b3ta.com talk
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Talk » Message 5368456

Morning people :)
Trust everyone's doing alright. Which one of you lovely things wants to help me sort out my network printer? I just set it up on my Mac and now whenever I go to print, the bloody thing spews blank paper, and when it does manage to print something, it just prints what looks like code, overlaid over itself and hanging off the edge of the page.

What the fuck have I done to it?
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:20, archived)
You lesbianised it.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:21, archived)
Well duh.
What else have I done to it? I thought HPs were meant to be reliable.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:22, archived)
It's probably caught dyke off you.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:23, archived)
That's the same as lesbianising it.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:23, archived)
No it's not.
Lesbianising is a much happier event. Catching dyke is all hairy and angry at men.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:24, archived)
Well it keeps your cartridges moisturized

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:01, archived)
Note to myself:
Do not ask how the cartridges are mosturized. Just smile, nod and pretend that you understand.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:05, archived)
Driver problem.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:47, archived)
I don't know:(

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:21, archived)
Have you tried turning if off
And then...this is the good bit...turning it on again?
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:22, archived)
Last time I did that it froze whilst turning off.
I haven't dared turn it off since.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:23, archived)
If it's freezing just turning it off and on, it might indicate that it is just knacked
Have you go the HP software installed?
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:24, archived)
wrong drivers?

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:23, archived)
...ehm..did you install the right drivers?
Are the cartridges alright?
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:24, archived)
Isn't that more interesting then everyone else's printers that only print boring old words and CVs and stuff?

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:25, archived)
Oh, Jesus.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:25, archived)
Stop it.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:26, archived)
Finally disappeared up your own arse?

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:27, archived)
No, we've all disappeared up yours.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:27, archived)
IT'S LIKE A BLACK HOLE.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:28, archived)
A black hole that you talk out of!

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:59, archived)
Candle, bitch.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:34, archived)
Six years, RJ.
Six. Years.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:38, archived)
Oh, Jesus.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:40, archived)
I second this.
Edit - oh, I didn't reply about the whole hydrogen power thing - when I was talking about the greenhouse potential of water, it was that it could become a major issue if the amount in the atmosphere changes massively (which would happen if you got a big increase in hydrogen cars), which is pretty much what that NS article you linked to said
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:43, archived)
No it doesn't.
It specifically says "This rapid turnover means that even if human activity was directly adding or removing significant amounts of water vapour (it isn't), there would be no slow build-up of water vapour as is happening with CO2"
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:49, archived)
Got the link again?
could have sworn it said that while water maintians a short atmospheric cycle, a significant change in emissions could still have major effect on climate...

Edit - I think it's symantics - It won't build up like CO2 because it's atmosnpheric period is only days, but major man-made emmissions could alter the equilibrium between atmospere and surface water, which could still have a major effect on climate.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:53, archived)
Other way around.
If the temperature increases (because of other greenhouse gases) then the amount of water in the atmosphere will increase. THE SEAS WILL BOIL.

Howd up a sec ...

environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11652

edit: that's definitely not semantics ... it's an effect of global warning, not a cause. That's a pretty clear and important distinction. The steam that comes from hydrogen fuel cells is not a contributer to global warning, which is what the myth asserts.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:55, archived)
have you chaps heard of the seawater greenhouse?
it made for interesting reading
www.seawatergreenhouse.com/
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:58, archived)
If that works, that would be quite cool.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:01, archived)
Oooh.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:04, archived)
Shit, that's so obvious
why didn't I think of that? innovative cunts.

I'll just stick my grump in by pointing out that they are re-introducing seawater into the sea at a much higher salinity, so any major exploitation of the technology would render areas of the sea biologically dead on a localised basis ;)
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:09, archived)
Do they have to put the runoff back into the sea?

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:11, archived)
not strictly, I suppose
but what else are you going to do with it, particularly if it's exploited on a large scale?
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:12, archived)
Sell it to Glasgow to put on their fish suppers.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:14, archived)
genius.
the concept is complete. we've done it.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:29, archived)
Not loading right now ...
yeah, it's all about equilibrium. I'd still maintain that major water constant emissions would effect the atmosphere/surface equilibrium but I take your point about short life in the atmosphere. But since water vapour will rise with temp anyway, we're pretty much toast regardless.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:01, archived)
Really soggy toast.
Yurk.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:02, archived)
It doesn't seem to.
environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11652
It mentions that the effect of water vapour in the atmosphere will be significant when there is more water vapour in the atmosphere because of rising temperatures, but it doesn't mention water emissions. If that's the right link.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:01, archived)
nope, finally got the link to load
you're both right, the article maitains that human emissions won't matter. I still think it's wrong though. even at a basic thermodynamic level, temp isn't the only thing that effects a liquid/vapour equilibrium.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:04, archived)
Most of the earth's surface is water.
It's a fairly simple diffusion model: an(effectively) infinite supply of water and a finite volume of gas in a (sort of) closed box. So temperature pretty much _is_ the only important thing.

