Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #93881 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-10-16 15:45 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-10-20 14:26 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 171 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 15:45 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-16 16:56 +0100
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 17:08 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-10-16 19:13 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 13:29 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-17 13:51 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 14:19 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 19:37 +0200
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:25 +0100
Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-18 11:57 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:20 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:25 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:31 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:23 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 13:35 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 18:45 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:41 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-19 00:57 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-19 09:26 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-19 14:17 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:11 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:38 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 03:52 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-19 03:56 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 05:58 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:41 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-19 03:03 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:49 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:49 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:29 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 01:59 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-20 13:20 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:29 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 18:10 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:19 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:22 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 18:05 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:15 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-19 00:44 -0400
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:54 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 20:27 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:38 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:26 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 18:59 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 20:36 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 09:08 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:35 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:21 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 18:55 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2026-10-18 19:05 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:41 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2026-10-19 00:15 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:02 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:18 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 01:52 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:37 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:39 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:22 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:11 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 17:45 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 18:28 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:05 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:48 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:42 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:20 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-10-20 08:39 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 07:53 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:38 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:23 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:13 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 23:18 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:09 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:22 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 11:19 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 13:44 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-21 13:54 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-21 15:33 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 15:19 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:44 +0000
Re: names of bats "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:04 +0200
Re: names of bats Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-22 11:15 +0100
Re: names of bats "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:20 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:24 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:16 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:31 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:22 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 11:21 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 14:00 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 19:56 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 19:04 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 22:02 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:22 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 20:29 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:12 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:22 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 13:57 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 15:18 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:51 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 19:58 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:58 +0000
Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:19 +0200
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-22 07:16 -0400
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 13:46 +0200
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:54 +0100
