Avoid Delta and Atlanta

Dave Frightens Me wrote:
On 14 Aug 2006 18:18:12 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote:


Miguel Cruz wrote:

Contrast this with Athens and Berlin. A tiny minority of the people have
shared fluency in any language.

Almost all speak English.

*chuckle*

You would be one of those ignorant yanks if you believe this!

A few years ago I commented to a friend of my in Angola about the
difficulty I had in France (I used to go there several times a year)
because I don't speak French and not all that many people spoke
English. He claimed that it was because many people have an attitude
like you just expressed (ignorant yank) abouit Americans.

At his suggestion I tried using Portuguese when I went to France (I had
learned that after several years in Angola). So I did. I'd speak to
someone in France using Portuguese and they would respond in French.
I'd try again in Portuguese and then they would shift to English as a
"neutral language".

I found that damn near everyone I met could speak English fairly well.

They share a handful of TV channels,
mostly the channels that are available in New York and New Orleans as
well. Popular music and films are different, the cuisines have less
overlap,

You think New Orleans food is similar to what you get in NYC?

It's a hell of a lot closer than Greek salad and Sauerkraut.

Clearly someone has never eaten Creole food and Philly Cheese Steaks.

On 15 Aug 2006 18:43:36 -0700, "Tchiowa"
wrote:


Miguel Cruz wrote:
"Tchiowa" wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote:

The "versions" of English that they speak are different. A high
percentage in both cities speak English as a second language. Spanish
is very common in NYC. French is dominant in New Orleans.

French is not "dominant" in New Orleans.

In some areas of New Orleans you hear more French than English.

Same as some areas in California you hear more Spanish than English.

They have 95% of the same TV channels, substantially the same
popular music and films,

The music scene in New York and New Orleans don't even resemble each
other. New Orleans is famous for it's jazz clubs while NYC is more
classical and show music.

Jazz clubs and Broadway shows are a small proportion of the music
listening that goes on in the respective cities (and come to think of
it, a couple days ago I saw a big New Orleans jazz band in New York;
never went to any shows). Most of the music people are listening to is
top-40 crap that is substantially the same across the USA but much less
the same as the top-40 crap in Europe.

Of course that's the same as Europe. Most listen to the same crap. But
that's not part of the local "culture". Certain areas define certain
music.

Yes, they all watch MTV. But of course so do the people in Berlin and
Athens.

Greece has its own music video channels that broadcast Greek pop music;
this is not heard anywhere else in Europe. Neither New York nor New
Orleans has any such thing.

the same brands in the shops and the same chains of shops.

Same is true for Athens and Berlin.

To a far lesser extent.

20 or more years ago, yes. But the chain stores are all over and the
brands are the same all over these days.

Contrast this with Athens and Berlin. A tiny minority of the people
have shared fluency in any language.

Almost all speak English.

Simply untrue. Many people in Germany speak English at some level; not
nearly so many in Greece. Outside of tourist-facing industries and
international business you will not have an easy time finding English
speakers in Greece older than 30 or so. I lived in Greece, and it became
pretty clear to me pretty quickly who I had to look for in order to find
someone I could communicate with in English.

Again, that has changed. The majority of Euros speak English.

I seriously doubt that. Particularly if you include all "Euros",
Russians, Belarussians, Ukrainians, Bulgarians, etc, etc. if yo
visit the major cities of what was Western Europe during the Cold
War you may find that a great many people in cities like Paris
speak enough English to deal with Anglo tourists, I have
reservations about any claim that over 50% of Parisians speak
English, and I suspect knowledge of English in more rural parts
is rther low.

While it sometimes seems as if a majority of Finns speak English
when I am visiting Helsinki, it turns out not even a majority of
my extended family in Finland in northerly Finland speaks
English.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

Hatunen wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote:
Hatunen wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote:
Greece has its own music video channels that broadcast Greek pop
music; this is not heard anywhere else in Europe. Neither New York
nor New Orleans has any such thing.

Arizona does. Some radio stations in northern Arizona broadcast
in Navajo.

But now you're cherry-picking. To bring this to its logical
conclusion, I can come up with two households in Europe (the Hvmlscz
family in the suburbs of Prague, and the Wongs, a marital unit
comprising 7 left-handed quadriplegic lesbians who recently moved
from Guangzhou to Lisbon) which are amazingly different from each
other, but that's not really that illustrative of the general case.

How is it cherry-picking to point out we have a separate and
distinct culture here up in the Navajo Nation, one that is even
more distinct than Greek culture? I see it quite consistent with
picking Basques and the like as distinct cultures.

The original claim with which I took issue, was that you could take two
large cities across the USA and they would be more culturally diverse
than two large cities across Europe.

