HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: godfrey@vxdesy.desy.de
Subject: Re: degrees-grades
Organization: (DESY, Hamburg, Germany)
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 02:22:22 GMT

In article <C0oo4p.3o3@newcastle.ac.uk>, Trevor.Kirby@newcastle.ac.uk (Trevor Kirby) writes:
> 
> In article <A.Grant.33.726616422@ucs.cam.ac.uk>, A.Grant@ucs.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:
> 
>>But it's common knowledge that external examiners at ex-polys admit to
>>giving firsts for work that would only get an upper second at their own
>>universities.
> 
> apparently it's only common knowledge at Cambridge.
> 
>  Trev

This argument has been going on intermittently for some time on s.c.b.
I teach at two ex-polys in London and I can say categorically that the standard
of the students who pass is much lower than at those universities with
which I have been associated and at which I have taught, in
UK, CXanada and US.  There is not a shadow of a doubt.  There is no-one in
the lecturing circles in which I move who would argue that the ex-polys
are the same standard as the established universities, including the lecturers
at the ex-polys.

Laurence

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: f0975893@jaguar.csc.wsu.edu
Subject: Re: Celsius <--> Fahrenheit (was Re: British Imperial...)
Organization: Washington State University
Date: 5 Jan 93 14:48:21 -0800

In article <05JAN93.15920537.0085@VM1.MCGILL.CA>, CZ94 <CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA>
writes:

>>>  -- or do you have to subtract 32 first?  Or is it afterwards?  I never
>>>     could remember.
>>
>>Simple. Don't bother, use this mechanism:
>> Celcius to Fahrenheit: subtract 40, *9/5, add 40
>> Fahrenheit to Celcius: subtract 40, *5/9, add 40
>>This works because -40F = -40C.
>>
> The above formulae are wrong.  You need to add 40, then multiply
> by 5/9 or 9/5, then subtract 40.

Well, I always use the formula,

           Temp(Celcius) = 5/9 * ( Temp(Farenheit) - 32 )

This seems to work for me.

Along with additional little trivia like,

          Temp (Celcius)         Temp(Farenheit)
          --------------         ---------------
		28			82
                16			61

These are easy to remember because the figure for one temperature is the
mirror image for the other!! And of course, the other equivalence that is
easy to remember is -40C = -40F.

Does anyone know how the Farenheit scale was developed and why it is such a
weird scale? I have heard that the 100F mark was supposed to be the tempera-
ture of blood (body temperature), only they got it wrong!! And 0F happened
to be the lowest temperature measured at that time (~freezing point of saline
water?!?).

I would love to know more about this and whether the rumo(u)rs above have
any fact to them. Apologies if this is going off the newsgroup track a 
little, I do not know if there is a history of science group!! Hopefully 
readers here will have some idea.

Thanks.

Richard.
  _\_   Richard J Appleyard  f0975893@jaguar.csc.wsu.edu
 /   \  Washington State University  
(   ) ) Voice (509) 335-7728  Fax (509) 335-9688 
 \___/  "To err is human, but to really screw things up takes a computer!"
From: sandee@Think.COM (Daan Sandee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: American humo(u)r (was Re: Studying Me
Date: 12 Jan 1993 19:11:16 GMT
Organization: TMC
NNTP-Posting-Host: tremor.quake.think.com

In article <1iusckINN3l5@west.West.Sun.COM>, ian@sun.com (Ian Griffin) writes:
|> In article 1iuq7jINNom@nereus.East.Sun.COM, curt@nereus.East.Sun.COM (Curt Harpold-Sun-Vienna VA-Systems Engineer) writes:
|> > I do, several times a week.  But then again, I live on Capitol Hill in 
|> > Washington, D.C., currently known as "Murder Capitol of the U.S.".
|> 
|> 'Scuse me, but the dubious distinction of "Murder Capitol USA" 
|> has recently been claimed by the small town of East Palo Alto, Ca.
|> This in fact has the highest per capita rates for 1992.  
|> 
|> What's uncanny about statistics like this is that an area like East Palo Alto
|> is literally less than a five minute drive across Hwy 101 from Palo Alto,
|> home of Stanford University, half-million dollar houses, expensive 
|> shopping malls etc.  The ability to distinguish a "good" from a "bad"
|> area is something that most visitors to the USA must learn quickly.

you're telling me ... I heard that statistic on the first day I arrived
in this area, so I didn't have to wonder why the rents north of 101 were
so cheap. So now I live in Menlo Park, just out of range of gunfire sounds.

