What has the UK ever done for you?



  • In this week's issue of The Economist, there's a two-page spread advertisement from UK Trade & Investment, a government body promoting "UK's cutting-edge technological revolution". The advertisements shouts (I'd post a picture but I'm short of wooden tables):

    @UK Trade & Investment said:


    So, apart from the iPod, the internet, Oxford University, investment banking, the railway, penicillin, Concorde, bioscience, copyright, catseyes (and the corkscrew)... what has the UK ever done for you?

    OK, so Apple's Chief of Cool is a Brit, but the iPod a UK invention???

    And His Pompousness Sir Berners Lee may have glued together the first HTTP server, but the internet already existed 20 years before that.

    And if the UK is so cutting edge, why do these guys work in San Francisco and Geneva?

    Bioscience? Whatever.

    Investment Banking? Britain's first investment bank, Barings, was founded 1763 - Germany's Berenberg was founded 1590.

    Copyright? The Berne Convention, intitiated by the French, established that in 1886. Britain was one of the last countries to adopt it.

     
    But you gotta hand it to them - they did invent the corkscrew.
     

     


     



  • Motörhead, Pink Floyd and many more fucking rock and roll ass kicking bands.

    They also invented football. * (see additional notes)

    If my girl was brittish that would cover about 90% of my life.

    oh wait there is also Bovril and Lyle's Golden Syrup, but those are hard to get around here.

     

    * Additional notes:
    yes US dudes, it's football, you play with your FEET and you kick a BALL
    (mmm.. should we call it FeetBall?)
     

    P.S. Where the hell does that 'soccer' name came from? This is a legit quetion.



  • And Barings collapsed... due to a British trader.

     What about the TV? Oh yeah, that was the Scots.
     



  • @fatdog said:

    P.S. Where the hell does that 'soccer' name came from? This is a legit quetion.

     

    From "Association Football"; as opposed to "Rugby Football", sometimes called "rugger".

     

     



  • The design engineer for all iPods and Macs, is a Brit. Jonathan Ive.



  • The ipods CPUs (two ARMs) are of British design too. :)

     



  • They gave me a deep-seated dislike of over-priveliged accident-of-birth jerk-offs who should be post-natally aborted as soon as possible. Like that whole unbelievable story of Lady Diana - a woman who couldn't even hold a pencil straight gets feted as some kind of humanitarian, whereas in reality it was all a great big publicity stunt designed to get her profile a bit higher after Charley dumped her. All it took was a car accident to get her sainted. Oh the gullibility of the average media dupe....



  • What about the TV? Oh yeah, that was the Scots.

     

    Umm, so Scotland isn't part of the UK? Think you need some education before continuing in this debate.

     



  • @JvdL said:

    In this week's issue of The Economist, there's a two-page spread advertisement from UK Trade & Investment, a government body promoting "UK's cutting-edge technological revolution". The advertisements shouts (I'd post a picture but I'm short of wooden tables):

    @UK Trade & Investment said:


    So, apart from the iPod, the internet, Oxford University, investment banking, the railway, penicillin, Concorde, bioscience, copyright, catseyes (and the corkscrew)... what has the UK ever done for you?

    OK, so Apple's Chief of Cool is a Brit, but the iPod a UK invention???

    And His Pompousness Sir Berners Lee may have glued together the first HTTP server, but the internet already existed 20 years before that.

    And if the UK is so cutting edge, why do these guys work in San Francisco and Geneva?

    Bioscience? Whatever.

    Investment Banking? Britain's first investment bank, Barings, was founded 1763 - Germany's Berenberg was founded 1590.

    Copyright? The Berne Convention, intitiated by the French, established that in 1886. Britain was one of the last countries to adopt it.

     
    But you gotta hand it to them - they did invent the corkscrew.
     

     

     

    Why do you come on here and post this question? Did you want to start some kind of flame war? I think there are better forums for this kind of pathetic post. 



  • I don't see why Oxford is on that list. Oxford is rubbish. Cambridge is awesome.