I would not argue with the claim that you can find two pockets in the
USA which are as different from each other as two pockets in Europe. No
sane person would, because in a sufficiently large place one can always
come up with distinctive pockets. I am only talking about big-picture
diversity.

miguel
--
Photos from 40 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Malaysia; Thailand; Singapore; Spain; Morocco
Airports of the world: http://airport.u.nu

Hatunen wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote:
If you know the location of the clocks you're setting, and you know
the location of your time beacon, then it's a trival matter to
cancel out the radio propagation delay.

This is entirely different from the vagaries of time sync propagation
across the internet, which is Mxsmanic's red herring of the day.

Propagation delays are not necessarily constant, although they
may sometimes be constant enough for the purpose at hand. Not to
mention it takes already syched clocks to determine the delay.

If you have line-of-sight to your beacon then you should be able to use
your location (as measured with GPS or even from a map) to determine the
delay.

For truly precise work, timekeeper synchronization can be tricky.
But a minute or two will usually get me to the movies on time.

Maybe for me and you, but if mxsmanic is one one-billionth of a second
late to the movies his day is ruined.

miguel
--
Photos from 40 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Malaysia; Thailand; Singapore; Spain; Morocco
Airports of the world: http://airport.u.nu

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 22:09:10 -0400, Miguel Cruz
wrote:

Hatunen wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote:
If you know the location of the clocks you're setting, and you know
the location of your time beacon, then it's a trival matter to
cancel out the radio propagation delay.

This is entirely different from the vagaries of time sync propagation
across the internet, which is Mxsmanic's red herring of the day.

Propagation delays are not necessarily constant, although they
may sometimes be constant enough for the purpose at hand. Not to
mention it takes already syched clocks to determine the delay.

If you have line-of-sight to your beacon then you should be able to use
your location (as measured with GPS or even from a map) to determine the
delay.

Line of sight isn't your most probable case. If you do have line
of sight, a surveyor's transit will give you the distance. But
note that the index of refraction of air varies somewhat,
resulting in slightly varying propagation times and even the
surveyors instruments will be affected by it. Having both your
clocks to be synched in line of sight with the same master clock
can be a problem.

Now, there's two ways to synch clocks. The first is to synch them
to each other, and to hell with the actual time so long as they
read the same thing. They may both say 17:00 even though it is
actually 17:33:12, but they are synchronized.

The other is to have them synched to tell accurate time, as in
syching to the master clock at the US NIST. There ain't a chance
in hell you're going to have line of sight to that clock, even
though it is the master clock for the entire USA. NIST time is
available on the WWV short wave radio stations at 2.5, 5.0, 10.0
mHz.

GPS depends on the synchronicity of clocks on satellites, so
using GPS to establish distance is also a bit variable and pushes
the problem back one step. The problem for the GPS clocks is to
have such accurate synchronization to each other that even
relativistic dime dilation must be accounted for.

For truly precise work, timekeeper synchronization can be tricky.
But a minute or two will usually get me to the movies on time.

Maybe for me and you, but if mxsmanic is one one-billionth of a second
late to the movies his day is ruined.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 22:06:09 -0400, Miguel Cruz
wrote:

Hatunen wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote:
Hatunen wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote:
Greece has its own music video channels that broadcast Greek pop
music; this is not heard anywhere else in Europe. Neither New York
nor New Orleans has any such thing.

Arizona does. Some radio stations in northern Arizona broadcast
in Navajo.

But now you're cherry-picking. To bring this to its logical
conclusion, I can come up with two households in Europe (the Hvmlscz
family in the suburbs of Prague, and the Wongs, a marital unit
comprising 7 left-handed quadriplegic lesbians who recently moved
from Guangzhou to Lisbon) which are amazingly different from each
other, but that's not really that illustrative of the general case.

How is it cherry-picking to point out we have a separate and
distinct culture here up in the Navajo Nation, one that is even
more distinct than Greek culture? I see it quite consistent with
picking Basques and the like as distinct cultures.

The original claim with which I took issue, was that you could take two
large cities across the USA and they would be more culturally diverse
than two large cities across Europe.

I'm not sure about "more", which I consider hyperbole, but I
agree with your general point that there is more cultural
diversity in the USA than even many Americans are willing to
acknowledge.

I would not argue with the claim that you can find two pockets in the
USA which are as different from each other as two pockets in Europe. No
sane person would, because in a sufficiently large place one can always
come up with distinctive pockets. I am only talking about big-picture
diversity.

Like I say, I didn't bring up the Basques, which is the sort of
claim I am responding to.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

Dave Frightens Me wrote:
On 14 Aug 2006 18:09:13 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote:


Jordi wrote:

No, they're not.

Spoken like a true Euro who have never been to the US.

Before you come up with the "smart" response, I've been to Europe
probably 100 times and visited a large number of European countries.

