On 12 Feb 2023 at 1:43:57 PM EET, "Tweed" <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

> Clank <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On 12 Feb 2023 at 1:01:58 PM EET, "MB" <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>>
>>>
>>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>>> so what is gained?
>>
>> Only if all the trains get flummoxed simultaneously. Otherwise you only need
>> enough drivers back at base to cover for the maximum number of simultaneously
>> flummoxed trains one might reasonably expect.
>>
>> Actually, I just like to say flummoxed.
>>
>> <https://imgur.com/G4IFJq6>
>>
>
> Meta and co might have to un bet the farm on this VR lark. My son, who
> works for a major US industry in the UK went on a company sponsored trial
> of this stuff, free top of the range headset etc. After two sessions they
> all decided to give up on it and the headset lies gathering dust. This is a
> company whose staff heavily use Teams and are very familiar with remote
> meetings across the globe. Other than niche use, I don’t think it answers
> any needs of business.

I tend to agree. I've had a VR headset for a bit more than 5 years, and fun as
it is, it's not much more than a novelty. A few of my team tried using them to
have VR meetings during the first round of Covid lockdowns as well, and
entertaining though it was it added absolutely nothing to productivity (and
subtracted quite a lot). AR I can see some legitimate uses for, mind.

It would be a mistake to conflate VR with remote-piloting of a train though.
There's no need for VR for that.

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 16:45:45 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 08/02/2023 16:21, MB wrote:
>>>>>>> On 02/02/2023 12:06, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>> And then a Shetlandic speaker threw a spanner in the works.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have mentioned before, some friends' children would something go into
>>>>>>> really thick Buchan if they wanted to annoy you!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Years ago I worked around Aberdeen several times and people would often
>>>>>>> ask if I could understand the but I never had any problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Round here children talk in Welsh when they don't want adults to know
>>>>>> what they're talking about.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That doesn't necessarily work so well in North and Mid Wales as it does in
>>>>> South Wales ;)
>>>>
>>>> West Wales, really - anywhere west of Gorseinon, said my friend from
>>>> Gorseinon.
>>>
>>> Looking back that was a really unintelligible comment. I meant it wouldn’t
>>> work in West Wales either.
>>>
>>
>> Last year I stayed in Tenby with friends - very English-speaking. But one
>> day we drove 36 miles to the National Wool Museum
>> <https://maps.app.goo.gl/woJU9mdiGZgJ6SFY6>, and the ladies working in the
>> cafe were speaking Welsh to each other.
>
>Yes - south of the Haven is Little England Beyond Wales. My grandfather
>was from Pembroke Dock and I remember his sister-in-law, who lived in
>Tenby, being amused that they’d had to invent a Welsh name for the town
>just to put on the road signs.
>
"Dinbych" has been around for centuries. If you are referring to
"y-pysgod" then that is just one of many suffixes added to placenames
across the UK in relatively recent history to differentiate similarly
named places (e.g. Southend on Sea versus Southend, Grantown on Spey
versus Granton, Barrow on Soar versus Barrow in Furness etc.).

>> When I wrote my post, I was thinking more about Llandudno and the
>> surrounding area, where I grew up. My parents spoke no Welsh, but I learned
>> it in school; my sister and her husband both can speak Welsh but it's not
>> the language of the household. My niece is learning Welsh at school. I dare
>> say that their household isn't unusual - anyone of a certain age who went
>> to school in the area will have learned Welsh.
>
>We lived in Cardiff for a number of years and most of the Welsh speakers we
>came across were from north west Wales, yr Wyddfa and Ynys Môn, or from
>west Wales, or they were adults who had to learn it for jobs in media or
>government. School children learned it like I learned French.
>
>Sam

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 16:29:02 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 10/02/2023 17:07, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> There’s a whole complex up there: Coulport, Faslane, Glen Douglas, Loch
>>> Striven. It’s a sort-of shame that the Scottish Government is so
>>> definitively anti-nuclear - we could make a good living from leasing those
>>> bases back to rUK.
>>
>>
>> Yes, that is a very large number of jobs that would be lost.
>>
>> I doubt that the UK government would want to lease them from a hostile
>> Scottish regime.
>
>Why would the Scottish regime (now there’s an interesting choice of word)
>be hostile? It’s largely the UK government who’s hostile to an amicable
>separation.
>
As with Ireland and elsewhere, any hostilities tend to settle down to
business as usual after a relatively short period.

