NASA HiRes Shuttle Pics.PAR2

On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:35:38 +0200, JRW wrote:

Peter Hucker wrote: On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 23:29:20 +0200, JRW wrote:


hielan' laddie wrote: On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 09:18:01 -0400, Andrew Chaplin wrote
(in article ) :




"J3" wrote in message
.. .
Because I didn't feel like uploading 5,100 jpg files. I posted an
intent to flood notice. If you prefer jpgs, go out an fine these
files.
It is a long time since I read a binary group's charter, but IIRC, it is
customary to restrict floods to 250 posts per group per day. I have over
8,300
headers from you in the space of a day. Some are reposts, e.g. part 31 was
posted twice -- 17 seconds apart, from the header information.




I am glad Giganews does not count headers in the bandwidth I buy.





He's posted under 300 files in two-three days. It's just that each of the
files is split into 30+ parts. A proper newsreader (Hogwasher or MTNW on
Macs, or Forte Agent on Windows, for example) can be configured to
automatically grab each part, download it, and stitch it into one file.




Outlook Express is, unfortunately, not a proper newsreader. It cannot do this
automatically, and indeed it takes some effort to do it at all with MSOE.




This leaves you with two options:




1 block the posts in question so that you never see them and their headers
don't show in your system.




2 get a proper newsreader.




Personally, I'd go with (2), which is indeed what I did many years ago when I
found that MSOE was totally inadequate for my purposes, both as an email
client and as a newsreader. However, it's your choice.




Third choice, go to the NASA website and download there.....less hassle and you don't need PARS to repair the 32 broken files. ))

Easier if someone else has done all the work.
Well here's 9000 pictures and all in one place and NO PARS and hectic downloads. )) http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/

Can I get the whole lot with a few clicks? Nope.
--
http://www.petersparrots.com http://www.insanevideoclips.com http://www.petersphotos.com

Hot Tub Tips for Women

It is not lady like to straddle a water jet, moan in ecstasy, then
scream at the top of your lungs, "Oh yes baby!"

Washing your partners back is sexy. Washing your pantyhose
is not!

Group nude bathing with strangers can be a pleasant experience,
but don't spoil things by making snide remarks like "I've seen bigger
wangs on Hamsters"

It's OK to pass a joint while tubbing. It's not OK to pass gas.

Don't think you're fooling anybody by trying to pass off your vibrator
as a toy submarine!

"Peter Hucker" wrote

He asked before he flooded. Everyone said go ahead.

Yes, they did, but the picture file size was not included in the warning,
was it? That is one part of my beef, but like you said, at least there was
fair warning.

The only error he made was using rar.

Yes, and not breaking it up into individual picture files.

No never mind to me. I am completely able to ignore series that I do not
want to hassle with. I do feel bad in the fact that there were no doubt
pictures in there that I would loved to have seen.

Does the Little Mermaid wear an algebra?

That is soooooo baaaaad ! ! !

Ten lashes with a wet noodle, and.....

Go to your room, Peter! g
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...
Yes, and not breaking it up into individual picture files.

If he'd broken it up into individual picture files, there would be no need
to use .rar, which is used to allow the easy transmission of many items at
the same time. Using .rar is the same as sending an entire folder, rather
than the individual files contained by that folder.

It's actually a good system, but J3 has gone way overboard.

Positively mind-boggling. A wonderful addition to my collection of
spacecraft pics.

As an added bonus, it allowed me to add quite a number of
technologically illiterate whiney non-contributors to my killfile.

Keep up the good work, Sir.

-Kevin in Indy
To reply, remove (+spamproof+) from address........

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:10:21 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote:


"Peter Hucker" wrote

He asked before he flooded. Everyone said go ahead.

Yes, they did, but the picture file size was not included in the warning,
was it? That is one part of my beef, but like you said, at least there was
fair warning.

"It will take several day to complete the posting as it is 4.7 GB in
size"

The only error he made was using rar.

Yes, and not breaking it up into individual picture files.

That's what I meant.

No never mind to me. I am completely able to ignore series that I do not
want to hassle with. I do feel bad in the fact that there were no doubt
pictures in there that I would loved to have seen.

I've almost got it all, gonna have to request reposts though....

Does the Little Mermaid wear an algebra?

That is soooooo baaaaad ! ! !

Ten lashes with a wet noodle, and.....

Oo er!

Go to your room, Peter! g

On my own?
--
http://www.petersparrots.com http://www.insanevideoclips.com http://www.petersphotos.com

Never have I seen a word as accurate as politics.
Poly meaning many, and tic being a blood-sucking thing.

Peter Hucker wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:10:21 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote:

"Peter Hucker" wrote

He asked before he flooded. Everyone said go ahead.
Yes, they did, but the picture file size was not included in the warning,
was it? That is one part of my beef, but like you said, at least there was
fair warning.

