On 11/07/2022 15:36, JNugent wrote:
> On 11/07/2022 02:56 pm, Indy Jess John wrote:
>
>> On 11/07/2022 14:33, Java Jive wrote:
>
>>> Because they see if for the mistake it was.
>
>> It was only a mistake because the Remainers wouldn't accept the
>> referendum result and sabotaged all attempts to get a decent severance
>> agreement.  Boris had to use the Teresa May's BRINO version to get
>> anywhere at all in the light of their efforts.
>
>> I know you will stick to your arguments, regardless of whether others
>> will consider them right or wrong, so I will leave it there. We will
>> agree to differ on this.
>
>> Jim
>
> *You* might agree to that...

:-D

Jim

On 11/07/2022 14:56, Indy Jess John wrote:
>
> On 11/07/2022 14:33, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> Because they see if for the mistake it was.
>
> It was only a mistake because the Remainers wouldn't accept the
> referendum result and sabotaged all attempts to get a decent severance
> agreement.  Boris had to use the Teresa May's BRINO version to get
> anywhere at all in the light of their efforts.

Remainers simply knew all along that it would be as bad as it has turned
out to be, after it was simply political-economic common sense. Stop
blaming others for your own piss-poor judgement.

> I know you will stick to your arguments, regardless of whether others
> will consider them right or wrong, so I will leave it there. We will
> agree to differ on this.

We will agree to differ, but that doesn't make you right ...

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jul/08/six-charts-that-show-how-the-uk-economy-is-in-crisis

.... or even still part of a majority ...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/25/one-year-on-most-voters-say-brexit-has-gone-badly

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 11/07/2022 12:01, Indy Jess John wrote:
> True democracy is when the people say what they want rather than
> trusting politicians. They voted not to give Scotland independence, yet
> there is a party in government in Scotland who refuse to accept this
> ("Lets keep trying until we get the answer we want"); and the people
> voted to leave the EU, which was followed by*years* of Parliamentary
> resistance to that result and there is still a sizeable proportion of
> MPs who want to reverse that decision. That's also the way UK
> 'democracy' works, and it stinks.

The EU like to work on that principle with referendums, if they get the
"wrong" result they keep trying until they get the "right" result.

On 11/07/2022 17:05, MB wrote:
>
> On 11/07/2022 12:01, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>
>> True democracy is when the people say what they want rather than
>> trusting politicians. They voted not to give Scotland independence, yet
>> there is a party in government in Scotland who refuse to accept this
>> ("Lets keep trying until we get the answer we want"); and the people
>> voted to leave the EU, which was followed by*years*  of Parliamentary
>> resistance to that result and there is still a sizeable proportion of
>> MPs who want to reverse that decision. That's also the way UK
>> 'democracy' works, and it stinks.
>
> The EU like to work on that principle with referendums, if they get the
> "wrong" result they keep trying until they get the "right" result.

Yet another bigoted anti-EU claim made without a shred of evidence in
support, so I presume, as on all the previous occasions, that you're
just lying.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 11/07/2022 17:09, Java Jive wrote:
> On 11/07/2022 17:05, MB wrote:
>> On 11/07/2022 12:01, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>
>>> True democracy is when the people say what they want rather than
>>> trusting politicians. They voted not to give Scotland independence, yet
>>> there is a party in government in Scotland who refuse to accept this
>>> ("Lets keep trying until we get the answer we want"); and the people
>>> voted to leave the EU, which was followed by*years*  of Parliamentary
>>> resistance to that result and there is still a sizeable proportion of
>>> MPs who want to reverse that decision. That's also the way UK
>>> 'democracy' works, and it stinks.
>>
>> The EU like to work on that principle with referendums, if they get
>> the "wrong" result they keep trying until they get the "right" result.
>
> Yet another bigoted anti-EU claim made without a shred of evidence in
> support, so I presume, as on all the previous occasions, that you're
> just lying.

From memory, they did that with Denmark's accession to the EU and RoI's
agreement of Maastricht. (I think they renamed the "agreement" in the
latter case.)