edit: is that right? where's the back of an envelope when you need one?

edit edit: yes ... I think that's right ... god it's a good job I don't do much science for a living any more
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:10, archived)
not strictly
because that assumes atmospheric temperature is the only cause of water vaporisation, which isn't really the case. The atmosphere is capable of holding more water for short periods on a localised basis .. I dunno, it's quite difficult for me to explain my reasoning behind this on the internet, so I'm not really expecting anyone to be convinced. It's something I've looked into a fair bit (one of my students is working on fuel cells)

one problem with the temp equilibrium argument around global warming though is that it opens a tiny door for the twats that say "ah but see, look at temp equilibriums and solubility, CO2 levels are actually rising BECAUSE of temp increases nernenerneneeeer .. and then I have to kill them.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:21, archived)
Sorry. That's not quite what I meant.
Water will evaporate at the surface (pretty much irrespective of temperature). The water vapour will diffuse into the rest of the volume of gas until it equalises. In an entirely closed system that would mean that eventually you'd get 100% saturation. But the actual equilibrium will be considerably below that because there are sinks of water vapor. The temperature dependence is not in how much water enters the system from evaporation, it's in the position of that equilibrium. Pumping additional water vapor into the system won't affect that equilibrium point, it will just affect how you reach it.

It'll have local effects on the weather of course ... you'll probably get much prettier clouds above cities.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:33, archived)
It's not like I haven't done anything else in them!

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:40, archived)
Oh what a pretty flame
Dancing in the twilight of your life
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:56, archived)
Don't be silly.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:02, archived)
joy!

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:01, archived)
you've got a fucking candle
you greedy bastard.

Mind you don't set light to anything.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:27, archived)
Well done on attaining candles

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:28, archived)


(
)\
{_}
.-;-.
|'-=-'|
|happy|
| b3ta|
| day |
| R.J |
'.___.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:34, archived)
Yay dynamite!

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:35, archived)
candle blah

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:37, archived)
Happy b3tacandledaything

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:39, archived)
hippy candle.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:39, archived)
Yeah, like, totally well done on managing to stay registered on a website.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:40, archived)
Under 2 months Buddy Boy and we'll be slapping you on your back for 6 years of membership too
Get your party hat ready!
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:45, archived)
I don't want to celebrate it.
I don't even want people to acknowledge it, because, lets face it... it's entirely meaningless.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:46, archived)
Yes, yes it is
But hey ho, so's most of what goes on here. What's one more meaningless ingredient in the pot?
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:48, archived)
HURRAH
CANDLE
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:59, archived)
LOL
UR A MONTH N A YR SADDER THAN ME
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:01, archived)
that'll be the wrong drivers installed for the printer
delete the printer and reinstal the right ones
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:25, archived)
Or maybe it's the wrong drivers

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:27, archived)
Or the wrong drivers

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:28, archived)
Or just the drivers

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:28, archived)
It might be the network bit.
Is it plugged into a router with an ethernet cable, or into another computer with a USB and you're accessing it that way?

If its the former, we struggled to make our HP work and gave up, and changed to the latter and shared the printers over the network that way instead. It works.

That, or the wrong drivers, Gromit.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:28, archived)
Exorcise it.
It's the only way.

In a more helpful vein, I have no idea. Shit at this sort of stuff, me. Coffee?
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:28, archived)
have you checked to see if it's working or not?

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:29, archived)
You've got the wrong printer for the drivers.
Throw away the printer and try other ones till one works.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:30, archived)
pick it up and shake it
shake it like an English Nanny
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:30, archived)
You've connected it to a Mac.
The gobbledegook means something if you have combat trousers and stupid facial hair.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:34, archived)
haha, this too!

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:50, archived)
Don't worry, I had a virus which made the printer do that once.
A simple re-format of C: should do the trick.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:36, archived)
on a mac?

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:01, archived)
Have you checked your settings on the software?
The printer management program might have a selection of checkboxes with options like "network printer [ ]" It may be worth going through them and checking that you have all the correct boxes ticked. Similarly did you specify network settings when installing the software? Sometimes it's better to enter settings like IP addresses manually rather than relying on the installation to do it properly.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:36, archived)
Jam?

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:51, archived)
and shoes.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:52, archived)
It has a virus
you'll have to get a new one.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:51, archived)
Dude, you can totally rescue it if you spray it with Dettol.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 9:52, archived)
Its a computer virus, you fool.

(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:01, archived)
so, like, spray it with d E-ttol, then
, and make sure you get ALL the little hot spinny bits inside the case
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 10:06, archived)