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 10:08:45 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 12/02/2023 09:46, Recliner wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <ts8n8e$1fuge$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:37:02 on Sat, 11 Feb
>>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ts571q$114o1$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:42:02 on Fri, 10 Feb
>>>>>> 2023, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 06:10:05 +0000
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <ts387r$no0j$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:50:04 on Thu, 9 Feb
>>>>>>>> 2023, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Oh come come. Did the CPC have an composite out, RS423, analogue
>>>>>>>>> input port, and optional econet port? Plus the BBC had proper
>>>>>>>>> ports for the printer and floppy disk, not just el-cheapo Sinclair
>>>>>>>>> style motherboard output tracks which were just asking to be shorted out.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Econet was a flop, as even their fanzine sites admit; and while it had a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Probably ahead of its time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diversity of built-in ports the question was: did they give value for
>>>>>>>> money if shipped to everyone whether they needed them or not? How many
>>>>>>>> home users actually required things like an analogue input.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How many home Amstrad users really needed a monitor when they probably had a
>>>>>>> perfectly good TV they could have used?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The child didn't, only the family had one (in the living room). It was
>>>>>> avoiding the need to crawl around to connect that up, then monopolise,
>>>>>> which was one of the main the attractions of the CPC concept.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And if the monitor died they were a bit stuffed using a non amstrad
>>>>>>> replacement due to the built in RGB connector cable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The RGB connector was cunningly designed to be <<drum roll>> compatible
>>>>>> with the BBC micro. So whatever BBC micro users would have (and often
>>>>>> they cost more than a whole CPC) would be fine. On the other hand, the
>>>>>> failure of the monitor was very unusual. Like the 14" colour TV it was
>>>>>> based on, they tended to last for years.
>>>>>
>>>>> And being based on a colour TV they would have been relatively low quality,
>>>>> both in the tube and dot pitch and in the driving electronics which likely
>>>>> had a sharp low pass filter at around 5 MHz. That made high contrast
>>>>> pixel-based images such as text not as sharp as they might have been.
>>>>
>>>> If you wanted sharper, then buy a "professional" monitor. Only £200
>>>> perhaps (£600 in today's money). In any event a dedicated RGB monitor
>>>> is always going to be sharper than the same size TV driven via a UHF
>>>> modulator.
>>>>
>>>>> I remember hitting this issue when looking at processing ultrasound
>>>>> images at around the time the BBC came out, and looking for suitable
>>>>> monitors for both text and image work: “Oh, look, the popularity of
>>>>> home computers means there are cheap monitors!” “Oh, they’re
>>>>> cheap because they’re based on colour TV tubes…”
>>>>
>>>> At home I had an extremely expensive Sony "separates" TV system (27"
>>>> Profeel). The tuner and Teletext decoder were in set-top boxes and the
>>>> idea was you could upgrade just those, if some new features became
>>>> popular.
>>>
>>> Snap! I bought one of those, too.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately they never did produce v2 of those set-top boxes. If
>>>> they'd had a picture-in-picture one, I would probably have bought it.
>>>
>>> Yes, I too was disappointed that they never followed up with upgraded
>>> components.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> However, the monitor lasted about 20yrs (with 3rd party SCART set-top
>>>> boxes), and I only got rid of it because it was a bit big and heavy by
>>>> modern standards.
>>>
>>> Mine failed on me disappointingly quickly, so I replaced it with a 29"
>>> Toshiba conventional telly, which worked perfectly till I replaced it with
>>> a 46" flat screen Samsung with 3D features. Like most people, I didn't take
>>> to 3D TV, and hated the powered, paired glasses you had to wear. I soon
>>> abandoned that feature, and, in any case, 3D TV wasn't broadcast for long
>>> in the UK.
>>>
>>
>> 3D goes in roughly 30 year cycles,[1] so expect it to come back into
>> fashion in about 20 years or so.
>>
>> [1] 30 years is about the time for a new generation of whizz-kids to
>> forget how crap it was and decide it is the next must-have. This has
>> been going on since the 19th century.
>
>Like wars, then.
>
They go on all the time.

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 11:30:35 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>
>>
>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>> so what is gained?
>>
>
>No, as I said, the remote drivers would only be needed if the automatic
>vehicle's computers get flummoxed. So, most of the time, the vehicles would
>go about their business automatically, without a dedicated VR driver at
>base. A small number of remote drivers would provide assistance to a large
>fleet.
>
How does a remote driver examine the train?

