HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: philip@mentorg.com (Philip Peake)
Subject: Re: British phones in France
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 19:50:37 GMT
Organization: Mentor Graphics
Keywords: 
Followup-To: 

In article <29959@castle.ed.ac.uk>, jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk (Jeremy Henderson) writes:
|> Does anyone know if a British phone will work in France. If not, are
|> adaptors available, or will I have to buy a new one?

Yes, a British 'phone will work in France.
You will have to cut off the plug (if it has one), and
fit one of those monsterous French things (the size of
a house brick) - but it will work.

BUT, remember that (as in most countries), if it doesn't
have the appropriate sticker on it, you are liable to
find then dragging out and oiling up the guillotine ...
(didn't stop me though ...).

Philip
From: cabr53@ccsun.strath.ac.uk ("R.A.McPheat")
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Eastern hemisphere electrical power
Date: 8 Jan 93 09:45:44 GMT
Organization: University of Strathclyde Computer Centre

In article <1ihmlkINN1sd@grapevine.EBay.Sun.COM> smckinty@sunicnc.France.Sun.COM (Steve McKinty - Sun ICNC) writes:

>Its the current that kills, but if you halve the voltage, and the resistance
>stays the same, you will halve the current too (i = v/r). Half the
>voltage only means twice the current if the power stays the same, i.e.
>if the resistance is quartered.

Usually the power required for similar equipment is the same on both sides of 
the Atlantic.

The important current in not the current passing through the equipment but the
current passing through the person being electrocuted. This is governed
by the voltage and the resistance across the relative parts of the body.
The higher current required for 110 volts means higher rated fuses so you
will have less protection from these though.

Robert.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.french
From: dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones)
Subject: Re: British phones in France
Followup-To: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.french
Organization: Morituri Te Salutent, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 19:48:34 GMT

Jean-Francois Berne (berne@nova3.stanford.edu) wrote:
> 
> Say, has anybody in England thought of inventing the fabulous mixing faucet?
> I am tired everytime I travel to UK to find in my bathroom one faucet for cold
> water and one faucet for hot water. Even in good hotels.
> --

Well, it could be regulations which require mixing apparatus to be isolated 
from the mains water by a header tank.  I seem to remember this coming up 
during the Great Shower Installation Bonanza Bubble Fiasco of the late 70s 
and early 80s.  Seems certain parties do not want water 
stored/heated/contaminated in buildings to have the remotest chance of 
getting mixed back into the mains, or into drinking water used in other 
parts of same building.  Makes some kinda sense but it's a real pain.  
Having inadvertently piped hot water from our washing machine inlet mixer 
into our kitchen's cold supply I can appreciate the point of the regulation.

Nobody seems to care here in the US, perhaps because the mains water is of
notoriously low quality anyway, though still drinkable by most standards.

> -- 
> Es gibt zwei Arten von Narren. Der eine sagt: "Dies ist alt und deshalb gut."
> Und der andere sagt: "Dies ist neu und deshalb besser."
>                                                          Unknown Origin     

Es gibt kein Narr wie ein alte Narr.....

--
||------------------------------------------------------------------------
||Dave Jones (dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com)|Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY  |
From: mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Truly English?
Date: 11 Jan 93 09:40:05 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

In article <C0JKu4.JAH@newcastle.ac.uk> Adrian.Waterworth@newcastle.ac.uk (Adrian Waterworth) writes:
>       I stand by what I said - to my view, Maggie (in the latter
>years of her 'reign') seemed to be showing increasing signs of mild
>megalomania and delusions of grandeur. Also, she appeared to be trying
>to turn her Cabinet into a bunch of toadying, little 'Yes-men'. (I
>leave the issue of her degree of success in that endeavour as a
>suitable topic for others to discuss, if they so wish.)
>
Yes, I fully agree with this. I simply wrote to note that there
was an alternative explanation to Thatcher's use of "we" on
this occasion, and that to me at least, as much as I might like
to think it was an echo of the so-called "royal we", it is far
easier explained as a reversion to a common pattern in
working-class speech.  Simply because a point of information
doesn't fit in with my prejudices doesn't mean I shouldn't post
it.

