Hexadecimal Kid - articles from Computerworld wanted
John
I have a set of Practical Computing magazines which feature stories about
the Son of Hexadecimal Kid:
http://www.vintagecomputers.freeserve.co.uk/mags/praccomp/stories/index.htm
However I found a post from 23 July that refered to the earlier Hexadecimal
Kid as follows:
On Jul 23, 2:38 am, "Charlie Gibbs" <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> In article <h483hp$hn...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>
> Peter_Fl...@Yahoo.com (Peter Flass) writes:
> > jmfbahciv wrote:
>
> >> Peter Flass wrote:
>
> If it's the same Computerworld (newspaper format), I was reading
> it in the late '70s.
>
> >>> I'd like to see someone digitize their old stuff.
>
> I probably still have a few photocopied articles around somewhere,
> including the serial "The Hexadecimal Kid (and his faithful dog
> ASCII)". Plus a few articles by "Miles Benson", several of which
> were later anthologized in "The Universal Elixir and Other
> Computing Projects Which Failed" (in which the author's real
> name, Robert L. Glass, is revealed).
Has anyone got some of these articles they can scan and email me please? I'm
sure they would be fun to read, I could put the scans up on the web.
I read somewhere that the UK paper Computing had some Hexadecimal Kid
articles too, please can someone confirm.
Regards,
John
Jim Haynes
but somewhat funny.
There was once an inventor who, noting the use of hexadecimal notation
in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
hex was the wave of the future. It was basically an attitude that
people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
computers work to communicate with people. He had invented an optical
character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits that
his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
them that way too. Never mind that the addition and multiplication
tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
have enough trouble learning as it is.
He wrote up a paper and submitted it to the IEEE Computer Society for
publication. It was rejected, of course. Some time later he submitted
basically the same paper again, this time to the Computer Society's
Computer magazine, which had an Open Channel section for unrefereed
papers. I was editor of that column at the time; and I decided that an
idea that stupid would be funny to read, so I let it be published, calling
it a satire. Of course I knew he was dead serious, as I had seen it
the first time it was submitted. He was furious!
Charles Richmond
> Ah, a subject line which reminded me of something entirely unrelated
> but somewhat funny.
>
> There was once an inventor who, noting the use of hexadecimal notation
> in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
> should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
> hex was the wave of the future. It was basically an attitude that
> people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
> computers work to communicate with people. He had invented an optical
> character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits that
> his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
> them that way too. Never mind that the addition and multiplication
> tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
> have enough trouble learning as it is.
>
I do *not* think that kids learn the multiplication tables
anymore. They just use calculators, and calculators that do hex
arithmetic can be built as cheaply as decimal ones.
--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
Mensanator
> Ah, a subject line which reminded me of something entirely unrelated
> but somewhat funny.
>
> There was once an inventor who, noting the use of hexadecimal notation
> in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
> should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
> hex was the wave of the future. �It was basically an attitude that
> people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
> computers work to communicate with people. �He had invented an optical
> character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits that
> his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
> them that way too. �Never mind that the addition and multiplication
> tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
> have enough trouble learning as it is.
If only he had thought to use octal...
Mensanator
> Jim Haynes wrote:
> > Ah, a subject line which reminded me of something entirely unrelated
> > but somewhat funny.
>
> > There was once an inventor who, noting the use of hexadecimal notation
> > in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
> > should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
> > hex was the wave of the future. �It was basically an attitude that
> > people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
> > computers work to communicate with people. �He had invented an optical
> > character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits that
> > his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
> > them that way too. �Never mind that the addition and multiplication
> > tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
> > have enough trouble learning as it is.
>
> I do *not* think that kids learn the multiplication tables
> anymore.
*sigh* Their loss. There is nothing more fun than building
your own number system:
http://mensanator.com/rotanasnem/cherries/cherries.htm
When I finished that web page, I was fluent in doing sums
in Slot Machine Arithmetic. Never got around to doing
multiplication, though. That was beyond the scope of the
project.
But the jaws dropped at the computer club when I walked
up to the blackboard and with nothing other than a piece
of chalk did a fine example of how to Cast Out Cherries.
Let's see someone try that with a TI graphing calculator!
> They just use calculators, and calculators that do hex
> arithmetic can be built as cheaply as decimal ones.
>
> --
> +----------------------------------------+
> | � � Charles and Francis Richmond � � � |
> | � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �|
> | �plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com � |
> +----------------------------------------+- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Patrick Scheible
> Jim Haynes wrote:
> > Ah, a subject line which reminded me of something entirely unrelated
> > but somewhat funny.
> >
> > There was once an inventor who, noting the use of hexadecimal notation
> > in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
> > should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
> > hex was the wave of the future. It was basically an attitude that
> > people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
> > computers work to communicate with people. He had invented an optical
> > character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits that
> > his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
> > them that way too. Never mind that the addition and multiplication
> > tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
> > have enough trouble learning as it is.
> >
>
> I do *not* think that kids learn the multiplication tables
> anymore. They just use calculators, and calculators that do hex
> arithmetic can be built as cheaply as decimal ones.
This is an overstatement. In my school district, they do still expect
kids to learn up to 10 x 10, and multiplication on paper.
The textbooks they have adopted don't even try to teach long division,
though. If parents want them to learn it, they have to supplement
what they get from the book.
-- Patrick
Patrick Scheible
> On Sep 24, 9:53=EF=BF=BDpm, Charles Richmond <friz...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> > Jim Haynes wrote:
> > > Ah, a subject line which reminded me of something entirely unrelated
> > > but somewhat funny.
> >
> > > There was once an inventor who, noting the use of hexadecimal notation
> > > in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
> > > should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
> > > hex was the wave of the future. =EF=BF=BDIt was basically an attitude t=
> hat
> > > people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
> > > computers work to communicate with people. =EF=BF=BDHe had invented an =
> optical
> > > character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits tha=
> t
> > > his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
> > > them that way too. =EF=BF=BDNever mind that the addition and multiplica=
> tion
> > > tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which childre=
> n
> > > have enough trouble learning as it is.
> >
> > I do *not* think that kids learn the multiplication tables
> > anymore.
>
> *sigh* Their loss. There is nothing more fun than building
> your own number system:
>
> http://mensanator.com/rotanasnem/cherries/cherries.htm
Neat hack.
-- Patrick
Quadibloc
> If only he had thought to use octal...
Or he could have taken the IBM 1620 as his inspiration, and let the
children do their multiplication with a copy of the times table in
front of them.
John Savard
Walter Bushell
<d58d5b58-5bfb-4f12...@v23g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
IIRC the 1620 also had the times table in memory.
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Joe Morris
>> Ah, a subject line which reminded me of something entirely unrelated
>> but somewhat funny.
>>
>> There was once an inventor who, noting the use of hexadecimal notation
>> in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
>> should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
>> hex was the wave of the future. ?It was basically an attitude that
>> people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
>> computers work to communicate with people. ?He had invented an optical
>> character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits that
>> his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
>> them that way too. ?Never mind that the addition and multiplication
>> tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
>> have enough trouble learning as it is.
>If only he had thought to use octal...
Cue Tom Lehrer and the song he wrote for the shrot-lived US version of the
TV show That Was The Week That Was (aka "TW3") in which he does a
subtraction problem. At what seems to be the end he announces that that the
answer he got wasn't the correct one: you were supposed to do it in base 8.
<audience laughter>
Lehrer continues: "Oh, base 8 is just like base 10. If you're missing two
fingers."
<audience ROFL>
Joe Morris
Joe Morris
Mensanator
Yeah, but the REAL joke is that in modern math, we only need 7 fingers
(with none raised to represent 0) do do math in base 8.
>
> Joe Morris
>
> Joe Morris- Hide quoted text -
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> . . . It was basically an attitude that
> people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
> computers work to communicate with people. . . .
That was a common attitude in the 1960s, when computers were seen as a
huge and welcome improvement.
They didn't teach kids hex. But as computers came out, people DID
have to be taught how to interact with them in ways very different
than what they were used. We take that for granted these days, but it
was new and different then.
--encoding fields exactly and only as specified. Names and addresses
sometimes were truncated to fit.
--encoding dates in a specific way.
--getting used to all caps
--hitting return/enter after typing; other terminal control keys.
Quadibloc
> They didn't teach kids hex. But as computers came out, people DID
> have to be taught how to interact with them in ways very different
> than what they were used. We take that for granted these days, but it
> was new and different then.
>
> --encoding fields exactly and only as specified. Names and addresses
> sometimes were truncated to fit.
