There are some pretty thick people out there

sev112

prowla said:

I have to say, I encounter a lot of people in the IT world who don't know the difference between "M" and "m", "G" and g", and "B" and "b"; I'm still not hardened to seeing opinionated people expressing disk sizes in "gb" (gram-bits?) and line speeds as "mbps" (milli-bits per second).

Maybe Science doesn't teach the SI System any more.

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

I too get frustrated when professional engineers don’t seem to know the difference between
kN/m2 and KPa and use them as if they inter-changeable  (sorry, can’t locate a superscript on my ipad for the “2”).

sev112

I got immensely disappointed when I found out that English o level didn’t include specific punctuation, spelling and grammar test elements.  I was brilliant at those, still think I am (although my typing is poor).  First 3 years of secondary school I got pretty much perfect marks.  o level it’s about writing stories and stuff , yuk ;( 
I’d suggest leaving story writing and prose for Eng.Lit. And make English O level /GCSE as punctuation, spelling and grammar

Jonathangus

prowla said:

I have to say, I encounter a lot of people in the IT world who don't know the difference between "M" and "m", "G" and g", and "B" and "b"; I'm still not hardened to seeing opinionated people expressing disk sizes in "gb" (gram-bits?) and line speeds as "mbps" (milli-bits per second).

Maybe Science doesn't teach the SI System any more.

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

On the flip side, I was once taken to task by a (particularly anal) learner for teaching that a kilobyte = 1024 bytes.  Apparently I should have been using the term 'kibibyte'.  I looked it up; turns out it is actually a thing, although for all practical purposes - and certainly within the scope of the course - it makes no difference whatsoever.

p90fool

strtdv said:

I sympathise with that view to a degree, however I suspect that correct grammar is a bit of a white/middle class thing these days. If we want people from a range of backgrounds to have good opportunities in life then I think it's reasonable to relax the standard a little.

Why should general standards be lowered just because some people want to to portray themselves as mouth breathing pseudo gangstas, whatever their intellect? 

It's not just an ethnic issue either, trying to appear inarticulate is common across all backgrounds and worryingly is no longer a teenage act people have the facility to just grow out of - it's starting to stick. 

I speak as someone with no formal qualifications at all who left school at 15, and home at 16. I survived by trying to keep up with my intellectual superiors rather than just mixing with others who were similarly disadvantaged, and ended up with a long and interesting career in a few specialist fields. 

Snags

@Jonathangus wait until you have to learn to accept that now they do all the units in round 1000s because the marketing droids won, and the world at large is apparently too bloody dim to cope with something that goes up in 1024s. So 1TB is now one thousand GB, and 1GB is one thousand MB etc.

Even though it clearly fucking isn't. But it is now. Because marketing and pricks.

RaymondLin

strtdv said:

I sympathise with that view to a degree, however I suspect that correct grammar is a bit of a white/middle class thing these days. If we want people from a range of backgrounds to have good opportunities in life then I think it's reasonable to relax the standard a little.

No, big fat no, wrong, terrible idea and just no.

Society should strive to better ourselves, we should seek to improve, raise literacy, maths, basic skills for everyone.  You don't hold the smart kid back because there are a few stupid kids in the class.  It's not a white middle-class thing (i am not white nor middle class, I grew up in a house with no toilet and then a council estate in HK).  Frankly, it is an insult to suggest we should lower standards.  We need to educate, not lower them.  We didn't send robots to Mars because we lower standards, society didn't get this far because we lower standards.

What's next? Let people who failed GCSE to operate on your brain? 

We need to RAISE standards, not lower them.

axisus

TeleMaster said:

Opening myself up here... The 20:20 one. She’s right no?

Fuck what have I missed?

I'm not sure that anyone answered with clarity:

She stated a time of day. A time of day occurs every day.
You need to include day, month and year for a unique occurrence.

scrumhalf

Relaxing standards seems to be a popular idea with those whose day-to-day activities don't rely on linguistic accuracy.

Given the fun and games I've had in the past with investment agreements and leases rhat were poorly worded or capable of more than one interpretation I'm all for raising standards. 

RaymondLin

scrumhalf said:

Relaxing standards seems to be a popular idea with those whose day-to-day activities don't rely on linguistic accuracy.