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 16:53:13 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 09:46:11 -0000 (UTC)
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> At home I had an extremely expensive Sony "separates" TV system (27"
>>>> Profeel). The tuner and Teletext decoder were in set-top boxes and the
>>>> idea was you could upgrade just those, if some new features became
>>>> popular.
>>>
>>> Snap! I bought one of those, too.
>>
>> Sounds about as sensible as seperate CD transports for the audiophool
>> market - paying over the odds for a drive in an otherwise empty box.
>
>A proper audiophile had:
> - a single speed, manual turntable with arm and stylus cartridge made by
>other specialist manufacturers

Diamond tipped.

> - a tuner
> - a pre-amp
> - a power amp

One costs at least 5 figures and has 1 or more oversized valves sticking
out the top that probably make it sound worse that if it was just solid
state.

> - speakers, possibly with separate sub-woofers
> - maybe a CD drive
> - perhaps some sort of tape or cassette drive
>
>These would be from several different manufacturers.

That normal people have never heard of. These guys wouldn't be seen
dead with Technics or even Nakamichi gear.

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 16:56:21 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> These would be from several different manufacturers.
>
>Oh, and I forgot the very thick gold connection leads.

One exception to that I'd make is HDMI cables. Its such a poorly designed
spec with limited tolerances that a cheap cable really can make the
difference between a picture or intermittent/no picture.

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 17:48:38 +0000
Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On 12/02/2023 15:56, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 09:56:13 +0000
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 12/02/2023 09:46, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Mine failed on me disappointingly quickly, so I replaced it with a 29"
>>>> Toshiba conventional telly, which worked perfectly till I replaced it with
>>>> a 46" flat screen Samsung with 3D features. Like most people, I didn't take
>
>>>> to 3D TV, and hated the powered, paired glasses you had to wear. I soon
>>>> abandoned that feature, and, in any case, 3D TV wasn't broadcast for long
>>>> in the UK.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 3D goes in roughly 30 year cycles,[1] so expect it to come back into
>>> fashion in about 20 years or so.
>>>
>>> [1] 30 years is about the time for a new generation of whizz-kids to
>>> forget how crap it was and decide it is the next must-have. This has
>>> been going on since the 19th century.
>>
>> Its technically possible now to do "proper" glasses free 3D right now by
>having
>> a spinning rotor inside a box with laser projection onto it. It seemed to
>> be around 5 years ago or so but I guess the noise was irritating.
>
>Definition was atrocious and they were very expensive.

So was TV in the 1930s. But I suspect as a partially mechanical device
it was a non starter anyway in the 21st century.

