• (cs)

An older version of this comment is now available, download will begin in the background.

• Timetraveller (unregistered) in reply to DoctaJonez
DoctaJonez:
An older version of this comment is now available, download will begin in the background.

DAMN you beat me to it....or did you?

• (cs) in reply to Timetraveller
Timetraveller:
DoctaJonez:
An older version of this comment is now available, download will begin in the background.

DAMN you beat me to it....or did you?

Well, his download hasn't finished yet. You'd better get a move on!

• Warren (unregistered)

Of course you want the older version, e.g. Windows 7 vs 8 Office 2003 vs 2007

• mortfurd (unregistered)

That would be multiply by 9, divide by 5, add 32. It was done correctly for Manchester.

London appears to have been "calculated" as multiply by 3.13 , add 90.31

That's what I get from a linear regression, anyway.

• None (unregistered) in reply to mortfurd
mortfurd:
That would be multiply by 9, divide by 5, add 32. It was done correctly for Manchester.

London appears to have been "calculated" as multiply by 3.13 , add 90.31

That's what I get from a linear regression, anyway.

It gives a new meaning to the expression "local weather" if your choice of algorithms is location-dependent.

• Yojin (unregistered) in reply to mortfurd

Glad to see that I'm not the only one that developed a mental tic about that math.

Also the real WTF is Celsius. What moron develops a system that puts 0 at the temperature that fresh water freezes at a few hundred feet above sea level.

Better to use good old Fahrenheit where 0 correlates to the average temp on the coldest day in the winter and 100 is the average temp on the hottest day in the summer. Which is generally true for everyone living 45th parallel (average longitude!).

That way you can always say, "On a scale of 0 to 100 what's the temp outside", instead of saying "On a scale of -17 to 37 what's the temp outside?"

• ClaudeSuck.de (unregistered)

I quite liked the overlay tit. Maybe that's to increase the size?

• -.- (unregistered) in reply to Yojin
Yojin:
Glad to see that I'm not the only one that developed a mental tic about that math.

Also the real WTF is Celsius. What moron develops a system that puts 0 at the temperature that fresh water freezes at a few hundred feet above sea level.

Better to use good old Fahrenheit where 0 correlates to the average temp on the coldest day in the winter and 100 is the average temp on the hottest day in the summer. Which is generally true for everyone living 45th parallel (average longitude!).

That way you can always say, "On a scale of 0 to 100 what's the temp outside", instead of saying "On a scale of -17 to 37 what's the temp outside?"

...So 100 is ideal? I don't like my temperature to be 37 degrees Celsius. Also, "is generally true", ergo: "you can Always say"?

The subWTF is people still using Fahrenheit, the real WTF is that the weatherfolk don't use Kelvin.

That way you can Always say "On a scale of 0 to 100 what's the temp outside, and how fast will I die being exposed to it?"

• Quirkafleeg (unregistered)

Yes, they remade that old rhyme:

44 Days hath September, April, June and November, All the rest have undefined, InvalidOperationException

• Thaumatechnician (unregistered)
According to the weather on the my Yahoo page it's: Multiply by 7, divide by 5 and add 32 ... unless you're in London then add 100.
Erm...it's Multiply by 9, divide by 5 and add 32. Or if you have to do it in your head: Multiply by 10, subtract one tenth and add 32.
• (cs)

Someone reversed updates? Does this mean we're going back to Windows 3.1?

• mortfurd (unregistered) in reply to Thaumatechnician
Thaumatechnician:
According to the weather on the my Yahoo page it's: Multiply by 7, divide by 5 and add 32 ... unless you're in London then add 100.
Erm...it's Multiply by 9, divide by 5 and add 32. Or if you have to do it in your head: Multiply by 10, subtract one tenth and add 32.
Been there, done that. See this post: http://thedailywtf.com/Comments/Hot-in-London.aspx#432351
• Jay (unregistered) in reply to mortfurd
mortfurd:
That would be multiply by 9, divide by 5, add 32. It was done correctly for Manchester.