     What about the industrial revolution? That's probably the most important thing Britain exported and it's not on that list.

    I think Thermos flasks are worthy of mention too :)

     

    Edit: Also, the first programmable computer was British.
     



  • @slyadams said:

    Why do you come on here and post this question? Did you want to start some kind of flame war? I think there are better forums for this kind of pathetic post. 

    It isn't a question, it's a quote - and no flame war intended.

    I don't mean to imply there aren't many innovations from the UK, but many of the items on this list are questionably of UK origin.

    I just struck me that the government official who made this up couldn't think of better examples of British invention, like sense of humour.

     

     



  • Joke: Why don't the British make computers anymore?  They couldn't figure out how to make them leak oil!

    But seriously.  I haven't been impressed with the stuff coming out of [i]actual[/i] British tech companies.  Let's see, what are the modern British programming languages?  There's Haskell... great!  Then there is Gödel and Whitespace.  One of them is a fairly fast and portable language with its own interpreter written in Haskell, and the other one is Gödel.



  • @slyadams said:

    What about the TV? Oh yeah, that was the Scots.

     

    Umm, so Scotland isn't part of the UK? Think you need some education before continuing in this debate.

     

    Yes, obviously part of the UK, but I'm gunning for England here.

    I don't see the point of the UK. As NI, Scotland and Wales are actually seperate countries, the idea of the UK is pretty much the same as the idea of Europe. So therefore whenever anybody mentions the UK, I generally assume they actually mean England rather than all 4 countries, as that is usually what people do mean (especially as UK is much shorter to type than England)



  • @mentaldingo said:

    Edit: Also, the first programmable computer was British.

    Nope. 

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/02/zuse_computer/ 



  • @ammoQ said:

    @mentaldingo said:

    Edit: Also, the first programmable computer was British.

    Nope. 

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/02/zuse_computer/ 

    Try again... [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Babbage#Analytical_engine[/url] 



  • Yes, obviously part of the UK, but I'm gunning for England here.

    I
    don't see the point of the UK. As NI, Scotland and Wales are actually
    seperate countries, the idea of the UK is pretty much the same as the
    idea of Europe. So therefore whenever anybody mentions the UK, I
    generally assume they actually mean England rather than all 4
    countries, as that is usually what people do mean (especially as UK is
    much shorter to type than England)

     

     

    Well, that shows your ignorance. The UK is not analogous to Europe at all. The best analogy is really that of the US.  England, Scotland, Wales and NI are all states and the UK is the 'federal' body. Each country can make some of its own laws (although some are, and will always be, centrally controlled) but overall ultimate control is central.

    If you are gunning for England then say England. Saying otherwise just highlights the ignorance of your posts. Saying that "whenever anybody mentions the UK, I generally assume they actually mean England" firstly makes my point for me and secondly generally highlights the ignorance that you don't actually know anything about England or the UK. Still, its outside the borders of the USA so I don't expect much more to be honest.



  • Joke: Why don't the British make computers anymore?  They couldn't figure out how to make them leak oil!

    But seriously.  I haven't been impressed with the stuff coming out of actual
    British tech companies.  Let's see, what are the modern British
    programming languages?  There's Haskell... great!  Then there is Gödel
    and Whitespace.  One of them is a fairly fast and portable language
    with its own interpreter written in Haskell, and the other one is Gödel.

     

    I see, so production of programming languages is synonymous with technical advancement and achievement?

    I know, I'll invent an equally arbitrary 'technology index' of quality of cars. They're technical after all. It is generally world renowned that American cars are, barring a few exceptions, terrible. See, I can make arbitrary statements too.

     



  • And Barings collapsed... due to a British trader.

     What about the TV? Oh yeah, that was the Scots.

     

    Enron/Worldcom? 



  • @GettinSadda said:

    @ammoQ said:
    @mentaldingo said:

    Edit: Also, the first programmable computer was British.

    Nope. 