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 10:08:45 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 12/02/2023 09:46, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ts8n8e$1fuge$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:37:02 on Sat, 11 Feb
>>>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ts571q$114o1$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:42:02 on Fri, 10 Feb
>>>>>>> 2023, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 06:10:05 +0000
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <ts387r$no0j$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:50:04 on Thu, 9 Feb
>>>>>>>>> 2023, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Oh come come. Did the CPC have an composite out, RS423, analogue
>>>>>>>>>> input port, and optional econet port? Plus the BBC had proper
>>>>>>>>>> ports for the printer and floppy disk, not just el-cheapo Sinclair
>>>>>>>>>> style motherboard output tracks which were just asking to be shorted out.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Econet was a flop, as even their fanzine sites admit; and while it had a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Probably ahead of its time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> diversity of built-in ports the question was: did they give value for
>>>>>>>>> money if shipped to everyone whether they needed them or not? How many
>>>>>>>>> home users actually required things like an analogue input.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How many home Amstrad users really needed a monitor when they probably had a
>>>>>>>> perfectly good TV they could have used?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The child didn't, only the family had one (in the living room). It was
>>>>>>> avoiding the need to crawl around to connect that up, then monopolise,
>>>>>>> which was one of the main the attractions of the CPC concept.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And if the monitor died they were a bit stuffed using a non amstrad
>>>>>>>> replacement due to the built in RGB connector cable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The RGB connector was cunningly designed to be <<drum roll>> compatible
>>>>>>> with the BBC micro. So whatever BBC micro users would have (and often
>>>>>>> they cost more than a whole CPC) would be fine. On the other hand, the
>>>>>>> failure of the monitor was very unusual. Like the 14" colour TV it was
>>>>>>> based on, they tended to last for years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And being based on a colour TV they would have been relatively low quality,
>>>>>> both in the tube and dot pitch and in the driving electronics which likely
>>>>>> had a sharp low pass filter at around 5 MHz. That made high contrast
>>>>>> pixel-based images such as text not as sharp as they might have been.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you wanted sharper, then buy a "professional" monitor. Only £200
>>>>> perhaps (£600 in today's money). In any event a dedicated RGB monitor
>>>>> is always going to be sharper than the same size TV driven via a UHF
>>>>> modulator.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I remember hitting this issue when looking at processing ultrasound
>>>>>> images at around the time the BBC came out, and looking for suitable
>>>>>> monitors for both text and image work: “Oh, look, the popularity of
>>>>>> home computers means there are cheap monitors!” “Oh, they’re
>>>>>> cheap because they’re based on colour TV tubes…”
>>>>>
>>>>> At home I had an extremely expensive Sony "separates" TV system (27"
>>>>> Profeel). The tuner and Teletext decoder were in set-top boxes and the
>>>>> idea was you could upgrade just those, if some new features became
>>>>> popular.
>>>>
>>>> Snap! I bought one of those, too.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately they never did produce v2 of those set-top boxes. If
>>>>> they'd had a picture-in-picture one, I would probably have bought it.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I too was disappointed that they never followed up with upgraded
>>>> components.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> However, the monitor lasted about 20yrs (with 3rd party SCART set-top
>>>>> boxes), and I only got rid of it because it was a bit big and heavy by
>>>>> modern standards.
>>>>
>>>> Mine failed on me disappointingly quickly, so I replaced it with a 29"
>>>> Toshiba conventional telly, which worked perfectly till I replaced it with
>>>> a 46" flat screen Samsung with 3D features. Like most people, I didn't take
>>>> to 3D TV, and hated the powered, paired glasses you had to wear. I soon
>>>> abandoned that feature, and, in any case, 3D TV wasn't broadcast for long
>>>> in the UK.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 3D goes in roughly 30 year cycles,[1] so expect it to come back into
>>> fashion in about 20 years or so.
>>>
>>> [1] 30 years is about the time for a new generation of whizz-kids to
>>> forget how crap it was and decide it is the next must-have. This has
>>> been going on since the 19th century.
>>
>> Like wars, then.
>>
> They go on all the time.

But not everywhere all at once.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 11:30:35 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>>
>>>
>>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>>> so what is gained?
>>>
>>
>> No, as I said, the remote drivers would only be needed if the automatic
>> vehicle's computers get flummoxed. So, most of the time, the vehicles would
>> go about their business automatically, without a dedicated VR driver at
>> base. A small number of remote drivers would provide assistance to a large
>> fleet.
>>
> How does a remote driver examine the train?

