Pete_the_Viscous

I had that a short while ago. Sorry, I can't remember what happened that got it sorted out; I think it did it on its own accord. Perhaps the same will happen for you? All I remember doing to try to fix it was restarting a few times, and then leaving it for about an hour or two... as I say: stopped on its own. Don't know if that's reassuring or not, but hey.

That could go too far, though: You could start pre-empting the question, and saying no to things like "do I look alright in this?" or something. :)

Fixed. I didn't actually do that, but I did open it in wordpad to take a look; it had no drive letter, so I supposed it would take which ever drive it was in's letter, and use that (which is does). Thanks :D

It seems that it's decided that all the files are on C: instead of E:... Does anyone know a way to persuade it otherwise? i.e. to change every item to the correct drive.

Assume that they are all compatible with winamp, and that 95% are MP3s.

Problem: I need to get winamp to recognise one of my playlists... it loads alright, but doesn't recognise any of the entries, so it just rusehs down the list skipping all of them. Any idea how to get it to work? All the addresses are correct, so I can't understand why it's not detecting them. Right: I started Winamp, and it came up with a little box saying something along the lines of "wouldja like to update to 5.09?", so I said yes I would. When it's done installing, it comes up with an error message saying that it's performed such and such an illegal operation and must close, what with it being annoying and all that. Having let it do that, I tried to start it again; it didn't work, for the same reason, whatever that was. I uninstalled it, installed it again, and it still didn't work. I uninstalled it again, re-downloaded it, and put it in new place this time, and it worked. However, it doesn't regcognise any of the entries in my playlist, so I've had to, as a temporary measure, add the big folder they're all in and get on with teh business of scrolling down slowly as it loads all the details for them. If anyone has any idea how I could get it to recognise my old playlist, this would save me hours of scrolling down, and days of re-organising

Repetition alert I don't mind ads that don't draw my attention away from things. Of course, an ad that doesn't draw attention isn't a very good advert, is it? On the other hand, the way that most ads these days try to draw attention makes them just as bad, as it puts so many people off what they're advertising. I'm using firefox, and I don't pay any attention whatsoever to adverts; I let it block what it wants, and don't pay any heed to the ones that occasionally show up. I block the odd one or two deliberately, but only those ones that are annoying, hence pointless anyway. Morality... If the place from which one is receiving a service for free decides to advertise, then I think it only fair that, if one continue to reveive that service, one not complain about the advertising. However, if the advertising is so annoying as to render the service unwanted, it's the provider's own fault if people block them. ...all that said, I quite like some adverts--not the annoying types--but, ridiculous as it sounds, I think that some of them look quite nice. Though I'm all for minimalism in some aspects of life, as long as it doesn't noticeably affect the loading time of what I'm viewing, I don't need it on my browser... if I did, I'd just buy a smaller monitor and be done with it.

They say that working is the only way for most people to revise. I suppose it works, too. Try re-doing any homeworks you have, or if you have a load of notes, re-write them in other words (i.e. say it differently, so you have to think about what it means). I don't know... Oh well. You know what I think is really stupid? Study leave. I think I probably work better at college than at home (I work more, at any rate), and at college there are tutors to ask questions of. What, then, is the point in sending people home so that they can get the most out of their time?

I saw it, yeah... I didn't like it that much. I think it was because it was made primarily with the people who've not read the books in mind that it was so. It was lacking, for example, all the deep philosophical book entries, for example, and had a rather crappy modern romance thrown in. In fact, the main thing put into it for already-fans' benefit seemed to be lots and lots of referrences to things that are in the book, but not in the film. I didn't think Mos Def as Ford Prefect would work out; I couldn't see him playing him as he is in the books or radio/tv programmes. What a nice surprise it was, then, that the character was changed sufficiently that he played it really well; he had to be my favorite character in the film. A shame, it was, that Marvin was reduced to such a small part. Getteth me not wrong; it's not a bad film---the bit where they're whizzing about on earth2 is inspired---it's just that it wasn't as good as it could have been. I thought the The Lord of the Rings films were as good as the book (though different, obviously), and wonder why I didn't come out of seeing this film feeling the same. I just felt that it had been dumbed down, that's all. I know DA had a hand in making it, but that doesn't stop it having been produced for the masses. Again, not bad, just not great.

What's that, then, for those of us who've not seen it? Funny?

I can think of two solutions: 1) ban people outright, and 2) make it compulsory, thus making it impossible to get an unfair advantage past the screenings. I'd go for the first one, though...

