The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
I have added a redlink to the "See also" section of the Big Ben article. ... which I've deleted because MOS:NOTSEEALSO says "The "See also" section should not include red links". (But feel free to put it back after someone creates an article.) Mitch Ames (talk) 12:29, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The LAX building was designed in 1959 by Pereira & Luckman, while Kolkata was by Vector Designs made public in 2015. I doubt an architect getting such huge contracts in the 50s is alive/working today (though I can't confirm it). Revival is common in art, though I doubt a mass Space-Age-Pop-Art revival movement is incoming. "Why is everyone wearing those [sci-fi-style] rings?" "Because nobody wears them anymore -- rings are stupid!" [3] -- my apologies. SamuelRiv (talk) 14:44, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nation Creditworthiness?
what's the rationale behind keeping GDP and other measurements as a sole indicator to identify creditworthiness for countries to avail external loan? Is there any justice to applying this principle on developing or least developed nations seeking funds because obviously their GDP's and other socio-economic indicators would be below global average? On what basis do world banks or other foreign financiers fund them on? Grotesquetruth (talk) 14:18, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The common term is sovereign credit rating. It takes a number of factors into account, not simply GDP, in order to determine the risk to investors of lending to that particular country. Factors include the country's level of indebtedness, credit history (e.g. has there ever been a default or other failures to reimburse previous loans) and political risk. See here for example: [4]Xuxl (talk) 14:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
in that case, will anyone take the risk of financing a least developed nation knowing full well that the sovereign credit ratings seem to not be in favour of the financing investor? Grotesquetruth (talk) 15:47, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's why interest rates are based in part on credit ratings, to offset risk. If you couldn't do that, nobody would ever buy riskier bonds. So nations who struggle paying debt can't leverage as much, but at least they can leverage some. Also, a credit rating isn't law -- it's just a guideline that investors and lenders use - that's why multiple agencies give different credit ratings. Also some governments simply deserve to have their credit ratings lowered, like when Sri Lanka or Greece decide to reject the IMF's assistance in a debt crisis and choose to default instead. SamuelRiv (talk) 15:58, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to question the notion – or the source that gave it to you – that GDP … or anything else ... is the “sole indicator to identify creditworthiness for countries to avail external loan[s].” First, no lender is going to rely solely on one criterion; second, “GDP” is pretty vague. Do you mean the level, the growth rate, the likely trend over the period of the loan, or some other usage? Finally, “justice” is not a term many lenders would use in determining whether or not a client is likely to pay back the loan. More useful would be knowing the track record for the country (does it tend to pay its loans in full and on time?), the current and projected economic and political stability of the borrower, and the reason for borrowing (investment in foreign currency generating activities would be more attractive than spending on consumption to ensure the ruling party wins the next election). As for the later question, there are indeed lenders willing to take a risk on sub-par borrowers, for the right fee (interest rate). That would, of course, be “in favour of the financing investor,” as are ALL loans both public and private. DOR (HK) (talk) 20:00, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
August 19
Concept of Rationality in Modern Decision Theory and the "Austrian School"?
It would appear the Mises Institute considers the concept more relevant to behavioral economics, which (from that article's perspective) is closer to psychology as a field. I don't see any philosophizing about the finer points of "rationality" being relevant to any major area of decision-making theory, since it's all about being measurable and quantifiable, both in theory and experiment (which is all anathema to Austrians). I found a discussion of how the modern Austrian School actually deals with basic economics problems in Klein 2008, so that's probably where you want to start. The Austrian School is obviously important in the history of economics in becoming a science, but apart from just some people saying they take inspiration from the philosophy or whatever I can't see what relevance it has had for the past half century considering it fundamentally disagrees the notion that economics can even be scientific. SamuelRiv (talk) 20:31, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes? Also rational choice theory is too nebulously defined to predict observed human behavior at small scales in general (and what Hayek proposes is essentially to not try to predict anything at all, so I don't know how that can be comparative). That's why there's all sorts of experiments and theoretical models for how humans calculate long-term and short-term risk and value (see for example expected utility hypothesis), given limited (or biased) information or not, and given limited time (or other psychometrics impediments -- I don't know the whole range of methodology) or not. That's just in the descriptive models by the way. There are other psychoeconomics questions like, if a person sets an objective end-term goal, how do they create an algorithm of incremental investments to get there? (And of course that relates to how the human mind might "naturally" try to create optimal algorithms in general, and whether learning certain bits of math or bias reduction techniques can improve either the algorithms or reveal if they work better or worse with cleaner data). None of these questions "care" about what grand theory of how philosophically an economist in their opening ECON 101 lecture wants to define "rational choice" (all that matters for that class is whatever gets the gist across that people will seek out best outcomes and minimize costs, and you can expand on that much later).
