On 25/09/2021 18.06, NY wrote:
> "Joerg Lorenz" <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote in message
> news:sikuut$bnb$2@dont-email.me...
>> Am 24.09.21 um 18:10 schrieb Alan Baker:
>>> On 2021-09-24 8:53 a.m., Java Jive wrote:
>>>> None of this is answer to the accusation of vendor lock-in which is the
>>>> salient point to which you were replying, so this is simply pro-Apple
>>>> bigotry, at the same level of useless irrelevance with the anti-EU
>>>> bigotry of others.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It was a direct answer to the explicit claim that:
>>>
>>> "It has been a long time since Apple introduced useful innovation"
>>>
>>> That claim is complete and utter bullshit.
>>
>> It is quite correct. Others have taken the lead long time ago.
>
> Also, Apple doesn't have a good record of their innovations becoming
> industry standards. They produce good products and set their own
> standards which may be better than the equivalents used by MS PCs and
> Android phones/tablets. But they charge a licence fee for non-Apple
> companies to use them, so people use a free non-Apple standard instead.
>
> Of course, Microsoft does this as well with standards such as NTFS. The
> reason that most digital still/video cameras and PVRs record/export to
> FAT filesystems is that FAT, FAT32 and exFAT are free standards, unlike
> NTFS where a manufacturer has to pay a licence fee to MS. I'm not sure
> how Linux manages to offer NTFS compatibility for free...

Because in some cases where Linux folk thread carefully, they do not
offer write support for NTFS, which you have to download from sources
external to the distributor. Similar thing happened with exfat. The
situation changed recently when M$ opened them up.

ntfs and exfat are not yet supported by the kernel, but by external
packages working in user space (fuse), which means they run slower than
a true kernel support. This should change soon.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 25/09/2021 18:31, Tweed wrote:
>
> https://www.etymonline.com/word/faucet
>
> faucet (n.)
> c. 1400, from Old French fausset (14c.) "breach, spigot, stopper, peg (of a
> barrel)," which is of unknown origin; perhaps diminutive of Latin faux,
> fauces "upper part of the throat, pharynx, gullet." Not in Watkins, but
> Barnhart, Gamillscheg, and others suggest the Old French word is from
> fausser "to damage, break into," from Late Latin falsare (see false).
>
> Spigot and faucet was the name of an old type of tap for a barrel or cask,
> consisting of a hollow, tapering tube, which was driven at the narrow end
> into a barrel, and a screw into the tube which regulated the flow of the
> liquid. Properly, it seems, the spigot was the tube, the faucet the screw,
> but the senses have merged or reversed over time. OED reports that faucet
> is now the common word in American English for the whole apparatus.

Yes, it seems my memory hasn't quite failed me yet.

> I’ve never heard faucet used in British English to refer to any form of
> tap.

Nor had I until I moved into this house. We're obviously not posh
enough, not even me. Some examples here, probably none of which I would
ever actually buy, for the reasons already given:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/b/Kitchen-Faucet/29508/bn_7023501717?mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=710-53481-19255-0&campid=5337052991&customid=&toolid=10001

However, I'm now puzzled how I came to believe the modern sort of single
lever mixer tap is called a 'faucet' because I went in search of the
instructions for mine, which were left in the house by the previous
occupants who installed the montrosity, and they called it
<whisper>kitchen tap</whisper>! I suppose I must have seen examples on
line pretentiously called 'faucet', and thought the pretentiousness was
a generally accepted name.

--

Fake news kills!

