iank
|
 posted on 2/5/09 at 06:52 PM |
|
|
What a crappy landing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8030898.stm
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
MautoK
|
| posted on 2/5/09 at 07:29 PM |
|
|
Must have been desperate! 
It really annoys me  when news articles quote an approximate or estimated distance, speed, weight, etc and then state the estimate in alternate
units to far higher resolution than the original figure. In this case 'about 150 ft' (which implies something in the 100-200 ft region) is
requoted as 46 m which implies 44-48 m.
'About 150 ft' is 'about 50 m'
Thank you! 
He's whittling on a piece of wood. I got a feeling that when he stops whittling, something's gonna happen. (OUATITW/Cheyenne)
|
|
|
RK
|
| posted on 2/5/09 at 07:47 PM |
|
|
That's the shits.
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 2/5/09 at 09:25 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MautoK
Must have been desperate!
It really annoys me when news articles quote an approximate or estimated distance, speed, weight, etc and then state the estimate in alternate
units to far higher resolution than the original figure. In this case 'about 150 ft' (which implies something in the 100-200 ft region) is
requoted as 46 m which implies 44-48 m.
'About 150 ft' is 'about 50 m'
Thank you!
Have to disagree. Why do you interpret 'about' as meaning +/- 33%? 'About' is a non-technical term that implies whatever
precision the person using it wants to imply! The article converts units and retains two significant figures - fair enough.
Geek mode off
Liam
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 2/5/09 at 09:25 PM |
|
|
And now I've actually read the article, it says 45m - not 46!! That's even less precision than the straight 2 s.f. conversion I assumed
he'd done (which would indeed give 46m)! Sheesh what do you want from the guy? Would "about 150ft (some metres)" be sufficiently
inprecise for you?
Geek mode now permanently off.
Liam
[Edited on 2/5/09 by Liam]
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 4/5/09 at 12:45 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Liam
Have to disagree. Why do you interpret 'about' as meaning +/- 33%? 'About' is a non-technical term that implies whatever
precision the person using it wants to imply! The article converts units and retains two significant figures - fair enough.
Geek mode off
Liam
So in that case my penis is "about 3 miles long"
But then it's my accuracy therefore it's a few miles either way
|
|
|