--
Max Demian

On 11/07/2022 14:24, Robin wrote:
>> If I were buying 17 I'd want them for £3 10s.
>>
>
> and get short shrift if £3 13s 11d is the price after the half-crown
> discount for buying a baker's dozen or more

I'd continue to barter.

Bill

On 11/07/2022 16:49, Java Jive wrote:
> On 11/07/2022 14:56, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>
>> On 11/07/2022 14:33, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> Because they see if for the mistake it was.
>>
>> It was only a mistake because the Remainers wouldn't accept the
>> referendum result and sabotaged all attempts to get a decent severance
>> agreement.  Boris had to use the Teresa May's BRINO version to get
>> anywhere at all in the light of their efforts.
>
> Remainers simply knew all along that it would be as bad as it has turned
> out to be, after it was simply political-economic common sense.  Stop
> blaming others for your own piss-poor judgement.
>
>> I know you will stick to your arguments, regardless of whether others
>> will consider them right or wrong, so I will leave it there. We will
>> agree to differ on this.
>
> We will agree to differ, but that doesn't make you right ...
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jul/08/six-charts-that-show-how-the-uk-economy-is-in-crisis
>
>
> ... or even still part of a majority ...
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/25/one-year-on-most-voters-say-brexit-has-gone-badly
>
>
Of course it has gone badly. That was the Remainer intention all along.

By the way, ad hominem attacks are always a sign you have nothing
constructive to say.

Jim

On 11/07/2022 17:25, Max Demian wrote:
> On 11/07/2022 17:09, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 11/07/2022 17:05, MB wrote:
>>> On 11/07/2022 12:01, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>>
>>>> True democracy is when the people say what they want rather than
>>>> trusting politicians. They voted not to give Scotland independence, yet
>>>> there is a party in government in Scotland who refuse to accept this
>>>> ("Lets keep trying until we get the answer we want"); and the people
>>>> voted to leave the EU, which was followed by*years*  of Parliamentary
>>>> resistance to that result and there is still a sizeable proportion of
>>>> MPs who want to reverse that decision. That's also the way UK
>>>> 'democracy' works, and it stinks.
>>>
>>> The EU like to work on that principle with referendums, if they get
>>> the "wrong" result they keep trying until they get the "right" result.
>>
>> Yet another bigoted anti-EU claim made without a shred of evidence in
>> support, so I presume, as on all the previous occasions, that you're
>> just lying.
>
> From memory, they did that with Denmark's accession to the EU and RoI's
> agreement of Maastricht. (I think they renamed the "agreement" in the
> latter case.)
>
Didn't they have three goes with Denmark before they got the answer they
wanted?

Jim

On 11/07/2022 19:49, Indy Jess John wrote:
>
> On 11/07/2022 16:49, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 11/07/2022 14:56, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>
>>> It was only a mistake because the Remainers wouldn't accept the
>>> referendum result and sabotaged all attempts to get a decent
>>> severance agreement.  Boris had to use the Teresa May's BRINO version
>>> to get anywhere at all in the light of their efforts.
>>
>> Remainers simply knew all along that it would be as bad as it has
>> turned out to be, after it was simply political-economic common
>> sense.  Stop blaming others for your own piss-poor judgement.

[snip]

> Of course it has gone badly.  That was the Remainer intention all along.

Paranoid conspiracy theory.

> By the way, ad hominem attacks are always a sign you have nothing
> constructive to say.