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

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 25/09/2021 18:31, Tweed wrote:
>>
>> https://www.etymonline.com/word/faucet
>>
>> faucet (n.)
>> c. 1400, from Old French fausset (14c.) "breach, spigot, stopper, peg (of a
>> barrel)," which is of unknown origin; perhaps diminutive of Latin faux,
>> fauces "upper part of the throat, pharynx, gullet." Not in Watkins, but
>> Barnhart, Gamillscheg, and others suggest the Old French word is from
>> fausser "to damage, break into," from Late Latin falsare (see false).
>>
>> Spigot and faucet was the name of an old type of tap for a barrel or cask,
>> consisting of a hollow, tapering tube, which was driven at the narrow end
>> into a barrel, and a screw into the tube which regulated the flow of the
>> liquid. Properly, it seems, the spigot was the tube, the faucet the screw,
>> but the senses have merged or reversed over time. OED reports that faucet
>> is now the common word in American English for the whole apparatus.
>
> Yes, it seems my memory hasn't quite failed me yet.
>
>> I’ve never heard faucet used in British English to refer to any form of
>> tap.
>
> Nor had I until I moved into this house. We're obviously not posh
> enough, not even me. Some examples here, probably none of which I would
> ever actually buy, for the reasons already given:
>
> https://www.ebay.co.uk/b/Kitchen-Faucet/29508/bn_7023501717?mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=710-53481-19255-0&campid=5337052991&customid=&toolid=10001
>
> However, I'm now puzzled how I came to believe the modern sort of single
> lever mixer tap is called a 'faucet' because I went in search of the
> instructions for mine, which were left in the house by the previous
> occupants who installed the montrosity, and they called it
> <whisper>kitchen tap</whisper>! I suppose I must have seen examples on
> line pretentiously called 'faucet', and thought the pretentiousness was
> a generally accepted name.
>

Isn’t that just eBay sellers stuffing their listings with keywords? I’d
imagine they use some sort of program to generate keywords, that also likes
to include American English. There’s lots of non native British English
speakers in the country that might have learnt American English, and even
the occasional American :)

It would make sense to make your listings appeal to all flavors (sic) of
English.

On 25/09/2021 20:56, Java Jive wrote:
>
> However, I'm now puzzled how I came to believe the modern sort of single
> lever mixer tap is called a 'faucet' because I went in search of the
> instructions for mine, which were left in the house by the previous
> occupants who installed the montrosity, and they called it
> <whisper>kitchen tap</whisper>!  I suppose I must have seen examples on
> line pretentiously called 'faucet', and thought the pretentiousness was
> a generally accepted name.

But now that I've read through the instructions, despite what it says on
the cover, throughout they do indeed refer to it as a 'faucet'.

--

Fake news kills!

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

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 25/09/2021 20:56, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> However, I'm now puzzled how I came to believe the modern sort of single
>> lever mixer tap is called a 'faucet' because I went in search of the
>> instructions for mine, which were left in the house by the previous
>> occupants who installed the montrosity, and they called it
>> <whisper>kitchen tap</whisper>!  I suppose I must have seen examples on
>> line pretentiously called 'faucet', and thought the pretentiousness was
>> a generally accepted name.
>
> But now that I've read through the instructions, despite what it says on
> the cover, throughout they do indeed refer to it as a 'faucet'.
>

UK made or overseas manufacture?

On 25/09/2021 21:46, Tweed wrote:
>
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> >> On 25/09/2021 20:56, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> However, I'm now puzzled how I came to believe the modern sort of single
>>> lever mixer tap is called a 'faucet' because I went in search of the
>>> instructions for mine, which were left in the house by the previous
>>> occupants who installed the montrosity, and they called it
>>> <whisper>kitchen tap</whisper>!  I suppose I must have seen examples on
>>> line pretentiously called 'faucet', and thought the pretentiousness was
>>> a generally accepted name.
>>
>> But now that I've read through the instructions, despite what it says on
>> the cover, throughout they do indeed refer to it as a 'faucet'.
>
> UK made or overseas manufacture?

Italiano: Venus Mix 300

--

Fake news kills!

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

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>> 'tap',
>>
>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>
> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!

D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.

> ISTR reading
> somewhere that 'faucet' is a French word for tap, but BTAIM, it's
> clearly French in origin, you can tell by the spelling and the
> pronunciation. I have an etymological dictionary somewhere, but it's
> packed away with most of my books, so this will have to do instead, and
> oh look, it is indeed from old French:
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=etymology+of+faucet&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
>
> "Where did the word faucet come from?
>
> From Middle English faucet, fawcett, borrowed from Old French fausset,
> of uncertain origin. Perhaps from Late Latin falsāre or from a
> diminutive of Latin faux, faucēs (“throat”)."