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/02/zuse_computer/ 

    Try again... [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Babbage#Analytical_engine[/url] 

    However, as you can also read there, the Analytical Engine was never actually built. The Zuse was the first usable, programmable computer.




  • I see, so production of programming languages is synonymous with technical advancement and achievement?

    I
    know, I'll invent an equally arbitrary 'technology index' of quality of
    cars. They're technical after all. It is generally world renowned that
    American cars are, barring a few exceptions, terrible. See, I can make
    arbitrary statements too.

     OK... you'd be totally correct there as far as I'm concerned.  No arguments from me.  I just figured, you know, programming languages and software were kind of something we all could relate to here.
     

     



  • @JvdL said:

    In this week's issue of The Economist, there's a two-page spread advertisement from UK Trade & Investment, a government body promoting "UK's cutting-edge technological revolution". The advertisements shouts (I'd post a picture but I'm short of wooden tables):

    @UK Trade & Investment said:


    So, apart from the iPod, the internet, Oxford University, investment banking, the railway, penicillin, Concorde, bioscience, copyright, catseyes (and the corkscrew)... what has the UK ever done for you?

    OK, so Apple's Chief of Cool is a Brit, but the iPod a UK invention???

    And His Pompousness Sir Berners Lee may have glued together the first HTTP server, but the internet already existed 20 years before that.

    And if the UK is so cutting edge, why do these guys work in San Francisco and Geneva?

    Bioscience? Whatever.

    Investment Banking? Britain's first investment bank, Barings, was founded 1763 - Germany's Berenberg was founded 1590.

    Copyright? The Berne Convention, intitiated by the French, established that in 1886. Britain was one of the last countries to adopt it.


    But you gotta hand it to them - they did invent the corkscrew.

    Britain did actually "invent" copyright.  They had a copyright law in the early 1700s at some point, which predated the Berne Convention. 

    Also - their Penicillin claim is dubious at best :)

    But all debates aside, I do have to bow my head for the Monty Python reference/allusion (depending on how you look at it).



  • @Pidgeot said:

    @GettinSadda said:
    @ammoQ said:
    @mentaldingo said:

    Edit: Also, the first programmable computer was British.

    Nope. 

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/02/zuse_computer/ 

    Try again... [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Babbage#Analytical_engine[/url] 

    However, as you can also read there, the Analytical Engine was never actually built. The Zuse was the first usable, programmable computer.

    If mentaldingo had said "The first usable programmable computer ever built was British" you would be right. However he said "...the first programmable computer was British" which is true.


  • Of course the No.1 British invention of all time has to be the practical steam engine (yes, there were precedents, but they were mostly curiosities rather than practical machines).

    Along with the also-British improved steam engine, the steam turbine, steam engines are responsible for generating about 90% of the world's electricity, powering the Internet and charging all those iPods.

    Of course the other great British contribution has to be Ubuntu Linux, sponsored by Canonical Ltd.

    Where would you (former colonies*) be without us?

    *If you live somewhere that is not a former colony, please ignore that particular part of my comment.



  • @valerion said:

    @slyadams said:

    What about the TV? Oh yeah, that was the Scots.

     

    Umm, so Scotland isn't part of the UK? Think you need some education before continuing in this debate.

     

    Yes, obviously part of the UK, but I'm gunning for England here.

    I don't see the point of the UK. As NI, Scotland and Wales are actually seperate countries, the idea of the UK is pretty much the same as the idea of Europe. So therefore whenever anybody mentions the UK, I generally assume they actually mean England rather than all 4 countries, as that is usually what people do mean (especially as UK is much shorter to type than England)

    I'm sorry, are you from the past? The UK is the country. England, Scotland, Wales, and NI are provinces of it. They haven't been countries for centuries. The UK has a single government based in London. Every town, city, county and borough has its own council/assembly/whatever, and so do three of the provinces, but they all answer to Westminster.