If you're interested in studying economics, I recommend you study it, from the ground up, with at least some classwork or research (depending on where your career is now). Just don't get married to any particular ideology. I remember going to an economics colloquium and seeing a poor undergrad get laughed at by the room when he asked during an exchange with the speaker, "But won't people seek optimal outcomes?" and the speaker replied, "Sure, congrats on your 'A' in ECON 101." I'm in a different field, but I felt really bad for the student as I have been there! (Hey academia: don't bite the newbies!) SamuelRiv (talk) 22:56, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Law and Economics
what is economics without law and the vice-versa? and what could be gathered from the effective application of law and economics in the governance of an economy? is there a better expression or term for this synergic concept of law and economics as a whole? Grotesquetruth (talk) 19:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Law and economics refers to a specific legal philosophy that says that the goal of legal systems should be to promote economic efficiency. Richard Posner (a US federal appellate judge) is a noted author in this field. Economics is basically the study of resource allocation and contention, so of course it can be studied outside the context of laws or even human societies. You can use economics principles to understand the behaviour of ant colonies, for example. I agree that real-world law without an economic context doesn't make much sense. The philosophies of legal realism or the more politically oriented Critical Legal Studies make this explicit. 2601:648:8201:5DD0:0:0:0:34C5 (talk) 19:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is too broad a question to answer; one could write several books about various aspects of this interaction, which may be quite different in different countries. --Lambiam16:17, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How did those Iranian carpet weavers manage to reconstruct shredded English-language documents during Iran hostage crisis, assuming they weren't so fluent in English, if didn't speak it at all? Were some Iranian-English interpreters involved? Our article seemingly doesn't explain that odd fact. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 20:15, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Partly it would be just seeing if what's on both sides matched up, like a jigsaw puzzle. That would require knowing the shapes of Latin-alphabet letters, but not command of the English language. AnonMoos (talk) 22:06, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And the level of shredding was pretty basic. The shredder used by Embassy staff turned the documents fed into the machine into long narrow strips, which could be pieced back together with some patience. More advanced shredders available today would turn similar documents into something akin to a fine powder, absolutely impossible to reconstitute. There's a similar story about the man who broke the Japanese radio code for the U.S. military during World War II not speaking any Japanese. He just figured out when re-constituted bits of audio sounded like natural sounds and no longer like static, after which he turned the results over to the translators. Xuxl (talk) 15:15, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I recently read [5] about how India and the UK "colluded" to prevent emigration of lower caste and lower "class" people from India. While that is long after the Soviet Union's restrictions, as the article mentions the practice predated India's independence. There some discussion e.g. on [6]. While these generally weren't strict emigration restrictions in that the affected people weren't completely prevented from leave British India, I'd argue they were effectively some mix of emigration and immigration restrictions since effectively people were denied documents which would allow them to be accepted in a number of places. I'd note also that if documents are required by many countries but obtaining these documents require payment which will be difficult for a subset of the population, or only available from some far off place which you might not need to travel to to emigrate, or required documents e.g. birth certificates which a subset of the population may not have, these also effectively act to restrict emigration from those affected. Again while these people may not be legally prevented from leaving, their ability to leave has been restricted by their government preventing them from obtain documents which will allow them to be accepted. Nil Einne (talk) 00:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What percentage of the Italian males who were born in 1899 died in World War I?
