Date   : Sun, 21 Nov 2010 13:18:13
From   : rick@... (Rick Murray)
Subject: [Beebsoc] Re: [OT] Who'da thought...

I'm hoping JGH pops up here soon, so here'll be a message waiting for 
him. ;-)


On 21/11/2010 16:00, J.G.Harston wrote:

> Ooooh!!!! Show me tell me. Yeah, done that.

Good stuff!


> That one was the test question, and reading up on it beforehand I was
> thinking: but surely I'd look in the manual, not try and remember all
> this 1.6mm 3/4 tread no bulge stuff? Do'h. Good job I had read through
> it beforehand :)

Well, like I said, modern tyres (at least good ones) have a little 
dimple, so you no longer need to look like a wally poking a ruler into 
the grooves of the tyre. It's a win all around, just just *look* at the 
thing.


> Before doing a Sheffield-Tarland run I check all lights and stuff, and
> then take the car - fully loaded - to the garage to top up the tires
> and fuel tank.

Good you take it fully loaded - laden weight affects tire pressure.


> the hazards on, and I said, well, that just tests the hazard switch, it
> doesn't test the indicator switch.

:-)


> The Rover did 1200 miles per year before I started using it.

!!?? It was driven by a granny for the weekly shop?!?

My work is about 12 miles away (I think, Internet iffy tonight so I 
won't try GoogleMap). As I don't drive, my mother takes me to then comes 
home, then goes to, then brings me home. Our car now does in a month 
what it used to do in a year.


> The book's better. About half of it covers cadet training and ethical
> instruction instead of the 0.2 minutes of the film.

True, but the 0.2 minutes in the film is 'cos we all really want to 
watch bug guts exploding. ;-)


> "Remember your responsibilities as a citizen for the conduct of local,
> national, and international affairs. Do not shrink from the time and
> effort your involvement may demand."

How many people these days would be willing to offer their time and 
efforts? Especially given as how so many things seem pointless and out 
of reach. I mean, unless I take a big gun and blow the brains out of 
some important politician, I can't see *me* having an effect on national 
affairs, never mind the playground of insanity that passes for 
international politics. At least in the local sense, I can run for 
Mayor. Perhaps I should, so even the no hoper pig-farmers-with-delusions 
will understand that there's somebody even less likely than them to be 
the new Mayor.
[Mayors in France are very important, not just figureheads]


> The whole point of the service-gives-citizenship ethos in ST is that
> state service is voluntary, conscription is unacceptable slavery,

Fair enough, but the flipside is the incredible lies being told to 
attract new recruits. If a country needs to tell barefaced lies to 
recruit soldiers, it doesn't deserve to have any.


> I'm sure I could find out if I could track down some of the
> various academic studies and fanwork.

As we're talking fiction, I'll throw "V for Vendetta" at you. ;-)

[would have been "1984", but that's just too damn obvious]


> I can do the maths and geometry based one, but fail on the language ones.
> House is to Rabbit as Bungalow is to.... wtf????

What were the options?

I guess we have to think: house is big, so our definition of big is 
"Rabbit". Bungalow is smaller than a house, so if the question is:

   House is to Rabbit as Bungalow is to..... [kitten|giraffe|elephant]

then the correct answer would be "kitten" (smaller than a Rabbit). It's 
a bit of a stretch to have this as a question that proves anything other 
than abilities of lateral thinking regarding pointless trivia.


> That's not intelligence, that's knowledge.

As is the number of constituencies in the UK. Intelligence is knowing 
what it means, knowledge is knowing the figure.


This leads to the question - what *actual* set of test questions would 
be a viable way to determine if a person is suitable for citizenship.

Of course, look at it the other way around. A typical crappy western 
government would be happy to exclude the morons and weirdos, but then 
they might not be looking favourably on smart people either. A good 
method of population control is to keep the masses stupid; television is 
making leaps and bounds in this respect.


Best wishes,

Rick.