year-old postmistress came up with the scam after stealing from the post office and then realising she would be exposed by a head office audit.

21???

Edit: the last paragraph! :DD

Malabelm · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 14:19

Zardoz wrote:

Malabar Front wrote:

My sub woofer is making something in the room vibrate every so often, and I can't trace the culprit.

Is Mrs Front around whn this happens? :hat:

No, but I think Myp might be hiding somewhere.

myp · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 14:39

I've just found out we're going to be supporting a new device at work soon. Where's the reverse Norman Tebbitt thread when you need it?

BikNorton · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 10089

Richer Sounds had a lovely Sony amp for £280 the other week. I was going to get one, and I think Doc did? Someone was going to, anyway.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32619

BikNorton wrote:

Richer Sounds had a lovely Sony amp for £280 the other week. I was going to get one, and I think Doc did? Someone was going to, anyway.

I was, but then I didn't, in a rare fit of fiscal responsibility.

markg · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 16570

That's still too expensive.

This gif is hypnotising me with its cuteness

BikNorton · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 10089

Why did they tickle sleeping hairy Yoda!?

sinister agent · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 7046

Mild ethical dilemma: A charity wants a discount for use of our images, on account of their being a charity, and the publication being a small print run and of rather niche appeal. But we're a charity as well. A very similar charity, in fact. We can't really afford to slash discounts off our main source of income.

Hm.

MaliA · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 15:44

sinister agent wrote:

Mild ethical dilemma: A charity wants a discount for use of our images, on account of their being a charity, and the publication being a small print run and of rather niche appeal. But we're a charity as well. A very similar charity, in fact. We can't really afford to slash discounts off our main source of income.

Hm.

Tell them "no".

sdg · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 15:45

MaliA wrote:

sinister agent wrote:

Mild ethical dilemma: A charity wants a discount for use of our images, on account of their being a charity, and the publication being a small print run and of rather niche appeal. But we're a charity as well. A very similar charity, in fact. We can't really afford to slash discounts off our main source of income.

Hm.

Tell them "no".

Have a charity dance off, with both charities nominating one person to out dance the other. Winner takes all.

myp · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 15:47

Tell them charity begins at home, while giving them a knowing nod. When they don't understand your (non-existent) connitations, smile ruefully, shake your head and show them the door.

kalmar · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 15:49

sinister agent wrote:

Mild ethical dilemma: A charity wants a discount for use of our images, on account of their being a charity, and the publication being a small print run and of rather niche appeal. But we're a charity as well. A very similar charity, in fact. We can't really afford to slash discounts off our main source of income.

Hm.

Discount in return for an advertisement for your charity in their publication?

Charities are businesses you know, not charities. Um.

itsallwater · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 15:50

markg wrote:

My sub woofer keeps making a loud humming when it's not meant to be making any sound at all. Also the sound drop outs from my 360 have become more frequent. I think I may need a new AV amp but they all seem to be about four fucking hundred fucking quid.

My one did that. I'd foolishly plugged the sub woofer into the sub woofer port. Turned out there's another port I should have used.

Zardoz · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 15:52

Tell them I can doctor the image just enough for them so you can't take them to court for half the price you're charging.

Malc · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 15:52

sinister agent wrote:

Mild ethical dilemma: A charity wants a discount for use of our images, on account of their being a charity, and the publication being a small print run and of rather niche appeal. But we're a charity as well. A very similar charity, in fact. We can't really afford to slash discounts off our main source of income.

Hm.

There is actually no cost to your charity if they use the image?

I would let them use it at a reduced cost, but then try and get something out of them too.

Malc

MaliA · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 15:53

Malc wrote:

sinister agent wrote:

Mild ethical dilemma: A charity wants a discount for use of our images, on account of their being a charity, and the publication being a small print run and of rather niche appeal. But we're a charity as well. A very similar charity, in fact. We can't really afford to slash discounts off our main source of income.

Hm.

There is actually no cost to your charity if they use the image?

I would let them use it at a reduced cost, but then try and get something out of them too.

Malc

Arsey photographers demanding to know where their royalties are, I would imagine.

sdg · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 15:56

I think I inhaled quite a lot of sulphuric acid earlier on and now I'm a wee bit slow.

sinister agent · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 7046

It's more the fact that without payments for reproduction rights, we would run out of money and have to start selling the incredibly rare and valuable books we own. And then we'd have nothing to actually do, and would have to shut down anyway. Charging for reproduction is our only real source of income.

Also mugging pensioners, but that doesn't bring in much as the admin skims so much off the top it's barely worth it.