According to my own rough calculations, it should be less than 5%. Italy had slightly over 1 million births in 1900, so the figure should almost certainly be the same for 1899: [[7]]. Since around half of all births are male, this should mean slightly over half a million male births in Italy in 1899. Meanwhile, the data here suggests that slightly less than 18,000 Italian men born in 1899 died in World War I:
If we're talking slightly over half a million Italian male births in 1899, well, 1% of this would be slightly over 5,000. So, around 3-3.5% of all Italian males born in 1899 (again, slightly less than 18,000 of them) would have perished in World War I. If we want to limit our calculations to those Italian-born males who lived to adulthood, then just a rough estimate, but maybe 2/3 (67%) of all Italian males born in 1899 lived to adulthood, in which case you'd do 3%/67% (0.03/0.67) or 3.5%/67% (0.035/0.67) and get around 5%, or 0.05. So, I would presume that around 5% of all Italian males born in 1899 and who lived to adulthood perished in World War I.
Italy's child mortality rate in 1900 was 323.09/1000 live births: I honestly didn't know actuarial data around the world was this good (and maybe I should because I've looked at death rates before): Child mortality rate (under five years old) in Italy from 1865 to 2020. Unfortunately to get the sources for that site you need to subscribe, but I should hope they're not completely reckless and have at least some oversight process. SamuelRiv (talk) 20:12, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So, I was right. About 1/3 of Italian children back then died during their childhood. That said, though, since it's only to age five, it could be a little bit higher if one extends this data up to age 18. Still, probably not a cardinal difference since AFAIK most child mortality happened in infancy back then. So, Yeah, my estimate that around 2/3 of Italian males who were born in 1899 ended up living to adulthood is probably (more-or-less) accurate or at least close to being accurate. 68.4.99.100 (talk) 21:54, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Child mortality (< 5 yrs) in the UK was 228 per thou in 1900 [8], France 219, but for Germany (in 1905) it was 352 [9], so Italy doesn't look too bad by comparison with the latter. Alansplodge (talk) 20:34, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Page 607 in your link appears to roughly match up with my estimate above here: As in, about 5% of the Italian men born in 1899 who lived to adulthood ended up dying in World War I. 68.4.99.100 (talk) 21:54, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Plattenseeaktion??
In a German-language source I came across a mention of a 'Plattenseeaktion', which by context of the book would have been some sort of military or political move by Hungary around Lake Balaton roughly 1920s. Any further info on this incident, any wikipedia article in other language wiki? --Soman (talk) 21:16, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So we're not talking about WW2's 1945 Operation Spring Awakening. Reading Lake Balaton, I wonder if this has anything to do with Hungary's "first biological research institute being built on its shore in 1927." This being not too far from Austria, in an area where national borders had previously been somewhat fluid, perhaps it (and the general opening up of the area), had implications for germanic thoughts of future expansion. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.121.96 (talk) 22:29, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The closest thing I can find is that Charles I of Austria (article quoted below) was briefly imprisoned on the shore of lake Balaton (at Tihany Abbey) in 1921, before being shipped over the Danube and eventually to Madeira. The article doesn't say, but it would make sense that a military vessel escorted him over the lake and then through the Sió river:
"After the second failed attempt at restoration in Hungary, Charles and his pregnant wife Zita were arrested and quarantined at Tihany Abbey. On 1 November 1921 they were taken to the Hungarian Danube harbour city of Baja, were taken on board the gunboat HMS Glowworm, and there removed to the Black Sea where they were transferred to the light cruiser HMS Cardiff." - Lindert (talk) 22:44, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Could be linked with the biological institute thing. Text in ref (talking about an individual born 1907, German nationalist in Czechoslovakia) "...Spitzenmitgl . der Aktion des Grenzschulheims Boberhaus in Löwenberg / Schlesien ( gegr . 1926 , Erwachsenen- und Fortbildung ) scharfe Stellungnahme gegen die sog . Plattenseeaktion der Ungarn ". See Boberhaus [de]. --Soman (talk) 11:06, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is saying the person in question was a "critic" of the battle (scharfe Stellungnahme means something like "sharp opinion"), which is entirely possible if he lived past 1945. But my German is very rusty. We'd need someone who spoke it natively to translate better than me. --Jayron3214:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If it's not about the battle (a bit a doubtful position in the circumstance IMO) it's about a wider Hungarian influence in the area rather than merely the biological institute specifically and then the sentence is linking his belonging to the Initiative regarding the educational movement in Silesia (see de) with a contemporaneous contradicting influence. --Askedonty (talk) 16:18, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Could be. AFAIK, the area has