Remotely. You’d have to design it with suitable diagnostics and
monitoring.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:05:45 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 10:08:45 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
>> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 12/02/2023 09:46, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ts8n8e$1fuge$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:37:02 on Sat, 11 Feb
>>>>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <ts571q$114o1$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:42:02 on Fri, 10 Feb
>>>>>>>> 2023, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 06:10:05 +0000
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <ts387r$no0j$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:50:04 on Thu, 9 Feb
>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Oh come come. Did the CPC have an composite out, RS423, analogue
>>>>>>>>>>> input port, and optional econet port? Plus the BBC had proper
>>>>>>>>>>> ports for the printer and floppy disk, not just el-cheapo Sinclair
>>>>>>>>>>> style motherboard output tracks which were just asking to be shorted out.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Econet was a flop, as even their fanzine sites admit; and while it had a
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Probably ahead of its time.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> diversity of built-in ports the question was: did they give value for
>>>>>>>>>> money if shipped to everyone whether they needed them or not? How many
>>>>>>>>>> home users actually required things like an analogue input.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How many home Amstrad users really needed a monitor when they probably had a
>>>>>>>>> perfectly good TV they could have used?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The child didn't, only the family had one (in the living room). It was
>>>>>>>> avoiding the need to crawl around to connect that up, then monopolise,
>>>>>>>> which was one of the main the attractions of the CPC concept.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And if the monitor died they were a bit stuffed using a non amstrad
>>>>>>>>> replacement due to the built in RGB connector cable.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The RGB connector was cunningly designed to be <<drum roll>> compatible
>>>>>>>> with the BBC micro. So whatever BBC micro users would have (and often
>>>>>>>> they cost more than a whole CPC) would be fine. On the other hand, the
>>>>>>>> failure of the monitor was very unusual. Like the 14" colour TV it was
>>>>>>>> based on, they tended to last for years.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And being based on a colour TV they would have been relatively low quality,
>>>>>>> both in the tube and dot pitch and in the driving electronics which likely
>>>>>>> had a sharp low pass filter at around 5 MHz. That made high contrast
>>>>>>> pixel-based images such as text not as sharp as they might have been.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you wanted sharper, then buy a "professional" monitor. Only £200
>>>>>> perhaps (£600 in today's money). In any event a dedicated RGB monitor
>>>>>> is always going to be sharper than the same size TV driven via a UHF
>>>>>> modulator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I remember hitting this issue when looking at processing ultrasound
>>>>>>> images at around the time the BBC came out, and looking for suitable
>>>>>>> monitors for both text and image work: ?Oh, look, the popularity of
>>>>>>> home computers means there are cheap monitors!? ?Oh, they?re
>>>>>>> cheap because they?re based on colour TV tubes??
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At home I had an extremely expensive Sony "separates" TV system (27"
>>>>>> Profeel). The tuner and Teletext decoder were in set-top boxes and the
>>>>>> idea was you could upgrade just those, if some new features became
>>>>>> popular.
>>>>>
>>>>> Snap! I bought one of those, too.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately they never did produce v2 of those set-top boxes. If
>>>>>> they'd had a picture-in-picture one, I would probably have bought it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I too was disappointed that they never followed up with upgraded
>>>>> components.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, the monitor lasted about 20yrs (with 3rd party SCART set-top
>>>>>> boxes), and I only got rid of it because it was a bit big and heavy by
>>>>>> modern standards.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mine failed on me disappointingly quickly, so I replaced it with a 29"
>>>>> Toshiba conventional telly, which worked perfectly till I replaced it with
>>>>> a 46" flat screen Samsung with 3D features. Like most people, I didn't take
>>>>> to 3D TV, and hated the powered, paired glasses you had to wear. I soon
>>>>> abandoned that feature, and, in any case, 3D TV wasn't broadcast for long
>>>>> in the UK.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3D goes in roughly 30 year cycles,[1] so expect it to come back into
>>>> fashion in about 20 years or so.
>>>>
>>>> [1] 30 years is about the time for a new generation of whizz-kids to
>>>> forget how crap it was and decide it is the next must-have. This has
>>>> been going on since the 19th century.
>>>
>>> Like wars, then.
>>>
>> They go on all the time.
>
>But not everywhere all at once.
>
The last couple of Big Mistakes actually had a significant degree of
non-participation.

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:05:46 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 11:30:35 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>>>> so what is gained?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, as I said, the remote drivers would only be needed if the automatic
>>> vehicle's computers get flummoxed. So, most of the time, the vehicles would
>>> go about their business automatically, without a dedicated VR driver at
>>> base. A small number of remote drivers would provide assistance to a large
>>> fleet.
>>>
>> How does a remote driver examine the train?
>
>Remotely. You’d have to design it with suitable diagnostics and
>monitoring.
>
That might involve a great number of different detectors to substitute
for using a Mk1 human.

On 12/02/2023 19:48, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 17:48:38 +0000
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 12/02/2023 15:56, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 09:56:13 +0000
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 12/02/2023 09:46, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Mine failed on me disappointingly quickly, so I replaced it with a 29"
>>>>> Toshiba conventional telly, which worked perfectly till I replaced it with
>>>>> a 46" flat screen Samsung with 3D features. Like most people, I didn't take
>>
>>>>> to 3D TV, and hated the powered, paired glasses you had to wear. I soon
>>>>> abandoned that feature, and, in any case, 3D TV wasn't broadcast for long
>>>>> in the UK.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3D goes in roughly 30 year cycles,[1] so expect it to come back into
>>>> fashion in about 20 years or so.
>>>>
>>>> [1] 30 years is about the time for a new generation of whizz-kids to
>>>> forget how crap it was and decide it is the next must-have. This has
>>>> been going on since the 19th century.
>>>
>>> Its technically possible now to do "proper" glasses free 3D right now by
>> having
>>> a spinning rotor inside a box with laser projection onto it. It seemed to
>>> be around 5 years ago or so but I guess the noise was irritating.
>>
>> Definition was atrocious and they were very expensive.
>
> So was TV in the 1930s. But I suspect as a partially mechanical device
> it was a non starter anyway in the 21st century.
>