> --encoding dates in a specific way.
> --getting used to all caps
> --hitting return/enter after typing; other terminal control keys.
Or something as simple as never putting commas in the middle of
numbers.
John Savard
Charles Richmond
If this were true, the common place system would be based on
*eleven*, since we have ten fingers (including the thumbs).
--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
Mensanator
Funny how that works out, eh?
Everything you know is wrong.
> since we have ten fingers (including the thumbs).
Where did you get the notion that counting on your fingers
is using "base 10"? Look in any computer textbook. You'll
find that "base R" refers to a "Standard Positional Number
System of Radix R" which does not include finger counting.
Those who use "base 8" to refer to a Tally System of Radix 8
are diplaying their ignorance.
>
> --
> +----------------------------------------+
> | � � Charles and Francis Richmond � � � |
> | � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �|
> | �plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com � |
> +----------------------------------------+- Hide quoted text -
jmfbahciv
> On Sep 24, 9:27 pm, Jim Haynes <jhay...@alumni.uark.edu> wrote:
>
>> . . . It was basically an attitude that
>> people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
>> computers work to communicate with people. . . .
>
> That was a common attitude in the 1960s, when computers were seen as a
> huge and welcome improvement.
Only by a very small minority. Regular people were afraid of
computers. I spent a lot of time in college talking to people
who were afraid about what kinds of things they could do and
how much person-time they would have to do other things.
This was 1969-1971.
/BAH
Dave Garland
> Mensanator wrote:
>> Yeah, but the REAL joke is that in modern math, we only need 7 fingers
>> (with none raised to represent 0) do do math in base 8.
>>
>
> If this were true, the common place system would be based on *eleven*,
> since we have ten fingers (including the thumbs).
The common system was firmly in place long before zero was invented.
So I suppose this is just another example of how maintaining backward
compatibility messes things up.
Dave
Charlie Gibbs
<527c1461-3da9-4c91...@d21g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com (hancock4) writes:
> On Sep 24, 9:27�pm, Jim Haynes <jhay...@alumni.uark.edu> wrote:
>
>> . . . It was basically an attitude that
>> people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
>> computers work to communicate with people. �. . .
>
> That was a common attitude in the 1960s, when computers were seen
> as a huge and welcome improvement.
Computers were one of the totems of our society. People believed
(and many still do) that by adopting their limitations you gain
their strengths.
> They didn't teach kids hex. But as computers came out, people DID
> have to be taught how to interact with them in ways very different
> than what they were used. We take that for granted these days, but
> it was new and different then.
>
> --encoding fields exactly and only as specified. Names and addresses
> sometimes were truncated to fit.
Stan Kelly-Bootle, in _The_Devil's_DP_Dictionary_, invented a term:
curtation n. The enforced compression of a string in the
fixed-length field environment.
The problem of fitting extremely variable-length strings such as
names, addresses, and item descriptions into fixed-length records
is no trivial matter. Neglect of the subtle art of curtation
has probably alienated more people than any other aspect of data
processing. You order Mozart's _Don_Giovanni_ from your record
club, and they invoice you $24.95 for MOZ DONG. The witless
mapping of the sublime onto the ridiculous! Equally puzzling
is the curation that produces the same eight characters: THE BEST,
whether you order _The_Best_of_Wagner_, _The_Best_of_Schubert_,
or _The_Best_of_the_Turds_. Similarly, wine lovers buying from
computerized wineries twirl their glasses, check their delivery
notes, and inform their friends, "A rather innocent, possibly
overtruncated CAB SAUV 69 TAL." The squeezing of fruit into
10 columns has yielded such memorable obscenities as COX OR PIP.
The examples cited are real, and the curtational methodology
which produced them is still with us. Compare TRUNCATE.
(My personal favourite is my job description at a PPOE.
To fit the 15-character field in the payroll record I became
a PROGRAMMER-ANAL.)
> --encoding dates in a specific way.
If only it was the One True Way (year/month/day), which sorts
so much better...
> --getting used to all caps
Many people today still insist on using all caps.
> --hitting return/enter after typing; other terminal control keys.
And don't forget leading zeros. If you want to look really
computerish, you have to put some leading zeros in front of numbers.
--
/~\ cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Quadibloc
> Mensanator wrote:
> > Yeah, but the REAL joke is that in modern math, we only need 7 fingers
> > (with none raised to represent 0) do do math in base 8.
>
> If this were true, the common place system would be based on
> *eleven*, since we have ten fingers (including the thumbs).
No, because that is true (after all, we write numbers with digits
going up to 9, and we don't have a digit with the value ten in decimal
numbers) but we find it more natural to use the total number of
fingers as a unit rather than the next number after.
John Savard
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Mensanator <mensa...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 25, 10:41�pm, Charles Richmond <friz...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> > If this were true, the common place system would be based on
> > *eleven*,
>
> Funny how that works out, eh?
>
> Everything you know is wrong.
>
> > since we have ten fingers (including the thumbs).
>
> Where did you get the notion that counting on your fingers
> is using "base 10"? Look in any computer textbook. You'll
> find that "base R" refers to a "Standard Positional Number
> System of Radix R" which does not include finger counting.
>
> Those who use "base 8" to refer to a Tally System of Radix 8
> are diplaying their ignorance.
Here's me I thought finger counting was a tally system with 9
count indicators and a carry indicator. When the carry goes up you tally
another 10 and drop all the fingers - thus it's base 10 counting
implemented on a tally.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Mensanator
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 21:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>
>
>
> Mensanator <mensana...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 25, 10:41 pm, Charles Richmond <friz...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> > > If this were true, the common place system would be based on
> > > *eleven*,
>
> > Funny how that works out, eh?
>
> > Everything you know is wrong.
>
> > > since we have ten fingers (including the thumbs).
>
> > Where did you get the notion that counting on your fingers
> > is using "base 10"? Look in any computer textbook. You'll
> > find that "base R" refers to a "Standard Positional Number
> > System of Radix R" which does not include finger counting.
>
> > Those who use "base 8" to refer to a Tally System of Radix 8
> > are diplaying their ignorance.
>
> � � � � Here's me I thought finger counting was a tally system with 9
> count indicators and a carry indicator. When the carry goes up you tally
> another 10 and drop all the fingers - thus it's base 10 counting
> implemented on a tally.
Yeah, so? There are lots of English words that remain
ambiguous even in context. To use "base" outside its
normal usage without clarification, in a computr newsgroup,
no less, is being deliberately ambiguous.
Chris Barts
> Jim Haynes wrote:
>> Ah, a subject line which reminded me of something entirely unrelated
>> but somewhat funny.
>>
>> There was once an inventor who, noting the use of hexadecimal notation
>> in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
>> should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
>> hex was the wave of the future. It was basically an attitude that
>> people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
>> computers work to communicate with people. He had invented an optical
>> character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits that
>> his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
>> them that way too. Never mind that the addition and multiplication
>> tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
>> have enough trouble learning as it is.
>>
>
> I do *not* think that kids learn the multiplication tables
> anymore. They just use calculators, and calculators that do hex
> arithmetic can be built as cheaply as decimal ones.
Balderdash. Calculators are typically banned entirely from the classroom
until well into the sixth grade, when algebra demands skills entirely
distinct from the simple arithmetic the allowed calculators can
do. Graphing calculators, introduced later (high school or later grammar
school), take the focus from mere number-crunching to the shape of
functions and, hopefully, an actual *understanding* of the subject.
Moving on to trigonometry, calculus, college algebra, and, possibly,
formal logic, vectors, or discrete math (depending on your major,
naturally), calculators are a vital tool to prevent time from being
wasted on the nonsense monkey-work a machine or a moron might be content
doing all day. Again, the focus is on an *understanding* of the ideas
being presented in the class.
Tables, whether multiplication or log, are a crutch. Four-function
calculators are a better one. Using a poor crutch is no mark of virtue;
it merely designates you as obsessed with form over function.
Graphing and algebraic calculators, up to and including software systems
such as MACSYMA/MAXIMA and Mathematica, are something more than a mere
crutch as they engage different parts of the brain compared to purely
arithmetical tools. By shifting the focus, one can ignore the irrelevant
(a talent limited to intelligent animals such as humans) and gain a new
perspective on the world of mathematics. From such perspective shifts a
true comprehension is gained.
Chris Barts
I think a surprising number of regular people are *still* afraid of
computers, even the ones who use them every day. This isn't just
ignorance and distaste: I have detected outright fear in the voices of
some people. It doesn't make sense to me, of course, since these very
same people are equally as ignorant of their car but would never dream
of being *afraid* of it.