Re: Margarine rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:46 +0000
Re: Margarine Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-22 19:05 +0000
Re: Margarine rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-23 00:19 +0000
Re: Margarine Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-10-23 04:18 +0000
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:17 +0200
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:33 +0100
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 12:20 +0200
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:49 +0100
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-23 09:25 +0100
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:15 +0200
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-23 07:04 -0400
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 14:09 +0200
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-23 13:53 +0100
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-23 09:18 -0400
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 20:07 +0200
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-24 00:12 -0400
Re: Margarine rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-23 17:41 +0000
[OT] Oil "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 20:21 +0200
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:46 +0100
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:40 +0100
Re: Margarine Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-23 09:21 +0100
Re: Margarine Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-23 19:40 +0000
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-24 02:00 -0400
Re: Margarine Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-24 09:04 +0100
Re: Margarine rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-24 08:57 +0000
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-24 10:25 +0100
Re: Margarine Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-25 08:42 +0000
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-25 22:12 -0400
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-24 10:24 +0100
Re: Margarine Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-24 09:31 +0000
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-24 05:39 -0400
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-24 11:55 +0100
Re: Margarine Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-25 08:43 +0000
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-25 09:53 +0000
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-25 22:33 -0400
Re: Margarine Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-26 11:25 +0000
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-26 07:53 -0400
Re: Margarine rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-26 17:29 +0000
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-26 20:48 +0000
Re: Margarine Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-10-27 06:40 -0700
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-27 14:38 +0000
Dr Spock "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-26 22:50 +0100
Re: Dr Spock rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-27 00:17 +0000
Re: Dr Spock "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-28 12:50 +0100
Re: Dr Spock c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-28 09:51 -0400
Re: Dr Spock The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-28 15:13 +0000
Re: Dr Spock The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-27 09:21 +0000
Re: Dr Spock c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-27 10:00 -0400
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:20 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 17:57 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 20:49 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:21 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:04 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-18 14:07 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-10-18 11:45 -0700
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-18 19:27 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:30 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:06 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:05 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-18 19:32 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-18 19:37 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:20 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:40 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 21:00 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 03:03 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:40 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:26 +0100
Page 8 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 Next page →
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-26 07:53 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <fm6dnQEhLuvXokL3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94696 |
On 10/26/26 07:25, Pancho wrote: > On 10/26/26 02:33, c186282 wrote: >> On 10/25/26 04:43, Pancho wrote: >>> On 10/24/26 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> On 24/10/2026 10:39, c186282 wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Michael Mosley appears to have been a stupid "look at me", BBC >>>>>> cunt, whose stupidity got him killed. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Look ... media/popular/cult "heath" shit DOMINATES. >>>>> >>>>> Has NOTHING to do with any "science". The main >>>>> goal is panic -> profit. >>>> >>>> Mosley had medical qualifications and was intensely interested in >>>> researching dietary issues. >>>> >>> >>> Interested is one thing, but medicine should be evidence based, as >>> opposed to the latest old wives' tale. Evidence based is slow and >>> boring. Unfortunately reputations are built on bets, pretending to >>> know something before the evidence is in. >> >> >> Reputations - but especially PROFIT$ .... >> >> >>> Dr Spock is a classic, telling parents babies should front sleep. >> >> Well, at least that didn't hurt. (umm ... 