Given the fun and games I've had in the past with investment agreements and leases rhat were poorly worded or capable of more than one interpretation I'm all for raising standards. 

That's fine, like I don't care if people don't wash their hands before they eat but it doesn't mean it's a good thing.  And especially oppose to any suggestion we all should wash our hands less to lower our hygiene standards just because you don't wash yours.

If you purposely don't want to learn to improve, that's totally your prerogative, but know that you will get picked up on it sometimes like people will call you dirty for not washing your hands, and certainly don't make it so everybody else lowers to your level.

strtdv

RaymondLin said:

strtdv said:

I sympathise with that view to a degree, however I suspect that correct grammar is a bit of a white/middle class thing these days. If we want people from a range of backgrounds to have good opportunities in life then I think it's reasonable to relax the standard a little.

No, big fat no, wrong, terrible idea and just no.

Society should strive to better ourselves, we should seek to improve, raise literacy, maths, basic skills for everyone.  You don't hold the smart kid back because there are a few stupid kids in the class.  It's not a white middle-class thing (i am not white nor middle class, I grew up in a house with no toilet and then a council estate in HK).  Frankly, it is an insult to suggest we should lower standards.  We need to educate, not lower them.  We didn't send robots to Mars because we lower standards, society didn't get this far because we lower standards.

What's next? Let people who failed GCSE to operate on your brain? 

We need to RAISE standards, not lower them.

I think you're confusing use of the English language with ability and intelligence.

In my year at university the majority were the sort you'd be expecting to study medicine (white middle class background, often at least one parent a doctor). Thanks to the grammar school system and the fact that there were still bursaries for low income families there were a few "outliers". One was from a working class inner city family and was the only one of about 6 siblings to go to university, and another was from a rough (and fairly notorious) part of North Dublin.
Unsurprisingly neither spoke Queen's English, but both are excellent doctors.

The only one in our year who failed to graduate was from Henley and was impeccably spoken

TeleMaster

axisus said:

TeleMaster said:

Opening myself up here... The 20:20 one. She’s right no?

Fuck what have I missed?

I'm not sure that anyone answered with clarity:

She stated a time of day. A time of day occurs every day.
You need to include day, month and year for a unique occurrence.

Ah yea. Slightly ambiguous one then. Or we're all dumb too lol. 

LastMantra

There will be a 8.20pm every day of 2020 though. So definitely not the only time it will ever happen. 

RaymondLin

strtdv said:

RaymondLin said:

strtdv said:

I sympathise with that view to a degree, however I suspect that correct grammar is a bit of a white/middle class thing these days. If we want people from a range of backgrounds to have good opportunities in life then I think it's reasonable to relax the standard a little.

No, big fat no, wrong, terrible idea and just no.

Society should strive to better ourselves, we should seek to improve, raise literacy, maths, basic skills for everyone.  You don't hold the smart kid back because there are a few stupid kids in the class.  It's not a white middle-class thing (i am not white nor middle class, I grew up in a house with no toilet and then a council estate in HK).  Frankly, it is an insult to suggest we should lower standards.  We need to educate, not lower them.  We didn't send robots to Mars because we lower standards, society didn't get this far because we lower standards.

What's next? Let people who failed GCSE to operate on your brain? 

We need to RAISE standards, not lower them.

I think you're confusing use of the English language with ability and intelligence.

In my year at university the majority were the sort you'd be expecting to study medicine (white middle class background, often at least one parent a doctor). Thanks to the grammar school system and the fact that there were still bursaries for low income families there were a few "outliers". One was from a working class inner city family and was the only one of about 6 siblings to go to university, and another was from a rough (and fairly notorious) part of North Dublin.
Unsurprisingly neither spoke Queen's English, but both are excellent doctors.

The only one in our year who failed to graduate was from Henley and was impeccably spoken

No, I am not.

Have some standards, just because you are smart and a good doctor doesn't mean you get a pass for having poor grammar.  In fact, you should be held to an EVER HIGHER standard.  Not less.

Just like driving, there is a base driving standard to get a licence, it doesn't matter how smart you are, if you can't drive then you are told you can't drive.

If you are a doctor or a cleaner, if you can't write good English, you are told you can't write good English.  Smart, stupid, lawyers, doctors, cleaners, no difference to me.  There should be a level of standard that everyone who finishes school should be able to do.

