When Did Detroit Start Building Cars Like Japanese dSLRs????
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: 7D full review at dpreview
Next: Photos about Botany
From: J�rgen Exner on 15 Nov 2009 22:10 "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote: >"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald(a)scs.uiuc.edu.remove.invalid> wrote in message >news:hdpqqa$7q1$1(a)news.acm.uiuc.edu... >> Neil Harrington wrote: >>> The bothersome one is Fahrenheit to Centigrade (or Celsius as they've >>> decided to call it for some silly reason), or vice versa of course. >>> Probably most people who've developed B&W film know that 68 F = 20 C, but >>> since the conversion is non-linear it's not something that you can >>> approximate instantly in your head. >> >> WHAT??? It most certainly IS linear! > >Not the conversion. Of coures it is linear. What else would it possibly be? Square? Polynomial? Exponentional? Logarithmic? Constant? Just another example that you have no clue what you are talking about. >10 kg. on the other hand is about 22 lbs., therefore 5 kg is 11 lbs., 20 kg >is 44 lbs., 100 kg is 220 lbs., and so on. That's what I mean by linear. Oh, right. What _YOU_ mean by linear. I see. Just like what _YOU_ meant by metric. If you want to call a table a john, then by all means that is your choice. But it certainly simplifies communication a lot if all involved parties have the same understanding of the meaning of a word. And because when they hear "john" most people will NOT imagine something with a flat top, often 4 legs, maybe a table cloth on top, and some nice chairs around it, it might be easier if you stick with the established semantic of words, too. Otherwise your claim that you just sat down at the john for dinner might cause some "astonishment". jue
From: Ray Fischer on 16 Nov 2009 00:05 J�rgen Exner <jurgenex(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >"Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote: >>"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald(a)scs.uiuc.edu.remove.invalid> wrote in message >>news:hdpqqa$7q1$1(a)news.acm.uiuc.edu... >>> Neil Harrington wrote: >>>> The bothersome one is Fahrenheit to Centigrade (or Celsius as they've >>>> decided to call it for some silly reason), or vice versa of course. >>>> Probably most people who've developed B&W film know that 68 F = 20 C, but >>>> since the conversion is non-linear it's not something that you can >>>> approximate instantly in your head. >>> >>> WHAT??? It most certainly IS linear! >> >>Not the conversion. > >Of coures it is linear. >What else would it possibly be? Square? Polynomial? Exponentional? >Logarithmic? Constant? > >Just another example that you have no clue what you are talking about. But what else is new? >>10 kg. on the other hand is about 22 lbs., therefore 5 kg is 11 lbs., 20 kg >>is 44 lbs., 100 kg is 220 lbs., and so on. That's what I mean by linear. > >Oh, right. What _YOU_ mean by linear. I see. Just like what _YOU_ meant >by metric. Rightards live in their own little world where words mean whatever they want them to mean. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: MikeW on 16 Nov 2009 02:04 Degrees Celcius to degrees Fahrenheit: double C, take off a tenth of the result, add 32. Always works. Degrees Fahrenheit to degrees Celcius: take off 32, halve the result, add a tenth. Certainly close enough for Government work. MikeW "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message news:fZednUem8613A53WnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d(a)giganews.com... > > "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message > news:YpadnXQtebCZDp3WnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >> >> "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message >> news:VKqdnV9VoYc69J3WnZ2dnUVZ_qOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >>> >>> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:4aff9d4d(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... >>>> Bill Graham wrote: >>>>> >>>>> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:4afe7080$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... >>>>>> Bill Graham wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "J�rgen Exner" <jurgenex(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:r48sf5hvnn2lu320s5prvsp7agi8aar9ff(a)4ax.com... >>>>>>>> "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> As a unit of liquid measure, the cup is what it is and does not >>>>>>>>> have any >>>>>>>>> particular relationship to the amount of coffee you're served in a >>>>>>>>> cup. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Then if the unit "cup" doesn't have a relationship to a cup of >>>>>>>> beverage >>>>>>>> then what is the specific benefit of having that unit "cup" instead >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> using e.g 1/4 liter? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> jue >>>>>>> >>>>>>> None. It's just a slang term. Actually, when it comes to a cup of >>>>>>> coffee, it's usually closer to 1/4 liter than a cup, which is 1/4 of >>>>>>> a quart. You have to remember that the world is 99% housewives, and >>>>>>> only 1% engineers. >>>>>> >>>>>> A metric cup *is* 1/4 of a liter. >>>>>> >>>>> The most common coffee cup used here in the US is the Corning, >>>>> "Correll Ware" cup, and it is almost exactly 250 cc's. >>>> >>>> Well, there you go. You're already used to one common metric measure. >>> >>> Most conversions are easy enough, even if pointless. Just looking at >>> focusing scales makes it obvious that 10 ft. is about 3 m, and it's easy >>> to remember that 1 kg is about 2.2 lbs. How many ounces in a kilogram or >>> grams in a pound is more difficult, but it's hard to imagine why anyone >>> would ever want to know. >>> >>> The bothersome one is Fahrenheit to Centigrade (or Celsius as they've >>> decided to call it for some silly reason), or vice versa of course. >>> Probably most people who've developed B&W film know that 68 F = 20 C, >>> but since the conversion is non-linear it's not something that you can >>> approximate instantly in your head. >>> >>> >> I can't agree that it's, "non linear". Both scales are straight lines >> that happen to cross at -40 degrees. > > Yes, they are linear in that way. What I meant was that converting one to > the other is not a simple matter of multiplication or division, as is the > case with kilograms and pounds. "Non-linear" was perhaps not the best way > of describing that. > >> People learn the important conversions for the work they do. Most nurses >> know that 98.6 F is 37 C for example. > > I doubt