Actually, 101 isn't the exact boundary, but yes, the distance between
prestigious living and the murder capital [sic ; the Capitol didn't move]
of the US is only a couple of blocks. For that matter, it's only a couple
of blocks in DC.

Daan Sandee                                           sandee@think.com
Thinking Machines Corporation
1010 El Camino Real, Suite 310
Menlo Park, CA 94025                                  (415) 329-9300
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller)
Subject: Re: Silly Bible semi-pedantry [was: Re: Happy Christmas!]
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:28:45 GMT

 Matthew Huntbach writes:
> Sue Miller writes:
>>He can't help it.  You have witnessed possibly your first lecture
>>from an American Bible Belt Christian.
>>
>No, not my first. When things get a bit slack on s.c.b or
>uk.politics, I go off and do a bit of Prod-bashing on
>soc.religion.christian. Great fun - almost as much fun as
>defending the Prods in NI in s.c.celtic.
>

soc.religion.christian seems to be a favorite haunt for that kind
of fun.  Being a born-again atheist (I used to be an agnostic until
I finally gave in and accepted the truth), I do understand the
attraction.  I don't give in to it very often, however.  I don't
think you should either - it can lead to blindness if indulged in
too often.



Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: jackson@soldev.tti.com (Dick Jackson)
Subject: Re: Studying Meteorology in the UK
Organization: Transaction Technology Inc.
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:21:13 GMT

In article <1if0qbINN3ue@early-bird.think.com> sandee@Think.COM (Daan Sandee) writes:
>In article <dhalliwe.725831451@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>, userDHAL@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (David Halliwell) writes:
>|> 
>|>    Hey! I resemble that remark!
>
> You WHAT ? Is your native language Yadallean, by any chance ? Are there
> native English speakers left in Alberta ?

Daan, that was a joke! Not only a very puny joke, but a very old one, I'm
surprised you didn't recognise it (but then again the concept of a joke
is still catching hold in the US, isn't it?).

I have heard that particular joke used in a Mash episode, but again it was
plagiarism.  I would hazard that the original should be credited to either
Groucho Marx or Jimmy Durante (both excellent joke makers but who did have
off days).

Dick Jackson
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: prodger@leland.Stanford.EDU (phillip prodger)
Subject: Re: --Body Shop & Wind vs. CO2
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 18:22:22 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.093038.12364@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:

>Does anyone else remember the very first Body Shop? It doesn't
>seem very long ago (15 years?) that it opened as a one-off in the
>backstreets of Brighton. The name was a joke as it was next
>door to an undertakers. In those days the North Laines where it
>was situated was a run-down area full of discount shops where
>my parents would go when they couldn't afford Sainsbury's.
>Nowadays it's full of trendy boutiques, of which the Body Shop
>was one of the pioneers, though the original Body Shop has been
>closed down.

I do remember the old Body Shop in Brighton.  Even then it had a
cult following.  Although they now carry a much larger selection than
they originally did, they do seem to carry most of the products they
started with in Brighton.

But I didn't know the original had closed down.  Is Brighton now
bodyshopless?



Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones)
Subject: Re: Celsius <--> Fahrenheit (was Re: British Imperial...)
Organization: Vonnegut Tent Rentals, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 15:04:42 GMT

R.A.McPheat (cabr53@ccsun.strath.ac.uk) wrote:
> 
> In article <1993Jan6.151444.14612@pixel.kodak.com> dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones) writes:
> >
> >Note that scientists don't use Celsius either - they use Kelvin, whose 
> 
> Try telling that to a meteorologist
Is meteorology a science?

> 
> >degrees just happen to be the same size, but which is measured from Absolute
>  ^^^^^^^
> The unit of temperature is Kelvin, not degrees Kelvin
Picky picky.....