'front sleep' did >> you mean face-UP or face-DOWN ??? Up IS probably better) >> >> SIDS, however, seems more related to a slight screw-up in >> the CO2/Oxygen internal sensor genetics. >> >> I don't suspect Spock's motives. > > Yes face down, so they don't choke on vomit, etc. Very plausible stuff. And SOME truth in that. Little kiddies puke a LOT. Amazing the species has continued so long. > The problem was it wasn't supported by epidemiological evidence. So he > writes a best-selling medical book that establishes, or possibly re- > enforces, received wisdom that babies should sleep face down. It is only > years later that someone investigates why SIDS deaths increased that > they realise sleeping face up is safer. Estimates are that 60,000 babies > died due to stomach sleeping. Have some doubts about such figures. MOST people will just throw baby in bed, won't even THINK about whether they're up down or sideways. Hmm, maybe sideways IS the best compromise ? > In essence, it is easy to do a simple experiment, propose a plausible > mechanism, but medical evidence is very complicated, statistical > relationships are often very weak. It isn't sensible to do experiments > on yourself for such weak relationships and then popularise your own > result as immediately generalisable to the entire population, as opposed > to an interesting result suitable for a proper test. Well, I hear Spock being blamed for 60,000+ deaths. This is easy demonization, not really 'fact'. BLAME *SOMEBODY* ! "Experiments" only work if you have a well-defined premise and well-controlled conditions. "Baby found dead", no data on WHY, doesn't cut it. Babies die all the time, often for NO obvious reasons. What I see here is scapegoating. My guess is that those babies would have died anyway. Not much good REPORTING/analysis of such events until after WW2. Indeed the 'analysis' bits are only just NOW kinda decent. There are CO2-sensing nerve clusters in the carotid arteries. THEY send the signals, brain responds in accordance. Bad signals = bad response. Maybe Momma ate too many prunes while she was pregnant ? Too much cocaine ? Too many pregnancy-denastification drugs (VERY popular in the 1950s - the most infamous being Thalidomide).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-26 17:29 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <nk9h04Fep5lU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94696 |
On Mon, 26 Oct 2026 11:25:20 +0000, Pancho wrote: > n 10/26/26 02:33, c186282 wrote: >> On 10/25/26 04:43, Pancho wrote: >>> On 10/24/26 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> On 24/10/2026 10:39, c186282 wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Michael Mosley appears to have been a stupid "look at me", BBC >>>>>> cunt, >>>>>> whose stupidity got him killed. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Look ... media/popular/cult "heath" shit DOMINATES. >>>>> >>>>> Has NOTHING to do with any "science". The main goal is panic -> >>>>> profit. >>>> >>>> Mosley had medical qualifications and was intensely interested in >>>> researching dietary issues. >>>> >>>> >>> Interested is one thing, but medicine should be evidence based, as >>> opposed to the latest old wives' tale. Evidence based is slow and >>> boring. Unfortunately reputations are built on bets, pretending to >>> know something before the evidence is in. >> >> >> Reputations - but especially PROFIT$ .... >> >> >>> Dr Spock is a classic, telling parents babies should front sleep. >> >> Well, at least that didn't hurt. (umm ... 'front sleep' did you >> mean face-UP or face-DOWN ??? Up IS probably better) >> >> SIDS, however, seems more related to a slight screw-up in the >> CO2/Oxygen internal sensor genetics. >> >> I don't suspect Spock's motives. > > Yes face down, so they don't choke on vomit, etc. Very plausible stuff. > The problem was it wasn't supported by epidemiological evidence. So he > writes a best-selling medical book that establishes, or possibly > re-enforces, received wisdom that babies should sleep face down. It is > only years later that someone investigates why SIDS deaths increased > that they realise sleeping face up is safer. Estimates are that 60,000 > babies died due to stomach sleeping. Spock is interesting as a social phenomenon. Post WWII the air was filled with the idea of progress driven by science and technology. Here was a doctor describing the best child rearing practices to new moms based of The Science. No mom in the '50s wanted to be accused of being old- fashioned. Morris Fishbein was another snake oil salesman. His 'The Handy Home Medical Adviser' was found in most homes and was the last word. He promoted circumcision for everyone. So clean and hygenic! The kid won't learn to masturbate fiddling with that foreskin! Besides god approves. The sheep love their shepherd, even as he feeds them to the wolves.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-26 20:48 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11boeb5$v0re$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94703 |
On 26/10/2026 17:29, rbowman wrote: > On Mon, 26 Oct 2026 11:25:20 +0000, Pancho wrote: > >> n 10/26/26 02:33, c186282 wrote: >>> On 10/25/26 04:43, Pancho wrote: >>>> On 10/24/26 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>> On 24/10/2026 10:39, c186282 wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael Mosley appears to have been a stupid "look at me", BBC >>>>>>> cunt, >>>>>>> whose stupidity got him killed. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Look ... media/popular/cult "heath" shit DOMINATES. >>>>>> >>>>>> Has NOTHING to do with any "science". The main goal is panic -> >>>>>> profit. >>>>> >>>>> Mosley had medical qualifications and was intensely interested in >>>>> researching dietary issues. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Interested is one thing, but medicine should be evidence based, as >>>> opposed to the latest old wives' tale. Evidence based is slow and >>>> boring. Unfortunately reputations are built on bets, pretending to >>>> know something before the evidence is in. >>> >>> >>> Reputations - but especially PROFIT$ .... >>> >>> >>>> Dr Spock is a classic, telling parents babies should front sleep. >>> >>> Well, at least that didn't hurt. (umm ... 'front sleep' did you >>> mean face-UP or face-DOWN ??? Up IS probably better) >>> >>> SIDS, however, seems more related to a slight screw-up in the >>> CO2/Oxygen internal sensor genetics. >>> >>> I don't suspect Spock's motives. >> >> Yes face down, so they don't choke on vomit, etc. Very plausible stuff. >> The problem was it wasn't supported by epidemiological evidence. So he >> writes a best-selling medical book that establishes, or possibly >> re-enforces, received wisdom that babies should sleep face down. It is >> only years later that someone investigates why SIDS deaths increased >> that they realise sleeping face up is safer. Estimates are that 60,000 >> babies died due to stomach sleeping. > > Spock is interesting as a social phenomenon. Post WWII the air was filled > with the idea of progress driven by science and technology. Here was a > doctor describing the best child rearing practices to new moms based of > The Science. No mom in the '50s wanted to be accused of being old- > fashioned. > > Morris Fishbein was another snake oil salesman. His 'The Handy Home > Medical Adviser' was found in most homes and was the last word. He > promoted circumcision for everyone. So clean and hygenic! The kid won't > learn to masturbate fiddling with that foreskin! Besides god approves. > > The sheep love their shepherd, even as he feeds them to the wolves. > Climate Change, the Movie, is based on this assumption -- "In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is true: it is true because it is powerful." Lucas Bergkamp