always been in Hungary, even when it was part of the Dual Monarchy; being an integral part of the Lands of the Crown of Saint Stephen/Transleithania, and I'm not sure there were ever German nationalist designs on the area; this is different from Silesia, which had always been a cultural crossroads, and changed hands between countries many times throughout history, and which various German and Austrian states had claimed numerous times. --Jayron3218:18, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Swabian Turkey and from Danube Swabians: After the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire following the First World War, the settlement areas of the Danube Swabians were divided into three parts by the Allied Powers. One part remained with Hungary, the second part was allocated to Romania, and the third part fell to the newly established state of Yugoslavia. In this atmosphere of ethnic nationalism, the Danube Swabians had to fight for legal equality as citizens and for the preservation of their cultural traditions. In the 1930s, Nazi Germany promoted National Socialist ideas to the Danube Swabians and claimed the right to protect them as part of its reason for expanding into eastern Europe.. fiveby(zero) 19:08, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Auto-translation of the Hungarian in this article isn't to great, but better for a German summary:
The youth representatives from the Danube countries had lively discussions about the problems in Southeast Europe in the youth center "Boberhaus" of the Silesian youth team in the small Silesian town of Löwenberg. Ivan Boldizsär reported about it in the November issue of Magyar Szemle (1934). The head of the Hungarian Institute at Berlin University, Professor Gyula Farkas, who had had good connections with the Silesian youth team for a long time, was also involved in the implementation of this “Southeastern Europe College”. Guided by him, those wandering groups of Silesian German youths came to Hungary year after year, which caused the Bethlen government more concern through their German nationalist agitation than other similar German groups. Their völkisch agitation mostly took place under the cloak of agricultural advice for Hungarian-German farmers. In Hitler's Germany, these 'wandering birds' of the Weimar period were already 'all members of the National Socialist Party, most of whom are in the civil service, quite a few hold leading positions,' Boldizsär notes in his report. He characterized their speeches as rhetoric that “almost puts the words in brown uniforms”. "The student leaders of several German universities were present at this college, who today in Germany are almost equal in power and rank to the rector". The interesting report describes how the German idea of the Reich was propagated by the German side, which was the "eternal mission of Germanness and even more than duty: the reality inoculated into the blood". Due to geopolitical circumstances, this program is primarily oriented towards south-eastern Europe.
The action in question might not be a battle, but rather some kind of incident with Hungarian police or government. These organized trips had been happening since at least 1922 when 50 youths visited a scout group at the lake then marched to Swabian Turkey.[10] It's hard to tell without more information or a link to the source, there might be other possibilities if looking outside 1926-37. I don't know why anyone would care to make a "sharp statement" about Balaton Limnological Institute. fiveby(zero) 02:37, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Embedded narrative was the term I was looking for (I should have searched harder :P ) but I'm still interested if there's a term for a character within one. 108.6.218.63 (talk) 22:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Romanian integration of its new territories after the end of World War I
How easy (or difficult) was it for Romania to integrate its new territories after the end of World War I? Romania's size massively increased as a result of WWI, with it acquiring Bukovina, Transylvania, the eastern Banat, Bessarabia, and a few small territories to the west of Transylvania. Was integrating such a large new population a huge challenge for Romania? Or was it relatively easy since the ethnicity (Romanian) was the same in both Old Romania and New Romania? 68.4.99.100 (talk) 23:00, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Transylvania contains a significant Hungarian population. It was protests in Timisoara which started the downfall of Ceausescu... AnonMoos (talk) 03:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Treaty of Trianon is a rather long article, but doesn't bother to explain that one reason that the terms of the treaty were unfavorable to Hungary is that the Hungarian government and aristocracy enthusiastically participated in suppressing Slavic nationalisms during much of the late 19th century and 20th century before 1914. AnonMoos (talk) 18:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
August 23
Looking for an American car tire company: B&S
Hello,
I've written an article on the French Wikipedia about Torrilhon, a former French tire manufacturer, active between the second half of the 19th and the first half of the 20th centuries. In 1902 this company obtained a product license for a car wheels rubber band (solid or pneumatic?) from an American manufacturer that I only known by its initials B&S. Looking on the en:WP desambigueous page B&S, there are only two industrial companies but they don't seem to have worked with rubber or made tires. Any ideas?