Yeah, I can google too. It *was* of french origin (maybe) not *is* a french
word like you asserted.

>>> but in the UK a 'faucet' means a thing with a single lever that
>>
>> I've never heard of a faucet here. It's an American word.
>
> I'm guessing that perhaps you haven't had your kitchen pretentiously
> redone recently to the latest fashion! I am indeed unlucky enough to
> have inherited a fuckset in mine.

I don't care what some designer wants to call it, it's still a tap.

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 25/09/2021 21:46, Tweed wrote:
>>
>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 25/09/2021 20:56, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> However, I'm now puzzled how I came to believe the modern sort of single
>>>> lever mixer tap is called a 'faucet' because I went in search of the
>>>> instructions for mine, which were left in the house by the previous
>>>> occupants who installed the montrosity, and they called it
>>>> <whisper>kitchen tap</whisper>!  I suppose I must have seen examples on
>>>> line pretentiously called 'faucet', and thought the pretentiousness was
>>>> a generally accepted name.
>>>
>>> But now that I've read through the instructions, despite what it says on
>>> the cover, throughout they do indeed refer to it as a 'faucet'.
>>
>> UK made or overseas manufacture?
>
> Italiano: Venus Mix 300

A-ha! Probably translated from the original Italian by an american or by
google translate. I've seen many Americanisms in english translations
abroad.

On 25/09/2021 23.45, Chris wrote:
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>>> 'tap',
>>>
>>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>>
>> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
>> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!
>
> D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.

Use DeepL instead,

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 09/25/2021 02:58 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 25/09/2021 23.45, Chris wrote:
>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>>>> 'tap',
>>>>
>>>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>>>
>>> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
>>> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!
>>
>> D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.
>
> Use DeepL instead,

BUT we don't call it faucet water, we call it tap water. Or in Texas
"branch water".

--
Cheers, Bev
Brian (Talking to crowd): You need to be independent minded.
Crowd: We are! We are!
Person in crowd: I'm not! -- Monty Python

On 09/25/2021 03:46 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 09/25/2021 02:58 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 25/09/2021 23.45, Chris wrote:
>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>>>>> 'tap',
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>>>>
>>>> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
>>>> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!
>>>
>>> D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.
>>
>> Use DeepL instead,
>
> BUT we don't call it faucet water, we call it tap water. Or in Texas
> "branch water".

And try to avoid buying modern faucets. The US now requires flow
restriction on ALL faucets, which means that it takes half a minute to
fill the coffeepot and several minutes to fill the sink if you still
wash dishes by hand. No idea how long it would take to fill a bathtub,
but I suspect you would use only hot water so it wouldn't be too cold by
the time you were ready to get in.

I can't imagine how anyone would run a non-shower faucet longer than
necessary to fill the container. No water is saved, but countless
months are wasted. If I have to choose between NO regulations and
regulations the way they're done now, I'd choose NO regulations.

Dave Barry used to make a joke about a vicious gang of Canadian toilet
smugglers. Perhaps they deal in faucets now. I wish I'd known before I
bought the goddam new faucet because I got tired of the old one leaking.

--
Cheers, Bev
Teamwork: A bunch of people running around doing what I tell them.

