Lets Paint The Kettle Black,Do You Have A Bitch On Whats Going On Around The Site Or Any Thing Negative To Report

Well, I think I win then, being the first person to suggest a thread in the mods lounge

Hehe >

 

Nephilim

see if ye can find or post the longest thread that all can see..
as most here can not see the private thread...as the private thread does not count.........

 

French train hits new world new speed record

ON BOARD TGV V150, eastern France (AFP) - France's TGV train set a new world speed on rails Tuesday, hitting 574.8 kilometres (357.2 miles) per hour on a stretch of track in eastern France.

link
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070403/wl_afp/francetransportrail_070403121835

 

there hope for ye neph,in ye golden years

Man, 102, takes out 25-year mortgage


A pensioner aged 102 has been granted a 25-year mortgage despite the fact he would have to live until 127 to pay the loan back.

The property investor from East Sussex has taken out an interest-only £200,000 mortgage and hopes to meet the £958 monthly repayments with income from rent as he joins a growing army of retired people hoping to cash in on buy-to-let schemes.

Most lenders set a limit at 75 years for mortgage applicants but a handful, including Woolwich, and Bristol & West, have no such restrictions. This has led to a rush of applications from older investors.

Jonathan Moore, of Mortgages for Business, an independent adviser based in Sevenoaks, Kent, told how he brokered the mortgage for the unnamed 102-year-old, one of hundreds he has arranged for pensioners. “This is a new phenomenon.Obviously there is an element of risk if property prices and rental income suddenly fall but there is no sign of that at the moment,” he said.

Richard Stone, 75, from north London, owns 10 houses and has taken out a £120,000 mortgage. The retired maths teacher admits such a commitment at his age can be “quite stressful”.

Charities supporting the elderly have warned that the stress of taking out a large loan could affect health and urge pensioners to seek advice before making such a financial commitment.

Gordon Lishman, the director-general of Age Concern, said: “It’s crucial that people think about the long-term implications.”

 

Grieving couple commits suicide after dog dies

HYDERABAD, India (Reuters) - Unable to come to terms with the death of their pet dog, an elderly couple in southern India committed suicide by hanging themselves, police said on Monday.

The bodies of 67-year-old retired soldier C.N. Madanraj and his wife, Tarabai, 63, were found on Sunday in their home in a suburb of Hyderabad.

Police said the childless couple had held a burial ceremony for their dog of 13 years, called "Puppy," and hosted a feast for friends before hanging themselves in their bedroom.

"The couple described the grief over their pet dog in the suicide note they left on March 29," said police inspector V. Anantaiah.

 

256 vs. 128 kbps: Can You Tell the Difference?

http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/003993.html

Wow. This is some kind of day. Baseball. Rock Band--an upcoming Guitar Hero sequel with bass, drum, and vocal parts (!)--was announced for the PS3 and the XBox 360. Oh, and DRM-free music from EMI. Clearly I'm pretty psyched.

I applaud EMI for making DRM-free music available to online music stores, and I'm glad it comes with a boost in audio quality. Apple will offer the option of converting any eligible iTMS purchases for $.30 a piece. But I'm sure there are at least a few people out there who are just fine playing their $.99 128kbps tracks on their iPods. The new DRM-free files may be twice as big, but that doesn't mean they'll sound twice as good.

(Demo below requires the QuickTime plugin.)

So is the boost in quality worth it? I certainly think so, but then I'm a bit of a freak about sound quality. Here's a quick way to see for yourself. I dug around the office for some CDs and ripped a couple short clips (nothing over 20 seconds) in both 128 kbps and 256 kbps AAC. Download these files, give 'em a listen and let us know if you can tell the difference. Or for an even better test, fire up iTunes and rip a few of your own CDs at different bit-rates. It's cool. I'll wait.

Or just play the files right here:
Mozart in 128kbps

Mozart in 256kbps

We also have a short sample of "Man on the Moon" by R.E.M.
R.E.M. in 128kbps

R.E.M. in 256kbps

So what do you think?


The difference is more obvious in the 256kbps Mozart piece (the strings don't sound so "mushy"). The R.E.M. 256kbps excerpt has more clarity or brilliance. Now, I'm listening on headphones and I usually don't mind casual (brief) music listening this way or on my PC's speakers. However, it's my personal experience that almost anything encoded at less than 320kbps played on my living room stereo system draws my attention to the low quality and it quickly becomes annoying because of that.
ImaPhake
April 02, 2007
7:11 PM PT

Buying music at 128kbps is like buying a book that only shows every other letter - you don't experience the work as intended by the author. Remember, lossy compression is named that way for a reason.
logandurand
April 03, 2007
5:40 AM PT

My day job is building and operating extremely large concert audio systems. Low bit rates MP3's are quite obvious even to the untrained ear. Totally acceptable for my computers multimedia speakers, but in a high quality audio environment, nothing beats a good old C.D.

GO HERE TO HEAR THE DIFFERENCE,YE NEED APPLE QUICK TIME TO PLAY THE TOONS
http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/003993.html

 

edited by ddp because of stupidity

 

did any one else get this error on xp..


the new update today kb925902 is causing a error in xp-home..

if uninstalled the error goes away..

rthdcpl.exe illegal system dll relocation

the system dll user32.dllwas relocated in memory,the application will not run properly.

wait i will post a pix of the error

 

@Tsumiro...first, welcome to afterdawn. I saw your other thread too and you've got to watch the "F-word". Lots of kiddies here and they frown upon it so I'd edit and change it.

 

@ ireland.. That looks very dodgy. dll's are usually loaded into specific places in ram as and when they are needed..
I would consider that error to be a warning of virus type behaviour attempting to exploit a modified dll by loading a different version.

This is a M$ update? I wouldn't trust it. I think you have some sort of downloader trojan in there somewhere.

Googled further and came upon something you can try..


If you are receiving errors about an ocx file, registering the file may solve the problem. To register an ocx file simply follow the simple steps below.


1.Locate the file using windows explorer or My Computer. Alternatively search for the filename.

2.Hold down the shift key and right click on the file. Then click 'Open With...' from the menu.

3.An 'Open With' dialog box should appear. Click the button 'Other...'.

4.Navigate to your windows\system32 directory and select the file 'RegSvr32.exe'. Do a file search for it if you have trouble locating the exact folder. On Windows 2000 it is typically located in c:\WINNT\System32. Click Open to select the file. Then click OK on the 'Open With' dialog.

5.You should see a message indicating the file was successfully registered. If you see an error message, try restarting your computer and going through the above process again.

 

Jan, for a friend of the Penguin you seem to be current with Bill's monster, tell me the truth, your teddy bear has windows 98 t-shirt on, doesn't it?

 

there is no 'RegSvr32.exe'in there xp-home

 

Yes there is.

 

No windows here... I work in a PC repair shop half the week, and in a phone/dvd shop the other half..

Sorry Ireland.. I'll see if I can find some specific XP instructions.. I thought ye was using 2000.

edit.. Found it.. It's where I thought it would be E:\WINDOWS\system32

 

i went to my back up and got the file,now i will play

 

I like to bitch >:-X

 

Put my freeken head through this here dry wall.

My bitch is that fricken inflation crap. I remember paying like $3 AUD for a fricken happy meal, Now I pay like $5 AUD. I rememeber paying 89cents a liter for unleaded, now it's like $1.35.
Argh!