Thanks TCY (talk) 06:08, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is one of Torrilhon advertisement published like here, in Swiss Chamber of commerce publications. The ad is focusing on product "B & S. Breveté SGDG". The "SGDG" certification being issued as a product patent, it is probable that "B & S" stands for the Torrilhon product identifier, but is not naming the American manufacturer. --Askedonty (talk) 09:44, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The only American B&S I know of commonly is Briggs & Stratton, and while they are in a very closely related industry, for which tires are an important component, they started in 1908, several years after the OP's 1902 license. The other one shown on the DAB page is Billings & Spencer, a tool and machine company that may have existed at the time, who would not have been in the business of dealing with rubber tires, AFAICT. According to this, they were acquired by Crescent Niagara in the 1960s. There is nothing in the B&S product line at that link that shows they would have been involved in anything related to rubber tires. --Jayron3215:13, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Jayron, please read my first answer about the Swiss chamber of commerce again. Even without agreeing to any guarantee, the French governement would have had a hard time certifying American brands as local tyre types, even in backward epochs like in the 1900's. The OP only forgot to explain clearly that it's about lorry tyres (read Torrilhon), and that in all the related sentences the wheels are on rubber bands. Given the American industrial prestige in the advertizing trade and in terms of that trade's prosody B&S "smells" American, at least Anglo-American. It has to be a significant acronym, but with the subtile perfume of ownership assorted to the licence issuer proper inner culture. --Askedonty (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I just mean that the acronym can't be the licence originator, it's not like it were about Coca-Cola with their particular line product. --Askedonty (talk) 15:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It may not be as famous as Coca Cola, but in the early 1900s, the manufacturing world was much more fragmented; there may have been a small manufacturer of tires by that name that had a single factory in some small US town. It would not be outside of the realm of possibility, it's a perfectly reasonable first line of inquiry. Since it turns out to be a likely dead-end, perhaps the initials refer to something else, but just because we arrived there by finding no such company doesn't mean the initial search was unwarranted. --Jayron3215:56, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find a company name in Newspapers.com other than individual tire stores as per Jayron's example. However, I've seen the term "balloon and solid tires" referenced. Maybe that has something to do with it? ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 15:49, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Balloon tires are a thing. They're listed on Wikipedia as a type of bicycle tire, but there are many applications of them, I have a wheelbarrow that uses a balloon tire. --Jayron3215:53, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Minto Parks
On WP I came across following 3 Minto Park articles.