Matthew HUntbach
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:18585 soc.culture.french:9605
From: jmunro@wyse.wyse.com (Jim Munro x2497)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.french
Subject: Re: British phones in France
Date: 12 Jan 93 20:42:34 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.british
Organization: Wyse Technologies San Jose, Ca

In article <C0prsE.3Gs@math.uwaterloo.ca> arpepper@math.uwaterloo.ca (Adrian Pepper) writes:
>In article <1isfqlINNaq8@morrow.stanford.edu> berne@nova3.stanford.edu (Jean-Francois Berne) writes:
>>
>>Say, has anybody in England thought of inventing the fabulous mixing faucet?
>What?  And risk an epidemic of Legionnaires' disease?  This is
>something a reasonably well-educated Englishman said was a concern
>about the concept.  Whatever the actual reasons, there seems to be some
>sort of scientific superstition at work.
>
>>I am tired everytime I travel to UK to find in my bathroom one faucet for cold
>>water and one faucet for hot water. Even in good hotels.
>

Here are a couple of thoughts:

In particular, mixer taps wont work in the UK because the cold water comes in
to the house at some pathetically low pressure direct to the tap, while the hot water
is fed from a storage tank in the roof of the house at an even more pathetically
low pressure. As you move a flexible shower head up and down or as other people turn
taps on and off, you get a big shift in pressure differential between hot and cold
and a corresponding shift in water temperature. British mixer taps are usually
thermostatically controlled and are slow to react, expensive, and just don't
work very well. There may be health reasons but I doubt it.

I am constantly amazed by how Europe and the US take such opposite views of various things which ought to have a single answer. For instance, how come Americal washer/dryers
 haven't changed in decades,
and are big, noisy, and innefficient, and yet the European models are innexpensive,
quiet, and do a better job in a more linmited space?

How come British road engineers have found ways to speed traffic flow by
innovative signing and other systems, whereas, the Americans use stop signs and
traffic lights exclusively to 'improve' any road situation. While Americans add
thousands of Stop signs every day, the British have virtually eliminated them. Don't
they ever discuss these issues and reach a concensus?

How come the British can't learn from American plumbing and electrical systems?

Enquiring minds want to know.

Jim Munro

From: tgg@otter.hpl.hp.com (Tom Gardner)
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 14:24:51 GMT
Subject: Re: Celsius <--> Fahrenheit (was Re: British Imperial...)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british

The way I heard it was:
	- lowest easily generatable stable temperature was at the triple-point
	  of salt water (how salt? Dunno.). Define this as 0 degrees F.
	- highest ditto was boiling water
	- define there to be 180 degrees (half circle, geddit?) between 
	  the boiling point of water and the triple-point of pure water.
	- this fixes boiling point as 212 degrees F.
Arbitrary. Sure. But then so was Celcius...
From: cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk (Colin Wilson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Banned: ``Happy Holidays'' [sic]
Date: 5 Jan 93 11:14:28 GMT
Organization: BT

In article <93004.173751RBYAML@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com>, RBYAML@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com (Aengus Lawlor) writes:

|> In article <1993Jan4.203045.7592@netcom.com>, sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) says:
|> >The biggest eccentricity here is the British insistence in calling
|> >multiple days off work a "holiday" (singular).  :-)
|> 

|> Bzzzt!! That's a US usage. In Britain and Ireland, people go on summer
|> holidays, or take christmas holidays

|> Aengus

All together now...

Doo doodle-oo doo doo doo
Doo doodle-oo doo doo doo
We're all going on a summer holiday
No more working for a week or two...


If Cliff Richard says it, well, it must the British way.

********************************************************************************
*  Colin Wilson,                           E-mail:  cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk     *
*  Glasgow Engineering Centre,             POTS:    (041) 220 5340             *
*  British Telecommunications plc.                  (+ 44 41) 220 5340         *
*  7 Caledon Street,                                                           *
*  Glesca / Glaschu G12 9BY,             Scotland a Twa-Leidit Fowkrick        *
*  Scotland / Alba.                      Biodh Alba 'na Poblachd Dha-Chananach *  ********************************************************************************
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:18556 alt.usage.english:10485
From: R.J.Woolley@lut.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Back from the UK
Date: 12 Jan 93 16:32:48 GMT
Reply-To: R.J.Woolley@lut.ac.uk (Late Login Merchant)
Organization: Loughborough University, UK.

