 | | Re: Over 70 LEGO products copied
|
|
(...) Err - did my post from yesterday get pulled, or just lost? I was wondering what the problem with the "Best-Lock" JCB was - I've seen them in the UK, and they don't appear to clone either a specific Lego set or recent elements. It has a lot of (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Over 70 LEGO products copied
|
|
(...) Hi Jason: Best-Lock caused quite a stir (URL) it hit the fan on RTL a few years ago,> largely because of initial perceptions that the Best-Lock minifigs were so similar to LEGO. As it turned out, they were rather different, as were the bricks, (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: monolith
|
|
(...) The monolith was 1x4x9 -- the first three squares. Yea, I'm a geek... :-) JohnG, GMLTC fut off-topic.geek (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Over 70 LEGO products copied
|
|
(...) I think the monolith is 1x4x9(1), Dave! I think you're endangering the mission when you post bad information, Dave! I think you should lie down and take a stress tab, Dave! 1 - (URL) cited without endorsement or further comment also from : (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Over 70 LEGO products copied
|
|
(...) Hey, I didn't specify which monolith I was citing. Now that you mention it, though, Best-Lock bricks and tiles allow you to build to the precise proportions of Clarke's Monolith, 20 LDraw Units deep by 80 units wide by 180 units tall. Groovy. (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Over 70 LEGO products copied
|
|
(...) Please demonstrate that, without any specific reference, it is reasonable to assume ANY OTHER monolith. That is, provide a cite to some other monolith just as, or more deeply, embedded in popular culture. :-) (...) I believe you can do that in (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Over 70 LEGO products copied
|
|
(...) I think it will be easier for me to prove that 2 is a perfect square... (...) I think that's correct, but I was too busy back-pedalling to mention it. Dave! (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Over 70 LEGO products copied
|
|
(...) That's true - I remember seeing those other sets around too. Although they look like Lego themes, they're not copies of specific sets. I seem to remember spotting that the 1x1 bricks are cubes too. So, why are Lego parading it as an illegal (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Over 70 LEGO products copied
|
|
(...) Actually, the monolith was 1x4x9. >> Mark (Oh my gosh, I'm such a *NERD*!!!!) :o (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Over 70 LEGO products copied
|
|
(...) Well then, join the geek! (URL) I know, like the rest of us aren't) (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Monolith Dimensions
|
|
"Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message news:HrwFG3.Euu@lugnet.com... (...) Best-Lock is (...) Actually, the monolith is 1x4x9. (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Monolith Dimensions
|
|
(...) Reading the rest of the thread before posting is often a good thing to do. (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Monolith Dimensions
|
|
(...) That way, the poster would have learned that 2 is a perfect square. By the way, the monolith is 1 x 4 x 9. Dave! FUT off-topic.self-deprecation (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Monolith Dimensions
|
|
(...) But no one in this thread has pointed out that the monolith is 1x4x9 yet! Or did I miss a post... Dave K (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Monolith Dimensions
|
|
(...) Three other people mentioned that when replying to the same post as you. Larry was the second one, so he's correct...in a mildly hypocrytical way. (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Monolith Dimensions
|
|
(...) ROTFLMAO And for those who haven't read the rest of the thread, the monolith is 1 x 4 x 9. Richard Still baldly going... (21 years ago, 24-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Monolith Dimensions
|
|
(...) Really? I heard it was 1 x 4 x 9. Fancy that. Adrian (21 years ago, 24-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Monolith Dimensions
|
|
(...) My excuse is that john Gerlach and I were posting our posts at essentially the same time, not that someone posted something (more than a week earlier in your case, Dave) thatI should have read before posting to the thread. So I'll see your (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) There isn't a link there, because the Golden Section isn't 2:3... The golden ratio is derive from a rectangle where if a square is cut from the rectangle, the remaining piece is another golden ratio rectangle. So, the sides of the original (...) (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) Mathematics aside, it's been a long time since I read the 2001 series (2001, 2010, 2061, 3001), but I recall that in one of 'em, there's a statement with the idea that the monolith is based on squares starting at 1, and the thought went on to (...) (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) For the record while I posted that text, I did not WRITE it. Bram trimmed off the cite I gave to the site I glommed the text from. I mean, really, does that prose read like something I'd have written? Sorry for any confusion (that Bram's (...) (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) Oops, sorry. Your cite wasn't very clear. (...) Nope, it doesn't... --Bram (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) Right. My point was that the Greek Golden ratio has nothing to do with the proportions of the monolith. --Bram (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) The golden ratio is related to a different sequence: the ratio between consecutive numbers of the Fibonacci sequence approaches Phi. Or phi, if you go backwards. So, if the monolith were golden-ratio realated, its sides in the primary three (...) (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) Yeah, but I wanted to post this somewhere, and here looked like a pleasant spot :) Dave K -what are you doing, Dave? Would you like to hear a song? (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) for a good Golden Section site: (URL) remember "Donald in Mathemagic land" Disney video? Jeff (21 years ago, 27-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) Yes. My very bad high school math teacher made us watch it a lot. (21 years ago, 27-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
"Bram Lambrecht" <bram@cwru.edu> wrote in message news:Hs3wLt.254@lugnet.com... (...) instance, (...) for (...) (first (...) number in (...) (final (...) exist (...) the (...) My God.. LOL. On Lugnet you can learn about everything! I allways use (...) (21 years ago, 28-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