London appears to have been "calculated" as multiply by 3.13 , add 90.31

That's what I get from a linear regression, anyway.

Or they could have multiplied by 1 and added 106. Or multiplied by 42 and subtracted 181. With only one pair of numbers, there are an infinite number of formulas that would map one to the other.

• mortfurd (unregistered) in reply to Jay
Jay:
mortfurd:
That would be multiply by 9, divide by 5, add 32. It was done correctly for Manchester.

London appears to have been "calculated" as multiply by 3.13 , add 90.31

That's what I get from a linear regression, anyway.

Or they could have multiplied by 1 and added 106. Or multiplied by 42 and subtracted 181. With only one pair of numbers, there are an infinite number of formulas that would map one to the other.

Take a good look at the screen shots. You've got 4 pairs for London, and 3 for Manchester.

• Jay (unregistered)

If Mr Brenner is dead, that might explain why he had to drop out of the race. Though that said, I don't know much about Afghan politics, but here in the U.S.:

(a) Dead people regularly vote. I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to run for office. There was just some story in the news that North Carolina had found that several hundred ballots had been cast in the last election in the name of dead people. They added, "most of them by absentee ballot". Which leads me to wonder: Which candidate did the people who mailed in their ballots from Hell vote for, as opposed to which candidate got the votes from the people in Heaven?

(b) If ALL the politicians were dead, maybe they couldn't pass so many stupid laws.

• F (unregistered) in reply to Jay
Jay:
If Mr Brenner is dead, that might explain why he had to drop out of the race. Though that said, I don't know much about Afghan politics, but here in the U.S.:

(a) Dead people regularly vote. I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to run for office. There was just some story in the news that North Carolina had found that several hundred ballots had been cast in the last election in the name of dead people. They added, "most of them by absentee ballot". Which leads me to wonder: Which candidate did the people who mailed in their ballots from Hell vote for, as opposed to which candidate got the votes from the people in Heaven?

Never mind that. Which dead people voted in person? and why were they not noticed?

• (cs) in reply to Thaumatechnician
Thaumatechnician:
According to the weather on the my Yahoo page it's: Multiply by 7, divide by 5 and add 32 ... unless you're in London then add 100.
Erm...it's Multiply by 9, divide by 5 and add 32. Or if you have to do it in your head: Multiply by 10, subtract one tenth and add 32.
Try multiply by TWO, subtract one tenth and add 32!
• Anders (unregistered) in reply to Yojin
Yojin:
That way you can always say, "On a scale of 0 to 100 what's the temp outside", instead of saying "On a scale of -17 to 37 what's the temp outside?"
On a scale from 0 to 100, how hot do you want your coffee?
• (cs)
article:
"Looks like news.google.com got a bit confused with it's article groupings," Bri wrote, (...)

[X] Yes [ ] No

article:
"Just received this email about a service subscription and it's a little confusing," Ari S. writes, (...)
Installation of "The english grammar" (1.0-STABLE) was successful!
• Chelloveck (unregistered)

Multiply by 2 and add 30, just as Bob and Doug McKenzie taught us. That's all the precision you need for any temperatures dealing with weather. At least, for dealing with weather anywhere you don't need protective gear that's much more serious than a jacket and toque! Take off, ya hoser!

C * 9 / 5 + 32 = F

• Paul Neumann (unregistered) in reply to Quirkafleeg
Quirkafleeg:
Yes, they remade that old rhyme:

44 Days hath September, April, June and November, All the rest have undefined, InvalidOperationException

`++`

Thaumatechnician:
According to the weather on the my Yahoo page it's: Multiply by 7, divide by 5 and add 32 ... unless you're in London then add 100.
Erm...it's Multiply by 9, divide by 5 and add 32. Or if you have to do it in your head: Multiply by 10, subtract one tenth and add 32.
Try multiply by TWO, subtract one tenth and add 32!
Keep guessing. Eventually you're going to get it right.
• (cs) in reply to Chelloveck
Chelloveck:
Multiply by 2 and add 30, just as Bob and Doug McKenzie taught us. That's all the precision you need for any temperatures dealing with weather. At least, for dealing with weather anywhere you don't need protective gear that's *much* more serious than a jacket and toque! Take off, ya hoser!
And the best part about conversions? A metric six-pack has 42 metric beers.
• Paul Neumann (unregistered) in reply to F
F:
Jay:
If Mr Brenner is dead, that might explain why he had to drop out of the race. Though that said, I don't know much about Afghan politics, but here in the U.S.:

(a) Dead people regularly vote. I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to run for office. There was just some story in the news that North Carolina had found that several hundred ballots had been cast in the last election in the name of dead people. They added, "most of them by absentee ballot". Which leads me to wonder: Which candidate did the people who mailed in their ballots from Hell vote for, as opposed to which candidate got the votes from the people in Heaven?

Never mind that. Which dead people voted in person? and why were they not noticed?

They just refused to show their ID and claimed their 26th amendment rights.

• (cs) in reply to DCRoss
DCRoss:
And the best part about conversions? A metric six-pack has 42 metric beers.
How much is that in dog beers?
• GlobalProtect (unregistered)
TICKET 20712:
Title: Upgrade dialog suggests update to older version

Affected Version: 1.2.1-23 State: Resolved

Description: Since the release of version 1.2.2-3 the update dialog of version 1.2.1-23 suggest to update to 1.2.1-15 which is in fact an older version.

Analysis: Version check over webservice is very complicated. Needs refactoring.

Resolution: Improved update dialog to display "older" instead of "newer", when the suggested version is older.

• foo AKA fooo (unregistered)
"Just received this email about a service subscription and it's a little confusing," Ari S. writes, "Now is it the 44th of November or the 11th of Fourtyforthember?"
Actually month names are shifted by 2 due to some calendar WTFs (September is 9th from Latin septem = 7 etc.). So it would actually be the Fourtytwothember which is mostly harmless.
• CigarDoug (unregistered)
"Just received this email about a service subscription and it's a little confusing," Ari S. writes, "Now is it the 44th of November or the 11th of Fourtyforthember?"
Hey, it's no more ridiculous than mm/dd/yyyy! </obligatory anti-American rant>
• Klimax (unregistered) in reply to Warren
Warren:
Of course you want the older version, e.g. Windows 7 vs 8 Office 2003 vs 2007

Nope.

• (cs)
"Just received this email about a service subscription and it's a little confusing," Ari S. writes, "Now is it the 44th of November or the 11th of Fourtyforthember?"

No, its fortyfirstember. You forgot July, August, and Smarch.

• Shill (unregistered) in reply to DCRoss
DCRoss:
Thaumatechnician:
According to the weather on the my Yahoo page it's: Multiply by 7, divide by 5 and add 32 ... unless you're in London then add 100.
Erm...it's Multiply by 9, divide by 5 and add 32. Or if you have to do it in your head: Multiply by 10, subtract one tenth and add 32.
Try multiply by TWO, subtract one tenth and add 32!
Keep guessing. Eventually you're going to get it right.

2x - (2x/10) + 32 = (20x-2x)/10 + 32 = 18x/10 + 32 = 9x/5 + 32

• J (unregistered) in reply to DCRoss

Mult by 2, subtract a tenth, add 32 is a valid way to do it

40C mult by 2 = 80 subtract a tenth = 72 add 32 = 104F

And now for the mathematical proof part. Starting with the official formula of C1.8 + 32 = F. Because N1.8 = N2 - (N2)/10, we can use substitution to see that C2 - (C2)/10 + 32 = F

Needs more parenthesis.

• (cs) in reply to The Great Lobachevsky
The Great Lobachevsky:
"Just received this email about a service subscription and it's a little confusing," Ari S. writes, "Now is it the 44th of November or the 11th of Fourtyforthember?"