> 
> >Zero.  You could just as easily have Fahrenheit sized degrees on an absolute
> >scale.
> 
> But to have Fahrenheit sized degrees on an absolute scale you have to know
> what size a Fahrenheit degree is. One hundredth of the difference between
> the temperature of freezing saline and that of someone with a slight fever
> is not a good definition.

Cobblers.  1/180th of the difference between freezing and boiling water is 
just fine.

RFD: a new temperature scale with Celsius sized degrees but based on 0=-20C.
That way you get numbers that people can relate to when discussing weather.
Most people probably can't sense a temperature difference of <1C anyway, so 
the greater unit size compared to deg F is not a problem.

And no, you don't have to name it after me.

--
||------------------------------------------------------------------------
||Dave Jones (dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com)|Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY  |
From: Trevor.Kirby@newcastle.ac.uk (Trevor Kirby)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: degrees-grades
Date: 12 Jan 93 09:41:46 GMT
Organization: Computing Laboratory, U of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK NE1 7RU.


In article <1993Jan11.114800.16631@infodev.cam.ac.uk>, ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:
>
>Oh, come on.  I only work here.  As it happens I got my info from a 2-page
>investigation of this whole question in (I think) the Independent about
>a month aog, where they talked to an external examiner (whose own university
>was Warwick).
>
Ah, common knowledge translates to one external talking to a paper who's identity
you are not sure of. Nice to know the evidence is so damning.

 Trev 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:18555 alt.usage.english:10483
From: dsg@impmh.uucp (Dave Gordon)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Back from the UK
Date: 12 Jan 93 18:20:20 GMT
Organization: Integrated Micro Products Ltd

In <1993Jan12.032713.10746@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>
>In article <1993Jan11.233015.28726@csi.uottawa.ca> misrael@csi.uottawa.ca (Mark Israel) writes:
>>
>>And on both sides of the Atlantic, "This book is quite good" means 
>>"This book is fairly good."
>
>I can't agree with that.  If someone said to me that the book they were
>reading is "quite good," I'd take that to mean that it's very good.

"Quite" is ambiguous in UK usage anyway; it can mean "very" *or* "fairly".
Which one depends on context and *intonation* (in speech).  It seems to
me (as a native of the UK) that the "very" meaning is (becoming) dated
and/or affected e.g. "The afternoon was quite perfect" (in an upper-class
accent) means "completely perfect" (yes I *know* it's a tautology),
while "It's *quite* a good film, but ..." carries the implication "could
be better".  BTW, I disagreed with the other part of Mark Israel's
quoted post:

   "This cup is quite full" means "This cup is completely full" on
   both sides of the Atlantic.  And on both sides of the Atlantic,
   "This book is quite good" means "This book is fairly good."

In the UK, I would expect "this cup is quite full" to mean that
it's more than half full, but *not* completely full, unless the
context suggests otherwise.

>Speaking of the "store" thing, does anyone know the history behind the
>word for "store" in most romance languages being cognate with our word
>"magazine" ??

In military usage, a "magazine" *is* a store (typically for ammunition).
-- 

===============================================================================
Dave | dsg@imp.co.uk | +44 753 516599 | I am not a .sig virus, I am a free bug!
===============================================================================
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:18541 soc.culture.celtic:8674
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Shetlands oil fiasco
Date: 12 Jan 93 10:36:26 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

In article <wZX6wB5w165w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca> yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee) writes:
>Is there ANY current information available about the Braer bungle?

Info from memory, and of mixed ages:  Yesterday (Monday) the papers
were speculating about why the ship had taken on 4 extra mechanics
before setting sail from Norway -- did the captain know there was
something wrong with the ship?

And, it was pointed out that working from the time the left Norway, to
the time of their distress call (and location then), you came out with
an average speed of something like 4.5 knots.  Other ship's captains
have said that that is unbelievably slow, even allowing for the
weather, so there is speculation that the ship may actually have lost
propulsion power and been adrift for some time before their initial
call for help.  (Even a couple more hours would have allowed time for
the ocean-going tugs to get to them and try to attach a line while they
were still well out from the coast, so any delay could be significant.)