They'll have to credit us as a source anyway - we always specify that. Advertisement wouldn't be feasible and they don't have anything we need. Apart from money. Ah, screw it. They've given me very short notice anyway; they can pay like everyone else.

sdg · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:00

I am searching for bottom carton staplers and one of the results I got was this.

Zardoz · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:01

Is that link safe?

sinister agent · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 7046

Zardoz wrote:

Tell them I can doctor the image just enough for them so you can't take them to court for half the price you're charging.

Not unless I give the image to you first, you can't. Or you could try breaking in, but good luck finding it in one of nine archives.

sdg · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:01

Yes, I am at my work!

MaliA · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:03

Point Break is available on the iPlayer...?

Bobbyaro · **Joined:** 18th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 11844

I just watched 28 weeks later. It is shit.

sinister agent · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 7046

Bobbyaro wrote:

I just watched 28 weeks later. It is shit.

Much like everything after the first hour of the first one, then?

markg · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 16570

Bobbyaro wrote:

I just watched 28 weeks later. It is shit.

No it isn't. Transformers 2 is shit, 28 Weeks Later is ok, it could have been better but at least it has its moments.

sdg · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:06

Bobbyaro wrote:

I just watched 28 weeks later. It is shit.

I said that a while ago and was disagreed with by people. I don't think it's anywhere near as good as 28 days later.

sdg · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:07

sinister agent wrote:

Bobbyaro wrote:

I just watched 28 weeks later. It is shit.

Much like everything after the first hour of the first one, then?

The first one was excellent, I liked the story. Infected are scary, but the possible human reactions are also scary.

Malc · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:10

MaliA wrote:

Point Break is available on the iPlayer...?

So are Brazil, Sweet Sixteen and The Terror!

Malc

sdg · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:12

I had my PS3 on for the first time in ages on Friday and it had an update to do. Once it had updated, the background was all sparkly. It's really pretty! I also now have the iPlayer on the homescreen and I really like it, it is very user friendly and I think it may encourage me to put Mrs PS3 on more often.

Zardoz · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:13

sinister agent wrote:

Not unless I give the image to you first, you can't. Or you could try breaking in, but good luck finding it in one of nine archives.

Is this a challenge?

Bobbyaro · **Joined:** 18th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 11844

sinister agent wrote:

Bobbyaro wrote:

I just watched 28 weeks later. It is shit.

Much like everything after the first hour of the first one, then?

I haven't seen the first one in ages, but the things which happen are just silly, make little sense at times, and generally left me thinking ?:|

and

.

Bobbyaro · **Joined:** 18th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 11844

superdupergill wrote:

I think I inhaled quite a lot of sulphuric acid earlier on and now I'm a wee bit slow.

Also, you do know that sulphuric acid is pretty nasty stuff, right? It's IDLH is only 80mg/m3, with a TWA of 1mg/m3.

Edit: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id ... 7d.84510.h

Edit edit: Seems I was wrong:

Quote:

SCOEL recommended that an 8-hour time-weighted average occupational exposure limit, set at 0.05 mg.m-3, would not lead to any adverse health effects in workers, and would not be associated with any increased risk of cancer.

In November 2001 the Health and Safety Executive published a Chemical Hazard Alert Notice for sulphuric acid mist, which recommended that employers should control mist exposure to below 0.3 mg.m-3, in line with advice from the National Sulphuric Acid Association. The 8-hour time-weighted average occupational exposure standard (OES) for sulphuric acid, formerly set at 1 mg.m-3, was withdrawn by the Health and Safety Commission in May 2003. There is currently no British occupational exposure limit.

So, am I mis reading this? They say 0.05 is "okay", then recommend 0.03, but then withdraw 0.1 and leave no limit at all?

MaliA · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:24

Bobbyaro wrote:

superdupergill wrote:

I think I inhaled quite a lot of sulphuric acid earlier on and now I'm a wee bit slow.

Also, you do know that sulphuric acid is pretty nasty stuff, right? It's IDLH is only 80mg/m3, with a TWA of 1mg/m3.

Edit: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id ... 7d.84510.h

Part of the reason I'm happy I'm not in the lab anymore is that my sense of smell has returned, and I've regained some sensation in my fingertips. Also, breathing in [HCl] does wonders for a cold.

Bobbyaro · **Joined:** 18th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 11844

See my edit above. ???

MaliA · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 16:28

THE MAN was quite pleased with my CV and also told me to edit a lot of the science shot out of it, and he was impressed with my answer to "Why did you want to change career and do law" as my answer did not include the words "hookers", "cocaine", "Porsche" or "money". He also smiled slightly when I said that, although i could spend my days arranging 400+ pages of contracts, I'd rather do something more client focussed as I'd get bored.

Be Excellent To Each Other

Bits & Bobs XII

Who is online