The media doesn't help. (When does it ever?) The notion that it's OK to
be a technophobe regarding computers doesn't really help, either: What
would the luddite-defenders say if they were confronted with someone who
stood in stark terror of telephones or TV sets? Being fundamentally
unable to deal with a significant part of your world very often makes
you a real pain in the ass for the rest of us.
Chris Barts
... especially if you're programming in C. You simply *must* cultivate
the image you balance your checkbook in octal if you want to fit in this
season, dahling!
Walter Bushell
Chris Barts <chbarts...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This isn't just
> ignorance and distaste: I have detected outright fear in the voices of
> some people. It doesn't make sense to me, of course, since these very
> same people are equally as ignorant of their car but would never dream
> of being *afraid* of it.
Which, of course, they should be. (Afraid of their car, that is.)
Walter Bushell
"Charlie Gibbs" <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> (My personal favourite is my job description at a PPOE.
> To fit the 15-character field in the payroll record I became
> a PROGRAMMER-ANAL.)
You better be, programming is detailed work.
Walter Bushell
"Charlie Gibbs" <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> And don't forget leading zeros. If you want to look really
> computerish, you have to put some leading zeros in front of numbers.
Some programmer forgot to do this and people were billed like 24*10^9
dollars for a purchase at a drug store.
This was discussed here, IIRC not too long ago.
There was apparently no sanity clause.
Now do you know why programers must be anal?
As one of my ex-bosses would say, "Details!, Details!".
Dave Garland
> Tables, whether multiplication or log, are a crutch. Four-function
> calculators are a better one. Using a poor crutch is no mark of virtue;
> it merely designates you as obsessed with form over function.
For appropriate problems, a tool is a poor crutch compared to being
able to do the operation in your head, with no tool at all other than
a standard-equipment brain. And for multiplication, that involves
having programmed the brain with a table.
Doesn't work well for exact answers of complicated problems, but then
again neither does using a 4-function calculator to get a seven
decimal place answer to a problem for which one of the factors was
"about a third".
Dave
Chris Barts
> In article <87ocox2...@chbarts.motzarella.org>,
> Chris Barts <chbarts...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This isn't just
>> ignorance and distaste: I have detected outright fear in the voices of
>> some people. It doesn't make sense to me, of course, since these very
>> same people are equally as ignorant of their car but would never dream
>> of being *afraid* of it.
>
> Which, of course, they should be. (Afraid of their car, that is.)
Indeed. It amazes me that the kinds of people who can successfully
control a giant hunk of metal moving down the highway at speeds that
make it impossible for them to stop or change direction without many
seconds of prior notification are also terribly afraid of any new
dialogue box that an unfamiliar program shows them.
The only way to make such terror rational is to posit that they believe
commodity computers are wired with C4 or similar high-explosive material
sufficient to kill them which can be triggered by an application
program. I've never actually asked anyone to determine if this is the
case. Maybe I should.
Charles Richmond
ISTM that the *fear* of computers these days *might* be based on
the fact that the computer is at the center of most jobs. If you
can *not* get the computer to work, you could be demoted... or
worse, be pounding the pavement looking for another job.
If one does *not* know what he/she is doing, he/she can destroy
huge amounts of customer data with the press of a button.
--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
Charles Richmond
BAH has noted before that she has "trashed out" her checkbook by
doing the arithmetic in octal. IIRC, she had to get someone else
to point out what the problem was to her!!!
Charles Richmond
> In article <2995.591T2...@kltpzyxm.invalid>,
> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> (My personal favourite is my job description at a PPOE.
>> To fit the 15-character field in the payroll record I became
>> a PROGRAMMER-ANAL.)
>
> You better be, programming is detailed work.
>
When you were in college, I hope you took ANAL GEOMETRY. ;-)
Charles Richmond
> In article <2995.591T2...@kltpzyxm.invalid>,
> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> And don't forget leading zeros. If you want to look really
>> computerish, you have to put some leading zeros in front of numbers.
>
> Some programmer forgot to do this and people were billed like 24*10^9
> dollars for a purchase at a drug store.
>
> This was discussed here, IIRC not too long ago.
>
> There was apparently no sanity clause.
>
> Now do you know why programers must be anal?
>
> As one of my ex-bosses would say, "Details!, Details!".
>
"The devil is in the details."
Charles Richmond
If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and
learning arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the
teenage clerk at the corner store count out change without
using the cash register to do it???
> Moving on to trigonometry, calculus, college algebra, and, possibly,
> formal logic, vectors, or discrete math (depending on your major,
> naturally), calculators are a vital tool to prevent time from being
> wasted on the nonsense monkey-work a machine or a moron might be content
> doing all day. Again, the focus is on an *understanding* of the ideas
> being presented in the class.
>
Calculators *are* wonderful tools. But one must be able to have
some understanding of arithmetic in order to determine if the
calculator's answers make any sense. If you add two plus three and
get 58, you have to be able to see that this can *not* be right.
> Tables, whether multiplication or log, are a crutch. Four-function
> calculators are a better one. Using a poor crutch is no mark of virtue;
> it merely designates you as obsessed with form over function.
>
I have memorized my multiplication tables. I have *not* memorized
the log tables. ;-) As I pointed out before, one *has* to have
some facility with mental arithmetic so that one can tell if a
calculator's answers make sense.
> Graphing and algebraic calculators, up to and including software systems
> such as MACSYMA/MAXIMA and Mathematica, are something more than a mere
> crutch as they engage different parts of the brain compared to purely
> arithmetical tools. By shifting the focus, one can ignore the irrelevant
> (a talent limited to intelligent animals such as humans) and gain a new
> perspective on the world of mathematics. From such perspective shifts a
> true comprehension is gained.
Graphing calculators and other computerized math systems *can* be
a real boost to understanding. But they are *not* substitutes for
understanding the basics yourself.
cjt
<snip> As I pointed out before, one *has* to have some
> facility with mental arithmetic so that one can tell if a calculator's
> answers make sense.
>
I sometimes think young people should be trained in the use of slide
rules to help them recognize nonsense answers.
Jorgen Grahn
...
> There was once an inventor who, noting the use of hexadecimal notation
> in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
> should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
> hex was the wave of the future. It was basically an attitude that
> people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
> computers work to communicate with people. He had invented an optical
> character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits that
> his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
> them that way too. Never mind that the addition and multiplication
> tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
> have enough trouble learning as it is.
Don't you mean 1.51 times as big? The generation before me in .se
didn't stop at 10 -- unless I am mistaken, they went to 13. To twelve
because it's a number with useful properties, and one more for good
measure I suppose.
I recall my teacher circa 1980 mentioning that she'd prefer that we
learned the 12*12 or 13*13 matrix, but that she couldn't force us to.
I ended up learning the squares by heart: 121, 144, 169.
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
Jorgen Grahn
> Jim Haynes wrote:
...
>> them that way too. Never mind that the addition and multiplication
>> tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
>> have enough trouble learning as it is.
>>
>
> anymore.
I don't believe that. You need them hardwired into your brain to do
everyday calculations in situations where you cannot pull up a pocket
calculator. Surely schools understand that?
Like, how many eggs are there in this tray, and do I have the money to
buy them?
o o o o o o o
o o o o o o o
o o o o o
o o o o o
> They just use calculators, and calculators that do hex
> arithmetic can be built as cheaply as decimal ones.
I can't recall when I last used one of those. Much simpler to use the
Python interpreter on my computer, in its interactive BASIC-style
mode.
Calculator emulators on computers, like xcalc and whatever the one in
Windows is called? A really stupid idea. They end up emulating the
artificial restrictions on primitive pocket calculators -- the very
things which make them hard to use correctly. All you gain is
familiarity.
Dave Wade
"Jorgen Grahn" <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote in message
news:slrnhbtvdf.6...@frailea.sa.invalid...
I checked on the "National Strategy" for mathematics in England and Wales.
At 11 years old children should know the multiplication tables up to 10 x
10....
http://nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/node/18571
jmfbahciv
First try: (numbers changed to reflect horse birth dates) 1221950
Bzzzt. Try again.
Second try: January211950
Bzzzt. Try again. Please put in format mmddyyyy
Now they tell me what they expect in formatting.
Third try: 01211950
Passed the fucking test.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> writes:
>
>> Jim Haynes wrote:
>>> Ah, a subject line which reminded me of something entirely unrelated
>>> but somewhat funny.