My one claim to fame is I am probably the last working (occasionally)
cameraman to have operated a Baird mechanical camera in anger!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 12/02/2023 20:29, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:05:46 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 11:30:35 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>>>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>>>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>>>>> so what is gained?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, as I said, the remote drivers would only be needed if the automatic
>>>> vehicle's computers get flummoxed. So, most of the time, the vehicles would
>>>> go about their business automatically, without a dedicated VR driver at
>>>> base. A small number of remote drivers would provide assistance to a large
>>>> fleet.
>>>>
>>> How does a remote driver examine the train?
>>
>> Remotely. You’d have to design it with suitable diagnostics and
>> monitoring.
>>
> That might involve a great number of different detectors to substitute
> for using a Mk1 human.

They do it with spaceships and F1 racing cars.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:42:00 +0000
Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On 12/02/2023 19:48, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> So was TV in the 1930s. But I suspect as a partially mechanical device
>> it was a non starter anyway in the 21st century.
>>
>
>My one claim to fame is I am probably the last working (occasionally)
>cameraman to have operated a Baird mechanical camera in anger!

Do you have your portrait on the wall at home that is slowly aging by
any chance?

On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:43:38 +0000, Graeme Wall
<rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 12/02/2023 20:29, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:05:46 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
>> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 11:30:35 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>>>>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>>>>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>>>>>> so what is gained?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, as I said, the remote drivers would only be needed if the automatic
>>>>> vehicle's computers get flummoxed. So, most of the time, the vehicles would
>>>>> go about their business automatically, without a dedicated VR driver at
>>>>> base. A small number of remote drivers would provide assistance to a large
>>>>> fleet.
>>>>>
>>>> How does a remote driver examine the train?
>>>
>>> Remotely. You’d have to design it with suitable diagnostics and
>>> monitoring.
>>>
>> That might involve a great number of different detectors to substitute
>> for using a Mk1 human.
>
>They do it with spaceships and F1 racing cars.
>
And still end up needing the Mk1 eyeball, even in space.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 12/02/2023 20:29, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:05:46 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
>> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 11:30:35 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>>>>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>>>>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>>>>>> so what is gained?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, as I said, the remote drivers would only be needed if the automatic
>>>>> vehicle's computers get flummoxed. So, most of the time, the vehicles would
>>>>> go about their business automatically, without a dedicated VR driver at
>>>>> base. A small number of remote drivers would provide assistance to a large
>>>>> fleet.
>>>>>
>>>> How does a remote driver examine the train?
>>>
>>> Remotely. You’d have to design it with suitable diagnostics and
>>> monitoring.
>>>
>> That might involve a great number of different detectors to substitute
>> for using a Mk1 human.
>
> They do it with spaceships and F1 racing cars.
>

It’s what you do about a detected failure though. An F1 car at worst can be
pushed to the side. Spacecraft have redundant systems and *huge* amounts
are spent on high reliability components and pre launch qualification and
testing. You could design a train to those standards but it would cost a
couple of orders of magnitude more.

Clank <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 12 Feb 2023 at 1:43:57 PM EET, "Tweed" <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Clank <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> On 12 Feb 2023 at 1:01:58 PM EET, "MB" <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>>>> so what is gained?
>>>
>>> Only if all the trains get flummoxed simultaneously. Otherwise you only need
>>> enough drivers back at base to cover for the maximum number of simultaneously
>>> flummoxed trains one might reasonably expect.
>>>
>>> Actually, I just like to say flummoxed.
>>>
>>> <https://imgur.com/G4IFJq6>
>>>
>>
>> Meta and co might have to un bet the farm on this VR lark. My son, who
>> works for a major US industry in the UK went on a company sponsored trial
>> of this stuff, free top of the range headset etc. After two sessions they
>> all decided to give up on it and the headset lies gathering dust. This is a
>> company whose staff heavily use Teams and are very familiar with remote
>> meetings across the globe. Other than niche use, I don’t think it answers
>> any needs of business.
>
> I tend to agree. I've had a VR headset for a bit more than 5 years, and fun as
> it is, it's not much more than a novelty. A few of my team tried using them to
> have VR meetings during the first round of Covid lockdowns as well, and
> entertaining though it was it added absolutely nothing to productivity (and
> subtracted quite a lot). AR I can see some legitimate uses for, mind.
>
> It would be a mistake to conflate VR with remote-piloting of a train though.
> There's no need for VR for that.