One suspects the Ottawa park would be named after Gilbert Elliot-Murray-Kynynmound, 4th Earl of Minto, who was Governor General of Canada 1898–1904. He was also Viceroy of India 1905–1910, so some Indo-Pak Mintos may be named after him rather than the 1st Earl. The Allahabad park was, according to one of the references in our article, created by the 4th Earl, so one would assume it was named after him. DuncanHill (talk) 09:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can confirm the Governor-General as the origin of the name for the Park in Ottawa; there are plenty of other things named for him around the city, as would be expected. Xuxl (talk) 15:42, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Established in 1904, Minto Park was named after the first Governor General that visited the Yukon, Governor General Gilbert Elliot-Murray-Kynynmound, the 4th Earl of Minto.[11]
And finally, its the name of a small cul-de-sac in Wishaw, Scotland. [12] This is not particularly close to the Scottish village of Minto, which seems to lack a public park as far as I can tell. Alansplodge (talk) 10:51, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
19th century naming trends
Was there in the time of Abraham Lincoln (19th century) a trend in English-speaking countries to name children after Old Testament figures (Abraham, Adam, Eve, Isaac, Rachel, etc.)? Religious names are mentioned in Naming in the United States, but that page doesn't mention trends over time. Were specifically Old Testament names (as opposed to Christian saints) more common in this era than before or later? Is it possible to find out through Wikidata, perhaps? (Curious detail: In my Swedish ancestry, full of Anders, Erik, Johan, Lars and Nils, there was suddenly an Aron (O.T.) born in 1838, which stuck in my surname Aronsson.) -- LA2 (talk) 11:48, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The use of Old Testament given names is often taken by family historians as an indicator of nonconformity.[13]
Some 18th century English examples, Abraham Darby (a Quaker}, Josiah Wedgwood (a Unitarian) and Joshua Routledge (a Methodist) support this, but there are also counter-examples such as Isaac Newton (an Anglican priest). Some other Old Testement forenames, such as Samuel, Daniel and Adam, seem to have remained constantly popular across the religious spectrum. Alansplodge (talk) 12:31, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When looking at the UK, you'd need to be wary of distorting answers by ignoring class. You could, for example, see a pronounced absence of Biblical names in the British PMs born in the 1800s, but that would be a rather selective cut of society. FWIW, without having crunched any numbers, the representation of Biblical names in that century doesn't seem tremendously different than in the ones before/after. --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing!13:26, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In the upper classes, the 18th and 29th centuries saw a fad for giving children names from Classical (Greco-Roman) history: Augustus/Augusta, Julius/Julia, Alexander/Alexandra, etc. Blueboar (talk) 13:37, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The century for really hard-core religious names was the 17th, when there were individuals such as "If-Jesus-Christ-had-not-died-for-thee-thou-hadst-been-damned Barebone", more commonly known in later years as Nicholas Barbon... AnonMoos (talk) 18:19, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if you've noticed, but these days when you see the Jehovah's Witnesses outside railway stations with their leaflets they don't approach passers-by. That's because they have been instructed to remain passive and only engage when spoken to. 2A00:23C5:E148:1D01:B176:C22E:2E25:A35 (talk) 14:00, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Longest ID numbers in national identity documents
National identity documents usually have a unique ID number resp. alphanumeric identifier. From my experience, those IDs usually contain a magnitude of 10 digits/characters, of course also depending on the size of the country. Around the globe, what may be the longest IDs used for identity cards? --KnightMove (talk) 13:00, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The 18-chatacter limit is fairly universal. You can confirm that here. I can't find any reason why, but I suspect that it was baked in to some early, widely used database system (such character limits were common in things like early MS-DOS systems for example), and is a legacy that got carried through to modern times. --Jayron3214:34, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
18 characters is the length allowed for names and for each of the two narrative columns in a standard 100/106 character bank statement electronic file? May not have a direct relationship with these IDs, but early computer systems were short on space so perhaps an 18-character 'standard' was common for names? -- Verbarson talkedits15:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I don't know what the ultimate source of such a limit is, but it is a real limit, and it appears in so many varied and unconnected contexts, it leads me to believe there is some underlying, long past technical reason which has just gotten carried on through to modern times. I can remember when things like the 8.3 filename were standard; every file in a computer was limited to an 8-character main name and a 3-character extension, which was often used to identify a file by type. Today, such limits don't exist. I can name my Google Doc pretty much anything I want. But you'd be surprised how such limitations on legacy systems hang around. The 18-character limit feels something like that. The number of bits for 18 bytes is 144, which lies somewhere between 128 and 256, which leads me to believe that there was likely some standard sized data block of 256 bits, with some amount of overhead that was reserved for another purpose, leaving 144 bits for character storage. But I'm mostly