In article <1993Jan11.233015.28726@csi.uottawa.ca> misrael@csi.uottawa.ca (Mark Israel) writes:
>In article <1993Jan11.020701.9391@news.columbia.edu>, gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>
>> Just got back from London, among the goodies toted back this trip are
>> some more US/UK differences worthy of discussion:
>> parts of the country) the "washroom."  
>
>   British houses often have the bath in a separate room from the
>toilet, so the euphemism "bathroom" wouldn't work.  Of course,
>"water closet", "W.C.", "the loo", etc. are often used.  (Choir 
>conductor's advice on how to sing the word "Hallelujah":  "Go to the 
>'loo'!")  But I'd say the Americans are more guilty than the British 
>of using a "substitute"!

How about the Irish phrase 'bog' (also beloved of british schoolkids)
>
>> d) The word "quite"
>>
>> I acquired a catalog of musical instrument kits (lutes, harpsichords,
>> etc) and it had a legend to show the level of difficulty of the kits.
>> The list read:
>>
>> 	 * = Easy
>>       ** = Quite easy
>>      *** = Average
>>     **** = Quite Challenging
>>    ***** = Challenging
>>
>> To my eyes this looked strange, as I would say that something "quite
>> challenging" is more challenging than something "challenging," 
>
>   It's ambiguous.  "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."

Quite is an adjective of moderation. It moderates the adjective it is attached to. So, 'Quite Easy' is less easy than 'Easy' whereas 'Quite Challenging' is less
Challening than 'Challenging'> 	
>> Opinions, anyone?
>
>   Of course!
>
>misrael@csi.uottawa.ca			Mark Israel
>Sunbeams brightly play, where Fancy's fair pavilion once is pight.

More opinoins welcome. Oh, BTW in the UK a sink has 'taps' not faucets (which
sound like an application of force)

Rob.
<R.J.Woolley@uk.ac.lut>
From: Trevor.Kirby@newcastle.ac.uk (Trevor Kirby)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: degrees-grades
Date: 11 Jan 93 09:38:49 GMT
Organization: Computing Laboratory, U of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK NE1 7RU.


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
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten)
Subject: Re: Eastern hemisphere electrical power
Organization: Fulcrum Communications
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 11:19:51 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.071308.15181@netcom.com> ewadams@netcom.com (Ernest Adams) writes:
> New, but in this case I'll make an exception. Non-lethal line voltage
> just makes better sense than 220 volts. It's like putting that smelly
> 
> (It also means our power cords can be discreet little things, not enormous
> cobra-hooded snakes that make a little radio look like an arc welder...
> but that's an aesthetic consideration.)

Really?  Suppose you want a 1KW electric heater.  On 240V that'll pull a
shade over 4 amps.  On 110V it's around 9 amps.  I reckon the heating
effect in a cable is proportional to the square of the current, so that
doesn't make the cable any smaller...quite the opposite.

The size of a cable is dictated by the current it carries, not the
voltage applied across it.

ian
From: mickw@autodesk.com (Mick Washbrook)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Silly Bible semi-pedantry [was: Re: Happy Christmas!]
Date: 6 Jan 93 21:35:58 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.092106.12107@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>, mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
> 
> There is a legend that Jesus was brought to Britain as a child
> by Joseph of Arimethea (not the same person as Joseph, Mary's
> spouse, though I have seen him wrongly referred to as such in
> several places this Christmas, most unfortunately in the
> Guardian). They stayed at Glastonbury, and there is still a
> thorn tree there which grew when Joseph planted his staff in
> the ground.

Ah, yes, Jesus. Wasn't he the guy who--as Christopher Lee describes
in the movie "The Wicker Man--was born of a virgin impregnated by
a ghost?

Still, some stories are fun, aren't they?



--
Death to all fanatics!!

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.

