54 pointsby itvision2 hours ago15 comments
  • JKCalhoun43 minutes ago
    "Back when I was a Catholic-school kid in northern Wisconsin, my school lessons briefly focused on the metric system. This was in the late 1970s."

    Man, the progressive school (Comanche Elementary in Overland Park, Kansas!) must have had a huge impact on my life. In addition to open classrooms (I was in Unit 5, not 4th Grade), team teaching, a focus on experimental science, a circular layout to the school with a sunken (architecturally) library in the center…

    Yeah, we went over the Metric System that whole year. I can still sing the "Metric Family" song from the film on metric units ("Kilo", "Milli", etc.). And to my young and impressionable mind, the U.S. was joining the rest of the "Free World" in a kind of Star-Trek-like casting aside of the old things that divided us—joining each other with a focus on progress, science, space…

    President Carter came along around the same time or shortly after. And I have a photo of a family road trip to South Dakota, Montana: the sign that indicates the altitude of a particular mountain pass has both feet and meters. I Google-mapped the same location recently and of course it's no longer in meters.

    I feel like in my elementary school days (the 1970's) the U.S. was on the cusp of a future of optimism—no doubt buoyed by having put astronauts on the Moon, but I was wildly on board for it.

    But then some kind of shit seemingly started to poison the country. I don't feel we have ever returned to that level of national optimism. Perhaps 1976, the Bicentennial, was the end of it. (Recently watching the film "Nashville" brought me back a bit of the vibe of the times.)

    I've been missing it my entire life since.

    • master_crab19 minutes ago
      It was there again in the 90s after the wall fell. Fukuyama was boldly proclaiming the “end of history.” Newt started to kick at the edges with his combative policies but the inertia continued until the dotcom crash and 9/11 came along, and fully ended with the Great Recession.*

      * (From my viewpoint as a millennial. Gen Z might think the golden years were during Obama, or just pre-COVID. To some extent every generation has a point in time that they see with rose tinted lenses.)

    • ericmay33 minutes ago
      > Yeah, we went over the Metric System that whole year. I can still sing the "Metric Family" song from the film on metric units ("Kilo", "Milli", etc.). And to my young an impressionable mind, the U.S. was joining the rest of the world "Free World" in a kind of Star-Trek-like casting aside of the old things that divided us—joining each other with a focus on progress, science, space…

      I’ve always found this peculiar because at times I have felt the same, but reflecting over the years and I guess as my mind settling on lived experience and opinions I’ve come to appreciate the Imperial system far more precisely because of its absurdities but also because of its history and usefulness without instrument.

      As someone who, well, finds say Renaissance or Impressionist art to so far be the peak of human artistry, I find the imperial system fits in better with that warmth of humanity in contrast to Frank Lloyd Wright, Banksy, minimalism, and the cold calculation of the more “scientific” metric system.

      Underneath that all is also this view that the United States at least needs to “join the world” and adopt Metric, and soccer, and such and I find myself increasingly rejecting both and other similar notions in favor of cultural uniqueness and fun over conformity.

      I hope we never change sustems, and I don’t think we will anytime soon. If we do, however, we should not switch to Celsius because the useful scale of Fahrenheit is far superior 0-100 versus 0-32. Celsius isn’t very Metric-y.

      • shoxidizer16 minutes ago
        Frank Llyod Wright lacking warmth and humanity? Never been to Falling Water?
  • threemuxan hour ago
    I'd part with cups and teaspoons/tablespoons and the like, but you'll pry inches/feet/yards and fahrenheit from my cold, dead hands. They're both more convenient for daily use. I think I'd prefer to keep miles as well but I don't have a good reason for that one.

    Fahrenheit has more precision without using decimals for the thing 99% of people are using temperature measurements for: air temp. Where I live, we generally experience 5 degrees F - 100 degrees F at different points of the year. That's 95 degrees of precision with no decimal. In C, that's -15 to 37.8, a mere 52.8 degrees. The difference between 75 (usually a beautiful day) and 85 (hot) is 23.8C to 29.4C. Everything packed into this tight range.

    Inches/feet being base 12 divides better into thirds and fourths, which is very useful in construction.

    For science, sure, I'll use metric.

    • eddyga minute ago
      Fahrenheit forever!

          0°C.................100°C
          Cold                 Dead
      
          0°F.................100°F
          Really Cold    Really Hot
    • Kim_Bruning33 minutes ago
      An eyeballed yard is roughly the same as an eyeballed meter. An eyeballed foot is 1/3 of that. You can stick 4 inches in 10 cm roughly.