True, but there might be for confused automated road vehicles.

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:05:46 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 11:30:35 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>>>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>>>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>>>>> so what is gained?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, as I said, the remote drivers would only be needed if the automatic
>>>> vehicle's computers get flummoxed. So, most of the time, the vehicles would
>>>> go about their business automatically, without a dedicated VR driver at
>>>> base. A small number of remote drivers would provide assistance to a large
>>>> fleet.
>>>>
>>> How does a remote driver examine the train?
>>
>> Remotely. You’d have to design it with suitable diagnostics and
>> monitoring.
>>
> That might involve a great number of different detectors to substitute
> for using a Mk1 human.
>

Those sensors are probably fitted anyway to automated vehicles.

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 12/02/2023 20:29, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:05:46 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
>>> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 11:30:35 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>>>>>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>>>>>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>>>>>>> so what is gained?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, as I said, the remote drivers would only be needed if the automatic
>>>>>> vehicle's computers get flummoxed. So, most of the time, the vehicles would
>>>>>> go about their business automatically, without a dedicated VR driver at
>>>>>> base. A small number of remote drivers would provide assistance to a large
>>>>>> fleet.
>>>>>>
>>>>> How does a remote driver examine the train?
>>>>
>>>> Remotely. You’d have to design it with suitable diagnostics and
>>>> monitoring.
>>>>
>>> That might involve a great number of different detectors to substitute
>>> for using a Mk1 human.
>>
>> They do it with spaceships and F1 racing cars.
>>
>
> It’s what you do about a detected failure though. An F1 car at worst can be
> pushed to the side. Spacecraft have redundant systems and *huge* amounts
> are spent on high reliability components and pre launch qualification and
> testing. You could design a train to those standards but it would cost a
> couple of orders of magnitude more.
>
>

You wouldn't invest so much in redundant systems in trains that were
designed to fail-safe. Part of their recovery procedures might be to stop
and reboot.

On 12/02/2023 20:56, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:42:00 +0000
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 12/02/2023 19:48, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> So was TV in the 1930s. But I suspect as a partially mechanical device
>>> it was a non starter anyway in the 21st century.
>>>
>>
>> My one claim to fame is I am probably the last working (occasionally)
>> cameraman to have operated a Baird mechanical camera in anger!
>
> Do you have your portrait on the wall at home that is slowly aging by
> any chance?
>

In the attic!
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 12/02/2023 20:59, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:43:38 +0000, Graeme Wall
> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 12/02/2023 20:29, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:05:46 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
>>> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 11:30:35 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/02/2023 10:32, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>> Yes, very likely. And perhaps future driverless vehicles (including trains)
>>>>>>>> will be fitted with the cameras that allow a driver back at base to take
>>>>>>>> over in VR if the driving computers get flummoxed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you are using VR heasdsets then you still need one 'driver' per train
>>>>>>> so what is gained?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, as I said, the remote drivers would only be needed if the automatic
>>>>>> vehicle's computers get flummoxed. So, most of the time, the vehicles would
>>>>>> go about their business automatically, without a dedicated VR driver at
>>>>>> base. A small number of remote drivers would provide assistance to a large
>>>>>> fleet.
>>>>>>
>>>>> How does a remote driver examine the train?
>>>>
>>>> Remotely. You’d have to design it with suitable diagnostics and
>>>> monitoring.
>>>>
>>> That might involve a great number of different detectors to substitute
>>> for using a Mk1 human.
>>
>> They do it with spaceships and F1 racing cars.
>>
> And still end up needing the Mk1 eyeball, even in space.

