 | | Special Browser Add-on Question
|
|
In the CAD.DAT group, the write up states (...) I've looked around and found something in the FAQ section. It refers to using LDLite to view dat files. Since I'm using Win2K the instructions don't quite work well, but I think I have it working (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Microsoft and LEGO Company Announce a Shared Doom
|
|
(...) The difference is that now, Lego are reasonably open about letting people build their own tools like NQC that use the firmware inside the box. Most Linux enthusiasts would tell you that we don't especially need Lego to release all their (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Because the mind of a bored Legomaniac at work is a dangerous thing...
|
|
(...) #6 Clearance hunting by an addict (true again): Lego here is cheap Only themes which I can't stand Buy it anyway Andrew Lipson (24 years ago, 13-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Microsoft and LEGO Company Announce a Shared Doom
|
|
(...) I set Followup-To: lugnet.off-topic.geek on this post... (...) No matter how good M$S@H may turn out to be, it will still be powered by M$ and not by LEGO, if the press release is accurate. BTW: (URL) 2) LEGO licensed the ability to use (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Because the mind of a bored Legomaniac at work is a dangerous thing...
|
|
We proudly present: Lego Haiku! #1 "On the ending of a dark age smack in the middle of December(true story)" See the empty shelves. The staff is tired and cranky. Toy store at christmas. #2 "set collecting philosiphy" I buy three of each: One to (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | I.Q. and recommended set ages
|
|
I was looking at the Mindstorms sets and noticed the RIS was recommended for ages 12+. I got to thinking that as far as I can remember, I think I could have handled this set at a much younger age (I am now 25). Then I remembered that I.Q. (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Remaining parts
|
|
(...) I actually left out some other possibilities for small error. The weight of the bag itself is certainly an opportunity for error. Another opportunity of course is if any foreign material or scrap gets into a bag or on the scale. Of course this (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Remaining parts
|
|
(...) I had a relatively brief exposure to statistics, but have picked up bits here and there. I actually got keyed into the theory which is the foundation of the extra parts during a job interview. Yes, I actually learned something at a job (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Remaining parts
|
|
(...) <SNIP> (...) WOW Frank! That was rather.... long winded. What's scarier? I followed most of it, from my University imposed, very brief exposure to statistics. Ewe... I think I actually learned something there! Matt (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Remaining parts
|
|
(...) Yes. The thing you're missing is that pieces rarely are missing. The scale is there as a check. Further, the bag is weighed after every insertion step, or so the stuff we've read seems to imply. As soon as a problem is noted, it's time to (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