  • @zedhex said:

    They gave me a deep-seated dislike of over-priveliged accident-of-birth jerk-offs who should be post-natally aborted as soon as possible. Like that whole unbelievable story of Lady Diana - a woman who couldn't even hold a pencil straight gets feted as some kind of humanitarian, whereas in reality it was all a great big publicity stunt designed to get her profile a bit higher after Charley dumped her. All it took was a car accident to get her sainted. Oh the gullibility of the average media dupe....

    Diana wasn't an accident of birth, she married into the royal family. She wasn't even titled before that.



  • One Thing: Tanqueray No. Ten.



  • @djork said:

    But seriously.  I haven't been impressed with the stuff coming out of [i]actual[/i] British tech companies.

    Probably because there aren't any such companies, to speak of. The technology industry never took hold in the UK; all we have in that sector is branches of the multinationals. Our primary external industries are financial services and tourism - but, like the US and unlike most of Europe, our economy is mostly internal: most UK companies are serving UK citizens, not foreigners.



  • Under "English Inventions" we have the first computers and the jet engine. Though admittedly the computers we protected by secrecy law until after someone else had reinvented them, thanks to their use in the war.

     



  • @GettinSadda said:

    If mentaldingo had said "The first usable programmable computer ever built was British" you would be right. However he said "...the first programmable computer was British" which is true.

    Were are getting very philosophical here. Is a programmable computer that eventually has never been build really a programmable computer? 



  • @djork said:


    They couldn't figure out how to make them leak oil!
    ...snip...
    I haven't been impressed with the stuff coming out of [i]actual[/i] British tech companies.

    On a side rebuttle, we're very successful at developing computer games.

    • Rockstar North - of GTA fame - is from Edinburgh.
    • Team Soho (London based) developed the Eye Toy
    • Media Molecue who are in development of LittleBigPlanet for PS3
    • Eidos who developed Tomb Raider are from West London

    I'm sure theres more. So basically just don't make us do anything mechanical.



  • @slyadams said:

    Well, that shows your ignorance. The UK is not analogous to Europe at all. The best analogy is really that of the US.  England, Scotland, Wales and NI are all states and the UK is the 'federal' body. Each country can make some of its own laws (although some are, and will always be, centrally controlled) but overall ultimate control is central.

    Yeah, cos central control is not like Europe at all.... Since when do US states have their own banknotes, for example? I stand by my analogy. You don't have to agree with it.  And in any case, they are still seperate countries. This is why you have England, Scotland, Wales & N.I entering the Football World Cup, along with France, Germany, you get the idea. The USA enters as one country.

     

    If you are gunning for England then say England. Saying otherwise just highlights the ignorance of your posts. Saying that "whenever anybody mentions the UK, I generally assume they actually mean England" firstly makes my point for me and secondly generally highlights the ignorance that you don't actually know anything about England or the UK. Still, its outside the borders of the USA so I don't expect much more to be honest.

    Showing your own ignorance here... when did I say I was from the US? I'm London born and bred... sounds like I know a lot more about it than you do at any rate.



  • @asuffield said:

    @valerion said:
    @slyadams said:

    What about the TV? Oh yeah, that was the Scots.

     

    Umm, so Scotland isn't part of the UK? Think you need some education before continuing in this debate.

     

    Yes, obviously part of the UK, but I'm gunning for England here.

    I don't see the point of the UK. As NI, Scotland and Wales are actually seperate countries, the idea of the UK is pretty much the same as the idea of Europe. So therefore whenever anybody mentions the UK, I generally assume they actually mean England rather than all 4 countries, as that is usually what people do mean (especially as UK is much shorter to type than England)

    I'm sorry, are you from the past? The UK is the country. England, Scotland, Wales, and NI are provinces of it. They haven't been countries for centuries. The UK has a single government based in London. Every town, city, county and borough has its own council/assembly/whatever, and so do three of the provinces, but they all answer to Westminster.

     

    Yes, yes ... It is, however, usually classified as a country, not a state/province/whatever of England/UK. But technically, technically it is not a country because it is not recognised by the UN, and another country (England) has sovereign control over it. It therefore techically falls somewhere between "Country" and "State". Perhaps nation?