spitballing here. All I know is the limit is real, it's pervasive, and I have no actual evidence where it comes from. --Jayron3216:13, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please make sure you get terms correct. I the United States, the term "regulatory power" or "regulation", in the context of government, refers to what is known as secondary legislation, which basically means that it has the power of law, but it does not come in the form of bills entered into law by the legislature, rather it comes from powers delegated to other bodies by the legislature to create and enforce their own policies. For example, the Clean Air Act (a bill passed by Congress and signed into law by the President) empowers the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the power to enact and enforce regulations in line with the parameters of the law. These parameters set by the EPA, and the penalties for violating them that the EPA has the power to enforce through civil penalties and fines, are called "regulations" rather than "laws", to distinguish them from legislative actions, but they still have the power of law. If it is a rule created by Congress, it's a law. If it is a rule passed by part of the executive branch (federal agencies), then it is a regulation. The judicial branch doesn't pass laws OR regulations, but it does mediate disputes (usually between the state and accused violators of the law or of regulations) over implementation of those laws and regulations. --Jayron3216:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Meanwhile, the relationship between the three branches is different in other countries. We really can not answer the question without knowing which country you are referring to. Blueboar (talk) 16:21, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So, even "common law" jurisdictions gets confusing because not all countries with a common law tradition have the same systems of government. The U.S. was founded on a strong separation of powers, which was based in part on the traditional European traditions of estates of the realm and in part on the concept of things like royal prerogative and parliamentary sovereignty and the like. Britain, and other countries using the Westminster system have evolved de facto into a different direction that does not have a distinct separation of powers. In practical purposes, Britain has what has been termed an "elective dictatorship" by its critics: In Britain, the majority party in Parliament gets to form a Government from among its own members. The Government (in a British sense, meaning what "Administration" means in an American sense) both acts as the Executive Branch, and as the primary source of primary legislation for the Parliament, as the UK has a strong whip system, meaning that the Government creates the legislation, brings it to Parliament for passing; and since their party is in power in that Parliament, the legislation passes. Essentially, the same body acts as both legislative and executive. Historically, the checks on this power, being the Monarch and Lords, had (and in theory still do have) power to reign in Commons, but in practice Commons is the source of all law, regulation, and enforcement in the UK. The Monarch basically never witholds royal assent (the UK equivalent of Veto Power), and Lords has the power to delay, but not to block, legislation that has been passed by Commons, meaning that for all practical purposes, the same body is responsible for all state powers in the UK. --Jayron3218:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think you meant "rein in", which ordinarily I wouldn't mention, but in this context confusion between 'rein' and 'reign' could be misleading. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.90.29 (talk) 23:30, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"15th century map" on display at the UN?
I saw this interesting map posted on Twitter, and according to the linked tweet, it's from the 15th century, which doesn't seem plausible on closer inspection since it shows what looks like Australia. Supposedly to be found at the UN. It looks to depict a flat earth with massive ice continents beyond Antarctica; as far as I can tell, these are labeled "Terra De Vista" and what looks like "Liberia" at lower left. Also an added continent in the Atlantic, maybe Atlantis. Does anyone have more context on this map and its origins? 24.43.123.69 (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that stood out to me too. Also I didn't see this close-up from the original poster earlier. It's got German place names and swastikas everywhere. Must be a work of Nazi pseudoscience and I highly doubt the claim that it's on display at the UN. I'd still be interested in knowing more about the context. 24.43.123.69 (talk) 19:14, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You should consider cross-posting this (i.e. a post with a link to this thread) on the Mathematics reference desk, as the "projection" on this map (if it is an actual calculated projection) is really weird. There are many types of map projections that result in a rough elliptical shape in which you can simply shift things so that both the North and South pole are in view, or roughly on the foci of the "ellipse" as in this map (though the shape is not very ellipse-like at all). But then this projection decides to map, in a large circle around the North pole, every line of latitude into a circle up until the Antarctic Circle, at which point I'm not sure how it's defined to get to the South pole. I honestly think all the ice around the edge is actually a decent, very rough sketch of Antarctica as we know it in this extremely exaggerated projection, however what disturbs me is the position of several other land masses (what is that chunk of China-looking stuff hanging off East Asia? Where is the rest of North America? Are those the Canary Islands off of Africa under some ridiculous distortion? Did Tierra del Fuego get pulled clockwise away from South America for some reason?)