>>>
>>> There was once an inventor who, noting the use of hexadecimal notation
>>> in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
>>> should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
>>> hex was the wave of the future. It was basically an attitude that
>>> people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
>>> computers work to communicate with people. He had invented an optical
>>> character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits that
>>> his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
>>> them that way too. Never mind that the addition and multiplication
>>> tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
>>> have enough trouble learning as it is.
>>>
>> I do *not* think that kids learn the multiplication tables
>> anymore. They just use calculators, and calculators that do hex
>> arithmetic can be built as cheaply as decimal ones.
>
> Balderdash. Calculators are typically banned entirely from the classroom
> until well into the sixth grade,
Wrong. My nephew was using a calculator before 6th grade. he could
not divide by 10 without using one. So kids weren't getting
taught exponents either.
<snip>
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> In article <2995.591T2...@kltpzyxm.invalid>,
> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> (My personal favourite is my job description at a PPOE.
>> To fit the 15-character field in the payroll record I became
>> a PROGRAMMER-ANAL.)
>
> You better be, programming is detailed work.
>
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> Chris Barts wrote:
>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> In article
>>> <527c1461-3da9-4c91...@d21g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
>>> hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com (hancock4) writes:
>>>> --hitting return/enter after typing; other terminal control keys.
>>> And don't forget leading zeros. If you want to look really
>>> computerish, you have to put some leading zeros in front of numbers.
>>
>> ... especially if you're programming in C. You simply *must* cultivate
>> the image you balance your checkbook in octal if you want to fit in this
>> season, dahling!
>
> BAH has noted before that she has "trashed out" her checkbook by doing
> the arithmetic in octal. IIRC, she had to get someone else to point out
> what the problem was to her!!!
>
Nope, not me. A guy I worked with did this.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> Walter Bushell wrote:
>> In article <2995.591T2...@kltpzyxm.invalid>,
>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> (My personal favourite is my job description at a PPOE.
>>> To fit the 15-character field in the payroll record I became
>>> a PROGRAMMER-ANAL.)
>>
>> You better be, programming is detailed work.
>>
>
> When you were in college, I hope you took ANAL GEOMETRY. ;-)
>
round holes.
/BAH
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and
> learning arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the
> teenage clerk at the corner store count out change without
> using the cash register to do it???
Probably because they've never been taught to do it, after all you
do not count out change by first doing the arithmetic to ork out how much
change to give back. The standard method of counting back change is
designed to minimise the arithmetic needed so that people who are not good
at arithmetic can reliably give te correct change.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Mensanator <mensa...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 26, 2:00�am, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 21:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
> > Mensanator <mensana...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > On Sep 25, 10:41 pm, Charles Richmond <friz...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> > > > If this were true, the common place system would be based on
> > > > *eleven*,
> >
> > > Funny how that works out, eh?
> >
> > > Everything you know is wrong.
> >
> > > > since we have ten fingers (including the thumbs).
> >
> > > Where did you get the notion that counting on your fingers
> > > is using "base 10"? Look in any computer textbook. You'll
> > > find that "base R" refers to a "Standard Positional Number
> > > System of Radix R" which does not include finger counting.
> >
> > > Those who use "base 8" to refer to a Tally System of Radix 8
> > > are diplaying their ignorance.
> >
> > � � � � Here's me I thought finger counting was a tally system with 9
> > count indicators and a carry indicator. When the carry goes up you tally
> > another 10 and drop all the fingers - thus it's base 10 counting
> > implemented on a tally.
>
> Yeah, so? There are lots of English words that remain
So finger counting is an implementation of base n where n is the
number of fingers. So counting with 8 fingers is base 8 counting, and
counting with 10 fingers is base 10 counting.
> ambiguous even in context. To use "base" outside its
> normal usage without clarification, in a computr newsgroup,
Unless by normal usage you mean "that part which is at the bottom
of the object" than I contend that this is normal usage of the word base as
it applies to arithmetic.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> Don't you mean 1.51 times as big? The generation before me in .se
> didn't stop at 10 -- unless I am mistaken, they went to 13. To twelve
> because it's a number with useful properties, and one more for good
> measure I suppose.
We stopped at 12 when I learned[1] my tables back in the 60s.
[1] Actually I was too lazy to learn them, I learned part of them and a
number of tricks to get from the bits I knew to the one I was being asked
for quickly enough that it looked like I'd learned it all.
Jim Haynes
> On 27 Sep 2009 05:52:47 GMT
> Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>
>> Don't you mean 1.51 times as big? The generation before me in .se
>> didn't stop at 10 -- unless I am mistaken, they went to 13. To twelve
>> because it's a number with useful properties, and one more for good
>> measure I suppose.
>
Not a matter of what numbers you learned to multiply from memory. What
I'm talking about is the size of the table you get when you multiply
one digit by one digit. A ten-by-ten table versus a 16-by-16 table.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> Or something as simple as never putting commas in the middle of
> numbers.
Good point. Forgot about that. Likeise not using dollar signs and
often not using decimal points.
I remember when training new people they'd always forget to hit
'enter'. They'd type something and stare and the machine.
Also, people had to be taught the various function keys, different
uses of SHIFT, ALT, and CTRL.
To this day I get confused entering a phone number. Some applications
offer a free form field which I like since I can enter the extension
number or the comment "day" or "evening"*, but others have separate
autoskip fields for 3 digits for the area code, 3 for the exchange,
and 4 for the number.
* It is amazing how many organizations disregard the day/evening
designation when calling me. Indeed, it seems they _purposely_ ignore
it, calling my home in the day time and my work in the evening. That
way they can quickly leave a message and not have to answer
questions. I caught a few organizations definitely doing that where
their form clearly had designations for two different numbers.
Dave Garland
> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and learning
> arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the teenage
> clerk at the corner store count out change without using the cash
> register to do it???
Because nobody's teaching how to count out change, and since they are
required to use the cash register (which calculates the change for
them) they wouldn't get any practice.
I don't think I learned to count out change in school, I suspect I
learned by having cashiers count out change to me. Leaving kids
aside, not even elderly cashiers count out change any more, unless
it's a shop so antiquated that their cash register doesn't calculate
the change.
Dae
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> > That was a common attitude in the 1960s, when computers were seen as a
> > huge and welcome improvement.
>
> Only by a very small minority. Regular people were afraid of
> computers. I spent a lot of time in college talking to people
> who were afraid about what kinds of things they could do and
> how much person-time they would have to do other things.
> This was 1969-1971.
In that timeframe there were many newspaper articles talking about the
future world of computers. A great deal of it came to pass as
predicted though the anticipated players are very different. In 1967
Western Union foresaw the functionality of the Internet and was
working hard to be the data backbone of it. WU also foresaw home
satellite dishes and broadband connections to the home. (When I get
time I will post a summary of the WU article.)
Anyway, in many of the articles the writers described what ordinary
people would have to do to accomodate computers, like understanding
hex, binary, flip flops, and other basic comp-sci fundamentals.
One problem with the computer world was that most computer people were
very technical and not very good at translating tech talk into
layman's terms.
(When I was in college our compsci professor wouldn't allow buzz words
in our system design reports. Also, all improvements had to be
specifically quantified. That is, we couldn't say "improved delivery
time" but rather we had to say _specifically_ how much faster delivery
time would be. Sadly that's something still not done today nor does
anybody ask for specific numbers.)
Remember that on-line interfaces in that time frame were generally
extremely terse due to the limited machine horsepower available back
then. A user would not get an error message in red saying "date of
birth can not be a future date" but rather a cryptic "E235" typed
out. The user would have to refer to a manual to see what E235
meant. Odds were the manual would only say "bad date".
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> *sigh* Their loss. There is nothing more fun than building
> your own number system:
When I was a kid they came out with the "New Math". Part of that
included understanding what base 10 meant and various other bases.
Came in handy when I later got into computers.
In my early days one needed to know hex well to decipher a core dump.
But later on there were core dump programs like "Abend-Aid" which
greatly reduced the hex work and sped up debugging.
The Univac 9000 series were like IBM machines and used hex, too. But
there stuff was harder to debug.
Quadibloc
> Also, people had to be taught the various function keys, different
> uses of SHIFT, ALT, and CTRL.
I still vividly remembering the time when I had to explain why Ctrl-
Alt-Del didn't work reliably for someone new to computers - because
Ctrl and Alt were shift keys, and were supposed to be held down while
you press Del.
