We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
25 Jan 10
00:14
Joined:
Date Joined:
14 Sep 04
I've just heard someone say this on the telly.
If this is true, the next time I fly I might take a bomb on board but not detonate it. The chances of another bomb being on board would then be a billion to one, so myself, and all the other travellers, would be able to rest that little bit easier.
If this is true, the next time I fly I might take a bomb on board but not detonate it. The chances of another bomb being on board would then be a billion to one, so myself, and all the other travellers, would be able to rest that little bit easier.
Show More
I'm old school Dealem. I still think of a billion as a million million. :)
wouldnae mind renee zellweger explaining this to me in the buff
A billion used to be a million million. Not regarded as such anymore, of course, but I preferred it that way.
I just know I'm gonna' be on a plane that has to make an emergency landing in the sea. The gallant pilot makes a text book landing, but unfortunately we are blown to bits by the impact on landing as everyone was reducing the chances of terrorism by carrying a bomb in their hand luggage. Typical. :(
The chances of another bomb being on board would then be a billion to one
no they'd still be a million to one
no they'd still be a million to one
I was involved in a near miss approaching Gatwick about fifteen years ago. It caused the pilot to engage our 747 into a gut wrenching aerobatic manoeuvre that seemed to involve flying vertically with the engines at full thrust.
You would expect mass panic and screaming, wouldn't you? I never heard any passenger utter a sound.
You would expect mass panic and screaming, wouldn't you? I never heard any passenger utter a sound.
It was a horrible sensation, Sparky. Blatantly obvious to everyone that something was very much amiss and I'm sure we all felt the same thing. Sick to the stomach.
I should have mentioned we were flying vertically upwards. The other way around and I daresay there might have been a bit of screaming.
I dont like flying to be honest pokermonster. I mean I know statistically it's safe, but jeez it all sounds far fetched1
i would lay the million to one personally , i think those odds are out .
There Must be millions of flight worldwide in a year .
There Must be millions of flight worldwide in a year .
canary is correct, i knew this but chose to follow on to correct for my own slef pleasure...
PM you are also right, but i refuse to acknowledge this. there is no name tag for 1000 mill so a billion is ok by me lol
i had a bet with someone in a pub once who was saying how a billion is a million million, this is how i know. i refused to believe it. my arguement was that the world is populated by about 3 billion people. he agreed. i said that wasnt 3000000000000. his arguement was that this is what it USED to be. of course i didnt pay... but nor did he lol
PM you are also right, but i refuse to acknowledge this. there is no name tag for 1000 mill so a billion is ok by me lol
i had a bet with someone in a pub once who was saying how a billion is a million million, this is how i know. i refused to believe it. my arguement was that the world is populated by about 3 billion people. he agreed. i said that wasnt 3000000000000. his arguement was that this is what it USED to be. of course i didnt pay... but nor did he lol
I'm sure there are Coach. I think the chap was just generalising.
I still don't buy into the argument that flying is one of the safest forms of transport, though. It obviously isn't.
I still don't buy into the argument that flying is one of the safest forms of transport, though. It obviously isn't.
you'd be wrong to actually Coachbuster
Type of Flight Fatalities per million flight hours
Airliner (Scheduled and nonscheduled Part 121) 4.03
Commuter Airline (Scheduled Part 135) 10.74
Commuter Plane (Nonscheduled Part 135 - Air taxi on demand) 12.24
General Aviation (Private Part 91) 22.43
Type of Flight Fatalities per million flight hours
Airliner (Scheduled and nonscheduled Part 121) 4.03
Commuter Airline (Scheduled Part 135) 10.74
Commuter Plane (Nonscheduled Part 135 - Air taxi on demand) 12.24
General Aviation (Private Part 91) 22.43
i think it is the safest.. purely governed by the cost of insurance of course...
Pokermonster , will you fly again after that experience ? :)
Oh yes Coach. I have flown many times since then.
Coachbuster, although that same site has stats which appear to contradcit that, so I may be wrong!
if it is a million or .1 of a million, that is still probs the safeest
sparkmaster. 25 Jan 01:45
you'd be wrong to actually Coachbuster
Type of Flight Fatalities per million flight hours
Airliner (Scheduled and nonscheduled Part 121) 4.03
____________________
Assuming the above makes up the type of airliner figures we are talking about ,we can assume 4 deaths per 1m flying hours.
Assuming the average flight lasts 4 hours ,we can therefore assume an average of 1 fatality per million flights .
Assuming that not all fatalities are caused by bombings i can therefore safely assume a winning payo,ut ;)
you'd be wrong to actually Coachbuster
Type of Flight Fatalities per million flight hours
Airliner (Scheduled and nonscheduled Part 121) 4.03
____________________
Assuming the above makes up the type of airliner figures we are talking about ,we can assume 4 deaths per 1m flying hours.
Assuming the average flight lasts 4 hours ,we can therefore assume an average of 1 fatality per million flights .