The guess I will posit is that someone was having fun with esoteric map projection ideas, hand-drafting them out, and then sketched world maps onto them freehand from memory. Someone who found this mathematician/geographer's old notes decided this looked cool, copied it, colorized it, and turned it into a poster with a bunch of other stuff to make it look a little more hermetic-like without completely destroying its integrity. SamuelRiv (talk) 15:10, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I said below, the map may actually be based on (a mirror flip of?) the lunar Maria, under the obscure conspiracy theory that the moon is a reflection of the Earth and shows lost continents (that may be Atlantis near Africa, and maybe Lemuria near Asia?). So it's not really a conventional map projection but an attempt to show correlations between the flat earth and the moon. Edit: andthis reddit post confirms it as a "moon/earth map"! Though a comment repeats the UN claim and also says it's of Soviet origin (despite the text appearing to be in German). 24.43.123.69 (talk) 16:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find the "15th century claim" on Twitter. According to Google Image search the map appeared on the web just one day ago. Its projection resembles the Flag of the United Nations. Similar maps used by flat earth supporters show the earth surrounded by an ice wall like c:File:Flat earth.png. That vikings, nazis and aliens live behind that wall, is usually a feature of the hollow earth supporters, who believe these groups live inside the earth, but here obviously used by a flat earth supporter. The round dot on the top could be an entrance into the hollow earth, thus combining the two views. I estimate the map was made after 2015, but the publication date of yesterday makes 2022 a likely date for the map. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 13:35, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The "15th century" claim is in my first link.
Thanks for the Bible references, Fut.Perf! I couldn't quite read that part. The quotes are:
John 14.4: Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life.No one comes to the Father except through me."
John 6:36: But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe.
I'm also seeing tweets comparing the map to a "moon map" or "plasma reflection," which from what I can find is a recently emerged fringe theory which postulates that the moon is made of plasma and the lunar maria are reflections of the flat earth's continents, including "lost" continents and the land beyond the Antarctic "ice wall." If you compare the pictures they do match up pretty well, with the "known" Earth being off-center and the continents oddly shaped, plus the presence of Atlantis near Africa. So, probably more evident that this is a recent publication. 24.43.123.69 (talk) 14:07, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a 15th century map, and AFAIK, it isn't hanging in the UN. To be fair, it's been about 3 years since I last visited the UN, but I don't recall anything like this being on display in the publicly accessible areas of the UN, unless there was a traveling exhibit that was on display there for some purpose (sections of the public areas of the UN are sort of like a museum, and there are exhibits). --Jayron3215:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For Tunisia, it came under French control in a different manner, at a different time, and under a different organizational structure than Algeria. France invaded, occupied and directly colonized Algeria (see pied noir), integrating them fully within France by 1848. The French protectorate of Tunisia was a protectorate, not a colony or integrated into France. It was established in 1881 (a generation later than Algeria) under a different treaty structure that still left Tunisian local authorities in control (though under influence from Paris). The French Third Republic was in a different political situation than was the July Monarchy that established French Algeria. For various reasons, they didn't seek the same kind of direct integration into the French state that Algeria had undergone; not the least of which is that French Algeria was always a major political problem. From the moment it was fully integrated, it was a political nightmare domestically for France, most of the major political crises France faced came down to Algeria. Establishing a protectorate rather than fully integration was probably a wiser strategy in the long run. --Jayron3213:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
August 24
Do all Indian subcontinent people know their caste or varna?
"Varnas" are overall wide classifications, often theoretical. For many Indians, their "jati" is more important to them in their daily lives (and was the social group which traditionally regulated marriage). AnonMoos (talk) 22:43, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
|[reply]
August 25
Salman Rushdie's "heresy" - more offensive to Shi'a than to Sunnis?
Hearing recently about Salman Rushdie being stabbed reminded me of this old saga.
As I understand it, the fatwa calling Rushdie an infidel and a heretic (and calling for his death) was issued by the Shi'a / Shi'iteAyatollah Khomeini. Likewise, the alleged assailant (who attacked Rushdie only a few weeks ago, as of this writing) was also Shi'a.
(Can somebody please clarify whether "Shi'a" or "Shi'ite" is more correct - or perhaps, which is more correct in which context? But please don't let this distract from the main question).
This raised interesting thoughts in my mind: Is Rushdie's supposed form of "heresy" more offensive to Shi'a than to Sunnis? And if yes, why so? (Islamic theology is not my specialty). Thanks in advance. Eliyohub (talk) 05:38, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