Off topic, but recently someone was annoying a tutor at college, so they threw a baguette at the offender's head, and exclaimed "YES! I've wanted to do that all year!" (It was all in good fun, before anyone gets concerned). On topic: I've never fallen asleep at school or college, but I did get really tired once, about a month ago now, and had to go outside into the cold so that I'd wake up. I wonder what caused that? I don't know..... lessons are usually too involving to fall asleep--the teacher usually notices.

Not really; I like that I like all the songs that I like, if you follow. I suppose I'd be a tad embarrassed listening to some of them in public, but I find it to be quite a talking point that I like unfasionable music.

I haven't measured or weighed myself recently, but I'm about 6-foot, and about 12 stone 7. When I take off my weighted platform shoes I'm probably a 4-foot 6-stoner ;). When I stop lying, I'll stop breathing, the doctors say; it's for my health that I do it.

England doesn't. The UK does, though.

...What IS the American national anthem? I'm really suprised to realise I don't know it: for some reason I know the philippine one, but not the USA one.

Anyone remember the TV series Hippies? "Oh, I'm so happy... I feel like I just ate a big bag of drugs" I don't remember anything of it but that line. I think it was called hippies, anyway.

I'm just SO glad that I saw FF7 at a friend's house years ago.... it's the sort of game that, usually, I wouldn't touch with a barge pole.

Yeah, silly idea. I suppose they mean "space as divided into sectors with the earth as the centre" or something, as there's no way they could do it any other way, what with everything moving. Still, even if they did it that way it's a bad idea, as everyone else said. You've just got to know where to draw the line... there's air-space, which is reasonable; you don't want people flying a few feet above your country, as they could drop bombs on you, or something. Imagine, then, if you had ground-space--you do already, to an extent; just like you have air-space to an extent. For instance, it'd be alright to say that someone down a mine is in the country he's under (ok by me, I mean); it wouldn't really be fair to say that someone near the centre of the earth (silly prospect, but work with me) is the country he's below, as he's nowhere near it. So, even if they were to divide the immediate regions of space above the countries into "space-space", it would have to stop at a reasonable distance from the earth, at which it would appear meaningless. For this reason, it would be silly to consider privatising space, as people could just "go the extra few feet away" and do their spying from there.

I don't think it makes you gay. Neither do I think that that many gay people wear it--not that I know of, anyway. Still, I don't think it looks especially nice on men, either. I suppose it depends what sort of pink you're talking about, as well: shocking pink might have a different effect than very pale pink.

Yeah: Baldur's Gate II and expansion set. Other than that, (I'm just going to be repeating myself from last time): FF7 Diablo 1&2 Dungeon Hack Pools of Darkness Morrowind Fallout 2 Planescape:Torment Stonekeep Quest for glory V: Dragon Fire ... and I'll stop there as it's boring to read a list any longer than that, I'd suppose.

Those were great... I don't know "the dark crystal", though. Krull is on every ploody week on channel 5 and the sci-fi channel. Willow I've not seen for YEARS, however.

I don't remember if it was called Stronghold or something similar, but... That. It was one where you control some kingdoms, and it was seen in "scenes" from above to the side... It was fun, anyway, regardless of how bad I am at explaining it. I remember that Chips thing... I wonder if I could do that level 20 thing nowadays. Raptor: Call of the shadows was a good flying/shooting game (I don't remeber what this sort of game is called). Find it (it's shareware) here: http://www.solscape.com/games/Raptor/rap.html Actic Adventure; Commander Keen; Biohazard (was it called that? I don't know: herr, it was that one in which you had the ability to hold "down" and shoot a big missile, at the cost of health); the duke nukem games (before -3D); Rise of the Triad... Rise of the triad was great. I never actually noticed how violent it was until recently, when I saw it in a magasine, mentioned as a really violent game. Anyway, anything that's obviously a classic, I shan't bother to reminisce about, as it's been done to death.

Not that I agree with you about putting them out (after all, it's only thinning out the gene-pool, because the ones whose constitutions are not strong enough to handle it will die), but try fighting fire with fire--simply light something on fire and blow smoke at them.

For me, it has to be something laid-back; if it were too "loud" then I'd get sick of the same bit over and over again, no matter how good the song was. I'd still like the song, and, if I stopped listening to it for a while I'd stop being sick of it. So: Fleetwood Mac - Albatross Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata Pink Floyd - Marooned Bach -- Sleepers Awaken Bach -- Jesu, Joy of man's desiring Led Zeppelin -- Stairway to Heaven Pachabel -- Cannon in D Major Louis Armstrong -- What a Wonderful World REM -- I've Been High Some exceptions, in that they aren't laid-back: John Williams -- The Imperial March Holst -- Mars, the bringer of War (which is very similar to the imperial march) Queen -- Don't Stop Me Now DVDA -- Now You're A MAN ...and lots of others