most nurses do know that, since Fahrenheit is still used for body > temp, or was the last I knew. But anyway *knowing* 98.6 F is 37 C would > not mean they could do the conversion. I've worked with a lot of nurses > over a period of 30+ years and I can tell you with confidence that most of > them couldn't do the conversion and get an accurate result. > > Just *one* of my doctors' offices has switched to metric scales, and that > was only in the last year or so. The others still weigh you in good ol' > pounds. The one that did switch, after I commented that I liked the look > of my weight much better in kilograms, the nurse came back in a few > minutes and told me what it was in pounds. When I asked if she'd done that > in her head she said No, and produced a *table* showing the equivalents. I > had already done the conversion in my head, which after all is just a > matter of multiplying by 2.2. Now if a nurse can't do that in her head but > needs a printed table for it, she sure as hell can't convert C to F or > vice versa. > > >
From: Eric Stevens on 16 Nov 2009 03:59 On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:14:46 -0800, "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >"Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message >news:8fWdnZe9nMMDDGLXnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >> >> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >> news:2009111410440716807-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >>> On 2009-11-14 10:03:45 -0800, "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> >>> said: >>> >>>> >>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >>>> news:2009111407313133169-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >>>>> On 2009-11-14 06:58:27 -0800, George Kerby <ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com> >>>>> said: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 11/14/09 4:55 AM, in article >>>>>> 2009111402550242612-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck" >>>>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2009-11-14 02:53:09 -0800, Savageduck >>>>>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> >>>>>>> said: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 2009-11-14 02:30:45 -0800, "Wilba" <usenet(a)CUTTHISimago.com.au> >>>>>>>> said: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Savageduck wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Wilba said: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Years ago I read that left-hand drive is safer overall, because >>>>>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>> person is startled they tend to raise their non-dominant hand to >>>>>>>>>>> protect >>>>>>>>>>> their head. If at the time they are steering a car on the left of >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> road, >>>>>>>>>>> 9 out of 10 will therefore sverve into oncoming traffic. >>>>>>>>>>> Apparently >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> effect is statistically significant. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It seems we left our history far behind. Have you ever noticed >>>>>>>>>> where >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> good old Wells Fargo stage coach driver sat, ...on the right, >>>>>>>>>> shotgun >>>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>> the left. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Don't see many of them 'round these here parts. :- ) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Note the driver on the left. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/Concord_stagecoach_1869.pn>> >>>>>> g >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sorry, that was the right, the shot gun was on the left. >>>>>>> Now I don't know my left from my right! >>>>>> The negative was flopped...? >>>>> >>>>> Aah! The Billy The Kid, left hand gun paradox. >>>> >>>> Yep. To this day, many (probably most) people still believe that Henry >>>> "Billy the Kid" McCarty was left-handed. One of the movies about him, >>>> "The >>>> Left Handed Gun," has surely contributed to that falsehood. >>> >>> Well here is a photo of a stagecoach, driven from the right, and with the >>> type on the coach correct and not mirror imaged. >>> http://www.old-picture.com/old-west/pictures/Stagecoach-Western.jpg >>> >>> and anothers of what seems to be of great character drivers (on the >>> right) >>> http://www.legendsofamerica.com/photos-oldwest/Deadwood%20stagecoach.jpg >>> http://www.owensvalleyhistory.com/cerro_gordo2/stage_coach.jpg >> >> Yes, stagecoaches and horse-drawn buggies were always driven from the >> right. I've never seen any picture showing otherwise. >Strange....I wonder why their replacement automobiles were developed to be >operated from the left side? I've already told you. It was Napoleon. Eric Stevens
From: Eric Stevens on 16 Nov 2009 04:00
On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:25:50 -0800, "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >"Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message >news:DOydnQgIzaeZCmLXnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >> >> "Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens(a)sum.co.nz> wrote in message >> news:t28uf5hjm52ous6p5d4sren7rv8k86agfo(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:03:47 -0500, "Neil Harrington" >>> <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >>>>news:2009111401130782327-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> It seems we left our history far behind. Have you ever noticed where >>>>> the >>>>> good old Wells Fargo stage coach driver sat, ...on the right, shotgun >>>>> on >>>>> the left. >>>> >>>>Apparently that was the standard arrangement for all horse and buggy >>>>drivers >>>>too. (Going by the movies, anyway.) >>>> >>>>And it's still the standard position for whoever's steering a power boat. >>>> >>>>At least some of the earliest American automobiles had right-hand drive >>>>also. Now I'm wondering where and why left-hand drive got started. >>>>Perhaps >>>>it was because the gearshift was centrally located, and it's more natural >>>>to >>>>work that with the dominant hand, which for 90% of people is the right >>>>one. >>>> >>> >>> Blame Napoleon. He laid down the law for France and at the beginning >>> of the 20th century France dominated the automobile industry. >> >> But sans Napoleon. >> >Hummmm.....I wonder if France had stagecoaches before their automobiles, and >if so, were they operated from the left or right sides? Where ever they were operated from, ever since Napoleon they drove on the right. Eric Stevens |