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-27 06:40 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bq9k0$1i0j1$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94704 |
On 10/26/2026 13:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 26/10/2026 17:29, rbowman wrote: [...] >> Morris Fishbein was another snake oil salesman. His 'The Handy Home >> Medical Adviser' was found in most homes and was the last word. He >> promoted circumcision for everyone. So clean and hygenic! The kid won't >> learn to masturbate fiddling with that foreskin! Besides god approves. >> >> The sheep love their shepherd, even as he feeds them to the wolves. >> > Climate Change, the Movie, is based on this assumption Which assumption? That circumcision is healthy? Never heard that before!;-} -- Lars Poulsen - an old geek in Santa Barbara, California
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-27 14:38 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bqd1p$1jcfk$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94720 |
On 27/10/2026 13:40, Lars Poulsen wrote: > On 10/26/2026 13:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 26/10/2026 17:29, rbowman wrote: > [...] >>> Morris Fishbein was another snake oil salesman. His 'The Handy Home >>> Medical Adviser' was found in most homes and was the last word. He >>> promoted circumcision for everyone. So clean and hygenic! The kid won't >>> learn to masturbate fiddling with that foreskin! Besides god approves. >>> >>> The sheep love their shepherd, even as he feeds them to the wolves. >>> >> Climate Change, the Movie, is based on this assumption > > Which assumption? That circumcision is healthy? Never heard that > before!;-} No. That the sheep love their shepherd, even as he feeds them to the wolves. But yes, there are some hygiene benefits to circumcision -- "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." Jonathan Swift.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-26 22:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Dr Spock |
| Message-ID | <aiu4rmx92t.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #94703 |
On 2026-10-26 18:29, rbowman wrote: > On Mon, 26 Oct 2026 11:25:20 +0000, Pancho wrote: >> n 10/26/26 02:33, c186282 wrote: >>> On 10/25/26 04:43, Pancho wrote: >>>> On 10/24/26 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>> On 24/10/2026 10:39, c186282 wrote: >>>> Dr Spock is a classic, telling parents babies should front sleep. >>> >>> Well, at least that didn't hurt. (umm ... 'front sleep' did you >>> mean face-UP or face-DOWN ??? Up IS probably better) >>> >>> SIDS, however, seems more related to a slight screw-up in the >>> CO2/Oxygen internal sensor genetics. >>> >>> I don't suspect Spock's motives. >> >> Yes face down, so they don't choke on vomit, etc. Very plausible stuff. >> The problem was it wasn't supported by epidemiological evidence. So he >> writes a best-selling medical book that establishes, or possibly >> re-enforces, received wisdom that babies should sleep face down. It is >> only years later that someone investigates why SIDS deaths increased >> that they realise sleeping face up is safer. Estimates are that 60,000 >> babies died due to stomach sleeping. > > Spock is interesting as a social phenomenon. Post WWII the air was filled > with the idea of progress driven by science and technology. Here was a > doctor describing the best child rearing practices to new moms based of > The Science. No mom in the '50s wanted to be accused of being old- > fashioned. Who is this Spock you keep talking about? Surely not the Star Trek one. > > Morris Fishbein was another snake oil salesman. His 'The Handy Home > Medical Adviser' was found in most homes and was the last word. He > promoted circumcision for everyone. So clean and hygenic! The kid won't > learn to masturbate fiddling with that foreskin! Besides god approves. > > The sheep love their shepherd, even as he feeds them to the wolves. > :-( -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-27 00:17 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Dr Spock |
| Message-ID | <nka8teFep5lU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94707 |
On Mon, 26 Oct 2026 22:50:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > Who is this Spock you keep talking about? Surely not the Star Trek one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Spock Is Claude sleeping?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-28 12:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Dr Spock |
| Message-ID | <e449rmxjru.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #94711 |
On 2026-10-27 01:17, rbowman wrote: > On Mon, 26 Oct 2026 22:50:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > >> Who is this Spock you keep talking about? Surely not the Star Trek one. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Spock > > Is Claude sleeping? I prefer you humans telling me, makes for conversation :-) No, I did not know of him. I have no kids. I don't think my parents knew of him, I have not seen his books in our library. At some point I did hear about a recommendation that infants should sleep on their back, and later about some controversy. I did not pay much attention, as I have no kids. Certainly I did not know who made it. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-28 09:51 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Dr Spock |
| Message-ID | <LvGcnddlOuNFYHz3nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94735 |