On Sat, 25 Sep 2021 15:53:40 -0700, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 09/25/2021 03:46 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 09/25/2021 02:58 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 25/09/2021 23.45, Chris wrote:
>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>>>>>> 'tap',
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>>>>>
>>>>> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
>>>>> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!
>>>>
>>>> D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.
>>>
>>> Use DeepL instead,
>>
>> BUT we don't call it faucet water, we call it tap water. Or in Texas
>> "branch water".
>
>And try to avoid buying modern faucets. The US now requires flow
>restriction on ALL faucets, which means that it takes half a minute to
>fill the coffeepot and several minutes to fill the sink if you still
>wash dishes by hand. No idea how long it would take to fill a bathtub,
>but I suspect you would use only hot water so it wouldn't be too cold by
>the time you were ready to get in.
>
>I can't imagine how anyone would run a non-shower faucet longer than
>necessary to fill the container. No water is saved, but countless
>months are wasted. If I have to choose between NO regulations and
>regulations the way they're done now, I'd choose NO regulations.
>
>Dave Barry used to make a joke about a vicious gang of Canadian toilet
>smugglers. Perhaps they deal in faucets now. I wish I'd known before I
>bought the goddam new faucet because I got tired of the old one leaking.

I'm not sure if you are serious about faucets, but if U.S. sold
faucets are like the ones here (I live in Thailand) you can unscrew
the bit on the end and remove the strainer like restrictor.

As proof positive, my wife complained and I did just as I explained so
now I'm a hero.... well until the next issue arises (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 09/25/2021 08:04 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Sep 2021 15:53:40 -0700, The Real Bev
> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On 09/25/2021 03:46 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 09/25/2021 02:58 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 25/09/2021 23.45, Chris wrote:
>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>>>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>>>>>>> 'tap',
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
>>>>>> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!
>>>>>
>>>>> D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.
>>>>
>>>> Use DeepL instead,
>>>
>>> BUT we don't call it faucet water, we call it tap water. Or in Texas
>>> "branch water".
>>
>>And try to avoid buying modern faucets. The US now requires flow
>>restriction on ALL faucets, which means that it takes half a minute to
>>fill the coffeepot and several minutes to fill the sink if you still
>>wash dishes by hand. No idea how long it would take to fill a bathtub,
>>but I suspect you would use only hot water so it wouldn't be too cold by
>>the time you were ready to get in.
>>
>>I can't imagine how anyone would run a non-shower faucet longer than
>>necessary to fill the container. No water is saved, but countless
>>months are wasted. If I have to choose between NO regulations and
>>regulations the way they're done now, I'd choose NO regulations.
>>
>>Dave Barry used to make a joke about a vicious gang of Canadian toilet
>>smugglers. Perhaps they deal in faucets now. I wish I'd known before I
>>bought the goddam new faucet because I got tired of the old one leaking.
>
> I'm not sure if you are serious about faucets, but if U.S. sold
> faucets are like the ones here (I live in Thailand) you can unscrew
> the bit on the end and remove the strainer like restrictor.

Yes, I'm serious. I removed not only the strainer on the end but the
entire spout. The restriction is either in the casting itself or in the
faucet cartridges, whatever they are.

> As proof positive, my wife complained and I did just as I explained so
> now I'm a hero.... well until the next issue arises (:-)

That was the first thing I did. It made no difference.

--
Cheers, Bev
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
"He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already
earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by
mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice."
-- Albert Einstein

On Sat, 25 Sep 2021 21:38:20 -0700, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 09/25/2021 08:04 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2021 15:53:40 -0700, The Real Bev
>> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 09/25/2021 03:46 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>> On 09/25/2021 02:58 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>> On 25/09/2021 23.45, Chris wrote:
>>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>>>>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>>>>>>>> 'tap',
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
>>>>>>> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.
>>>>>
>>>>> Use DeepL instead,
>>>>
>>>> BUT we don't call it faucet water, we call it tap water. Or in Texas
>>>> "branch water".
>>>
>>>And try to avoid buying modern faucets. The US now requires flow
>>>restriction on ALL faucets, which means that it takes half a minute to
>>>fill the coffeepot and several minutes to fill the sink if you still
>>>wash dishes by hand. No idea how long it would take to fill a bathtub,
>>>but I suspect you would use only hot water so it wouldn't be too cold by
>>>the time you were ready to get in.
>>>
>>>I can't imagine how anyone would run a non-shower faucet longer than
>>>necessary to fill the container. No water is saved, but countless
>>>months are wasted. If I have to choose between NO regulations and
>>>regulations the way they're done now, I'd choose NO regulations.
>>>
>>>Dave Barry used to make a joke about a vicious gang of Canadian toilet
>>>smugglers. Perhaps they deal in faucets now. I wish I'd known before I
>>>bought the goddam new faucet because I got tired of the old one leaking.
>>
>> I'm not sure if you are serious about faucets, but if U.S. sold
>> faucets are like the ones here (I live in Thailand) you can unscrew
>> the bit on the end and remove the strainer like restrictor.
>
>Yes, I'm serious. I removed not only the strainer on the end but the
>entire spout. The restriction is either in the casting itself or in the
>faucet cartridges, whatever they are.
>
>> As proof positive, my wife complained and I did just as I explained so
>> now I'm a hero.... well until the next issue arises (:-)
>
>That was the first thing I did. It made no difference.