This is why I think that the keyboard for the IBM PC ought to have
used a color scheme like the one shown in this illustration
http://www.quadibloc.com/comp/images/pca70.gif
for the 101-key keyboard (and its international and Japanese variants)
because this makes it obvious which keys are shift keys (cream) which
keys are for printable characters (grey), which keys emit control
characters (green), and which keys have special functions (black). Of
course, I allow additional colors for the numeric keypad, the cursor
cluster, and the function keys, but I don't think that is too
confusing.
John Savard
Patrick Scheible
I heard that prior to currency decimalisation British kids were highly
encouraged to learn up to 20 x 20 so they could calculate with
shillings.
-- Patrick
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> ISTM that the *fear* of computers these days *might* be based on
> the fact that the computer is at the center of most jobs. If you
> can *not* get the computer to work, you could be demoted... or
> worse, be pounding the pavement looking for another job.
So true. Happened to a friend of mine.
> If one does *not* know what he/she is doing, he/she can destroy
> huge amounts of customer data with the press of a button.
Erasing an entire file is not as bad as corrupting parts of the file.
We always read about organizations (business, govt, and others) that
send out a mass mailing completely in error, lose confidential
information, etc.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and
> learning arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the
> teenage clerk at the corner store count out change without
> using the cash register to do it???
If they had to--say the register failed--I'm sure they could do it by
hand.
It's like any other skill. If you use it enough you become fast and
proficient in it, if you don't, you're slow and cumbersome.
There are some ultra-modern computer things (like downloading music
and videos) that would be cumbersome to many older people, yet a
complete breeze for a kid.
Note that when I was a kid we learned how to manually figure out a
square root (weird hairy form of long division), and maybe even a log
(base 10). We learned how to 'interpolate' sin/cos/tan/log functions
from tables. Beyond school I never ever used any of those skills and
would have no idea how they're done. If I needed a math function I'd
go to a computer and enter PRINT SIN(x) and get the answer instantly.
(I'd use BASIC, but I think spreadsheets have all those functions).
Likewise, somewhere I learned the formulas for calculating present-
value and the like. Again, I'd use pre-built functions in a computer.
> Calculators *are* wonderful tools. But one must be able to have
> some understanding of arithmetic in order to determine if the
> calculator's answers make any sense. If you add two plus three and
> get 58, you have to be able to see that this can *not* be right.
Someone can use square roots without knowing how to figure them out by
hand.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> I don't think I learned to count out change in school, I suspect I
> learned by having cashiers count out change to me. Leaving kids
> aside, not even elderly cashiers count out change any more, unless
> it's a shop so antiquated that their cash register doesn't calculate
> the change.
My parents taught me how to count change, I didn't learn it in school.
Some older cashiers do count it out my hand as follows: Your purchase
comes to 72c. The cashier sees you pulling out a dollar bill from
your wallet, and then immediately starts pulling coins out to give you
when you hand her the dollar bill.
In a discussion in the railroad newsgroup, it was observed a great
many people these days buy EVERYTHING, even tiny purchases, on credit
cards. For example, the easiest way to buy a $1.35 light rail ticket
is via a credit card, not cash because it's sold by machine.
grey...@mail.com
> "Dave Wade" <g8...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>>
>> http://nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/node/18571
>
> I heard that prior to currency decimalisation British kids were highly
> encouraged to learn up to 20 x 20 so they could calculate with
> shillings.
Here, .ie, basically the British system, we went to 12x12. Remember
there were 12 pence to a shilling, 20 shilling to a pound, and also
halfpence and farthings (quarterpennies) in common coins. Some
dealings were in Guineas (still are, in a sort of way)(21 shillings).
With all that, we were never in as spectacular a mess as at the
moment. I was reading that the number `squillion' was used in one
legal claim recently. Googling, the only definition of that I can
find is 1,000,000,000,000,000,000.
--
Greymaus....
Are You a `human` or a `zombie`?
Case A, vote "No".
Mensanator
Normal usage means that when people are talking about
settimg file permissions, they say 377, not ||||||||.
Have you ever heard anyone say ||||||||?
I haven't, not once in 27 years.
Why not? It's "base 8", isn't it?
And neither have I ever heard anyone say ||||||||||
when speaking about "base 10".
You'll find that "normal" usage of "base n" is to refer to
"Standard Positional Number System of Radix n". The fact that
you can make a case for non-standard usage does not in any way
justify such usage.
> --
> Steve O'Hara-Smith � � � � � � � � � � � � �| � Directable Mirror Arrays
> C:>WIN � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �| A better way to focus the sun
> The computer obeys and wins. � � � � � � � �| � �licences available see
> You lose and Bill collects. � � � � � � � � | � �http://www.sohara.org/- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Peter Flass
> Jim Haynes wrote:
>> Ah, a subject line which reminded me of something entirely unrelated
>> but somewhat funny.
>>
>> in IBM System/360 and later computers, came to believe that children
>> should be taught arithmetic in hexadecimal rather than decimal because
>> hex was the wave of the future. It was basically an attitude that
>> people should adapt to communicate with computers rather than having
>> computers work to communicate with people. He had invented an optical
>> character recognition machine and had a notation for the hex digits that
>> his machine could easily read; so he wanted people to learn to write
>> them that way too. Never mind that the addition and multiplication
>> tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
>> have enough trouble learning as it is.
>>
>
> just use calculators, and calculators that do hex arithmetic can be
> built as cheaply as decimal ones.
>
I've often wished I'd taken the trouble to learn hex multiplication
tables years ago.
Mensanator
I bought an HP-16 instead. Does octal, too. Came in real handy
for use with the PDP-11 machines I had to work with.
Walter Bushell
Chris Barts <chbarts...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Which, of course, they should be. (Afraid of their car, that is.)
>
> Indeed. It amazes me that the kinds of people who can successfully
> control a giant hunk of metal moving down the highway at speeds that
> make it impossible for them to stop or change direction without many
> seconds of prior notification are also terribly afraid of any new
> dialogue box that an unfamiliar program shows them.
>
And deal with all the other people doing the same thing whilst eating,
reading, on the phone, or texting. It does little good if you stop if
the tractor trailer behind you doesn't. I suppose they have to ignore
the risk to be able to continue with their lifestyle or hold a job.
> The only way to make such terror rational is to posit that they believe
> commodity computers are wired with C4 or similar high-explosive material
> sufficient to kill them which can be triggered by an application
> program. I've never actually asked anyone to determine if this is the
> case. Maybe I should.
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Walter Bushell
<26de6ad5-6b63-46cc...@d34g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
There was a database program in the early Macintosh days that held all
the data in RAM so was very fast and was very positively reviewed. But,
they used a key combination that the Macintosh used for "undo" to push
down a column. This lead to predictable results. For example, one
magazine lost its subscriber base because this operation was apparently
done an arbitrary number of times at various times and updates were
applied in the wrong place.
Walter Bushell
Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and
> learning arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the
> teenage clerk at the corner store count out change without
> using the cash register to do it???
The kids who can do arithmetic are running your bank, pension and
government.
Walter Bushell
<33d28a84-c07f-4c91...@l34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> Note that when I was a kid we learned how to manually figure out a
> square root (weird hairy form of long division), and maybe even a log
> (base 10). We learned how to 'interpolate' sin/cos/tan/log functions
> from tables. Beyond school I never ever used any of those skills and
> would have no idea how they're done. If I needed a math function I'd
> go to a computer and enter PRINT SIN(x) and get the answer instantly.
> (I'd use BASIC, but I think spreadsheets have all those functions).
Ah, but square roots, I do by the Newton Ralphson method. If I had to do
it a lot, I could become very fast with the method. If you start with a
one digit guess you need only work to 2 digit accuracy, then 4 then 8.
Number of digits double each time and only the last iteration affects
the accuracy of the final result.
Walter Bushell
wrote:
> riday, I was asked to enter my date of birth on the phone.
>
> First try: (numbers changed to reflect horse birth dates) 1221950
> Bzzzt. Try again.
>
> Second try: January211950
> Bzzzt. Try again. Please put in format mmddyyyy
>
> Now they tell me what they expect in formatting.
>
> Third try: 01211950
>
> Passed the fucking test.
But it should be yyyymmdd that way you can sort dates as numbers.
Better yyyyddd but that is not human friendly.
Hey, they could have wanted the Julian day number.
Charles Richmond
...or unless the damn cash register is *broken*!!! This happens
more than you might think.
I have said for years now, that high school (at least by then)
there should be a *mandatory* course on handling money, compound
interest, and what investments are available out there. It should
also include methods of developing a consistent savings plan.