On 10/28/26 07:50, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-10-27 01:17, rbowman wrote: >> On Mon, 26 Oct 2026 22:50:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> >>> Who is this Spock you keep talking about? Surely not the Star Trek one. >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Spock >> >> Is Claude sleeping? > > I prefer you humans telling me, makes for conversation :-) > > > No, I did not know of him. I have no kids. I don't think my parents knew > of him, I have not seen his books in our library. > > > At some point I did hear about a recommendation that infants should > sleep on their back, and later about some controversy. I did not pay > much attention, as I have no kids. Certainly I did not know who made it. Practically every USA kid born from the mid 50s thru the 60s was raised using Spock's advice. You can argue details of where he was right or wrong - but his IMPACT was tremendous. Before ... the advice was "Beat 'em with a stick" for the most part.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-28 15:13 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Dr Spock |
| Message-ID | <11bt3fa$2h4in$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94738 |
On 28/10/2026 13:51, c186282 wrote: > Before ... the advice was "Beat 'em with a stick" > for the most part. And there was probably less crime as a result -- "The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll look exactly the same afterwards." Billy Connolly
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-27 09:21 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Dr Spock |
| Message-ID | <11bpqfo$1cad7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94707 |
On 26/10/2026 21:50, Carlos E.R. wrote: > Who is this Spock you keep talking about? Surely not the Star Trek one. Bless. Google it -- A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-27 10:00 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Dr Spock |
| Message-ID | <2BGdnV0Q_7nBM333nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94707 |
On 10/26/26 17:50, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-10-26 18:29, rbowman wrote: >> On Mon, 26 Oct 2026 11:25:20 +0000, Pancho wrote: >>> n 10/26/26 02:33, c186282 wrote: >>>> On 10/25/26 04:43, Pancho wrote: >>>>> On 10/24/26 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>> On 24/10/2026 10:39, c186282 wrote: > > >>>>> Dr Spock is a classic, telling parents babies should front sleep. >>>> >>>> Well, at least that didn't hurt. (umm ... 'front sleep' did you >>>> mean face-UP or face-DOWN ??? Up IS probably better) >>>> >>>> SIDS, however, seems more related to a slight screw-up in the >>>> CO2/Oxygen internal sensor genetics. >>>> >>>> I don't suspect Spock's motives. >>> >>> Yes face down, so they don't choke on vomit, etc. Very plausible stuff. >>> The problem was it wasn't supported by epidemiological evidence. So he >>> writes a best-selling medical book that establishes, or possibly >>> re-enforces, received wisdom that babies should sleep face down. It is >>> only years later that someone investigates why SIDS deaths increased >>> that they realise sleeping face up is safer. Estimates are that 60,000 >>> babies died due to stomach sleeping. >> >> Spock is interesting as a social phenomenon. Post WWII the air was filled >> with the idea of progress driven by science and technology. Here was a >> doctor describing the best child rearing practices to new moms based of >> The Science. No mom in the '50s wanted to be accused of being old- >> fashioned. > > Who is this Spock you keep talking about? Surely not the Star Trek one. Gen-X I presume :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 10:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial |
| Message-ID | <11ba05h$3p0ft$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94421 |
On 20/10/2026 20:04, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-10-20, Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> wrote: > >> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Do people in the USA use another numbering for CR2032 batteries? Or do >>> they just use the SI units there? >> >> 3,5 Inch Floppies are actually specced as 89 mm. In the 1990ies some >> german courts fined companied for not giving the floppy size in SI >> units, which prompty led to advertisements like "Diskette 8,89 cm". > > What amuses me is when I go to the grocery store for some butter > and it's marked "454 g". So how metric are we, really? > > Give a man 25.4 mm, and he'll take 1.609 km. > Theres always a man with a low coefficient of reflectivity in the wood pile -- “Some people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of a car with the cramped public exposure of an airplane.” Dennis Miller
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 17:57 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial |
| Message-ID | <njpod6Fei39U56@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94370 |
On Tue, 20 Oct 2026 02:20:22 +0100, Nuno Silva wrote: > Do people in the USA use another numbering for CR2032 batteries? Or do > they just use the SI units there? Most know what is stamped on the battery and don't really think about it being dimensions. It's haphazard. I'm looking at a sports drink bottle that is labeled 20 Fl Oz (59 ml). In other cases the label may lead with 750 lm (25.4 Fl Oz). The whisky bottlers were one of the first to go to SI units. A fifth of booze was a 1/5 of a US gallon or 757 ml. The new fifth is 750 ml. What difference does 7 ml make? Well, if you're bottling 100,000 units...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-19 20:49 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) |
| Message-ID | <eb5iqmxe97.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #94213 |
On 2026-10-18 21:05, Roger Blake wrote:
> On 2026-10-18, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> Here, the imperial system is not even mentioned in school. All is SI. As
>> in most countries.
>
> How are vehicles wheel/tire diameters in your country measured?
> All the imported cars I see here in the U.S. have wheels and
> tire size measured in inches.
I don't know. I just ask my mechanic for a new set of wheels, in the
acceptable set listed by the manufacturer :-D
Google says:
Car wheels are measured using specific dimensions and a mix of inches
and millimeters, according to Wikipedia.
Main Measurements and Units
• Diameter (Rim Size): Measured in inches. This is the distance across
the wheel taken from the inside bead seat (where the tire mounts) rather
than the very outer edge of the lip.
