We used porridge oats in our dogs food for a while before changing his food to another brand, and since then we’ve not had to add it, and have had no problems. We just give him a dried food btw.

So many favourite cheeses…

Colston Basset Stilton
Licolnshire Poacher
Taw Valley Tasty (one of them cheddars with the crystals in it… but it’s not salt, it’s lactic acid)
Stinking Bishop

are all ones I have had recently, but so many others… so many…

Smee… so jumping red lights on a bike is legal? Brilliant… :D

Not sure there are that many in the UK yet, so you might be better off asking on the Turner forum on MTBR… but I’d not hesitate if my 5-Spot went pop and I had the cash.

Catch 22

Last year I was expecting it to be hell trying to find an NHS dentist, but like clubber above, it took no time to find one, and was booked in for a checkup within the week. Have a look on the NHS website there is a services search where you can search for dentists in your area, and that shows if they are taking on new NHS patients.

Also, my dentist told me that there was no need to come back in 6 months, a year would be fine, it was 6 months for my other half though…

You can just turn up, no need to be a member, although most folk I know who use them are members just so they are giving something for the upkeep etc…

Spongebob… okay, so just the fuel allowance, just wanted to check.

Oh, and that tax relief has nothing to do with whether you get a car allowance or not.

Aaaah, so you like stealing stuff off the internet instead… gotcha! :oD

So why exactly do you need a TV?

Or the mentality od those people who understand that the vast majority of the BBC’s output just wouldn’t exist if it was a commercial organisation… just take a look at ITV! Just the amazing quality of the natural history programs are worth the licence fee!

I don’t think I have ever had it go out, although it does get a little dimmer after about 3 hours or so, so I am guessing there isn’t much juice left in it by then…

For such a small unit, it really does do very well..

I must be missing out on something on all the other channels if they are at a quality far higher than the Beebs…

So just what is this high quality programming that I am missing?

I use it on my helmet in combination with a Lumi HID on the bars, and it’s not totally blasted out by the HID which is impressive for such a small beastie… although to be fair, it is a far tighter beam.

It’s perfectly good for riding offroad on it’s own too, although you probably wouldn’t want to be going very fast with it.

As a commuting light it’s fantastic too…

Spongebob… what tax relief can you get for buying and using your own car for work? I’m not aware that you can unless you are self employed…

The only tax relief I am aware of if you are employed and using your own car is on fuel payments if you get less than the Inland Revenue tax free limits.

surfer… if you get paid less than 40p a mile, the tax man doesn’t give you back the difference, he gives you tax relief on the difference.

So, if you only get paid 20p a mile and do 10,000 miles, you don’t get £2000 back from the tax man, you get the tax back that you would have paid on that amount… so at basic rate you’d get 20% back… or £400. Obviously nowhere near as good as getting the whole 40p, but better than a kick in the teeth.

sheldona… I’d say as PP points out, it’s easy enough to do on 40p a mile if you make a sensible car choice.

Three years? Blimey… not heard of anyone doing it for more than a year, in which case, you are probably screwed on the warranty.

To be fair to Halfords though, the 3 years part is your companies doing, and not part of what Halfords do, they just supply the bikes.

Also, a friend has just got a bike from Merlin through Halfords on the scheme, and the person on the phone who she spoke to warned her that the warranties might not be upheld by Merlin… although I thought this was more likely to be because Halfords make more money by selling their own bikes through the scheme…

Xan… you don’t own the bike though, your company does, you just pay to hire the bike from the company for the year. They are then completely within their rights to keep the bike and not sell it to you at the end of that year.

So, for the year that you hire the bike from the company, the company gets warranty from Halfords. After that period the company doesn’t care about warranty if they have sold the bike on to you, because as stated above the bike then becomes secondhand.

Granted, it’s a bit of a bugger when manufacturers warranties end up like this, but I would imagine that even through a Spesh distributor the same issue would apply as you are not the initial owner of the bike.

Aaaaah, so is this no dogs, horses, walkers etc in the same way that it is no bikes on footpaths?

:D

Alternatively, if you are just after route logging, rather than using a GPS to follow a set course, then using something like the Nokias Sportstracker which runs on their GPS enabled S60 phones (I use a Nokia 6210 Navigator) is ideal. You ride a route, it keeps track of where you have gone, and then you can upload it to the website, where you can then let other people see it. I believe, although I haven’t tried it, that it can even do this live…

There is also some OS mapping for the phones as well, but I can never remember the name of the software… but I am sure that someone on here will know it.

The only issue is battery life, but you can now get little recharger units that plug into most phones that will give them a couple of recharges and keep them going for longer.

Me too…

Bugger..

:wink:

Aaaah, but Smee, you don’t know which of the two children is that girl.

If what you and Rona/Andy are saying is correct, then can you please demonstrate by use of an experiment, that can be performed, using only the information given in the first question, and not using any assumed information.

The Sky+ interface is generally thought of as better, but the V+ box has an extra tuner, so you can record 2 things at once while watching something else.

On top of that, you get a pretty good on demand service with Virgin, which is not available on Sky, and it includes full access to the BBC iPlayer.

Andy… but it doesn’t leave a single unknown, you are just making that assumption.