From: duncan@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Duncan Mcintryre@grenoble)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 10:16:12 GMT
Subject: Re: Eastern hemisphere electrical power
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Clara, CA
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british

In soc.culture.british, ewadams@netcom.com (Ernest Adams) writes:

> Somebody wrote:

> >Underpowered and over here.

> Generally I'm not in favor of trying to make the Old World more like the
> New, but in this case I'll make an exception. Non-lethal line voltage
> just makes better sense than 220 volts. It's like putting that smelly
> stuff in natural gas: you don't *have* to do it, but it gives the
> innocent victim of a breakdown better odds of surviving.

At a rough guess, 110v is likely to be pretty lethal. Especially when you
consider that it is at 60Hz, which is roughly the nastiest frequency to apply
to a human body (until you get up to GHz :-). Que for a history of the
development of electrical power and a good slagging for Edison....

> (It also means our power cords can be discreet little things, not enormous
> cobra-hooded snakes that make a little radio look like an arc welder...
> but that's an aesthetic consideration.)

Here in France line voltage is 220v and the plugs are just about as small as
in the States. Useful for Hi-Fi, but for anything else give me good old
MK-style British three pins. Especially if you've got kids.


===============================================================================
Duncan McIntyre                        ".. I am drunk and you madam are ugly,
Hewlett Packard France                     but in the morning I shall be sober."
Email: Duncan_McIntyre@grenoble.hp.com           Winston Churchill
===============================================================================
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: American humo(u)r (was Re: Studying Me
Date: 12 Jan 93 16:14:32 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <1isuc6INNogn@west.West.Sun.COM>, ian@sun.com (Ian Griffin - NCN Reseller SE) writes:
> 
> Do people in England feel a greater or lesser degree of personal
> danger from, say random bombings in the High Street?

I feel no danger at all from bomb attack or from gunfire. I have never even
heard a gun fired in anger; I have only ever once been involved in a bomb
scare.
-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   For Sale: Posts in British Government. Suit
wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk    |   outgoing American. Highest bids accepted.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,uk.politics
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Back to the Liberals (was Re: Silly Bible semi-pedantry)
Reply-To: Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 21:27:16 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.132515.933@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>, mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew
Huntbach) writes:

|>In article <1993Jan7.111443.18649@infodev.cam.ac.uk> gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk
|>writes:
|>>In article <1993Jan7.103545.27019@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew
|>Huntbach) writes:
|>>
|>>>Most people don't sit down, analyse the policy of each
|>>>political party, and vote accordingly. If this were the case,
|>>>the Liberals would win every time.
|>>
|>>Evidence, Matthew?
|>>
|>Look at any opinion poll asking people's views on policies
|>which does not attach a party label to each policy.

Problem with this approach is that most people realize that they are entirely
unfit to run the country. It follows that they should chose the party whose
policies they most disagree with.

--

Phill Hallam-Baker
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: hugh@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Hugh Graham)
Subject: Re: Celsius <--> Fahrenheit (was Re: British Imperial...)
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1993 17:37:19 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523

Dave Jones (dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com) writes:
>Note that scientists don't use Celsius either - they use Kelvin, whose
>degrees just happen to be the same size, but which is measured from Absolute
>Zero.  You could just as easily have Fahrenheit sized degrees on an absolute
>scale.

Degrees Rankine. Zero Celsius = 491.7 deg Rankine.

Hugh
hugh@lamar.colostate.edu
Free at last! Free at last!
From: Geraint.Jones@comlab.oxford.ac.uk (Geraint Jones)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re:ymond Baxter
Date: 7 Jan 93 11:20:46 GMT
Organization: The Pontifex Portable Thunderbox and Collapsible Flush Company
Originator: geraint@clts1.comlab

About:

(  >It was Tomorrow's World, when it was Really Tomorrow's World,
 ) >with Admiral Raymond Grand Prix Baxter and his silk cravat.

Trevor.Kirby@newcastle.ac.uk (Trevor Kirby) asks:
 
(  I thought he was a fly boy, wasn't he a squadron leader. Hence the 
 )  involvement with all the air shows.