• Width: Measured in inches. This is the distance between the inner bead
seat and the outer bead seat of the rim.
• Offset (ET): Measured in millimeters (mm). This is the distance from
the wheel's centerline to the surface that bolts against the car hub. It
can be positive, negative, or zero.
• PCD (Pitch Circle Diameter / Bolt Pattern): Expressed as the number of
bolt holes and the diameter of an imaginary circle passing through their
centers, measured in millimeters (mm) (e.g., 5x114.3).
• Center Bore: Measured in millimeters (mm). This is the diameter of the
large hole right in the center of the wheel that fits over the vehicle's
hub.
If you are looking up a specific wheel or tire size, let me know the
year, make, and model of your car and I can help you find the stock
dimensions.
And the tires?
Car tires (the rubber part) are measured using a mix of three different
metric and imperial units. If you look at the sidewall of a tire, you
will see a standardized code like 205/55R16, which breaks down as follows:
1. Section Width (Millimeters)
The first number indicates the width of the tire from sidewall to
sidewall in millimeters (mm). For example, a 205 tire is 205 millimeters
wide at its widest point.
2. Aspect Ratio (Percentage)
The second number is a percentage representing the profile or height of
the sidewall relative to the tire's width. In a 55 tire, the sidewall
height is 55% of its 205mm width (which equals about 112.75 mm). Lower
percentages mean a low-profile tire with a thinner rubber edge.
3. Wheel Diameter (Inches)
The final number tells you the size of the wheel the tire is designed to
fit, measured in inches. An R16 tire is designed for a 16-inch wheel
(the "R" stands for radial construction).
Complete Tire Specification Example: 205/55R16 91V
Component Meaning Unit / Type
205 Section Width Millimeters (mm)
55 Aspect Ratio Percentage (%)
R Construction Type Radial
16 Wheel Diameter Inches (")
91 Load Index Numeric Code (e.g., 91 = 615 kg)
V Speed Rating Letter Code (e.g., V = up to 240 km/h)
In primary school or high school, I never did calculations using inches
or miles or pounds, we only used the SI. There were lessons on the
equivalences, taught as a curiosity, not as a real thing. And how to
convert units.
In engineering schools, we used the SI. I also studied in a Canadian
college, I felt home there. No inches.
Of course, some engineers have to deal with things such as different
threads. Marines use the nautical miles, aviators use feet for altitude.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 13:21 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) |
| Message-ID | <11b2dl1$11pis$25@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94160 |
On 18/10/2026 12:57, Kenny McCormack wrote: > Believe it or not, this (the age-old discussion of US/Imperial vs. metric) > actually seems to be another instance of "Yes, it is technically superior, > but it is not the standard (i.e., what most people use), so we think you > should go with the standard even though it is technically inferior." > I fail to see anything superior about either system, frankly And I have used both nearly all my life. You don't get far as an engineer without being able to convert standards rapidly and fluently in your head. Or on a calculator The arguments are mostly people talking bollocks about stuff they have no understanding of, so they substitute violently defended opinions > There are actually quite a lot of those in life. > > I.e., what I'm saying is that there actually are quite a few arguments to > be made that US/Imperial is actually better. > *shrug* duodecimal versus decimal. sexadecimal even better 360 dyas in a year, almost. Good enough for religion > Sort of like Betamax (Yes, the classic example of "better does not ensure > market dominance".) Again *shrug*. Plywood is sold as 2.4384 metres long, instead of 8 feet. Its the same bloody sized wood It is a complete storm in a bigots teacup. Any US garage will be using metric and imperial all the time. Any pilot will be too. -- “The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it.” – H. L. Mencken
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 19:04 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) |
| Message-ID | <njkji4Fei39U30@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94169 |
On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 13:21:53 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > I fail to see anything superior about either system, frankly When you are under the car it's much easier to say 'Darling, can you give me the 20' than ask for a 13/16".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 14:07 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) |
| Message-ID | <18dfa4de459a02e4$1865$25751$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com> |
| In reply to | #94160 |