I should have looked first (:-( I now read that the U.S. does indeed
mandate a flow rate of "WaterSense labeled bathroom sink faucets and
accessories that use a maximum of 1.5 gallons per minute".

And I do remember when I lived in Southern California someone telling
me that I wasn't to water my lawn (so I did it after dark).

"America the home of the free....")
--
Cheers,

John B.

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/25/2021 03:46 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 09/25/2021 02:58 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 25/09/2021 23.45, Chris wrote:
>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>>>>>> 'tap',
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>>>>>
>>>>> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
>>>>> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!
>>>>
>>>> D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.
>>>
>>> Use DeepL instead,
>>
>> BUT we don't call it faucet water, we call it tap water. Or in Texas
>> "branch water".
>
> And try to avoid buying modern faucets. The US now requires flow
> restriction on ALL faucets, which means that it takes half a minute to
> fill the coffeepot and several minutes to fill the sink if you still
> wash dishes by hand.

Use a dishwasher. It more energy and water efficient.

> No idea how long it would take to fill a bathtub,
> but I suspect you would use only hot water so it wouldn't be too cold by
> the time you were ready to get in.
>
> I can't imagine how anyone would run a non-shower faucet longer than
> necessary to fill the container. No water is saved, but countless
> months are wasted.

False. Lots of water is saved. It has no effect on baths or showers as they
don't have restricted taps. Only taps used for hand washing are needed. At
least that's the way in Europe.

> If I have to choose between NO regulations and
> regulations the way they're done now, I'd choose NO regulations.

It's" the American way " isn't it? How dare people infringe my wasteful
ways for the benefit of the planet?!

On 26/09/2021 05.04, John B. wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Sep 2021 15:53:40 -0700, The Real Bev
> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 09/25/2021 03:46 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 09/25/2021 02:58 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 25/09/2021 23.45, Chris wrote:
>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>>>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>>>>>>> 'tap',
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
>>>>>> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!
>>>>>
>>>>> D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.
>>>>
>>>> Use DeepL instead,
>>>
>>> BUT we don't call it faucet water, we call it tap water. Or in Texas
>>> "branch water".
>>
>> And try to avoid buying modern faucets. The US now requires flow
>> restriction on ALL faucets, which means that it takes half a minute to
>> fill the coffeepot and several minutes to fill the sink if you still
>> wash dishes by hand. No idea how long it would take to fill a bathtub,
>> but I suspect you would use only hot water so it wouldn't be too cold by
>> the time you were ready to get in.
>>
>> I can't imagine how anyone would run a non-shower faucet longer than
>> necessary to fill the container. No water is saved, but countless
>> months are wasted. If I have to choose between NO regulations and
>> regulations the way they're done now, I'd choose NO regulations.
>>
>> Dave Barry used to make a joke about a vicious gang of Canadian toilet
>> smugglers. Perhaps they deal in faucets now. I wish I'd known before I
>> bought the goddam new faucet because I got tired of the old one leaking.
>
> I'm not sure if you are serious about faucets, but if U.S. sold
> faucets are like the ones here (I live in Thailand) you can unscrew
> the bit on the end and remove the strainer like restrictor.
>
> As proof positive, my wife complained and I did just as I explained so
> now I'm a hero.... well until the next issue arises (:-)

