Media mistakes

I must admit that I was also struggling to see the ambiguity. Perhaps not quite as clear to the ignorant masses as it could be, but ambiguous? No.
Of course there is ambiguity in the phrase "the over 70s" (and not the variations people have picked up on). We do not traditionally count age in years and seconds, when we turn 70 we are 70 for a whole year, so we do not become "over 70" until we become 71. And yet the phrase is commonly understood to mean "70 and over" - which is how it should be expressed (but usually isn't). That's the thrust of Scrat's argument, and I'm with him: people of age 70 (not yet 71) might feel included or excluded, and it would be an interesting result to find out what proportion.
 
Last edited:
So you would not count the time as being past 1pm until it reached 2pm?

(although if I had arranged to meet someone for 1pm for lunch - pre-Covid- I would not start fretting until it was about ten past - not enough time for a full pint and still stay in sync for buying rounds)
 
So you would not count the time as being past 1pm until it reached 2pm?
That's the point BH is making I think. General use of these values varies with context.
"After 1pm" and "After your 70th birthday" are equivalent.
"When you are 70" or "When you are over 70" are usually understood differently even though technically they are the same as the first two.
 
Maybe they think there is such a thing (like a Chesterfield sofa)

(For those without Facebook, or without following the link: the reference is to an advert for a "3 draw Chester draws" - "draw" should be drawer of course.)

The photo illustrates a 3-drawer bedroom unit, but one might envision Chester City FC shorts thrice-used.
 
Maybe they think there is such a thing (like a Chesterfield sofa)

(For those without Facebook, or without following the link: the reference is to an advert for a "3 draw Chester draws" - "draw" should be drawer of course.)

The photo illustrates a 3-drawer bedroom unit, but one might envision Chester City FC shorts thrice-used.
I think Chester FC are more concerned about a lack of draws.
 
Today's Kurosu was about as tough as they come (which isn't very), and I score it a 4/5, but the Mail only rated it two star.
Code:
 ———————————————————————
|   |   |   | X |   | O |
|———|———|———|———|———|———|
|   | X |   |   | X |   |
|———|———|———|———|———|———|
|   |   |   | X |   |   |
|———|———|———|———|———|———|
|   | O |   |   | O |   |
|———|———|———|———|———|———|
| X |   |   |   |   |   |
|———|———|———|———|———|———|
|   | X | O |   |   | O |
 ———————————————————————
BH Rating: ●︎●︎●︎●︎○︎
 
I usually only do these on a Saturday and haven't bothered so far this year. If you transcribed that correctly, I didn't find that very tough at all.
 
I usually only do these on a Saturday and haven't bothered so far this year. If you transcribed that correctly, I didn't find that very tough at all.
Anyway, the correct term is noughts and crosses kurosu. Kurosu is different.
 
Who decided which is correct? All I know is yours doesn't look anything like mine, and I don't know the rules for yours.
Ok, any horizontal or vertical run of n must contain 1 to n. Here is one marked as easy. The other one is marked hard.Screenshot_20210218-152851.png
 
It is a variant of Kakuro, or kakan kurosu, in which the segment n always has sum n(n+1)/2, which forces the numbers to be 1 to n, of course.

Here is a more general Kakuro.

480px-Kakuro_black_box.svg.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top