Also as of yesterday, about 25 miles of coastline had been
contaminated, and about 10 square miles of coastal farmland (owing to
oil blowing ashore).  Crops on said farmland have been condemned.  The
government has also banned sale of fish taken from a large surrounding
area.  (Though actually the local fishermen had already said that, in
order to retain public confidence, they would undertake not to fish in
an even larger area.)  Oil slicks are usually a hazard to things that
live at or near the top of the ocean, but there's evidence to suggest
that the weather is mixing the oil in to a depth which is killing off
local sea-floor life as well.

There were some spells where the weather abated sufficiently to allow
dispersants to be used.  The government says there is no danger to
human health, but has been issuing facemasks to people living near the
south coast.  At least one of the dispersants being used has been
banned in several countries, because of its own toxicity.  There is an
ongoing argument about whether this 'cure' might actually be worse, in
context, than the original problem.  The 'anti's claim that for spills
of this sort of light oil, the best overall results are achieved simply
by letting wind and wave action break up and disperse the spill.  There's 
a lot of that about just now.

Last night the weather worsened again, and according to this morning's
news (Tuesday) they now estimate that 3/4 of the Braer's cargo has
probably already escaped, and that the ship may break up completely,
with the release of the remainder of the oil, before the weather clears
sufficiently to allow any attempt to pump it out.

-- 
Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK
 P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272 303132
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: a-kevinp@microsoft.com (Kevin Purcell)
Subject: Re: British Imperial Weights and Measures
Date: 08 Jan 93 17:54:03 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.

In article <128030005@otter.hpl.hp.com> tgg@otter.hpl.hp.com wrote:
> |  -- or do you have to subtract 32 first?  Or is it afterwards?  I never
> |     could remember.
> 
> Simple. Don't bother, use this mechanism:
> 	Celcius to Fahrenheit: subtract 40, *9/5, add 40
> 	Fahrenheit to Celcius: subtract 40, *5/9, add 40
> 
> notice the similarity.
> 
> This works because -40F = -40C.
> 
> 
Even better (when you reverse the subtractions) is the simpler aproximate
algorithm as used by the Met Office:

To convert C to F: double and add 30.
To convert F to C: subtract 30 and halve.

its close enough for getting a feel.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks)
Subject: Re: Martini
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 14:16:30 GMT

marcusc@acfcluster.nyu.edu writes:
| Stephen Fry, in an introductory monologue, presumably designed to give
| needed background info to the American market, describes what a gentleman's
| gentleman was.  He refers at one point to "mixing martinis" for the 
| gentleman.

Yesterday, he talked about an "eiderdown".  If he were as attuned to the
U.S. audience as Another Presenter was, he would have said "comforter".

Mr. Fry, you're no Alistair Cooke.
-- 
David Brooks					dbrooks@osf.org
Open Software Foundation			uunet!osf.org!dbrooks
Shine out, fair sun, with all your heat!  Black winter freezes to his seat...
The boneless fish close quaking lies...the stars in icicles arise!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: godfrey@vxdesy.desy.de
Subject: Re: Celsius <--> Fahrenheit (was Re: British Imperial...)
Organization: (DESY, Hamburg, Germany)
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 03:05:09 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.144821.1@jaguar.csc.wsu.edu>, f0975893@jaguar.csc.wsu.edu writes:
> In article <05JAN93.15920537.0085@VM1.MCGILL.CA>, CZ94 <CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA>
> writes:
> 
>>>>  -- or do you have to subtract 32 first?  Or is it afterwards?  I never
>>>>     could remember.
>>>
>>>Simple. Don't bother, use this mechanism:
>>> Celcius to Fahrenheit: subtract 40, *9/5, add 40
>>> Fahrenheit to Celcius: subtract 40, *5/9, add 40
>>>This works because -40F = -40C.
>>>
>> The above formulae are wrong.  You need to add 40, then multiply
>> by 5/9 or 9/5, then subtract 40.
> 

This is correct.

> Well, I always use the formula,
> 
>            Temp(Celcius) = 5/9 * ( Temp(Farenheit) - 32 )
> 
> This seems to work for me.
> 

It only needs elementary algebra to show the equivalence of this to the method
described above.