On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 11:57:54 -0000 (UTC), Kenny McCormack wrote: > > I.e., what I'm saying is that there actually are quite a few arguments to > be made that US/Imperial is actually better. > The metric system was imposed, i.e. forced, whereas the Imperial units are traditional and hence far more natural. Forcing an entire society to change is never a good idea. To force SI units in the laboratory, among professional scientists, may be an easy switch, but to expect the general, unwashed, population to immediately embrace a new system of units is folly. Keep SI in the lab and let the common folk do as they always have done. Then there is the issue of manufacturing. Converting a large industrial base, such as in the US, willy-nilly to SI units is a very expensive undertaking. For example, virtually all lumber products in the US are cut to Imperial dimensions. The ubiquitous "stud," which is universal in construction, is still the "2 by 4" being 2 inches by 4 inches by 8 feet. I highly doubt that any lumber product is cut to SI dimensions. The saw mills are too old to easily change, and the wood worker is too conditioned to think differently. Also, most raw materials such as pipes, tubing, and other parts are still produced in Imperial units because most everything classified as buildings or infrastructure was built according to Imperial specs. It will be a LONG, LONG TIME before US society becomes exclusively metric.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 11:45 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) |
| Message-ID | <11b3451$1d9sl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94198 |
On 10/18/2026 07:07, Leroy H wrote: >[...] > Then there is the issue of manufacturing. Converting a large industrial base, > such as in the US, willy-nilly to SI units is a very expensive undertaking. On the other hand, NOT joining the world standards has its own cost. Back in the 1980s, at a PPOE, we licensed a design for an electronic device. Having been designed in Scotland, of course all mechanical dimensions were given in millimeters. An older manufacturing manager wanted it "Americanized" and directed a summer intern to convert all dimensions to "traditional" measures. The kid got out a calculator and converted all measurements to inches with 3 decimals. When they took it to the metal shop, the shop foreman asked if they really needed the dimensions exact to 0.001" ? No, of course not, that would be way too expensive. So the old guy replaced all the measurements to fractional inches instead. The resulting product never worked right, but had bad fits between the PCBs and the card cage, betwwen the chassis frame and the side, top and bottom panels, and felt warped when customers tried to mount it in a rack. Of course, it was all stupid. The machine shop where they built it had mostly Japanese machinery, which could do inces or millimeters at the flick of a switch. > For example, virtually all lumber products in the US are cut to Imperial > dimensions. The ubiquitous "stud," which is universal in construction, is > still the "2 by 4" being 2 inches by 4 inches by 8 feet. I highly doubt > that any lumber product is cut to SI dimensions. The saw mills are too old > to easily change, and the wood worker is too conditioned to think differently. Your example is a little odd, because a "2 by 4" is NOT 2 inches by 4 inches and has not been for decades. A standard 2x4 lumber has actual dimensions of 1.5 inches thick by 3.5 inches wide (38 mm × 89 mm). This principle applies to other dimensional lumber as well, such as 2x6, 2x8, and 4x4, where the actual dimensions are slightly smaller than the nominal size to account for finishing processes. > Also, most raw materials such as pipes, tubing, and other parts are still > produced in Imperial units because most everything classified as buildings > or infrastructure was built according to Imperial specs. > > It will be a LONG, LONG TIME before US society becomes exclusively metric. Jimmy Carter started, but Reagan reversed the process. -- Lars Poulsen - an old geek in Santa Barbara, California
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 19:27 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) |
| Message-ID | <18dfb65996728c15$2363$2483150$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com> |
| In reply to | #94208 |
On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 11:45:50 -0700, Lars Poulsen wrote: > > Your example is a little odd, because a "2 by 4" is NOT 2 inches by 4 > inches and has not been for decades. > > A standard 2x4 lumber has actual dimensions of 1.5 inches thick by 3.5 > inches wide (38 mm × 89 mm). > The cutting dimensions at the saw mill are 2" X 4". After cutting, however, the lumber is dried in kilns which shrinks the dimensions. But the size of the lumber throughout the distribution chain is always based on the original saw mill cutting dimensions. One never walks into a lumber yard and asks for a "1.5 X 3.5." It is always "2 X 4." The same applies to all other lumber products. It is a peculiar system but one gets used to it. >> >> It will be a LONG, LONG TIME before US society becomes exclusively metric. > > Jimmy Carter started, but Reagan reversed the process. > What I find somewhat amusing is that, like most other DIY people, I was forced to purchase a set of metric sockets (at great expense). Each socket is forged on one end to be a specific metric size (e.g. 10mm) but the reverse end, where the shaft of the socket wrench attaches, is forged to an Imperial unit (e.g. 1/4 inch or 1/2 inch). The tools are actually a hybrid. If a society is forced to go metric it should go metric all the way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web