Jenner
I wish I was English like my hero Tj.
Okay I was only born in '94, so obviously have no idea what life in '92 was like.
.
Good god I'm old....
Okay I was only born in '94, so obviously have no idea what life in '92 was like.
.
Good god I'm old....
Okay I was only born in '94, so obviously have no idea what life in '92 was like.
What the hell does that make me then?
So this makes me: Ancient.Older?
The olds might have a gone a bit far with their scepticism, this time .. but as a rule of thumb?
Best practice, I reckon.
I think I came out of the Ark!!!
You do realize that the overwhelming bulk of publicly available human knowledge is on the internet, right?
If the rule of thumb is that if it's online it's not real, then nothing is real...which can be argued, but is probably more of a philosophical statement than what the 'olds' meant in this case.
double check sources
Always, but that applies at least a much to offline information.
WRONG GENDER!!!Mum???
Meanwhile legible, ancient texts are still around.
Some of them. For every thousand year old text we have a complete copy of, there are probably ten more that aren't complete, a hundred we have only references to, and a thousand gone from all memory.
The amount of knowledge lost to the sands of time is one of the few things in this world that actually depresses me.
I blame T.J. however; if you are not happy, re-assignment is optional across most of the planet.WRONG GENDER!!!
Like the Roman Dodecahedron.Some of them. For every thousand year old text we have a complete copy of, there are probably ten more that aren't complete, a hundred we have only references to, and a thousand gone from all memory.
The amount of knowledge lost to the sands of time is one of the few things in this world that actually depresses me.
Eighty per cent of scientific data are lost within two decades, according to a new study that tracks the accessibility of data over time.
The culprits? Old e-mail addresses and obsolete storage devices.
For the analysis, published today in Current Biology, Vines and colleagues attempted to collect original research data from a random set of 516 studies published between 1991 and 2011. They found that while all datasets were available two years after publication, the odds of obtaining the underlying data dropped by 17 per cent per year after that.
“I don’t think anybody expects to easily obtain data from a 50-year-old paper, but to find that almost all the datasets are gone at 20 years was a bit of a surprise.”
You do realize that the overwhelming bulk of publicly available human knowledge is on the internet, right?
If the rule of thumb is that if it's online it's not real, then nothing is real...which can be argued, but is probably more of a philosophical statement than what the 'olds' meant in this case.
A womble with snazzy trainers?What the hell does that make me then?