Prev: Polynomial used to create Galois field for AES?
Next: C vs. Fortran (half OT questions)
From: Bart Goddard on 11 Aug 2010 17:16

A few minutes ago, I was honored by a phone call from
one of our local news stations. The fact checker had
a math issue. Their informant was using (in some
context unknown to me) "millions of dollars", but it
turns out that the actual number of dollars is
1.4 million.

So his question to me, (the lucky prof who happened
to be in his office on a summer afternoon) was whether
it was appropriate to say "millions" if one did not
have at least 2 of them. And since 1.4 < 2, he though
his source might be overstating his case.

I answered that as far as I knew, the mathematical
community had no standards for such usage. But
I'm tossing the question out to whoever wants to say
something:

Is 1.4 million dollars "millions of dollars"?

I guess I do feel mislead if someone says "They're
wasting millions of dollars on that project" and
it turns out to be only 1.4 million. Hmmm..what
about 1.01 million?

Bart

--
Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.
From: quasi on 11 Aug 2010 18:12
On 11 Aug 2010 21:16:38 GMT, Bart Goddard <goddardbe(a)netscape.net>
wrote:

>
>A few minutes ago, I was honored by a phone call from
>one of our local news stations. The fact checker had
>a math issue. Their informant was using (in some
>context unknown to me) "millions of dollars", but it
>turns out that the actual number of dollars is
>1.4 million.
>
>So his question to me, (the lucky prof who happened
>to be in his office on a summer afternoon) was whether
>it was appropriate to say "millions" if one did not
>have at least 2 of them. And since 1.4 < 2, he though
>his source might be overstating his case.
>
>I answered that as far as I knew, the mathematical
>community had no standards for such usage. But
>I'm tossing the question out to whoever wants to say
>something:
>
>Is 1.4 million dollars "millions of dollars"?
>
>I guess I do feel mislead if someone says "They're
>wasting millions of dollars on that project" and
>it turns out to be only 1.4 million. Hmmm..what
>about 1.01 million?

For a project where the cost is estimated at 1.4 million (but might
end up being higher), it's certainly ok to say "the cost will be in
the millions" to indicate that it lies somewhere in the millions
group.

I think the key is whether you know the amount is 1.4 million or
whether all you have is a range. If you really know the amount, then
it's definitely misleading to give a range that is centered much
higher (or much lower).

For the 1.4 million example, you might say "the cost is in the low
millions" to at least be a little less misleading.

quasi
From: Ken Pledger on 11 Aug 2010 19:48
In article <Xns9DD1A0BF12A05goddardbenetscapenet(a)74.209.136.98>,
Bart Goddard <goddardbe(a)netscape.net> wrote:

> A few minutes ago, I was honored by a phone call from
> one of our local news stations. The fact checker had
> a math issue. Their informant was using (in some
> context unknown to me) "millions of dollars", but it
> turns out that the actual number of dollars is
> 1.4 million.
>
> So his question to me, (the lucky prof who happened
> to be in his office on a summer afternoon) was whether
> it was appropriate to say "millions" if one did not
> have at least 2 of them. And since 1.4 < 2, he though
> his source might be overstating his case.
>
> I answered that as far as I knew, the mathematical
> community had no standards for such usage. But
> I'm tossing the question out to whoever wants to say
> something:
>
> Is 1.4 million dollars "millions of dollars"?
> ....


Since the 1.4 is likely to be approximate anyway, why not just say
"over a million"?

Ken Pledger.
From: James Waldby on 11 Aug 2010 20:33
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:48:40 +1200, Ken Pledger wrote:
> Bart Goddard wrote:
>> A few minutes ago, I was honored by a phone call from one of our local
>> news stations. [...] Their informant was using [...] "millions of
>> dollars", but [...] the actual number of dollars is 1.4 million.
>>
>> So his question [...] was whether it was appropriate to say "millions"
>> if one did not have at least 2 of them. And since 1.4 < 2, he though
>> his source might be overstating his case.
....
>> Is 1.4 million dollars "millions of dollars"? ....
>
> Since the 1.4 is likely to be approximate anyway, why not
> just say "over a million"?

Obviously, the appropriate phrase depends on what needs to be
highlighted or hidden. :)

Cheap at the price: "just barely over a million", "a mere million
and change"

Neutral / ambiguous: "low 7 figures", "about $1.4 million",
"over $1 million", "under $2 million"

Too expensive or too much being spent: "millions of dollars",
"way more than a million dollars"

--
jiw
From: eratosthenes on 11 Aug 2010 21:47

> Is 1.4 million dollars "millions of dollars"?

To say so would be misleading, though not terribly so, way to state
the amount.
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Polynomial used to create Galois field for AES?
Next: C vs. Fortran (half OT questions)