Yus... I think he was in the RAF.  I only called him Admiral because he is
something odd like the Hon Admiral of the Cockleshell Heroes.  And in the
absence of a handlebar moustache, it seemed to fit the image rather better.
He lives somewhere on the south coast of England where everyone over forty /
(and many people under forty) seem to pretend to be an admiral.  Perhaps  /
everyone down there really is RN retired.                                / g
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: kelley@rapnet.sanders.lockheed.com (Sean Kelley)
Subject: Re: American humo(u)r (was Re: Studying Meteorology in the UK)
Organization: Lockheed Sanders, Inc., Nashua, NH
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 14:24:11 GMT

Guy Barry (gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk) wrote:
: In article <1993Jan8.234130.21248@netcom.com> sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) writes:
: >In article <1993Jan8.193559.19125@infodev.cam.ac.uk> gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk writes:
: >>Purely deliberate, I'd have thought -- the implication being "If
: >>Americans can't recognize old American jokes, how can they have a
: >>sense of humour?"

: >I'm sure it was.  I'm complaining that it was weak - please try again.  
: >If Americans don't have a sense of humor, then there can be no old American 
: >jokes for them to recognize.

: Yes there can.  One stereotype is that Americans will only laugh at
: something if they're told it's a joke (e.g. if it's conveyed to them
: by a professional comedian).  The flipside is that they'll *always*
: laugh if they're told it's a joke, even if it isn't funny -- hence
: the gales of laughter on most current American sitcoms, old Bob
: Newhart recordings and so on.

: 
: Guy Barry, University of Cambridge 


When American sitcoms are produced in front of a studio audience, monitors
are placed above the viewing stands so as to better inform the audience when 
to laugh!  :-)

But usually, the laugh tracks are dubbed sans audience.



--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sean Kelley            INTERNET: kelley@rapnet.sanders.lockheed.com
From: pt@curie.lif.icnet.uk (Paul Taylor <pt@acl.icnet.uk>)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Truly English?
Date: 8 Jan 93 14:12:03 GMT
Organization: Imperial Cancer Research Fund
NNTP-Posting-Host: curie.lif.icnet.uk

In article <1993Jan8.120809.19731@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
>>mingos@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>>> A few years ago, Margaret Thatcher became a grandmother.  She came out of
>>>her house and proudly announced
>>
>>>              "We are a grandmother"
>>
>This is how it was reported at the time, and a lot of pompous
>middle-class trendy lefties had a great deal of fun saying that
>this was a sign of her delusions of grandure. However, the use
>of plural forms for the first person singular can be a feature
>of working class speech, and I would guess it was really
>another case of an emotional Mrs.T slipping into her native
>Lincolnshire.
>
>Matthew Huntbach

Pompous? Us?

Paul
From: smckinty@sunicnc.France.Sun.COM (Steve McKinty - Sun ICNC)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Eastern hemisphere electrical power
Date: 11 Jan 1993 09:07:23 GMT
Organization: SunConnect
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: hardy.france.sun.com

In article <55860010@hpscit.sc.hp.com>, duncan@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Duncan Mcintryre@grenoble) writes:
> In soc.culture.british, ewadams@netcom.com (Ernest Adams) writes:
> 
> > Somebody wrote:
> 
> > >Underpowered and over here.
> 
> > Generally I'm not in favor of trying to make the Old World more like the
> > New, but in this case I'll make an exception. Non-lethal line voltage
> > just makes better sense than 220 volts. It's like putting that smelly
> > stuff in natural gas: you don't *have* to do it, but it gives the
> > innocent victim of a breakdown better odds of surviving.
> 
> At a rough guess, 110v is likely to be pretty lethal. Especially when you
> consider that it is at 60Hz, which is roughly the nastiest frequency to apply
> to a human body (until you get up to GHz :-). Que for a history of the
> development of electrical power and a good slagging for Edison....
> 
It's not fair to slag Edison for that. He was a DC enthusiast, hated AC. It
was Westinghouse who were the main proponents of AC and who convinced
the authorities that it was a better solution since it allowed the
use of transformers instead of motor-generators for voltage conversion.

Steve

-- 
Steve McKinty
SUN Microsystems ICNC
38240 Meylan, France
email: smckinty@france.sun.com	   BIX: smckinty