  • @UK Trade & Investment said:


    So, apart from the iPod, the internet, Oxford University, investment banking, the railway, penicillin, Concorde, bioscience, copyright, catseyes (and the corkscrew)... what has the UK ever done for you?

    Two words: Bass Ale.

     



  • @cconroy said:

    @UK Trade & Investment said:

    So, apart from the iPod, the internet, Oxford University, investment banking, the railway, penicillin, Concorde, bioscience, copyright, catseyes (and the corkscrew)... what has the UK ever done for you?

    Two words: Bass Ale.

     

    Samuel Smith's will take Bass Ale out behind the pub and make mincemeat of it.</britishaccent>



  • @valerion said:

    @slyadams said:

    Well, that shows your ignorance. The UK is not analogous to Europe at all. The best analogy is really that of the US.  England, Scotland, Wales and NI are all states and the UK is the 'federal' body. Each country can make some of its own laws (although some are, and will always be, centrally controlled) but overall ultimate control is central.

    Yeah, cos central control is not like Europe at all.... Since
    when do US states have their own banknotes, for example? I stand by my
    analogy. You don't have to agree with it.  And in any case, they are
    still seperate countries. This is why you have England, Scotland, Wales
    & N.I entering the Football World Cup, along with France, Germany,
    you get the idea. The USA enters as one country.

     

     

    You really don't grasp this do you. Can Scotland opt out of the UK. No, it can't. Can the UK opt out of the EU? In a heartbeat. We are not controlled by Europe, regardless of what you read. We chose to follow EU directives because it is a co-operative.

    @slyadams said:

    If you are gunning for England then say England. Saying otherwise just highlights the ignorance of your posts. Saying that "whenever anybody mentions the UK, I generally assume they actually mean England" firstly makes my point for me and secondly generally highlights the ignorance that you don't actually know anything about England or the UK. Still, its outside the borders of the USA so I don't expect much more to be honest.

     @valerion said:

    Showing your own ignorance here... when did I say I was from the US? I'm London born and bred... sounds like I know a lot more about it than you do at any rate.

     

    Well, if you are London born and bred then you have no excuse to be honest. Your ignorance is astounding. To think that the political and legal relationship between England, NI, Scotland and Wales to the UK is the same as the UK's relationship to Europe is just factually incorrect and has no foundation whatsoever.



  • @valerion said:

    @slyadams said:

    Well, that shows your ignorance. The UK is not analogous to Europe at all. The best analogy is really that of the US.  England, Scotland, Wales and NI are all states and the UK is the 'federal' body. Each country can make some of its own laws (although some are, and will always be, centrally controlled) but overall ultimate control is central.

    Yeah, cos central control is not like Europe at all.... Since when do US states have their own banknotes, for example? I stand by my analogy. You don't have to agree with it.  And in any case, they are still seperate countries. This is why you have England, Scotland, Wales & N.I entering the Football World Cup, along with France, Germany, you get the idea. The USA enters as one country.

     

    If you are gunning for England then say England. Saying otherwise just highlights the ignorance of your posts. Saying that "whenever anybody mentions the UK, I generally assume they actually mean England" firstly makes my point for me and secondly generally highlights the ignorance that you don't actually know anything about England or the UK. Still, its outside the borders of the USA so I don't expect much more to be honest.

    Showing your own ignorance here... when did I say I was from the US? I'm London born and bred... sounds like I know a lot more about it than you do at any rate.

     

    I've reread your post and it just astounds me even more. The basis for your opinion is the word of FIFA? Unbelievable. I could counter that in the Olympics we compete as one county, but its pointless, sport doesn't define countries. Cardiff and Swansea play in the English football league, for example.

     
    Also, in regards to  "Since when do US states have their own banknotes, for example", they don't, but they have their own coins. In the same way that different countries in Europe have different design of Euro/cent coins (even if they are all worth the same) the US states have different design of coins. This is no different to Scotland having its own design of banknote. They are of the same currency and are worth the same, simply have a different cosmetic design. Once again, your point has no basis in fact.