Notice that the restrictor also reduces splashes so that the user
doesn't get wet :-p

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another
incorectly formatted USENET posting on Sun, 26 Sep 2021 15:28:56 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <siq3jo$dud$6@dont-email.me>.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another
incorectly formatted USENET posting on Sun, 26 Sep 2021 16:04:39 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <siq5mm$dud$8@dont-email.me>.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another
incorectly formatted USENET posting on Sun, 26 Sep 2021 16:12:11 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <siq64r$dud$9@dont-email.me>.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another
incorectly formatted USENET posting on Sun, 26 Sep 2021 16:35:57 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <siq7hc$jfa$1@dont-email.me>.

On 09/26/2021 01:10 AM, Chris wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 09/25/2021 03:46 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 09/25/2021 02:58 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 25/09/2021 23.45, Chris wrote:
>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>>>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>>>>>>> 'tap',
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
>>>>>> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!
>>>>>
>>>>> D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.
>>>>
>>>> Use DeepL instead,
>>>
>>> BUT we don't call it faucet water, we call it tap water. Or in Texas
>>> "branch water".
>>
>> And try to avoid buying modern faucets. The US now requires flow
>> restriction on ALL faucets, which means that it takes half a minute to
>> fill the coffeepot and several minutes to fill the sink if you still
>> wash dishes by hand.
>
> Use a dishwasher. It more energy and water efficient.

This assumes that there's enough room in my kitchen for one. Or in my
house. Or in my yard. Or that I actually want one. How much additional
energy is used to create and run the dishwasher? More than what I'm
doing now. LOTS more.

>> No idea how long it would take to fill a bathtub,
>> but I suspect you would use only hot water so it wouldn't be too cold by
>> the time you were ready to get in.
>>
>> I can't imagine how anyone would run a non-shower faucet longer than
>> necessary to fill the container. No water is saved, but countless
>> months are wasted.
>
> False. Lots of water is saved. It has no effect on baths or showers as they
> don't have restricted taps. Only taps used for hand washing are needed. At
> least that's the way in Europe.

Shower heads were the first thing affected, or maybe toilets. Sharper
Image sold some really nice ones that increased the water pressure while
decreasing the water quantity. Son moved out of that house and left the
shower heads. I don't think they're available any more. The flow
restrictors on the showers at the gym just cut down the water flow to a
dribble.

>> If I have to choose between NO regulations and
>> regulations the way they're done now, I'd choose NO regulations.
>
> It's" the American way " isn't it? How dare people infringe my wasteful
> ways for the benefit of the planet?!

I'm not wasteful. The City keeps track and congratulates me every month
for using less water than my most efficient neighbors. It was always
that way.

All my life I have avoided wasting anything. I'm within my rights to be
pissed because this is just more virtue-signaling. In Kalifornia less
than 10% of the water is used by cities. The remaining 90% is split
fairly evenly between agriculture and "the environment" -- which means
it flows directly into the ocean without being used by anyone but Delta
Smelt and other aquatic entities. Yeah, the farmers are pissed. So am I.

The water we city folk save by these flow restrictors isn't even NOISE.