"It will take several day to complete the posting as it is 4.7 GB in
size"

He may need new batteries for his calculator - I put him into my filter
after he posted over *11GB* of messages. Then I purged him out of the
news spool (I run a local server). Then I swore a lot because I got a
message from my ISP telling me I was over quota and would be throttled
to 128Kbps until the end of my billing period. Bugger!

Cheers,
Gary B-)

--
__________________________________________________ ____________________________
Armful of chairs: Something some people would not know
whether you were up them with or not
- Barry Humphries

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:01:39 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
wrote:

Peter Hucker wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:10:21 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote:

"Peter Hucker" wrote

He asked before he flooded. Everyone said go ahead.
Yes, they did, but the picture file size was not included in the warning,
was it? That is one part of my beef, but like you said, at least there was
fair warning.

"It will take several day to complete the posting as it is 4.7 GB in
size"

He may need new batteries for his calculator - I put him into my filter
after he posted over *11GB* of messages.

The files when extracted are indeed around 5GB. Add the pars and
reposts and maybe....

Then I purged him out of the
news spool (I run a local server). Then I swore a lot because I got a
message from my ISP telling me I was over quota and would be throttled
to 128Kbps until the end of my billing period. Bugger!

Get a new ISP.
--
http://www.petersparrots.com http://www.insanevideoclips.com http://www.petersphotos.com

An explorer in the deepest Amazon suddenly finds himself surrounded by a bloodthirsty group of natives.
Upon surveying the situation, he says quietly to himself, "Oh god, I'm ****ed."
There is a ray of light from heaven and a voice booms out: "No you are NOT ****ed.
Pick up that stone at your feet and bash in the head of the chief standing in front of you."
So the explorer picks up the stone and proceeds to bash the living **** out of the chief.
As he stands above the lifeless body, breathing heavily and surrounded by 100 natives with a look of shock on their faces, god's voice booms out again:
"Okay ..... NOW you're ****ed."

On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:23:22 +0100, Peter Hucker
wrote:

Rars are useful when you're posting huge files like DVDs which would
split into several hundred articles and be useless if one went
missing. But with small files such as jpegs, I don't really see any
benefit.


Easier handling in that one uploads fewer parts. At least some
providers have file number upload limit. It depends on the number of
files. I've uploaded photo series before (only c. 100-200 per set, not
5,100!) and it makes life much simpler.

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:50:05 GMT, Casey Tompkins
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:23:22 +0100, Peter Hucker
wrote:

Rars are useful when you're posting huge files like DVDs which would
split into several hundred articles and be useless if one went
missing. But with small files such as jpegs, I don't really see any
benefit.


Easier handling in that one uploads fewer parts. At least some
providers have file number upload limit. It depends on the number of
files. I've uploaded photo series before (only c. 100-200 per set, not
5,100!) and it makes life much simpler.

You have to rar them up, create pars, post reposts, then the person at
the other end has to do all that in reverse. If they were jpegs I'd
just highlight them all and presss save.
--
http://www.petersparrots.com http://www.insanevideoclips.com http://www.petersphotos.com

_____ ___
o8888888p ,o888888o_
d88P"""888. d888PP"Y888
]88P `888 888P 888
`888.____888 Y888. 888P
`8888888888 Y888ood88P
`""""""' `Y88888P
o8o
Y888
888[
_o888P
,8888P
,888P
d888 ,.
`8888oo888P
`Y8888P'
,. ,o_
`888o_ o8888
`Y888bo_ __oo888P'
`8X_o.8oo.______,ood88888P'
dX,XXX[XX888888888888P''
dXdXXXX[XXX8XX8"""''
,_XXXXXP,oo8XXP
XXXXXXXoXXX'XP
XXXXXXXXXXPXP
XXXXXXXXP'P
`YXXXXPP'
'''

"Casey Tompkins" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:23:22 +0100, Peter Hucker
wrote:

Rars are useful when you're posting huge files like DVDs which would
split into several hundred articles and be useless if one went
missing. But with small files such as jpegs, I don't really see any
benefit.


Easier handling in that one uploads fewer parts. At least some
providers have file number upload limit. It depends on the number of
files. I've uploaded photo series before (only c. 100-200 per set, not
5,100!) and it makes life much simpler.

I do enjoy how some of the prolific poster handle posting multiple files. I
didn't realize how much I appreciate the way some do it, until the latest
disaster. Also, it gives you something to look forward to, the next day.

I like when they post an index to start, then no more than about 30 or so
pictures, all in jpeg format, with a maximum of around 200 kb.

If more detail is required, I'll bet the poster would repost or send an
individual file on request.
--
Jim in NC