Laurence

Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:18548 soc.culture.celtic:8677
From: cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Chris Cooke)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Shetlands oil fiasco
Date: 12 Jan 93 16:23:35 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, Scotland

Yesterday, another oil tanker was sighted sailing at high speed about four
miles off the coast of Fair Isle.  In hurricane force winds.
--
	-- Chris. 	cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk   (on Janet, cc@uk.ac.ed.dcs)
From: mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Silly Bible semi-pedantry [was: Re: Happy Christmas!]
Date: 6 Jan 93 13:56:22 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

In article <1993Jan5.160544.11049@vax.oxford.ac.uk> wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>In article <1993Jan5.092106.12107@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>, mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
>Talking of the Guardian, we must congratulate Matthew on his recent letter to
>it: three or four paragraphs on politics and not a reference to Paddy's happy
>band in sight. Well done!

It was difficult not to write a letter of this sort when
yesterday someone had one printed saying how wonderful the
Labour Party was with all its new radical commitment to regional
devolution, an elected second chamber, a bill of rights etc. etc.
basically all the things the Liberal Party has been committed
to for forty years.
>
>> They stayed at Glastonbury, and there is still a
>> thorn tree there which grew when Joseph planted his staff in
>> the ground.
>
>Or at least people say there is.

ObPortslade-Liberation-Front

I wonder if it's related to the legendary thorn tree which was
supposed to exist close to my home village of Portslade, which
was supposed to revive the sick when you carried them round it
and bumped them into it three times. Last time it was tried,
though, apparently the patient died  (the site of this tree is
long forgotten, so we can't blame Hove Borough Council for
removing this one).

Matthew Huntbach
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: CZ94 <CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA>
Subject: Celsius <--> Fahrenheit (was Re: British Imperial...)
Organization: McGill University
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 19:44:28 GMT

In article <128030005@otter.hpl.hp.com> tgg@otter.hpl.hp.com (Tom Gardner) writes:
>|  -- or do you have to subtract 32 first?  Or is it afterwards?  I never
>|     could remember.
>
>Simple. Don't bother, use this mechanism:
> Celcius to Fahrenheit: subtract 40, *9/5, add 40
> Fahrenheit to Celcius: subtract 40, *5/9, add 40
>
>notice the similarity.
>
>This works because -40F = -40C.
>
The above formulae are wrong.  You need to add 40, then multiply
by 5/9 or 9/5, then subtract 40.

Tom Box
CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA
>
>.
>.
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Martini
Date: 11 Jan 93 14:46:41 GMT
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <1993Jan10.223047.1@acfcluster.nyu.edu> marcusc@acfcluster.nyu.edu writes:

>Martinis are "mixed" in
>the US but not in Britain (in fact an american martini is what we would call a
>gin and it in UK). 

As far as I know "Martini" is a proprietary name for a brand of vermouth
in Britain. not a generic, but then I don't drink the stuff so I'm
hardly an expert.  The American usage has always baffled me: is it
a proprietary name over there as well?

--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.usage.english
From: heidi@ucthpx.uct.ac.za (Heidi de Wet)
Subject: Re: Back from the UK
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 14:50:15 GMT
Organization: Dept of Elec Eng, UCT

ytsuji@cfi.waseda.ac.jp ("Y.Tsuji") writes:
>'quite' in the sense 'fairly' is used in Thoreau's Walden (I looked in
>OED2 just now.) But I don't like to imply  Thoreau was an American English
>user if such a thing ever existed before WW1. 'quite good' meaning
>'very good' is undoubtedly an Americanism (I like to hearif Scottish,
>Irish, South African and other variants is like South of England usage
>or not on this point.)

'Quite' is generally used in the sense of 'fairly' in SA, but it's
occasionally used as 'completely': "The petrol tank is quite empty."
I don't think I've heard it used as 'very'.

-- 
The net is like a vast sea of lutefisk with tiny dinosaur brains embedded 
in it here and there. Any given spoonful will likely have an IQ of 1, but 
occasional spoonfuls may have an IQ more than six times that!
                                                     - James 'Kibo' Parry