Assuming that not all fatalities are caused by bombings i can therefore safely assume a winning payo,ut ;)
surely the safest is virtually travelling via chit-chat? I've been to Las Vegas and Krakow 37 times and it's not cost me a penny.
I flew into New York a couple of months before the Twin Towers terrorist attacks. An hour or so before landing we heard television reports that there had been hijack alerts and that they were threatening to crash NYC bound planes into the cities skyscrapers.
Once in New York aispace we were held circling in the air for what seemed like ages before eventually landing safely. At the time the threats were linked to a group involved with the Columbine shooters. When the towers fell I never heard these earlier threats mentioned once, but I'm sure they must have been connected.
Once in New York aispace we were held circling in the air for what seemed like ages before eventually landing safely. At the time the threats were linked to a group involved with the Columbine shooters. When the towers fell I never heard these earlier threats mentioned once, but I'm sure they must have been connected.
Another worrying statistic to look up, Sparky, is the percentage of planes that end up crashing.
I can't remember the figure, but it is much higher than one might imagine.
I can't remember the figure, but it is much higher than one might imagine.
Linked by the television reporter, Sparky. I have no idea what his source was I'm afraid, I simply cannot remember.
As to the group, the reporter alleged those two shooters were part of a bigger terrorist group. Again, this is all I know.
What I was getting at that is I believe they were wrong in the above assumptions and that the intelligence they did have was connected to the fateful events of 11th September.
As to the group, the reporter alleged those two shooters were part of a bigger terrorist group. Again, this is all I know.
What I was getting at that is I believe they were wrong in the above assumptions and that the intelligence they did have was connected to the fateful events of 11th September.
Bloody Hell, my typing is getting worse by the minute.
coach is correct.
RE: safety. In the aviation engineering industry there is a saying, "you cant just park it in a lay by". This is shopfloor speak for the multiple back up systems in place in airplane design. Literally every system has backups and failsafes, and in the end a plane can fly and land with no power and a few of its basic mechanical systems in tact.
The danger really comes from human error and misendevour. Lets face it this will happen in all aspects of life and flyin is probably safer even then.
RE: A billion. English billion is 1000000, (short scale) & American is 1000000000 (long scale).
RE: safety. In the aviation engineering industry there is a saying, "you cant just park it in a lay by". This is shopfloor speak for the multiple back up systems in place in airplane design. Literally every system has backups and failsafes, and in the end a plane can fly and land with no power and a few of its basic mechanical systems in tact.
The danger really comes from human error and misendevour. Lets face it this will happen in all aspects of life and flyin is probably safer even then.
RE: A billion. English billion is 1000000, (short scale) & American is 1000000000 (long scale).
PM, re your first post, I believe you're right, but also that the vast majority of passengers survive such crashes. It's all in the definition of what is a crash.
True, Jim, but a billion did use to have twelve zeros.
We did this in school after we had an Iraqi kid come over from America and he dissagreed with the teacher lol.
It gets more complicated after a billion two. shortscale = every extra 3 zeros becomes the next xxxxxillion, (by naming convention), wereas in long scale it is each 000x000, and even te americans then use some shortscale terms in error but commonly.
I prefer powers ;-)
I prefer powers ;-)
no Jim, a billion is now nationally recognised as 1000 000 000 regardless. i go back to my "world population" example. we dont have 6 billion in this country and 6 hundred thousand million in America...
the million million is OLD ENGLISH apparently.
no one applys it anywhere these days.
the million million is OLD ENGLISH apparently.
no one applys it anywhere these days.
actually you are right, the change occurred in 1974 according to wiki!
I was still in nappies then though.
I was still in nappies then though.
some of us can apply common sense without the use of yanker entrepenuers lol ;)
Yes, changing sometime around the mid seventies sound about right to me. I certainly remember it anyway.
The following is from the Oxford English Dictionary website:
Billion.
If you are American, it is undoubtedly 1,000,000,000. This amount is known to traditionally minded British people as a thousand million, and by some more adventurous ones as a milliard, though this word has not made as much headway in English as in some other European languages. A trillion is then 1,000,000,000,000, and so on.
If you are British, on the other hand, a billion may be 1,000,000,000,000 (a million million), following the older convention.
The following is from the Oxford English Dictionary website:
Billion.
If you are American, it is undoubtedly 1,000,000,000. This amount is known to traditionally minded British people as a thousand million, and by some more adventurous ones as a milliard, though this word has not made as much headway in English as in some other European languages. A trillion is then 1,000,000,000,000, and so on.
If you are British, on the other hand, a billion may be 1,000,000,000,000 (a million million), following the older convention.
pokerM, that is actually the opposite.
i think it was the Yanks who kept the extra zeros in...
i think it was the Yanks who kept the extra zeros in...
and since the Yankers are naturally a greedy race i can fully believe it...
I don't think so Dealem. I can remember being taught at school that a billion was a million million.
And I lifted that quote form the Oxford English Dictionary website.