Make sure to include information about how insurance works (house,
car, life, etc.).
I heard a female college student admit on TV, that when she got a
credit card in college, she did *not* realize she would have to
pay back the money!!! This kind of ignorance should *not* happen.
--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
> I have said for years now, that high school (at least by then) there
> should be a *mandatory* course on handling money, compound interest,
> and what investments are available out there. It should also include
> methods of developing a consistent savings plan.
the comptroller general (appointed a little more than a decade ago for
15yr teram) had been on tirade that nobody in congress for the past 50
yrs has been capable of middle school arithmatic, he apparently stepped
down last spring so he could be more vocal.
misc. past posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006f.html#41 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006f.html#44 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#9 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#14 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#27 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#2 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#3 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#4 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#17 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#19 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#33 The Pankian Metaphor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006o.html#61 Health Care
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006p.html#17 Health Care
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006r.html#0 Cray-1 Anniversary Event - September 21st
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006t.html#26 Universal constants
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007j.html#20 IBM Unionization
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007j.html#91 IBM Unionization
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007k.html#19 Another "migration" from the mainframe
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007o.html#74 Horrid thought about Politics, President Bush, and Democrats
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007p.html#22 U.S. Cedes Top Spot in Global IT Competitiveness
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007q.html#7 what does xp do when system is copying
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007s.html#1 Translation of IBM Basic Assembler to C?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007t.html#13 Newsweek article--baby boomers and computers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007t.html#14 Newsweek article--baby boomers and computers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007t.html#15 Newsweek article--baby boomers and computers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007t.html#24 Translation of IBM Basic Assembler to C?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007t.html#25 Newsweek article--baby boomers and computers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007t.html#33 Newsweek article--baby boomers and computers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007t.html#35 Newsweek article--baby boomers and computers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007v.html#26 2007 Year in Review on Mainframes - Interesting
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008.html#57 Computer Science Education: Where Are the Software Engineers of Tomorrow?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#40 Computer Science Education: Where Are the Software Engineers of Tomorrow?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008e.html#50 fraying infrastructure
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008f.html#86 Banks failing to manage IT risk - study
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008g.html#1 The Workplace War for Age and Talent
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008h.html#3 America's Prophet of Fiscal Doom
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008h.html#26 The Return of Ada
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008i.html#98 dollar coins
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008n.html#8 Taxcuts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008n.html#9 Taxcuts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008n.html#17 Michigan industry
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009f.html#20 What is the real basis for business mess we are facing today?
--
40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970
Charles Richmond
> On Sep 27, 1:05 am, Charles Richmond <friz...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and
>> learning arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the
>> teenage clerk at the corner store count out change without
>> using the cash register to do it???
>
> If they had to--say the register failed--I'm sure they could do it by
> hand.
>
It happened to a checkout clerk when my cousin was buying
something at a grocery store. It took this clerk *ten* minutes to
"solve" the problem and she gave my cousin the wrong change anyway...
> It's like any other skill. If you use it enough you become fast and
> proficient in it, if you don't, you're slow and cumbersome.
>
> There are some ultra-modern computer things (like downloading music
> and videos) that would be cumbersome to many older people, yet a
> complete breeze for a kid.
>
I think everyone should learn all the "new" stuff. Some of the new
technology really improves the quality of life; other parts just
make things so easy that it's *not* worth doing anymore.
> Note that when I was a kid we learned how to manually figure out a
> square root (weird hairy form of long division), and maybe even a log
> (base 10). We learned how to 'interpolate' sin/cos/tan/log functions
> from tables. Beyond school I never ever used any of those skills and
> would have no idea how they're done. If I needed a math function I'd
> go to a computer and enter PRINT SIN(x) and get the answer instantly.
> (I'd use BASIC, but I think spreadsheets have all those functions).
>
I'm sure most of the older folks here learned how to take square
roots "by hand". And most have used trig tables to look up sines
and cosines, as well as log tables.
> Likewise, somewhere I learned the formulas for calculating present-
> value and the like. Again, I'd use pre-built functions in a computer.
>
But knowing how to compute "present value" by hand helps you
understand what it really means.
>> Calculators *are* wonderful tools. But one must be able to have
>> some understanding of arithmetic in order to determine if the
>> calculator's answers make any sense. If you add two plus three and
>> get 58, you have to be able to see that this can *not* be right.
>
> Someone can use square roots without knowing how to figure them out by
> hand.
>
But when you seek the square root of 38 with a calculator, and end
up with 8.635 as the answer... you have to have the "smarts" to
know that this can *not* possibly be right. You need to realize
that the square root of 38 *has* to be between 6 and 7, closer to
the 6 side.
Charles Richmond
If your "four banger" calculator does *not* have a square root
key, but has a "four key" memory... then it is pretty easy to take
a square root using the Newton Raphson method. Each iteration gets
you about two more digits of the answer.
Charles Richmond
> In article <h9mrq0$and$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and
>> learning arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the
>> teenage clerk at the corner store count out change without
>> using the cash register to do it???
>
> The kids who can do arithmetic are running your bank, pension and
> government.
>
;-)
I remember hearing a radio commercial tauting the importance of
learning math. The male clerk calls his female boss: "Yes, Miss
I-took-advanced-calculus. I'll be glad to stay late and finish up
the project." Female boss: "Okay, Mr. I-only-took-algebra-one."
Charles Richmond
In Left-Pondia, we call any unreasonably large number a "zillion"
or a "ga-zillion". After the first set of three digits, the three
digit sets are called thousands, millions, billions, trillions,
quadrillions, quintillions, hextillions, heptillions, octillions,
nonillions, undecillion, duodecillion, tredecillion,
quattuodecillion, quindecillion, sexdecillion, septendecillion,
octodecillion, novemdecillion, vigintillion, and centillion. After
that, I'm *not* sure.
The British have the same names, except they stick a "milliard"
after the million, and shove the other names down the list.
See the following web page:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/table/dict/number.htm
Bernd Felsche
>> Note that when I was a kid we learned how to manually figure out
>> a square root (weird hairy form of long division), and maybe even
>> a log (base 10). We learned how to 'interpolate' sin/cos/tan/log
>> functions from tables. Beyond school I never ever used any of
>> those skills and would have no idea how they're done. If I
>> needed a math function I'd go to a computer and enter PRINT
>> SIN(x) and get the answer instantly. (I'd use BASIC, but I think
>> spreadsheets have all those functions).
>Ah, but square roots, I do by the Newton Ralphson method. If I had to do
>it a lot, I could become very fast with the method. If you start with a
>one digit guess you need only work to 2 digit accuracy, then 4 then 8.
>Number of digits double each time and only the last iteration affects
>the accuracy of the final result.
I did Taylor series expansions for pixel locations. Finite
resolution means that you only need 4 to 5 digits of significance;
which is much quicker to calculate than the trancendental function;
especially without FPU in specialised hardware.
Similarly, the relationships between trigonometric functions can be
exploited, making the cosine of an angle able to be calculated by a
multiplication, subtraction and square root, instead of a fresh
invocation of the transcendental. If you do many of these in e.g.
analysis via finite element method, it can be a massive saver of
time.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | The growth of knowledge depends
X against HTML mail | entirely on disagreement.
/ \ and postings | -- Karl Popper
Charles Richmond
> On 27 Sep 2009 05:52:47 GMT
> Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>
>> Don't you mean 1.51 times as big? The generation before me in .se
>> didn't stop at 10 -- unless I am mistaken, they went to 13. To twelve
>> because it's a number with useful properties, and one more for good
>> measure I suppose.
>
>
> [1] Actually I was too lazy to learn them, I learned part of them and a
> number of tricks to get from the bits I knew to the one I was being asked
> for quickly enough that it looked like I'd learned it all.
>
You really *did* learn all the multiplication table, just *not* by
rote, but by "hook or crook""... ;-) In a way, that is even
better. It keeps your mind active. Any good parrot can repeat the
table by rote.
Charles Richmond
> On 2009-09-27, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On 27 Sep 2009 05:52:47 GMT
>> Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>>
>>> Don't you mean 1.51 times as big? The generation before me in .se
>>> didn't stop at 10 -- unless I am mistaken, they went to 13. To twelve
>>> because it's a number with useful properties, and one more for good
>>> measure I suppose.
>
> I'm talking about is the size of the table you get when you multiply
> one digit by one digit. A ten-by-ten table versus a 16-by-16 table.
The binary product of two "four bit" numbers should fit in an
"eight bit" number... ;-)
On this newsgroup, programmers are over-represented.
