Skip to main content

Revised release date

This weekend is now officially a “day at home break” but I’ve been given Wednesday as my probable “real” release date. Big thanks to my loving family and many valuable and informative RPH staff for helping to sort that out and for their massive ongoing help.

An additional Micro-special-thanks to sister-in-law (J) for frowning sternly throughout a DVD presentation (this morning) on “non-controversial” correction techniques.

I’ll also have an interview in a week and a smidge with a doctor who will make a firm appointment for my cranioplasty (rough translation: “sticking skull back together”), apparently a few weeks to months from then. This will require a shorter (in theory) term readmission to the Wellington Street hospital.

Comments

Leon RJ Brooks said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
05 May, 2006 20:45
Leon RJ Brooks said…
Oops, I typed past the vital and substantial thanks due for so very many (guessedly-)self-selecting friends from various “walks” of life (oh, yes, and some are more of the “types” style, a few “dancers”, a number of genuinely awe-inspiring singers, evidently at least a few “follicular Rechabites” — yup, and quite a brain-boggling range of other wonderful people).

Heartfelt thanks to you amongst the overwhelming number of unrelated-ish people who have helped, many without anything obvious to gain by pitching in so competently and helpfully.

This is all on top of the huge express-load of thanks to so many with a predictable affection or competence “allotment”.
05 May, 2006 20:49
The CO said…
Leon, you have no idea how good it is to see you back online.

The Hawke of Dark Feathers
07 May, 2006 11:57
Leon RJ Brooks said…
Hawke: helping my semi-randomised memory, I hope... guessing — you're the, um, creative artist from (once, at least) down near Spearwood?
07 May, 2006 19:27
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

An Open and Shut response to Darl McBride

Hi, Darl. I see you’re being dishonest again . It’d be really nice if you could shoot straight for a change, but I think Kerry’s Dad will be selling snowplows in Hell first. Three years ago, when I first joined The SCO Group, we focused the company on the area that was most profitable and provided the most benefit to customers, investors, resellers, developers and employees: UNIX No, you focused the company on suing people, which was most profitable to lawyers and provided some golden parachutes for your buddies. People thought we were crazy. They were right. But since SCO owns the UNIX operating system The SCO Group does not own UNIX® in any sense of the word. The Open Group owns the UNIX trademark, definition and other rights , The SCO Group does not. The SCO Group doesn’t even own the UnixWare® or OpenServer® code, the rights to those are held by Novell and TSG use them only by permission and under certain conditions — which they have violate...
5 comments
Read more

5x7 text dot-matrix in five minutes...

This is a fairly primitive toy I threw together today for a specific purpose, published in case it’s any use to others... feed it a list of words as command arguments, which it will then display as a 5x7 ASCII dotmatrix with ‘#’ as a dot & ‘_’ as a blank. /* * display text using a 5x7 bitmap font in ASCII letters */ static unsigned char font [] [5] = { { 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00 }, // 0x20 32 { 0x00,0x00,0x6f,0x00,0x00 }, // ! 0x21 33 { 0x00,0x07,0x00,0x07,0x00 }, // " 0x22 34 { 0x14,0x7f,0x14,0x7f,0x14 }, // # 0x23 35 { 0x00,0x07,0x04,0x1e,0x00 }, // $ 0x24 36 { 0x23,0x13,0x08,0x64,0x62 }, // % 0x25 37 { 0x36,0x49,0x56,0x20,0x50 }, // & 0x26 38 { 0x00,0x00,0x07,0x00,0x00 }, // ' 0x27 39 { 0x00,0x1c,0x22,0x41,0x00 }, // ( 0x28 40 { 0x00,0x41,0x22,0x1c,0x00 }, // ) 0x29 41 { 0x14,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x14 }, // * 0x2a 42 { 0x08,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x08 }, ...
5 comments
Read more

Citizens Augmenting Government Waste

So here we have Microsoft-funded “ Citizens Against Government Waste ” (CAGW) heavily criticising Massachusetts’s switch to an internationally accepted and open document standard (not open source, open standard — but I seem to remember a large monopolist who frequently confuses the two when it suits them). I remember CAGW, they were the organisation who had dead people writing in to support Microsoft in court a few years ago — thanks to sbergman27 for the link — is this “the dead hand of CAGW” at work again? Let’s follow the money and find out. Who stands to lose the most money and control if Massachusetts switches to an unencumbered document format? Big surprise, it’s CAGW sponsor Microsoft, through their dominant MS-Office suite. Why did CAGW list Microsoft’s suite last, after two other much-less-dominant examples which are waning anyway? If you’re inclined to wallow in additional irony, consider that at leas...
Post a Comment
Read more