Odds of being killed on a single airline flight
Top 25 airlines with the best records
______________________________
1 in 8.47 million Top 25 airlines with the best records
1 in 13.57 million
Bottom 25 with the worst records
______________________________
1 in 830,428 Bottom 25 with the worst records
1 in 1.13 million
Top 25 airlines with the best records
______________________________
1 in 8.47 million Top 25 airlines with the best records
1 in 13.57 million
Bottom 25 with the worst records
______________________________
1 in 830,428 Bottom 25 with the worst records
1 in 1.13 million
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The long and short scales are two of several different large number naming systems used throughout the world:
Short scale is the English translation of the French term échelle courte.[1] It refers to a system of large number names in which every new term greater than million is 1,000 times the previous term: billion means a thousand millions (109), trillion means a thousand billions (1012), and so on.
Long scale is the English translation of the French term échelle longue. It refers to a system of names in which every new term greater than million is 1,000,000 times the previous term: billion (from bi and million) means a million to the power of two or a million millions (1012), trillion (from tri and million) means a million to the power of three or a million billions (1018), and so on.
Many countries, including most in continental Europe, use the long scale. For most of the 19th and 20th centuries, the United Kingdom uniformly used the long scale,[2] while the United States of America used the short scale,[2] so that usage of the two systems was often referred to as British and American respectively. In 1974, the government of the UK switched to the short scale, a change that is now reflected in its mass media and official usage.[3][4][5][6] Although some residual usage of the long scale continues in the UK,[7] the phrases British usage and American usage are no longer accurate nor helpful characterizations. The two systems can be a subject of misunderstanding or controversy. Usage changes can evoke resentment in adherents to the older system, while national differences of any kind can acquire jingoistic overtones.[8]
Jump to: navigation, search
The long and short scales are two of several different large number naming systems used throughout the world:
Short scale is the English translation of the French term échelle courte.[1] It refers to a system of large number names in which every new term greater than million is 1,000 times the previous term: billion means a thousand millions (109), trillion means a thousand billions (1012), and so on.
Long scale is the English translation of the French term échelle longue. It refers to a system of names in which every new term greater than million is 1,000,000 times the previous term: billion (from bi and million) means a million to the power of two or a million millions (1012), trillion (from tri and million) means a million to the power of three or a million billions (1018), and so on.
Many countries, including most in continental Europe, use the long scale. For most of the 19th and 20th centuries, the United Kingdom uniformly used the long scale,[2] while the United States of America used the short scale,[2] so that usage of the two systems was often referred to as British and American respectively. In 1974, the government of the UK switched to the short scale, a change that is now reflected in its mass media and official usage.[3][4][5][6] Although some residual usage of the long scale continues in the UK,[7] the phrases British usage and American usage are no longer accurate nor helpful characterizations. The two systems can be a subject of misunderstanding or controversy. Usage changes can evoke resentment in adherents to the older system, while national differences of any kind can acquire jingoistic overtones.[8]
million million is an english billion
thousand million is a yank billion
thousand million is a yank billion
good, the greedy Yanks tried to revolt and gave up hahah
i stand reinformed...
i stand reinformed...
I think the Americans should have adopted the British system rather than the other way around. I think it makes more sense.
Still, it could just be my jingoistic overtones I suppose. :)
So we switched to the short scale to match the yanks. So the correct answer is 1000000000, and the other number is pre-1974 when we matched Europe.
ten to the nine I say ;-)
ten to the nine I say ;-)
no, iof course it makes more sense, as i said b4, there is no nickname for 1000 mill.
BRITS RULE..
BRITS RULE..
a thousand milll would have been called a millard, apparently!
Dealem: The British used to call a thousand million a MILLIARD.
There's nothing wrong with calling 1,000,000,000 a THOUSAND MILLION in my opinion, because that's plainly what it is.
There's nothing wrong with calling 1,000,000,000 a THOUSAND MILLION in my opinion, because that's plainly what it is.
It all depends how fast this plane is descending to earth for its scary fate imo. in which case anything ending in illion would probably suffice.
The so-called short scale is devoid of logic, and naturally suits Americans.
It is sad that our Govt has kow-towed. It's not the only example, of course.
It is sad that our Govt has kow-towed. It's not the only example, of course.
It's true... we now also have 14" pizzas lol...
PM, then you would also like to call a million a thousand thousand since that is plainly what it is.
PM, then you would also like to call a million a thousand thousand since that is plainly what it is.
No Dealem, I prefer to use the word MILLION instead of ONE THOUSAND THOUSAND.
It's technically correct, of course, but it sounds clumsy.
It's technically correct, of course, but it sounds clumsy.
pokermonster you do realise that these forums are monitered by mi5 for particular phrases like in the header , sleep with your clothes on and dont lock the doors, they will just damage them when they come for you ,
ps dont ask for a snorkel when they waterboard you ,it will just antagonise.
ps dont ask for a snorkel when they waterboard you ,it will just antagonise.
If their waterboards are anything like their wardrobes I've got nothing to worry about.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539