Clever trick for an unmanned satellite.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:05:45 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 10:08:45 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
>>> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/02/2023 09:46, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ts8n8e$1fuge$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:37:02 on Sat, 11 Feb
>>>>>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <ts571q$114o1$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:42:02 on Fri, 10 Feb
>>>>>>>>> 2023, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 06:10:05 +0000
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ts387r$no0j$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:50:04 on Thu, 9 Feb
>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh come come. Did the CPC have an composite out, RS423, analogue
>>>>>>>>>>>> input port, and optional econet port? Plus the BBC had proper
>>>>>>>>>>>> ports for the printer and floppy disk, not just el-cheapo Sinclair
>>>>>>>>>>>> style motherboard output tracks which were just asking to be shorted out.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Econet was a flop, as even their fanzine sites admit; and while it had a
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Probably ahead of its time.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> diversity of built-in ports the question was: did they give value for
>>>>>>>>>>> money if shipped to everyone whether they needed them or not? How many
>>>>>>>>>>> home users actually required things like an analogue input.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How many home Amstrad users really needed a monitor when they probably had a
>>>>>>>>>> perfectly good TV they could have used?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The child didn't, only the family had one (in the living room). It was
>>>>>>>>> avoiding the need to crawl around to connect that up, then monopolise,
>>>>>>>>> which was one of the main the attractions of the CPC concept.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And if the monitor died they were a bit stuffed using a non amstrad
>>>>>>>>>> replacement due to the built in RGB connector cable.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The RGB connector was cunningly designed to be <<drum roll>> compatible
>>>>>>>>> with the BBC micro. So whatever BBC micro users would have (and often
>>>>>>>>> they cost more than a whole CPC) would be fine. On the other hand, the
>>>>>>>>> failure of the monitor was very unusual. Like the 14" colour TV it was
>>>>>>>>> based on, they tended to last for years.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And being based on a colour TV they would have been relatively low quality,
>>>>>>>> both in the tube and dot pitch and in the driving electronics which likely
>>>>>>>> had a sharp low pass filter at around 5 MHz. That made high contrast
>>>>>>>> pixel-based images such as text not as sharp as they might have been.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you wanted sharper, then buy a "professional" monitor. Only £200
>>>>>>> perhaps (£600 in today's money). In any event a dedicated RGB monitor
>>>>>>> is always going to be sharper than the same size TV driven via a UHF
>>>>>>> modulator.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I remember hitting this issue when looking at processing ultrasound
>>>>>>>> images at around the time the BBC came out, and looking for suitable
>>>>>>>> monitors for both text and image work: ?Oh, look, the popularity of
>>>>>>>> home computers means there are cheap monitors!? ?Oh, they?re
>>>>>>>> cheap because they?re based on colour TV tubes??
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At home I had an extremely expensive Sony "separates" TV system (27"
>>>>>>> Profeel). The tuner and Teletext decoder were in set-top boxes and the
>>>>>>> idea was you could upgrade just those, if some new features became
>>>>>>> popular.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Snap! I bought one of those, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unfortunately they never did produce v2 of those set-top boxes. If
>>>>>>> they'd had a picture-in-picture one, I would probably have bought it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I too was disappointed that they never followed up with upgraded
>>>>>> components.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, the monitor lasted about 20yrs (with 3rd party SCART set-top
>>>>>>> boxes), and I only got rid of it because it was a bit big and heavy by
>>>>>>> modern standards.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mine failed on me disappointingly quickly, so I replaced it with a 29"
>>>>>> Toshiba conventional telly, which worked perfectly till I replaced it with
>>>>>> a 46" flat screen Samsung with 3D features. Like most people, I didn't take
>>>>>> to 3D TV, and hated the powered, paired glasses you had to wear. I soon
>>>>>> abandoned that feature, and, in any case, 3D TV wasn't broadcast for long
>>>>>> in the UK.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 3D goes in roughly 30 year cycles,[1] so expect it to come back into
>>>>> fashion in about 20 years or so.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] 30 years is about the time for a new generation of whizz-kids to
>>>>> forget how crap it was and decide it is the next must-have. This has
>>>>> been going on since the 19th century.
>>>>
>>>> Like wars, then.
>>>>
>>> They go on all the time.
>>
>> But not everywhere all at once.
>>
> The last couple of Big Mistakes actually had a significant degree of
> non-participation.

Yes, so there are a whole series of Smaller Mistakes which tend to happen
at 30-40 year intervals regionally. It’s not a natural law, just a
tendency.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 12/02/2023 20:43, Graeme Wall wrote:
> They do it with spaceships and F1 racing cars.

But they have large teams of humans monitoring the monitoring.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 12/02/2023 20:43, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> They do it with spaceships and F1 racing cars.
>
>
> But they have large teams of humans monitoring the monitoring.

Actually the multitudes of Starlink satellites are pretty self-reliant,
able to change course to dodge space debris. I don't think there's much
human intervention.

¯hhttps://uk.pcmag.com/networking/141345/starlink-satellites-still-dodging-orbital-debris-from-russian-missile-test>

https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-russia-space-debris-squalls