     
    Finally, the UN, which is surely the ultimate authority of countries, has UK representatives. There are no representatives of England, Scotland, NI or Wales. These representatives could all very easily be English (practically they wouldn't) if Westminster decides it.



  • @slyadams said:

    I've reread your post and it just astounds me
    even more. The basis for your opinion is the word of FIFA?
    Unbelievable. I could counter that in the Olympics we compete as one
    county, but its pointless, sport doesn't define countries. Cardiff and
    Swansea play in the English football league, for example.

     
    Also,
    in regards to  "Since when do US states have their own banknotes,
    for example", they don't, but they have their own coins. In the same
    way that different countries in Europe have different design of
    Euro/cent coins (even if they are all worth the same) the US states
    have different design of coins. This is no different to Scotland having
    its own design of banknote. They are of the same currency and are worth
    the same, simply have a different cosmetic design. Once again, your
    point has no basis in fact.

     
    Finally, the UN, which is
    surely the ultimate authority of countries, has UK representatives.
    There are no representatives of England, Scotland, NI or Wales. These
    representatives could all very easily be English (practically they
    wouldn't) if Westminster decides it.

    If you
    didn't the sarcasm in the football bit then sorry, probably my fault...
    as for the UN, see my reply to someone else when I made that exact
    point. Regarding banknotes I never said Scotland had different
    currency, merely notes. As I said to whoever it was above, I know
    Scotland is technically not a country, but it is often classified as
    one. It sits at a level between State and Country. I'm sure you will
    know the exact term as you obviously have an encyclopedic knowledge of
    these things. But, I would still stand by my point that the UK
    resembles Europe more than the US. Ok, Scotland can't opt out of our
    rule, but they have managed to get more freedom from us in recent
    times, whereas we've ceded more control to Brussels.



  • @slyadams said:

    @valerion said:

    @slyadams said:

    Well, that shows your ignorance. The UK is not analogous to Europe at all. The best analogy is really that of the US.  England, Scotland, Wales and NI are all states and the UK is the 'federal' body. Each country can make some of its own laws (although some are, and will always be, centrally controlled) but overall ultimate control is central.

    Yeah, cos central control is not like Europe at all.... Since when do US states have their own banknotes, for example? I stand by my analogy. You don't have to agree with it.  And in any case, they are still seperate countries. This is why you have England, Scotland, Wales & N.I entering the Football World Cup, along with France, Germany, you get the idea. The USA enters as one country.

     

    If you are gunning for England then say England. Saying otherwise just highlights the ignorance of your posts. Saying that "whenever anybody mentions the UK, I generally assume they actually mean England" firstly makes my point for me and secondly generally highlights the ignorance that you don't actually know anything about England or the UK. Still, its outside the borders of the USA so I don't expect much more to be honest.

    Showing your own ignorance here... when did I say I was from the US? I'm London born and bred... sounds like I know a lot more about it than you do at any rate.

     

    I've reread your post and it just astounds me even more. The basis for your opinion is the word of FIFA? Unbelievable. I could counter that in the Olympics we compete as one county, but its pointless, sport doesn't define countries. Cardiff and Swansea play in the English football league, for example.

     
    Also, in regards to  "Since when do US states have their own banknotes, for example", they don't, but they have their own coins. In the same way that different countries in Europe have different design of Euro/cent coins (even if they are all worth the same) the US states have different design of coins. This is no different to Scotland having its own design of banknote.

    What are you talking about?  Only the federal government has the right to mint coinage in the USA, per the constitution.  Are you confused by the commemorative state quarters? 

     That being said, the argument that Wales, Scotland et al are different countries because of their currency is simply an invalid criterion.  The United States federal government, while under the Articles of Confederation, did not have the exclusive right to mint coinage and there was no federal banking system.
     



