A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

BBC News Blunder



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old July 31st 17, 11:32 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Paul Ratcliffe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,451
Default BBC News Blunder

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 17:48:14 +0100, NY wrote:

You'd think the someone on the crew, having a technological background,
might have said "hey, that's wrong" and got the director to put the
presenters straight via the talkback earphone.


Given that 'people on the crew' are often treated as clueless scum, why
should they bother?
Perhaps they did and were ignored. Ask me how I know.
(Although I did narrowly win one battle with a journo over the
difference between energy and power.)
  #52  
Old August 1st 17, 08:45 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Roderick Stewart[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,093
Default BBC News Blunder

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:59:29 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

An orbit parallel to the equator but at a latitude of (for example) 50
degrees (for northern Europe) will require constant burning of fuel to
keep it overhead, so it's not viable.


That wouldn't be an orbit' it would be a flight path.


True, and a rather peculiar flight too. The "satellite", if you could
really call it that, would have to be continuously firing its jets at
right angles to its direction of travel.

Rod..
  #53  
Old August 1st 17, 09:02 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Roderick Stewart[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,093
Default BBC News Blunder

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:10:09 +0100, "NY" wrote:

I can understand why non-computer people refer to megabytes when they mean
megabits, because most other measures in computing are multiples of a byte


Curiously, they don't usually seem to have the same misunderstanding
of the relationship between things like pounds and pennies, or days
and weeks etc, though these are really just the same relationships
with different multipliers.

Rod.
  #54  
Old August 1st 17, 09:15 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Roderick Stewart[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,093
Default BBC News Blunder

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 23:32:21 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
wrote:

You'd think the someone on the crew, having a technological background,
might have said "hey, that's wrong" and got the director to put the
presenters straight via the talkback earphone.


Given that 'people on the crew' are often treated as clueless scum, why
should they bother?
Perhaps they did and were ignored. Ask me how I know.
(Although I did narrowly win one battle with a journo over the
difference between energy and power.)


BTDTBTTS. A technician on the crew would have absolutely zero
incentive to risk being branded as a troublemaker in order to correct
the ignorance of somebody being paid ten times more for their
supposedly superior expertise. I always felt there was a measure of
sarcasm in referring to the front-of-camera people as the "talent".

Rod.
  #55  
Old August 1st 17, 09:25 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Roderick Stewart[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,093
Default BBC News Blunder

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 17:01:48 +0100, "NY" wrote:

All I'm saying is that maybe there is a case for a given application (eg
internet comms rates) always using the same units to make it easier for
people who aren't as conversant as us in SI prefix multipliers. Actually,
it's worse than that because k, M, G and T really imply steps of 1000x,
whereas in computing, it's common to use them to mean steps of 1024x -
except for hard disk manufacturers who use 1000 because it results in
slightly larger, more impressive numbers.


There's a simple notation for that too, which if properly used should
eliminate any ambiguity. This Wikipedia article

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix

explains it very clearly. It'll probably take longer to read than to
grasp the principle on which it's based.

MiB doesn't just stand for "Men in Black", you know.

Rod.
  #56  
Old August 1st 17, 09:36 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.tech.digital-tv,alt.satellite.tv.europe
Invalid[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default BBC News Blunder

In message , Ian Jackson
writes
In message , NY
writes
"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
As for always using the same units, it's horses for courses (miles
or furlongs).


All I'm saying is that maybe there is a case for a given application
(eg internet comms rates) always using the same units to make it
easier for people who aren't as conversant as us in SI prefix
multipliers. Actually, it's worse than that because k, M, G and T
really imply steps of 1000x, whereas in computing, it's common to use
them to mean steps of 1024x - except for hard disk manufacturers who
use 1000 because it results in slightly larger, more impressive numbers.


But is this really relevant to the situation where at least five people
didn't have a clue about the ratio between 500kb/s and 28Mb/s? As they
bothered to ring in, I would presume that they thought they knew
something about the subject. The closest wrong answer was 57 - but
heaven knows how the guy arrived at that conclusion.


Possibly a betting man. Where you get your stake back as well as your
winnings. So a 2:1 bet gets you back three times the money you paid.

so a 28,000,000:500,000 bet would get you back 57 times the amount paid
in?
--
Invalid
  #57  
Old August 1st 17, 10:17 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Robin[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 432
Default BBC News Blunder

On 01/08/2017 10:02, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:10:09 +0100, "NY" wrote:

I can understand why non-computer people refer to megabytes when they mean
megabits, because most other measures in computing are multiples of a byte


Curiously, they don't usually seem to have the same misunderstanding
of the relationship between things like pounds and pennies, or days
and weeks etc, though these are really just the same relationships
with different multipliers.


OTOH pounds and pennies, and days and weeks, aren't near homophones.
Now if octet[1] had prevailed ...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_(computing)

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
  #58  
Old August 1st 17, 11:11 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.tech.digital-tv,alt.satellite.tv.europe
AnthonyL
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 183
Default BBC News Blunder

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 15:20:32 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

Wikipedia has an animated image showing GPS satellites orbiting the
Earth and the Earth rotating beneath them. It shows which satellites are
in view of a particular point on the Earth at any time. The satellites
in view are shown in red. A satellite not in view is black.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global...#Space_segment


nice screensaver.

--
AnthonyL
  #59  
Old August 1st 17, 11:17 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
NY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,135
Default BBC News Blunder

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 17:01:48 +0100, "NY" wrote:

All I'm saying is that maybe there is a case for a given application (eg
internet comms rates) always using the same units to make it easier for
people who aren't as conversant as us in SI prefix multipliers. Actually,
it's worse than that because k, M, G and T really imply steps of 1000x,
whereas in computing, it's common to use them to mean steps of 1024x -
except for hard disk manufacturers who use 1000 because it results in
slightly larger, more impressive numbers.


There's a simple notation for that too, which if properly used should
eliminate any ambiguity. This Wikipedia article

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix

explains it very clearly. It'll probably take longer to read than to
grasp the principle on which it's based.

MiB doesn't just stand for "Men in Black", you know.


On the other hand, "kibibytes" and "mebibytes" sounds like someone with a
speech impediment (Roy Hattersley?) trying to say "kilobytes" and
"megabytes" :-)

  #60  
Old August 1st 17, 11:45 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband,uk.tech.digital-tv,alt.satellite.tv.europe
AnthonyL
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 183
Default BBC News Blunder

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 17:20:49 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

In message , NY
writes
"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
As for always using the same units, it's horses for courses (miles or
furlongs).


All I'm saying is that maybe there is a case for a given application
(eg internet comms rates) always using the same units to make it easier
for people who aren't as conversant as us in SI prefix multipliers.
Actually, it's worse than that because k, M, G and T really imply steps
of 1000x, whereas in computing, it's common to use them to mean steps
of 1024x - except for hard disk manufacturers who use 1000 because it
results in slightly larger, more impressive numbers.


But is this really relevant to the situation where at least five people
didn't have a clue about the ratio between 500kb/s and 28Mb/s? As they
bothered to ring in, I would presume that they thought they knew
something about the subject. The closest wrong answer was 57 - but
heaven knows how the guy arrived at that conclusion.


To paraphrase a well known saying, there are 10 type of people, those
who understand bits and those that don't.

--
AnthonyL
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.