So why are you making them, as in your other-planet remarks about
Remainers above?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 11/07/2022 17:25, Max Demian wrote:
> On 11/07/2022 17:09, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 11/07/2022 17:05, MB wrote:
>>> On 11/07/2022 12:01, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>>
>>>> True democracy is when the people say what they want rather than
>>>> trusting politicians. They voted not to give Scotland independence, yet
>>>> there is a party in government in Scotland who refuse to accept this
>>>> ("Lets keep trying until we get the answer we want"); and the people
>>>> voted to leave the EU, which was followed by*years*  of Parliamentary
>>>> resistance to that result and there is still a sizeable proportion of
>>>> MPs who want to reverse that decision. That's also the way UK
>>>> 'democracy' works, and it stinks.
>>>
>>> The EU like to work on that principle with referendums, if they get
>>> the "wrong" result they keep trying until they get the "right" result.
>>
>> Yet another bigoted anti-EU claim made without a shred of evidence in
>> support, so I presume, as on all the previous occasions, that you're
>> just lying.
>
> From memory, they did that with Denmark's accession to the EU

So that was the Danish government's doing, not the EU's

> and RoI's
> agreement of Maastricht. (I think they renamed the "agreement" in the
> latter case.)

No, you seem to be confused, it ratification of the Lisbon Treaty that
required two Irish referenda, as far as I have been able to discover,
the Maastricht one passed first time. Wrt the former, read the actual
sequence of events here, and note again that this was the Irish
government's doing, not the EU's.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 11/07/2022 19:51, Indy Jess John wrote:
>
> Didn't they have three goes with Denmark before they got the answer they
> wanted?

Again, Danish government's doing, not the EU's.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 13:54:31 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am>
wrote:

>>> Have you tried multiplying £3 13s 11d by 17 on a calculator?
>>
>> No, but we used to do calculations of that type in school *without*
>> calculators. We used pencil and paper, and our own brains.
>
>I think that was the point. These things don't exist any more. Well,
>pencils and paper do, obviously, but not the other.

I've still got mine, and it still works (more or less).

Rod.

On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 15:26:16 +0100, Figaro <figaro@ddaiv.co.uk> wrote:

>On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 13:17:28 +0100, Indy Jess John
><bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:
>
>>The correct answer is £62 16s 7d
>>
>>Give yourself a pat on the back :-)
>>
>>Jim
>>
>
>Ok but it was a bit awkward!
>
>For the given example it can be done mentally or with paper and pencil
>£3 x17 = £51
>13s x17 =10x17 +3x17 =221s /20 £11 1s
>11p x 17=(1s - 1p) x17 =17s -17p = 15s 7p
>so adding it all up
>£62 16s 7p

I'm sure if we'd kept British money into the age of the electronic
calculator, the ability to do sums like this would be a standard
feature of them.

For those who needed it.

When I worked in telly, I recall seeing a catalogue entry for a
"timecode calculator", basically a calculator that could add and
subtract time intervals in hours, minutes, seconds and frames, and
could be set to any of the standard frame rates, 24, 25 or 30, with or
without "drop frame" (for American colour TV), but I never saw anybody
actually use one. All the production assistants seemed to work out
their timings either using pencil and paper, or in their heads.

I guess if you have to do something a certain way, and have to do it a
lot, you simply get used to it.

Rod.

On 12/07/2022 07:01, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> I'm sure if we'd kept British money into the age of the electronic
> calculator, the ability to do sums like this would be a standard
> feature of them.

Is "Are You Being Served" where they get an older person in the men's
section and he totals up long lists of £-s-d amounts in his head?

On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 21:23:51 +0100, Indy Jess John
<bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:

>On 06/07/2022 11:22, Martin wrote:
>
>> UK was never ruled from Brussels
>
>Technically correct but in practice it made no difference. There was
>legislation passed in John Major's time as PM which said (paraphrasing)
>where UK law and EU regulations differ, the EU ones take precedence.
>
>That is how a man selling bananas by the pound in full compliance with
>the UK's weights and measures act (which has never been repealed) was
>found guilty of not pricing by the kilogram as required by an EU Directive.
>
>He was ruled by Brussels, because of a UK law.

because it made sense and govt. agreed with it.
--

Martin in Zuid Holland

On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 23:09:06 +0100, Indy Jess John
<bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:

>On 10/07/2022 22:16, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 10/07/2022 21:23, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/07/2022 11:22, Martin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> UK was never ruled from Brussels
>>>
>>> Technically correct but in practice it made no difference.  There was
>>> legislation passed in John Major's time as PM which said
>>> (paraphrasing) where UK law and EU regulations differ, the EU ones
>>> take precedence.
>>
>> Exactly, he broke a *UK* law that by *DEMOCRATIC* choice of the *UK
>> PARLIAMENT* gave precedence to Brussels on this particular issue.
>>
>>> That is how a man selling bananas by the pound in full compliance with
>>> the UK's weights and measures act (which has never been repealed) was
>>> found guilty of not pricing by the kilogram as required by an EU
>>> Directive.
>>
>> Bloody good thing too  -  Imperial weights and measures and the old
>> non-decimal currency were con-men's charters because their mathematics,
>> being too complicated to do in one's head, very often required pen and
>> paper.  No-one I know misses either.  An old family friend found that
>> after decimalisation she became able to work out her 'divvies' whereas
>> previously it had been beyond her.  I use SI units for everything except
>> distances and road-speed, because all the sign-posts are still in miles,
>> so there would be no benefit in learning to use kilometres, but if they
>> were changed, so would I.
>>
>> The idea that we should all have to return to these archaic systems from
>> the unscientific dark ages because of subservience to the religion that
>> is Brexshit is clear proof of the irrationality of the whole goddamned
>> bag of lies, and that it is indeed, just a religion.
>>
>>> He was ruled by Brussels, because of a UK law.
>>
>> Exactly, he broke a *UK* law that by *DEMOCRATIC* choice of the *UK
>> PARLIAMENT* gave precedence to Brussels on this particular issue, and
>> was therefore rightly convicted.
>>
>Actually, he complied with UK law, because the Weights and Measures Act
>was still extant and it required prices to be quoted per pound. That was
>his defence, which the Supreme Court ruled was inadmissible.
>
>Also it wasn't a democratic choice. It was a condition of accepting the
>Maastricht Treaty.
>
>Before he signed the Maatricht Treaty John Major had promised the UK
>people that any loss of sovereignty would be put to them in a
>referendum. He signed the treaty which surrendered our right to govern
>ourselves unless we followed the EU expectations, and then when his
>party tried to keep him to his referendum promise he threatened them
>that they either endorsed the Treaty in Parliament or he would call an
>immediate General Election and warned them that a significant proportion
>of them would lose their seats if he did. His rebels gave in and
>approved the legislation including the clause that I referred to.
>
>No one would realistically call that a democratic choice. That was
>legislation passed under duress.

That's how democracy works in UK.

>
>After that, EU regulations were rubber stamped in Parliament without
>discussion, because that preserved the myth that Parliament was still
>important. In fact if none of the regulations had been put to
>Parliament, they would still have been operative.

So other than UK going part metric which other regulation is bad?
--

Martin in Zuid Holland

On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 17:05:42 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 11/07/2022 12:01, Indy Jess John wrote:
>> True democracy is when the people say what they want rather than
>> trusting politicians. They voted not to give Scotland independence, yet
>> there is a party in government in Scotland who refuse to accept this
>> ("Lets keep trying until we get the answer we want"); and the people
>> voted to leave the EU, which was followed by*years* of Parliamentary
>> resistance to that result and there is still a sizeable proportion of
>> MPs who want to reverse that decision. That's also the way UK
>> 'democracy' works, and it stinks.
>
>The EU like to work on that principle with referendums, if they get the
>"wrong" result they keep trying until they get the "right" result.

Can you give some examples? I've never voted in an EU referendum.
Please say you don't believe all the other lies Boris wrote in his weekly
articles in the DT.
--

Martin in Zuid Holland

On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 19:51:05 +0100, Indy Jess John
<bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:

>On 11/07/2022 17:25, Max Demian wrote:
>> On 11/07/2022 17:09, Java Jive wrote:
>>> On 11/07/2022 17:05, MB wrote:
>>>> On 11/07/2022 12:01, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> True democracy is when the people say what they want rather than
>>>>> trusting politicians. They voted not to give Scotland independence, yet
>>>>> there is a party in government in Scotland who refuse to accept this
>>>>> ("Lets keep trying until we get the answer we want"); and the people
>>>>> voted to leave the EU, which was followed by*years*  of Parliamentary
>>>>> resistance to that result and there is still a sizeable proportion of
>>>>> MPs who want to reverse that decision. That's also the way UK
>>>>> 'democracy' works, and it stinks.
>>>>
>>>> The EU like to work on that principle with referendums, if they get
>>>> the "wrong" result they keep trying until they get the "right" result.
>>>
>>> Yet another bigoted anti-EU claim made without a shred of evidence in
>>> support, so I presume, as on all the previous occasions, that you're
>>> just lying.
>>
>> From memory, they did that with Denmark's accession to the EU and RoI's
>> agreement of Maastricht. (I think they renamed the "agreement" in the
>> latter case.)
>>
>Didn't they have three goes with Denmark before they got the answer they
>wanted?

Wasn't it because the majority wasn't within the agreed limits? Having
referendums was the Dutch parliaments decision not the EU's. If UK had set
similar limits on the Brexit referendum, UK wouldn't have left the EU.
--

Martin in Zuid Holland

On 11/07/2022 20:35, Java Jive wrote:
> On 11/07/2022 19:49, Indy Jess John wrote:

>> Of course it has gone badly.  That was the Remainer intention all along.
>
> Paranoid conspiracy theory.
Or fact, depending on which side you are on.
>
>> By the way, ad hominem attacks are always a sign you have nothing
>> constructive to say.
>
> So why are you making them, as in your other-planet remarks about
> Remainers above?
>
Remainers are a class of people; "ad hominem" is a specific person, of
which you and not I have resorted to.

Jim

On 12/07/2022 09:01, Martin wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 23:09:06 +0100, Indy Jess John
> <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/07/2022 22:16, Java Jive wrote:
>>> On 10/07/2022 21:23, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 06/07/2022 11:22, Martin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> UK was never ruled from Brussels
>>>>
>>>> Technically correct but in practice it made no difference.  There was
>>>> legislation passed in John Major's time as PM which said
>>>> (paraphrasing) where UK law and EU regulations differ, the EU ones
>>>> take precedence.
>>>
>>> Exactly, he broke a *UK* law that by *DEMOCRATIC* choice of the *UK
>>> PARLIAMENT* gave precedence to Brussels on this particular issue.
>>>
>>>> That is how a man selling bananas by the pound in full compliance with
>>>> the UK's weights and measures act (which has never been repealed) was
>>>> found guilty of not pricing by the kilogram as required by an EU
>>>> Directive.
>>>
>>> Bloody good thing too  -  Imperial weights and measures and the old
>>> non-decimal currency were con-men's charters because their mathematics,
>>> being too complicated to do in one's head, very often required pen and
>>> paper.  No-one I know misses either.  An old family friend found that
>>> after decimalisation she became able to work out her 'divvies' whereas
>>> previously it had been beyond her.  I use SI units for everything except
>>> distances and road-speed, because all the sign-posts are still in miles,
>>> so there would be no benefit in learning to use kilometres, but if they
>>> were changed, so would I.
>>>
>>> The idea that we should all have to return to these archaic systems from
>>> the unscientific dark ages because of subservience to the religion that
>>> is Brexshit is clear proof of the irrationality of the whole goddamned
>>> bag of lies, and that it is indeed, just a religion.
>>>
>>>> He was ruled by Brussels, because of a UK law.
>>>
>>> Exactly, he broke a *UK* law that by *DEMOCRATIC* choice of the *UK
>>> PARLIAMENT* gave precedence to Brussels on this particular issue, and
>>> was therefore rightly convicted.
>>>
>> Actually, he complied with UK law, because the Weights and Measures Act
>> was still extant and it required prices to be quoted per pound. That was
>> his defence, which the Supreme Court ruled was inadmissible.
>>
>> Also it wasn't a democratic choice. It was a condition of accepting the
>> Maastricht Treaty.
>>
>> Before he signed the Maatricht Treaty John Major had promised the UK
>> people that any loss of sovereignty would be put to them in a
>> referendum. He signed the treaty which surrendered our right to govern
>> ourselves unless we followed the EU expectations, and then when his
>> party tried to keep him to his referendum promise he threatened them
>> that they either endorsed the Treaty in Parliament or he would call an
>> immediate General Election and warned them that a significant proportion
>> of them would lose their seats if he did. His rebels gave in and
>> approved the legislation including the clause that I referred to.
>>
>> No one would realistically call that a democratic choice. That was
>> legislation passed under duress.
>
> That's how democracy works in UK.
>
>>
>> After that, EU regulations were rubber stamped in Parliament without
>> discussion, because that preserved the myth that Parliament was still
>> important. In fact if none of the regulations had been put to
>> Parliament, they would still have been operative.
>
> So other than UK going part metric which other regulation is bad?