The question put by mboy, gives you three unknowns, but that third one is irrelevant. The original difference, birth order, is still there even without the race issue. You could just as well do it where one child has ginger and one child has blonde.

If you actually do the experiment as GrahamS describes, which involves asking each family the question ‘Is at least one of your children a girl?’ then you get the 66% result as described.

If what you are saying is correct, that there is only a single unknown in the original question, then you can tell me which of the childern, older or younger, is definitely a girl.

So how long have you been hanging around refreshing waiting to post that then Drac? :wink:

I have read your posts, and just don’t agree with you.

It is the middle one that is not correct in this circumstance, and that’s the subtlety.

You have said, the probability of an unknown child being boy or girl is 50%.

This is true for a specific child.

But the question, as originally asked, does not allow you to specify either child as being the one you know the sex of. As soon as you tie that down you get the 50% answer, but you are unable to tie that down.

If you are correct, then you should be able to answer my pet question as being 50% without any more information, as it gives you exactly the same information as you have in this question.

You know these things:-

There are 2 children = there are 2 pets
One child is older than the other = one is a cat and one is a dog
At least one is a girl = at least one is a female

They are directly analogous to one another.

Why is order not important with the children? Why does age not allow us to differentiate the two children, as species does for the pets?

With your thinking, does older boy equal younger boy?

The problem is that you are reading too much information into the original question which isn’t there. You are trying to determine the sex of the unknown child, but you don’t know which child you know the sex of, just as you don’t know what species of pet the female is.

Okay, if, as you are saying, the chance is 50%, then that means the chances of a girl/girl are equal to that of boy/girl. Is that correct?

Apart from the fact that there are twice as many families with a boy and a girl as there are families with a girl and a girl…

So, in order to get the answer of 50%, you need to know more information than is in the original question.

I’ll point you again at my example of the cat and the dog. If you know at least one of the pets is female then you have:-

female cat/male dog
male cat/female dog
female cat/female dog

What are the odds that the other pet is a male?

How is this any different to the question with the children?

Rona/Andy… but that’s the subtlety and why the question is worded in such a way, and if you do any of the various experiments the results will bare that out.

The problem with your second approach is that you are using information that you do not have. You know there are 2 children, and you know that one of them is a girl, but you don’t know which of the two children that actually is. As soon as you specify one child as being one sex or the other you are using information that you don’t have.

For example, say you have a cat and a dog, then I ask you ‘Is at least one of your pets female?’ and you answer ‘Yes”.

Now, you can either have a female cat and a male dog, a female dog and a male cat, or you have a female cat and female dog, but you don’t know which of those three it could be, and they are all distinct choices.

This is the limit of the information that you know in the question above, it’s just that you assume that you know more.

As soon as you know the sex of one of the pets for certain, the sex of the other then becomes 50:50, and that is where the mistake lies, you just don’t know the sex of either child in the original puzzle, all you know that one of them is a girl. The girl could be child A, or it could be child B, or it could be both of them, but you just don’t know.

Look Smee, you have a friend… :D

By the way, you never did answer me about whether an older girl/younger boy is really the same as an older boy/younger girl…

Smee… it doesn’t matter what you say, I know that’s what you meant. You lost, and are just too proud to admit it.

Aaaah, so you are admitting you are wrong, but won’t change your mind anyway.

Excellent.

Get got the result chaps!

:D

Smee.. so you are saying that an older boy/younger girl is the same as an older girl/younger boy?

Smee.. if B/G is the same as G/B as you claim, and the chances of it occuring are not doubled, then you have either:-

B/B 25%
B/G or G/B 25%
G/G 25%

Which does not total 100%, or:-

B/B 33.3%
B/G or G/B 33.3%
G/G 33.3%

Which does equal 100%.

This is the logical extension of what you are arguing.

Okay then… take 3 families

Family A has an older boy and younger girl
Family B has an older girl and younger boy
Family C has two girls

If you pick a family at random, what are the chances that you will pick a family with a boy?

If you believe you can discount either family A or family B from this, as you seem to be doing in your examples above, can you give a reason for which family you would discard, and why that one and not the other.

Okay then, can you please explain why neither of those sets of probabilities are relevant?

Oooooh.. my Dad was one of the engineers who designed the Seawolf system, which I would imagine was a precursor to the Paams system used here.

I presume their main role would be in picket defence for the carriers.

I might have an old cable kicking around at home that I can pop in the post for you if that would be any help…

Otherwise, don’t Maplin do those connectors?

Smee… humour me here would you by answering a simple question.

Which one of the following sets of probabilities is correct for a woman having two children, taking into account that the sum of all probabilities must equal 100%:-

Boy/Boy 25%
Boy/Girl 50%
Girl/Girl 25%

or

Boy/Boy 33.3%
Boy/Girl 33.3%
Girl/Girl 33.3%

devs… sorry, I must be really thick or something, but are you really saying that the friction in the wheel bearings is enough to keep an aeroplane stationary when it’s throttled up to try and take off?

I’m with mike on this one too, there is definitely a redundant set of brackets in there…

To get to £100 inc VAT the ex-VAT price would be:-

100/1.15 = £86.96

So, a 13.04% reduction. (100 – 86.96 = 13.04)