"To a carpenter, every tool looks like a hammer, and every problem
like a nail."
Charles Richmond
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:53:19 -0500, Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>> Jim Haynes wrote:
> ...
>>> them that way too. Never mind that the addition and multiplication
>>> tables in hex are 2.56 times as big as those for decimal, which children
>>> have enough trouble learning as it is.
>>>
>> I do *not* think that kids learn the multiplication tables
>> anymore.
>
> everyday calculations in situations where you cannot pull up a pocket
> calculator. Surely schools understand that?
>
> Like, how many eggs are there in this tray, and do I have the money to
> buy them?
>
> o o o o o o o
> o o o o o o o
> o o o o o
> o o o o o
>
Now you see why so many of those "kids" are having problems later
in life...
>> They just use calculators, and calculators that do hex
>> arithmetic can be built as cheaply as decimal ones.
>
> I can't recall when I last used one of those. Much simpler to use the
> Python interpreter on my computer, in its interactive BASIC-style
> mode.
>
> Calculator emulators on computers, like xcalc and whatever the one in
> Windows is called? A really stupid idea. They end up emulating the
> artificial restrictions on primitive pocket calculators -- the very
> things which make them hard to use correctly. All you gain is
> familiarity.
>
On the current versions of Mac OS/X and Windows, the calculators
have a "scientific" mode. They can cough up values for sine and
cosine, logs, and take the 17th root of 5 for you.
Charles Richmond
> On Sep 25, 11:21 pm, Quadibloc <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>> Or something as simple as never putting commas in the middle of
>> numbers.
>
> Good point. Forgot about that. Likeise not using dollar signs and
> often not using decimal points.
>
> I remember when training new people they'd always forget to hit
> 'enter'. They'd type something and stare and the machine.
I have gotten into an elevator (lift) with other people. The door
closed, and *no* one is pressing any of the buttons!!! So I say:
"It's automatic, but you have to press the button." :-)
> Also, people had to be taught the various function keys, different
> uses of SHIFT, ALT, and CTRL.
>
...and "double-bucky".
> To this day I get confused entering a phone number. Some applications
> offer a free form field which I like since I can enter the extension
> number or the comment "day" or "evening"*, but others have separate
> autoskip fields for 3 digits for the area code, 3 for the exchange,
> and 4 for the number.
What gets me is that *some* entry fields auto-skip after you enter
the area code. Others want you to tab to the next field. Sometimes
I just enter the area code and then tab... and find out I have
*skipped* a field. :-( It's just another "time waster".
Charles Richmond
> On Sep 27, 10:54 am, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> Also, people had to be taught the various function keys, different
>> uses of SHIFT, ALT, and CTRL.
>
> I still vividly remembering the time when I had to explain why Ctrl-
> Alt-Del didn't work reliably for someone new to computers - because
> Ctrl and Alt were shift keys, and were supposed to be held down while
> you press Del.
Now you can confuse them all over again. Windows Vista has a
setting that allows Ctrl and Alt to be "sticky". If you set this
option, you *can* press Ctrl-Alt-Del in *sequence* instead of
simultaneously.
> This is why I think that the keyboard for the IBM PC ought to have
> used a color scheme like the one shown in this illustration
>
> http://www.quadibloc.com/comp/images/pca70.gif
>
> for the 101-key keyboard (and its international and Japanese variants)
> because this makes it obvious which keys are shift keys (cream) which
> keys are for printable characters (grey), which keys emit control
> characters (green), and which keys have special functions (black). Of
> course, I allow additional colors for the numeric keypad, the cursor
> cluster, and the function keys, but I don't think that is too
> confusing.
>
John, you are just asking for more trouble here. You would be
surprised how prevalent color blindness is among men. I had a
friend who could *not* get into electronics in the air force
because he was color blind: he could *not* read the color codes
on the resistors, etc.
Color blindness is especially prevalent in Japan. A larger
percentage of Japanese men are color blind than in the U.S. That's
why the test for color blindness is call the "Ishihara Test": Dr.
Ishihara in Japan developed it. See the following web site:
http://www.toledo-bend.com/colorblind/Ishihara.asp
Charles Richmond
> On Sep 26, 8:55 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>
>>> That was a common attitude in the 1960s, when computers were seen as a
>>> huge and welcome improvement.
>> Only by a very small minority. Regular people were afraid of
>> computers. I spent a lot of time in college talking to people
>> who were afraid about what kinds of things they could do and
>> how much person-time they would have to do other things.
>> This was 1969-1971.
>
> In that timeframe there were many newspaper articles talking about the
> future world of computers. A great deal of it came to pass as
> predicted though the anticipated players are very different. In 1967
> Western Union foresaw the functionality of the Internet and was
> working hard to be the data backbone of it. WU also foresaw home
> satellite dishes and broadband connections to the home. (When I get
> time I will post a summary of the WU article.)
>
This seems odd to me, because in the book _Where Wizards Stay Up
Late_ about the development of the Arpanet and Internet, it says
that the communications companies swore that a "packet switching
network" was impossible and would fail. The opposition of the
telephone companies in particular caused the development of packet
switching networks to become a controversial subject.
Charles Richmond
"To err is human; to really foul things up requires a computer."
Dave Garland
> I heard a female college student admit on TV, that when she got a credit
> card in college, she did *not* realize she would have to pay back the
> money!!! This kind of ignorance should *not* happen.
Hard to credit that it actually did. It's not difficult for the
balance to steadily creep up on a novice until she's over her head,
but that's not for want of knowing it's going to come due.
Dave
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> To this day I get confused entering a phone number. Some applications
> offer a free form field which I like since I can enter the extension
> number or the comment "day" or "evening"*, but others have separate
> autoskip fields for 3 digits for the area code, 3 for the exchange,
> and 4 for the number.
That rules out any international phone numbers and possibly mobile
numbers too.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> The binary product of two "four bit" numbers should fit in an
> "eight bit" number... ;-)
Indeed I recall a multiplication routine for the 8080 that used a
256 byte lookup table to multiply four bit numbers as the core wrapped in an
implemntation of long multiplication.
jmfbahciv
> On Sep 25, 11:21 pm, Quadibloc <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>> Or something as simple as never putting commas in the middle of
>> numbers.
>
> Good point. Forgot about that. Likeise not using dollar signs and
> often not using decimal points.
>
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> Charles Richmond wrote:
>
>> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and learning
>> arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the teenage
>> clerk at the corner store count out change without using the cash
>> register to do it???
>
> required to use the cash register (which calculates the change for
> them) they wouldn't get any practice.
>
> I don't think I learned to count out change in school,
I didn't. My grandmother taught me when I was really little.
>I suspect I
> learned by having cashiers count out change to me. Leaving kids
> aside, not even elderly cashiers count out change any more, unless
> it's a shop so antiquated that their cash register doesn't calculate
> the change.
I got a refresher course when I started working as a waitress.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> On Sep 27, 1:05 am, Charles Richmond <friz...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and
>> learning arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the
>> teenage clerk at the corner store count out change without
>> using the cash register to do it???
>
> hand.
Nope. The register drawer won't open. So even cash transactions
can't be done.
<snip>
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> On Sep 27, 12:49 am, Charles Richmond <friz...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> ISTM that the *fear* of computers these days *might* be based on
>> the fact that the computer is at the center of most jobs. If you
>> can *not* get the computer to work, you could be demoted... or
>> worse, be pounding the pavement looking for another job.
>
> So true. Happened to a friend of mine.
>
>
>
>> If one does *not* know what he/she is doing, he/she can destroy
>> huge amounts of customer data with the press of a button.
>
> Erasing an entire file is not as bad as corrupting parts of the file.
I disagree with this one...extremely disagree.
>
> We always read about organizations (business, govt, and others) that
> send out a mass mailing completely in error, lose confidential
> information, etc.
You can thank the bloody GUI interface for that.
/BAH
Peter Flass
> Dave Garland wrote:
>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>
>>> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and learning
>>> arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the teenage
>>> clerk at the corner store count out change without using the cash
>>> register to do it???
>>
>> Because nobody's teaching how to count out change, and since they are
>> required to use the cash register (which calculates the change for
>> them) they wouldn't get any practice.
>>
>> I don't think I learned to count out change in school, I suspect I
>> learned by having cashiers count out change to me. Leaving kids
>> aside, not even elderly cashiers count out change any more, unless
>> it's a shop so antiquated that their cash register doesn't calculate
>> the change.
>>
>
> ...or unless the damn cash register is *broken*!!! This happens more
> than you might think.