The one that came to mind first of all was the Working Time Directive.
It was proposed under "Employment" until the UK said they had a veto on
that category, so it was finally passed as a Health and Safety Directive
to which the UK had no veto.

Jim

On 12/07/2022 07:01, Roderick Stewart wrote:

> I'm sure if we'd kept British money into the age of the electronic
> calculator, the ability to do sums like this would be a standard
> feature of them.
>
> For those who needed it.

I was a programmer in the days of £SD and there were standard
subroutines to call for multiplying and dividing money.

Jim

Indy Jess John wrote:

> I was a programmer in the days of £SD

Back when we had a major textiles industry in Leicester, I worked on systems
that variously handled quantities in dozens and/or singles

> and there were standard subroutines to call
ditto, of course knowing which other systems used which units was important

On 12/07/2022 08:57, Martin wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 21:23:51 +0100, Indy Jess John
> <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 06/07/2022 11:22, Martin wrote:
>>
>>> UK was never ruled from Brussels
>>
>> Technically correct but in practice it made no difference. There was
>> legislation passed in John Major's time as PM which said (paraphrasing)
>> where UK law and EU regulations differ, the EU ones take precedence.
>>
>> That is how a man selling bananas by the pound in full compliance with
>> the UK's weights and measures act (which has never been repealed) was
>> found guilty of not pricing by the kilogram as required by an EU Directive.
>>
>> He was ruled by Brussels, because of a UK law.
>
> because it made sense and govt. agreed with it.

The UK Government had no choice. The mistake they made was mentioning
the veto during the proposal stage.

Jim

On 12/07/2022 09:41, Indy Jess John wrote:
> On 11/07/2022 20:35, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 11/07/2022 19:49, Indy Jess John wrote:
>
>>> Of course it has gone badly.  That was the Remainer intention all along.
>>
>> Paranoid conspiracy theory.
>
> Or fact, depending on which side you are on.

Facts need to be backed up with evidence, you have provided none, so,
until you do, it's just another paranoid conspiracy theory.

>>> By the way, ad hominem attacks are always a sign you have nothing
>>> constructive to say.
>>
>> So why are you making them, as in your other-planet remarks about
>> Remainers above?
>
> Remainers are a class of people; "ad hominem" is a specific person, of
> which you and not I have resorted to.

It's hypocrisy whatever else you choose to call it.

To blame Remainers for the failure of Brexshit is to blame the messenger
for the message, and is the surest sign yet that Brexshit is just
another irrational political religion.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Roderick Stewart wrote:

> Figaro wrote:
>
>> £62 16s 7p
>
> I'm sure if we'd kept British money into the age of the electronic
> calculator, the ability to do sums like this would be a standard
> feature of them.
>
> For those who needed it.
>
> When I worked in telly, I recall seeing a catalogue entry for a
> "timecode calculator", basically a calculator that could add and
> subtract time intervals in hours, minutes, seconds and frames, and
> could be set to any of the standard frame rates, 24, 25 or 30

My school calculator handled fractions and could use angles in degrees, minutes
and seconds, If decimalisation had never happened, we'd have calculators that
handled money internally in 1/960th of a pound