When Did Detroit Start Building Cars Like Japanese dSLRs????
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: 7D full review at dpreview
Next: Photos about Botany
From: Bill Graham on 11 Nov 2009 03:42 "J�rgen Exner" <jurgenex(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:2tlkf5dv03jmudhdl6jij705tkfoom6hj2(a)4ax.com... > "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote: >>And go metric, you mean? There'd be no point to it. Metric is silly for >>most >>ordinary purposes, > > Yeah, right. That's probably the reason why 200+ countries are using it > where there are only 3 that don't. > >>and it would cost billions to change everything. > > "Those who are late will be punished by life itself." > >>Hexadecimal really makes far more sense than metric, > > You got 16 fingers? Amazing! > And you are fluent in adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing > them, too? Like 3A4F + BE3 * 2D5? Even more amazing! > > Besides, what does the radix of a numeral system have to do with metric > or not? > >>and that is closer to >>the old familiar English systems of measure. > > ??? > What? Where except for small liquid quantities? > >>You blokes should have stayed >>with what you had. (Well, except for currency I suppose. But even that had >>the advantage of being charmingly quaint.) > > How many cubic inches are in a gallon, again? How many tea spoon are in > one cubic foot of water? And how many inches are there to a mile? And > how high can I lift 1 pound with the energy provided by 1 BTU in 1 hour? > And do you even know how a furlong by a chain is commonly called today? > Now tell me again, that that nonsense makes any logical sense. > > jue Do people still add and subtract? - I thought everyone used a pocket calculator for things like that.
From: J�rgen Exner on 11 Nov 2009 06:09 "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote: >"J�rgen Exner" <jurgenex(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote: >>>Hexadecimal really makes far more sense than metric, >> >> You got 16 fingers? Amazing! >> And you are fluent in adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing >> them, too? Like 3A4F + BE3 * 2D5? Even more amazing! >> [...] >Do people still add and subtract? - I thought everyone used a pocket >calculator for things like that. Your pocket calculator must be pretty advanced to support hexadezimal arithmetic. Of course those things do exist, but they are definitely *NOT* commonplace. At least I've never seen keys 'A' to 'F' on e.g. the typical TI-30. jue
From: R. Mark Clayton on 11 Nov 2009 13:47 "J�rgen Exner" <jurgenex(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:gj6lf5dhnj8cl3cqsojdgf3mv30rn31osr(a)4ax.com... > "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote: >>"J�rgen Exner" <jurgenex(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote: >>>>Hexadecimal really makes far more sense than metric, >>> >>> You got 16 fingers? Amazing! >>> And you are fluent in adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing >>> them, too? Like 3A4F + BE3 * 2D5? Even more amazing! >>> > [...] >>Do people still add and subtract? - I thought everyone used a pocket >>calculator for things like that. > > Your pocket calculator must be pretty advanced to support hexadezimal > arithmetic. Of course those things do exist, but they are definitely > *NOT* commonplace. At least I've never seen keys 'A' to 'F' on e.g. the > typical TI-30. Back in the early 80's IIRC Texas brought out the first hexadecimal calculator (also did decimal, octal and binary). Common in programming dept's. Casio started producing multiple base calculators in the late 80's and most of their scientific ones support it. These days even my calculator from the pound shop has it and the answer to the above is 21E42E = 2221102 > > jue
From: nospam on 11 Nov 2009 13:54 In article <h6adnWjrlq08m2bXnZ2dnUVZ8hWdnZ2d(a)bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton <nospamclayton(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > Back in the early 80's IIRC Texas brought out the first hexadecimal > calculator (also did decimal, octal and binary). Common in programming > dept's. nope, the hp-16c was the first in 1982. hp also had the 15c which did complex arithmetic and the hp-41c which could do pretty much anything.
From: R. Mark Clayton on 11 Nov 2009 14:20
"Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message news:W8-dnQ16jqYTl2fXnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > > "R. Mark Clayton" <nospamclayton(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message > news:OLmdnQWi2eLSIGTXnZ2dnUVZ7rudnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> SNIP >> >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course the tripod mount thread is 1/4" Whitworth. >>>>> >>>>> Really?! I always just assumed that was SAE too. >>>>> >>>> I think he's kidding.....Mine's 1/4-20 SAE. >>> >>> That's what I thought. But I don't think he's kidding. >>> >>> As far as I know, Whitworth sizes were only used on British products. >>> >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitworth_thread >> >> "Within the United States, the Whitworth thread that most people >> encounter is the quarter-inch thread on the bottom of most cameras for >> mounting on a tripod." > > That's interesting. But the chart on that page shows 1/4-20 to be a > standard Whitworth size, so a 1/4-20 SAE bolt still fits, even if not > perfectly. I believe the shape of the threads is slightly different > between the two. > > For American mechanics working with Whitworth bolts, nuts and wrenches, > the main problem is the difference in wrench sizes -- which is only > because SAE measures size across the flats while Whitworth measures point > to opposite point. Also the angle of the thread may be 60 degrees instead of 55, so it will turn in for a while and then get stuck - unless of course SAE cribbed it. Whitworth heads were quite large and were reduced during the war to save metal. > >> >> Touch�! >> >> Even though the Yanks left the Empire they still won't join the rest of >> the world. > > And go metric, you mean? There'd be no point to it. Metric is silly for > most ordinary purposes, and it would cost billions to change everything. Well what about the cost of not changing it? Item 1 Mars Climate Orbiter crashes and burns* $327,600,000.00c So that's about one dollar per citizen - bad start! (OK so in the fifties the Brits made a car engine that had metric bolts with imperial heads... ) > Hexadecimal really makes far more sense than metric, and that is closer to > the old familiar English systems of measure. You blokes should have stayed > with what you had. (Well, except for currency I suppose. But even that had > the advantage of being charmingly quaint.) > Well this only works for avoirdupois weight (16 ounces to the pound), but for troy weight there are only 12 and for fluid measure 20 fluid ounces to the pint (OK so it is 16 now in our former colony, but what do they know about measurement or spelling?). As for the pound sterling this is the last currency in the world that has any relation to the original pound weight of silver that the Libra (�) in Lsd stood for in Roman times. By 1914 there were four ounces (~112g) of 92.5% silver to the �, but now one pound will only buy you about 4 to 5g. Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling are working hard to reduce this as rapidly as possible :-((. The French Livre blew up during their revolution with a loaf of bread costing �15 or more and was replaced by the Franc (revalued by 100 ~1960). By the time the Italian Lira was replaced by the Euro there were thousands to the Euro. * http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter%23The_metric.2Fimperial_mix-up&usg=AFQjCNHBbstCpB4S2gxZe2bJ9jJJGEClxw&ei=ng37SpzEINeMjAfr0bGxBA&sa=X&oi=section_link&resnum=2&ct=legacy&ved=0CAoQygQ |