  • @djork said:

    @cconroy said:
    @UK Trade & Investment said:

    So, apart from the iPod, the internet, Oxford University, investment banking, the railway, penicillin, Concorde, bioscience, copyright, catseyes (and the corkscrew)... what has the UK ever done for you?

    Two words: Bass Ale.

     

    Samuel Smith's will take Bass Ale out behind the pub and make mincemeat of it.</britishaccent>

    Hmm, will have to look for it.  Wikipedia says it's exported to the U.S. but I've never heard of it.  In the meantime (or until I get back across the pond), Bass it is. 



  • @slyadams said:


    Also, in regards to  "Since when do US states have their own banknotes, for example", they don't, but they have their own coins. In the same way that different countries in Europe have different design of Euro/cent coins (even if they are all worth the same) the US states have different design of coins.


    US states do not have their own coins. Current US quarters are being minted with a series of designs highlighting each state, but they are not all being minted at once, and they are distributed nationwide.



  • @SuperousOxide said:

    @slyadams said:

    Also, in regards to "Since when do US states have their own banknotes, for example", they don't, but they have their own coins. In the same way that different countries in Europe have different design of Euro/cent coins (even if they are all worth the same) the US states have different design of coins.


    US states do not have their own coins. Current US quarters are being minted with a series of designs highlighting each state, but they are not all being minted at once, and they are distributed nationwide.

     

    I never stated the coins were different in value, size, composition and usage. All I said was that there are state specific designs on some coins, true or false? In the same way different countries in the EU have coins minted for them with different designs on it, even though the coins are the same value, same size, same composition and same usage. In EXACTLY the same way, Scotland has been allowed to have notes made that have a different graphical design. The only significant difference is that Scotland still has a £1 note. Apart from that, the difference is just cosmetic. However, valerion was trying to use this fact to support his notion that Scotland is more independant than, say, Texas:

     

    Since when do US states have their own banknotes, for example?


     



  • @valerion said:

    As I said to whoever it was above, I know
    Scotland is technically not a country, but it is often classified as
    one. It sits at a level between State and Country. I'm sure you will
    know the exact term as you obviously have an encyclopedic knowledge of
    these things.

    There is no exact term. Or, rather, there's not a definitive system of terms at all - Wales, England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland are called "countries". Ireland on the whole (consisting of both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland), along with Korea, Germany pre-1989, etc, could reasonably be called a "Nation" (but not a "nation-state"). Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, etc, are called "states", even though elsewhere in the world "state" often (not always - mexico and germany have divisions called "states" too) refers to an entity with complete independence and sovereignty. The EU is sui generis. There aren't any terms that are equally valid in describing all the 192-odd "countries"/"states"/"nations" in the world except some made-up term like "sovereign entity". There are just terms that apply specifically to a single level of subdivisions within a single larger division, for example, Alaska has "boroughs", Louisiana has "parishes", every other US state has "counties", but they're really all the same thing. The US and Australia have "states", Canada has "provinces", etc.

    And there's nothing quite like EnglandAndWales anywhere else in the world. 

    @slyadams said:

    I never stated the coins were different in
    value, size, composition and usage. All I said was that there are state
    specific designs on some coins, true or false? In the same way
    different countries in the EU have coins minted for them with different
    designs on it, even though the coins are the same value, same size,
    same composition and same usage. In EXACTLY the same way, Scotland has
    been allowed to have notes made that have a different graphical design.
    The only significant difference is that Scotland still has a £1 note.

    And
    there's also the fact that their notes aren't legal tender anywhere.
    Not even Scotland (but, then, English notes aren't legal tender there
    either)

     



  • @Random832 said:

    @valerion said:

    As I said to whoever it was above, I know
    Scotland is technically not a country, but it is often classified as
    one. It sits at a level between State and Country. I'm sure you will
    know the exact term as you obviously have an encyclopedic knowledge of
    these things.