Nice one. How come you have such an odd view of Europe? Is it because
you are lying?

No, it's because I've been all over the world and have had the
opportunity to compare various cultures.

There's history, you see. Are you by any chance pretending the US is
exempt from those?

No. Just pointing out the fact that the reason so many Euros have
passports is due to hatred and bigotry, not some cultural superiority
as has been implied.

Very bizzare response.

Yes, I find European history quite odd myself. I assume that you're not
trying to claim that the reasons that Europe is chopped up into a few
dozen small countries is *not* because of the hatred and bigotry that
has marked your entire history.

No, we're talking two completely different things. All this came after
you said more or less 'what's the use of holidays if people don't have
money to spend', Europeans do have enough money to keep a... say
'western' lifestyle without having to work 51 weeks a year, that's all.

But their "western" lifestyle is lower than American's.

In what sense? 1.0 litre less of engine?, 4 less inches on a flat TV?
Having some real vacation weighs substantially more on overal quality
of life.

As do a lot of other things. Most Americans have "real" vacations and
most have more to spend on their vacations that Euros do.

That is meaningless, as you included "real", which could mean anything.

No, Jordi included "real". I quoted him.

Try to keep up.

If you are talking on an international level, you will see many of
these allegedly burdened employers competing hand to hand with other
'unburdened' ones.

With a whole lot less employees which is demonstrated by the high
unemployment rates in Europe.

You are talking about just which countries out of the forty or so?

All the ones in the G-7.

Pretty much all the countries in Europe, period.

Dave Frightens Me wrote:
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 08:43:22 -0700, Hatunen wrote:

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 17:34:13 +0200, Dave Frightens Me
wrote:

On 14 Aug 2006 18:09:13 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote:

No. Just pointing out the fact that the reason so many Euros have
passports is due to hatred and bigotry, not some cultural superiority
as has been implied.

Very bizzare response.

Not as bizarre as it looks at first glance. Passports are a
result of World War One.

His inclusion of the phrase "so many" suggests that's not what he
meant.

Wrong yet again. This part of the thread started when someone (I forget
who) was trying to claim some type of superiority for Euros because
more Euros have passports than Americans. Well the reason is not
because of any cultural reason but because Europe is split up into tiny
countries while the US is not. And the reason that Europe is split up
is primarily due to generations of hatred and bigotry. Thus the reason
that Europeans have passports is because Europeans *need* passports to
travel and that is because of the history of bigotry and hatred that
has kept the continent chopped up into small political units.

Dave Frightens Me wrote:
On 14 Aug 2006 17:46:14 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote:


Dave Frightens Me wrote:
On 13 Aug 2006 21:25:19 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote:


Dave Frightens Me wrote:
On 10 Aug 2006 18:01:31 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote:

Utter rubbish. These people are no more likely to have links with Al
Qaeda and the Taliban than anyone else. They were just rounded up so
the USA could have some spoils.

And your proof of that?

They are being deprived due process only because many of them would be
found to have done nothing.

And your proof of *that*???

Just read the ****ing article and educate yourself. They have been
assumed guilty, and have no way of proving otherwise.

In other words you have to proof and you are willing to believe any
slanted article you can find.

Please, show where the slant is. The info comes from government
sources, and I can't seem to fault it. Help me if you like.

The slant is obvious in the phrasing of the article. There is a very
clear agenda.

In particular which part? I suspect you haven't even looked at it.

Actually I did. It appears to be you that didn't.

The article is not an article it is an editorial comment. Do you
understand the difference?

The editorial comes from a source (BBC) that has already been caught
deliberately distorting information about the wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq to further a rather extreme Left political view.

The information does *NOT* come from a government source. The article
doesn't claim that it does. The information comes from a "DEFENSE
ATTORNEY* who claims to have analyzed other data:

"Yet a thorough analysis by an American law professor and a defence
lawyer of information released by the US defence department revealed
last week that 92% of the 517 Guantanamo detainees had not been
al-Qaeda fighters."

And of course defense attorney's would never consider slanting their
information to serve their clients, would they?

Next time read it.

On 15 Aug 2006 21:13:20 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote:


Wrong yet again. This part of the thread started when someone (I forget
who) was trying to claim some type of superiority for Euros because
more Euros have passports than Americans. Well the reason is not
because of any cultural reason but because Europe is split up into tiny
countries while the US is not. And the reason that Europe is split up
is primarily due to generations of hatred and bigotry. Thus the reason
that Europeans have passports is because Europeans *need* passports to
travel and that is because of the history of bigotry and hatred that
has kept the continent chopped up into small political units.


The US is just split up into 50 states...hmmm..and polarized ones at
that...

and Europeans can travel between most countries without going through
any kind of passport control.