22 Feb
2004
22 Feb
'04
10:52 p.m.
In message <20040222202842.V77297(a)newshell.lmi.net>et>, Fred Cisin writes:
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 blstuart(a)bellsouth.net wrote:
Feb 29, 1860.
Therefore, 35th birthday (1900 was NOT a leap year)
DOH (accompanied by the distinctive sound of a palm and
a forehead making rapid contact)! And afer all the times
I've covered the leap year example in class, how could
I have forgotten that. Of course, since I was working
> >
> 39th? Shouldn't it be older than that?
Methinks ol' Herman must have
been born on February 29, 1848. from 39th birthday, I would have ended up with 1844
which would still have been off.
The reason why the 1890 census was expected to take too
long
to process without Hollerith was:
A) There were too many dinosaurs to count
B) Volts flowed slower in those days
C) They were using MICROS~1 software
D) There was a shortage of 1s to use in making binary
E) The need to invent hanging chad
Gee I thought that it was because they were being sued
because the idea of counting people violated SCO's
intellectual property.
BLS