--
Cheers, Bev
"Rats cry when they hear about my life." -- Dilbert

On 09/26/2021 01:57 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 26/09/2021 05.04, John B. wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2021 15:53:40 -0700, The Real Bev
>> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/25/2021 03:46 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>> On 09/25/2021 02:58 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>> On 25/09/2021 23.45, Chris wrote:
>>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 25/09/2021 18:01, Chris wrote:
>>>>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - in case you are not aware, 'faucet' is merely the French word for
>>>>>>>>> 'tap',
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nope. The French word for tap is "robinet".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is certainly true, but if you put 'robinet' into Google Translate,
>>>>>>> it gives 'faucet' as the English equivalent, not tap!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> D'uh! Google is american so they don't know what a tap is.
>>>>>
>>>>> Use DeepL instead,
>>>>
>>>> BUT we don't call it faucet water, we call it tap water. Or in Texas
>>>> "branch water".
>>>
>>> And try to avoid buying modern faucets. The US now requires flow
>>> restriction on ALL faucets, which means that it takes half a minute to
>>> fill the coffeepot and several minutes to fill the sink if you still
>>> wash dishes by hand. No idea how long it would take to fill a bathtub,
>>> but I suspect you would use only hot water so it wouldn't be too cold by
>>> the time you were ready to get in.
>>>
>>> I can't imagine how anyone would run a non-shower faucet longer than
>>> necessary to fill the container. No water is saved, but countless
>>> months are wasted. If I have to choose between NO regulations and
>>> regulations the way they're done now, I'd choose NO regulations.
>>>
>>> Dave Barry used to make a joke about a vicious gang of Canadian toilet
>>> smugglers. Perhaps they deal in faucets now. I wish I'd known before I
>>> bought the goddam new faucet because I got tired of the old one leaking.
>>
>> I'm not sure if you are serious about faucets, but if U.S. sold
>> faucets are like the ones here (I live in Thailand) you can unscrew
>> the bit on the end and remove the strainer like restrictor.

As I mentioned before, doing that did NOTHING to increase the flow rate.

>> As proof positive, my wife complained and I did just as I explained so
>> now I'm a hero.... well until the next issue arises (:-)
>
> Notice that the restrictor also reduces splashes so that the user
> doesn't get wet :-p

No that's the aerator which is in addition to the restrictor and which
were available long before the restriction regulations were promulgated.
I hate that too. It makes rinsing the hand-washed dishes difficult,
especially the silverware.

--
Cheers, Bev
"Rats cry when they hear about my life." -- Dilbert

On 09/26/2021 08:26 AM, AJL wrote:
> On 9/25/2021 11:26 PM, John B. wrote:
>
>> I now read that the U.S. does indeed mandate a flow rate of
>> "WaterSense labeled bathroom sink faucets and accessories that use a
>> maximum of 1.5 gallons per minute".
>
> Probably because too many Americans were leaving the water run while
> they were brushing their teeth.
>
>> And I do remember when I lived in Southern California someone
>> telling me that I wasn't to water my lawn (so I did it after dark).

Twice a week in summer before 9am or after 6pm. Once a week in winter.
Exception for hand watering with hoses with shutoff valves in the
handle. That's incredibly stupid because that cuts the water flow in
half. I just walk to the faucet, which is at most 20 feet away and turn
it off. Come get me, coppers!

> I have a rock yard. Very easy on water.

Increases the need for AC in summer.

>> "America the home of the free...."
>
> Yup. I freely modified my low water use toilets so that all the shit
> actually goes down on the first try, thus SAVING water (1 flush instead
> of 2)... ;)

The first ones needed multiple flushes. By the time we replaced our
ancient water-guzzler they had figured out how to make them work
properly. Now if they could just figure out a way to keep them from
silting up where you can't reach with a brush...

--
Cheers, Bev
"Rats cry when they hear about my life." -- Dilbert

On 09/26/2021 08:56 AM, Chris wrote:
> John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote:
>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Use a dishwasher. It more energy and water efficient.
>>
>> How can a dishwasher be more "energy efficient" than handwashing, dim
>> bulb?
>
> Because it is. Dishwashers use much less water and therefore less energy
> for heating the water. Also in the UK, for example, domestic hot water is
> mainly heated via a gas boiler so the carbon impact is far worse than an
> electric powered dishwasher.
>
> You do need to fill it up for best efficiencies, obviously.

In my house, that may take a week. By this time stuff has dried on the
dishes and can't be removed. My mom had one, but except for holiday
dinners she just washed her dishes by hand and used the dishwasher as a
drainer. If you have to rinse the dishes before putting them in the
dishwasher that kind of cancels out the water saving while increasing
electricity usage.

--
Cheers, Bev
"Rats cry when they hear about my life." -- Dilbert

John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote:

> 100% pure unadulterated troll...

Indeed. [followup set]

--
fold, spindle, mutilate.