No excuses.

p90fool

strtdv said:

RaymondLin said:

strtdv said:

I sympathise with that view to a degree, however I suspect that correct grammar is a bit of a white/middle class thing these days. If we want people from a range of backgrounds to have good opportunities in life then I think it's reasonable to relax the standard a little.

No, big fat no, wrong, terrible idea and just no.

Society should strive to better ourselves, we should seek to improve, raise literacy, maths, basic skills for everyone.  You don't hold the smart kid back because there are a few stupid kids in the class.  It's not a white middle-class thing (i am not white nor middle class, I grew up in a house with no toilet and then a council estate in HK).  Frankly, it is an insult to suggest we should lower standards.  We need to educate, not lower them.  We didn't send robots to Mars because we lower standards, society didn't get this far because we lower standards.

What's next? Let people who failed GCSE to operate on your brain? 

We need to RAISE standards, not lower them.

I think you're confusing use of the English language with ability and intelligence.

In my year at university the majority were the sort you'd be expecting to study medicine (white middle class background, often at least one parent a doctor). Thanks to the grammar school system and the fact that there were still bursaries for low income families there were a few "outliers". One was from a working class inner city family and was the only one of about 6 siblings to go to university, and another was from a rough (and fairly notorious) part of North Dublin.
Unsurprisingly neither spoke Queen's English, but both are excellent doctors.

The only one in our year who failed to graduate was from Henley and was impeccably spoken

And you're confusing poshness with an ability to convey meaning accurately, which IS a requirement for being a good doctor and is not exclusive to those with RP.

jellyroll

zedhex said:

50% of the population is of average or below average intelligence. 

That's median intelligence, isn't it? 

siremoon

zedhex said:

50% of the population is of average or below average intelligence. All of them have a vote. Most elections are decided on 50% or less of the population voting for the winner.This explains the political careers of people like Donald Trump, Nigel Farage and lots more. It could be that these kind of populist politicians have been smart enough to figure out that you don't need to convince the smart people in society in order to win elections - it's much easier, cheaper and more effective just to convince the idiots.

Translation:  People who don't vote Labour are idiots.

Or if you prefer just another variant of blaming the electorate because a party fails to stand up for what ordinary people actually care about and so loses.  Blair is despised by the left but Labour leaders not named Blair haven't won an election for 47 years.  That suggests the idiots are those on the left devising the policies not those doing the voting. 

viz

LastMantra said:

There will be a 8.20pm every day of 2020 though. So definitely not the only time it will ever happen. 

It was probably meant for the 2nd or 20th of February, but the poster just managed to miss that crucial bit of info out - an easy mistake to make! Well, easy-middling maybe. 

TeleMaster

LastMantra said:

There will be a 8.20pm every day of 2020 though. So definitely not the only time it will ever happen. 

Haha yes. 

thecolourbox

viz said:

LastMantra said:

There will be a 8.20pm every day of 2020 though. So definitely not the only time it will ever happen. 

It was probably meant for the 2nd or 20th of February, but the poster just managed to miss that crucial bit of info out - an easy mistake to make! Well, easy-middling maybe. 

But that date isn't even remarkable really is it, it would have been more remarkable at 20:02 on the 20/02/2002

thecolourbox

siremoon said:

zedhex said:

50% of the population is of average or below average intelligence. All of them have a vote. Most elections are decided on 50% or less of the population voting for the winner.This explains the political careers of people like Donald Trump, Nigel Farage and lots more. It could be that these kind of populist politicians have been smart enough to figure out that you don't need to convince the smart people in society in order to win elections - it's much easier, cheaper and more effective just to convince the idiots.

Translation:  People who don't vote Labour are idiots.

Or if you prefer just another variant of blaming the electorate because a party fails to stand up for what ordinary people actually care about and so loses.  Blair is despised by the left but Labour leaders not named Blair haven't won an election for 47 years.  That suggests the idiots are those on the left devising the policies not those doing the voting. 

Not necessarily no, that's a very simplistic reading of that which then goes off on a tangent. The idiot vote isn't necessarily the whole vote, it's just enough of the vote to tip it in their favour. IMO Any side could get that slight advantage if they are backed by the mass media, as Blair was, because he was basically just a "blue in a red suit" so was deemed acceptable to back by the press. But that's a discussion for a different area of the board i suppose