    There is no exact term. Or, rather, there's not a definitive system of terms at all - Wales, England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland are called "countries". Ireland on the whole (consisting of both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland), along with Korea, Germany pre-1989, etc, could reasonably be called a "Nation" (but not a "nation-state"). Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, etc, are called "states", even though elsewhere in the world "state" often (not always - mexico and germany have divisions called "states" too) refers to an entity with complete independence and sovereignty. The EU is sui generis. There aren't any terms that are equally valid in describing all the 192-odd "countries"/"states"/"nations" in the world except some made-up term like "sovereign entity". There are just terms that apply specifically to a single level of subdivisions within a single larger division, for example, Alaska has "boroughs", Louisiana has "parishes", every other US state has "counties", but they're really all the same thing. The US and Australia have "states", Canada has "provinces", etc.

    And there's nothing quite like EnglandAndWales anywhere else in the world. 

    @slyadams said:

    I never stated the coins were different in
    value, size, composition and usage. All I said was that there are state
    specific designs on some coins, true or false? In the same way
    different countries in the EU have coins minted for them with different
    designs on it, even though the coins are the same value, same size,
    same composition and same usage. In EXACTLY the same way, Scotland has
    been allowed to have notes made that have a different graphical design.
    The only significant difference is that Scotland still has a £1 note.

    And
    there's also the fact that their notes aren't legal tender anywhere.
    Not even Scotland (but, then, English notes aren't legal tender there
    either)

     

     

    Scottish notes aren't legal tender? 



  • @slyadams said:

    I never stated the coins were different in value, size, composition and usage. All I said was that there are state specific designs on some coins, true or false? In the same way different countries in the EU have coins minted for them with different designs on it, even though the coins are the same value, same size, same composition and same usage. In EXACTLY the same way, Scotland has been allowed to have notes made that have a different graphical design. The only significant difference is that Scotland still has a £1 note. Apart from that, the difference is just cosmetic. However, valerion was trying to use this fact to support his notion that Scotland is more independant than, say, Texas:



    But those notes are primarily distributed and used in Scotland, correct? The Wyoming quarter (for example) is used to the same extent in all 50 states because all new quarters that come out of the mint right now are Wyoming quarters. The EU versions of the Euro coins may migrate somewhat to the other countries, but Germany's Euro coins are minted for Germany and enter circulation there.



  • I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the Internet yet...

     

    I guess its a USA invention...we do act like we own it. The .gov TLD is US only, we bogart all the .coms, the IANA is located in California (as well as the Internet Archive, and Google), and the US ARPANET is often credited as the Internet's predecessor.
     



  • Joy Division, Radiohead, uh... that's all I can think of right now.



  • @Spacecoyote said:

    I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the Internet yet...

     

    See the original post :D

    Anyway The Internet was an American Invention, but the World Wide Web was a British Invention :-)

    British Inventions : Harry Potter, The Sandwich, Fish and Chips.... there's probably a lot more



  • @slyadams said:

    Scottish notes aren't legal tender? 

    Bank of England notes are the only legal tender in England and Wales. There is no paper legal tender in Scotland - only coinage is legal tender there. 

    It is worth remembering that the subject of legal tender is usually irrelevant for practical purposes. There is only one situation in which it matters: when you owe somebody a debt, and they want that debt to be paid in a specific form, you may also require them to accept payment in any form of legal tender. In Scotland, you may require them to accept a sack filled with pound coins; in England and Wales there's a limit on legal tender for coinage, so you would have to use banknotes instead.



  • @ammoQ said:

    Were are getting very philosophical here. Is a programmable computer that eventually has never been build really a programmable computer? 

    I do believe that Babbage's Analytical Engine was finally built by one of the British colleges (I forget which one) to be displayed in the Science Museum in London - and it worked. I also seem to remember that they actually built it using Meccano.



  • I have to say that the UK has provided a lot of things that I appreciate and enjoy: they just aren't directly related to my profession (except for the first set).  Those things are:

    • IPA, Gin and Tonic
    • Brian Eno
    • Belle and Sebastian
    • Dry humor
    • That way of acting calm and collected no matter how horribly things are going at the moment


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.