At that point I've seen cashiers take out a scrap of paper and a pencil
and try to figure change.
Charles Richmond
Plotting graphics on screen can be done grossly enough that often
one can keep a *small* table of sines and cosines. It's even
faster than doing a few calculations.
However, ISTM that the newer personal computer chips have sine and
cosine built in to the floating point unit so you can get a value
with one instruction.
Charles Richmond
Sometimes the change mechanism breaks *without* disabling the cash
register proper... I'm referring to the part where the change
comes out of the chute near the edge of the counter.
Dave Garland
> Sometimes the change mechanism breaks *without* disabling the cash
> register proper... I'm referring to the part where the change comes out
> of the chute near the edge of the counter.
>
register in fact has calculated the change due (and usually printed it
on the receipt). And keeps working normally. So the cashier doesn't
need to count back, they just need to manually remove the calculated
amount of change from the coin magazine.
Dave
Dave Garland
I'm not sure why they'd use periods instead of commas (spaces maybe),
but I bet using commas instead of (decimal) periods was a problem.
Unless you had a compile option to change the decimal indicator.
Dave
Bernd Felsche
Too big to squeeze into monitor code of the time (AMOS).
It'd be of the order of 500 to a thousand values for direct lookup,
wouldn't it? Approximately one for each "pixel" (possible result)?
IIRC, memory segment for the monitor was limited to 16 kbytes for
everything. Stuffing the table into the application (in AlphaBASIC)
would have had little advantage of 3 terms of Taylor series
requiring 3 multiplies and 2 divides (or multiplies) as well as an
add and a subtract.
sin(x) =~ x - x^3/3! + x^5/5!
Tricks:
3! and 5! are constants and their inverse can be stored if
multiplies are faster than divides.
calculate and save x^2 from x * x
calculate and save x^3 from x * x^2
calculate approximation of sin(x); substituting for x^5 with
stored variables x^3 * x^2 and multiplying by the inverse of
the respective factorials.
Making a lookup table itself isn't very pretty at all.
>However, ISTM that the newer personal computer chips have sine and
>cosine built in to the floating point unit so you can get a value
>with one instruction.
One instruction that takes how many cycles?
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
In some countries , is the decimal separator and . is the grouping
separator.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
> I'm not sure why they'd use periods instead of commas (spaces maybe),
> but I bet using commas instead of (decimal) periods was a problem.
> Unless you had a compile option to change the decimal indicator.
wait until the directions for the clerk comes out as number of
individual items (different dollar and change demoninations) as opposed
to just the total change value. it is akin to when the airlines changed
from boarding by rows to boarding by area ... since it appeared that
many people didn't understand whether their row was "greater" than
specific row number (and it would have been too time-consuming to call
out each individual row).
--
40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970
Walter Bushell
Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> Dave Garland wrote:
> > Charles Richmond wrote:
> >
> >> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and learning
> >> arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the teenage
> >> clerk at the corner store count out change without using the cash
> >> register to do it???
> >
> > Because nobody's teaching how to count out change, and since they are
> > required to use the cash register (which calculates the change for
> > them) they wouldn't get any practice.
> >
> > I don't think I learned to count out change in school, I suspect I
> > learned by having cashiers count out change to me. Leaving kids
> > aside, not even elderly cashiers count out change any more, unless
> > it's a shop so antiquated that their cash register doesn't calculate
> > the change.
> >
>
> ...or unless the damn cash register is *broken*!!! This happens
> more than you might think.
>
> I have said for years now, that high school (at least by then)
> there should be a *mandatory* course on handling money, compound
> interest, and what investments are available out there. It should
> also include methods of developing a consistent savings plan.
>
> Make sure to include information about how insurance works (house,
> car, life, etc.).
>
> I heard a female college student admit on TV, that when she got a
> credit card in college, she did *not* realize she would have to
> pay back the money!!! This kind of ignorance should *not* happen.
And when you buy a house with a 30 year mortgage, you have to pay 3
times the amount. Of course, in 20 years the money may be wall paper,
but. (Brief calculation of why someone would loan money for 30-40 years
given that money ten years out even is going to be worth much less. I
suppose they feel, "It's not *my* money, I can get my institution out of
the market if the conditions get too bad, and I am likely somewhere else
where I will not be blamed for the loss.) We went through the results of
everyone trying to exit the market at once several times, stop loss
orders that fail by not stopping loss.
But seriously what is likely to happen if they deal with payday lenders.
I remember though, one man saying how he realized he was paying
outrageous sums for the same money over and over, but he said, "That's
not the way I look at it."
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Charlie Gibbs
(Charles Richmond) writes:
> In Left-Pondia, we call any unreasonably large number a "zillion"
> or a "ga-zillion". After the first set of three digits, the three
> digit sets are called thousands, millions, billions, trillions,
> quadrillions, quintillions, hextillions, heptillions, octillions,
> nonillions, undecillion, duodecillion, tredecillion,
> quattuodecillion, quindecillion, sexdecillion, septendecillion,
> octodecillion, novemdecillion, vigintillion, and centillion. After
> that, I'm *not* sure.
Me neither, except for one more entry: a googol (10^100).
> The British have the same names, except they stick a "milliard"
> after the million, and shove the other names down the list.
This makes it dangerous to use any name larger than a million.
Better to switch to exponential notation at that point.
--
/~\ cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Charlie Gibbs
(Charles Richmond) writes:
> I heard a female college student admit on TV, that when she got a
> credit card in college, she did *not* realize she would have to
> pay back the money!!! This kind of ignorance should *not* happen.
Was she related to the one who turned on the motor home's cruise
control and went into the back to prepare lunch?
Charlie Gibbs
<33d28a84-c07f-4c91...@l34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com (hancock4) writes:
> On Sep 27, 1:05�am, Charles Richmond <friz...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> If the kids are memorizing their multiplication tables and
>> learning arithmetic skills in the lower grades, then why can't the
>> teenage clerk at the corner store count out change without
>> using the cash register to do it???
>
> If they had to--say the register failed--I'm sure they could do it
> by hand.
Not necessarily. I recently encountered a kid who tried three
times - unsuccessfully each time - to make change for a meal I
had just purchased. I finally had to tell her what the change
should be and verify that she counted it out correctly.
Charlie Gibbs
writes:
> hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> Erasing an entire file is not as bad as corrupting parts of the file.
>
> I disagree with this one...extremely disagree.
It depends on the situation. If the file is missing completely
then you know about it quickly. Corrupted data can go undetected
for a long time - to the point where it spreads to all the backups
and is no longer recoverable.
>> We always read about organizations (business, govt, and others)
>> that send out a mass mailing completely in error, lose confidential
>> information, etc.
>
> You can thank the bloody GUI interface for that.
Not always - I've made some pretty destructive typos on a
command line too. However, people don't realize the tremendous
demands on hand-eye co-ordination made by GUIs - if your hand
moves slightly while clicking a mouse button, for instance, you
can easily wind up making a selection other than the one you
wanted. And if the adjacent option is destructive - especially
if it doesn't pop up an "Are you sure?" box - you can be in for
a world of hurt. (Note that having too many "Are you sure?" boxes
is equally counterproductive, since it gets users into the habit
of blindly clicking away all of those pesky popups that get in
the way of what they're trying to do.)
Walter Bushell
Dave Garland <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:
I am somewhat incredulous myself, but remember suburban kids are
insulated from life to the point that they have no life experience.
Experience is defined as what you get when you don't get what you want.
There world consists of other kids as far as hurtful experiences goes,
social experience, but not including economic reality.
So, yes, I think it possible. She has seen people use credit cards, but
perhaps not paying them, and
And kids from the favored classes have no idea what kind of trauma their
parents go through to give them the lifestyle. Everything is provided
gratis and so the kids steal money from their parents and use it to buy
heroin. (Current article in the NY Times.)
<http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/27/nyregion/27heroin.html?em>
As to a complete lack of fiscal knowledge as the aforesaid coed [1], I
have seen people with no apparent understanding of physics. Now, take my
ex-wife. (I refuse to say "please".) I demonstrated the value of an
exhaust fan and that the area in the window around the fan must be
blocked for the thing to work. Later on a visit I notice that she has a
fan set to exhaust in an unoccupied room with nothing around the fan. I
give up, I thought. I can't deal with *that* level of stupidity. But,
now I realize she had no exposure to physics.
Perhaps a similar lack of knowledge is the reason people can drive
distracted, drunk, texting, reading, in a hurry, or just plain tired.