No, its fortyfirstember. You forgot July, August, and Smarch.

Lousy Smarch weather.

• (cs)

• HonoredMule (unregistered) in reply to None
None:
mortfurd:
That would be multiply by 9, divide by 5, add 32. It was done correctly for Manchester.

London appears to have been "calculated" as multiply by 3.13 , add 90.31

That's what I get from a linear regression, anyway.

It gives a new meaning to the expression "local weather" if your choice of algorithms is location-dependent.

Not so much local weather as local weather system.

• Anonymii (unregistered) in reply to chubertdev
chubertdev:

Fahrenheit is made for Americans. For the rest of the globe, Celsius works just fine.

captcha : opto. Why doesn't the US opto switch like everyone else ?

• Mason Wheeler (unregistered) in reply to Warren
Warren:
Of course you want the older version, e.g. Windows 7 vs 8 Office 2003 vs 2007

Visual Studio 2008 vs. all the ugly, slow, buggy versions they've come out with since then.

• (cs) in reply to Anonymii
Anonymii:
chubertdev:

Fahrenheit is made for Americans. For the rest of the globe, Celsius works just fine.

captcha : opto. Why doesn't the US opto switch like everyone else ?

And be commoners like you? Bah!

• Dan (unregistered)

Since there is only One True Date Format, it follows that there is only one possible interpretation for the date "44-11-2015".

Back in the year 44 -- not 1944, just 44 -- they were using some pretty wacky calendars, so why shouldn't November have 2015 days?

• Tom (unregistered) in reply to Jay
Jay:
which candidate got the votes from the people in Heaven?
People in heaven can't vote. They're not allowed to choose the lesser of two evils.
• Ralph (unregistered) in reply to Warren
Warren:
Of course you want the older version, e.g. Windows 7 vs 8 Office 2003 vs 2007
Web 1.0 vs. all the crappy insecure bloatware floating around today.
• (cs) in reply to Tom
Tom:
Jay:
which candidate got the votes from the people in Heaven?
People in heaven can't vote. They're not allowed to choose the lesser of two evils.

Voting is also considered to be a form of gambling.

• Carl (unregistered) in reply to Jay
Jay:
I can understand them wanting to vote. Why not?

The interesting question is whether they all voted for Obamacare. You know, so their families could come join them sooner.

• John (unregistered) in reply to Yojin
Yojin:
Also the real WTF is Celsius. What moron develops a system that puts 0 at the temperature that fresh water freezes at a few hundred feet above sea level.

To be fair to Celsius, he didn't - he put 100 there. It got switched around later.

Captcha: abbas - Latin, you love but you have a cold.

• (cs) in reply to Thaumatechnician
Thaumatechnician:
According to the weather on the my Yahoo page it's: Multiply by 7, divide by 5 and add 32 ... unless you're in London then add 100.
Erm...it's Multiply by 9, divide by 5 and add 32. Or if you have to do it in your head: Multiply by 10, subtract one tenth and add 32.
The simple rule of thumb is "double it and add 32". We use it for everything. Kilometers to miles? Double it and add 32. Pounds to kilograms? Double it and add 32. Meters (excuse me, metres - mustn't anger the French) per second to furlongs per fortnight? Double it and add 32.
• (cs) in reply to F
F:
Jay:
If Mr Brenner is dead, that might explain why he had to drop out of the race. Though that said, I don't know much about Afghan politics, but here in the U.S.:

(a) Dead people regularly vote. I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to run for office. There was just some story in the news that North Carolina had found that several hundred ballots had been cast in the last election in the name of dead people. They added, "most of them by absentee ballot". Which leads me to wonder: Which candidate did the people who mailed in their ballots from Hell vote for, as opposed to which candidate got the votes from the people in Heaven?

Never mind that. Which dead people voted in person? and why were they not noticed?

Just because you're a zombie doesn't mean you should lose your right to vote!

• Dan (unregistered)

Zombies don't vote. They're looking for brains.