      And I just poke my nose out the window and look outside to see what the temperature is

        Freezing.... ~30°F.... ~0°C
      
        Need coat... ~50°F... ~10°C
      
        T-shirt..... ~70°F... ~20°C
      
        Melting..... ~90°F... ~30°C
      
      Rules of thumb can be learned either direction!

      ps HN tables are not really a thing, are they?

      pps Suspiciously many experiments are conducted at 293K

    • flohofwoe36 minutes ago
      > They're both more convenient for daily use.

      That's really just because you're used to it. The rest is rationalization...

      OTH of course the rest of the world can hardly complain since we didn't switch time or (angle-)degrees to decimal either ;)

      • etiennebausson14 minutes ago
        Not switching to metric for time is reasonable, because there are already two existing 'natural' units for time (the day and the year), and they don't align on each other in metric (a year of exactly 1000 days would be so much easier, but we'll have to deal with reality as it is... or accelerate the rotation speed of the planet I suppose).

        So long as we live on earth, metric time won't make much sense.

    • modo_mario38 minutes ago
      >Everything packed into this tight range.

      AS someone that grew up with metric that feels fairly natural and not tight at all?

      >Inches/feet being base 12 divides better into thirds and fourths, which is very useful in construction.

      I used ruler tapes with both metric and imperial on either side and i always wondered how one could use the inches since they're so big and didn't always have the same minute subdivisions. Also doing my math in decimals seemed easier than calculating with quarter or 1/8th inches or smaller.

      >For science, sure, I'll use metric.

      Surely it would feel more natural to use the same for everything and all measurements.

      I want to know how much rainwater my IBC roughly holds. I take out my measuring tape real quick. I'm not even sure how I'd get started in imperial without some strong intuition build up over years?

      • svara27 minutes ago
        > (...) grew up with (...) feels fairly natural (...)

        Really all there is to that discussion.

        • modo_mario3 minutes ago
          Mostly yeah at which point the only relevant arguments are being able to tie in with the rest of the world and being able to easily tie measurements togheter/do math.
      • threemux27 minutes ago
        I mean it's mathematically a tighter range. I think part of this comes down to the more mild and less variable European climate. There is just less emphasis on air temperature so you don't see the drawbacks.

        Your tape measure didn't have 1/3, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, and 1/32 subdivisions? Sounds like a bad tape measure (or really just one where US Customary was an afterthought).

        As for science, well, most people don't do it. Those that do can use different things in different contexts, it's not that hard.

        • modo_mario13 minutes ago
          >Your tape measure didn't have 1/3, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, and 1/32 subdivisions?

          I think one of em did and the other didn't. Either way it seems far more difficult to do some math with.

    • jlongman42 minutes ago
      That’s funny because when I work with Fahrenheit I just work with 5°F ranges to compensate for the approximate mental math required. Eg very quick mentally, 100°F = 37.778 °C (thanks autocorrect) = (100-32)/2 = 34.

      But if it was closer to freezing say 42°F =5.556 °C (again) so 5°C. So arbitrarily we could say 57°F was 12°C =53.6 °F actually.

      But a true Canuck knows knowing the temp is barely half the battle, what’s the wind speed and humidity? 29°C can be a lovely day if it’s dry or completely unbearable if it’s humid.

      We hardly ever use decimals for weather-related measurements, the other factors above being more relevant.

      Contrast that with measurements where I would say if you need to know a precise one you should be using decimal; ie what do you do if it doesn’t precisely third or fourth? If you’re talking about tool sizes then any system works as long as your froodle matches the grommlet.

    • jeppester24 minutes ago
      I like this!

      I wonder if there's a place on the internet where I can find more of this sort of seemingly strong and well-thought out arguments for something that is so clearly subjective (if not just inferior).

    • gonzalohm31 minutes ago
      Interesting. As an European living in the US. The only US units that I find useful are cups, teaspoons and tablespoons. And that's only for cooking. It's way faster to measure volume than weight (although less accurate)
    • Tor344 minutes ago
      What's the problem with decimals? They're all numbers. -4.5 degrees C is fine, isn't it? (The actual temperature right here right now). Where's the problem?
      • gonzalohm34 minutes ago
        You don't even need decimals. 45x10^-1. There, fixed
  • cjs_ac2 hours ago
    > U.S. customary (the more accurate name for what’s sometimes the called the British Imperial system)

    For those wondering why there is this distinction, the British Imperial units were created by the Weights and Measures Act 1824; US customary units follow the Winchester Standard of 1588.

    • pjc502 hours ago
      And in a few places they're different (US measuring "cup" vs UK, US gallon, etc)

      edit: ref https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zfnjb7h

      • beardyw2 hours ago
        UK doesn't use cups in recipes and fuel is dispensed in litres.

        Road signs are still in miles.

        • arethuzaan hour ago
          I'll drive 80 miles to walk 25 km to climb mountains because they are over 3000ft high (Munros) even though I think about the heights on the mountains in metres!
        • hellzbellz12310 minutes ago
          The standard cup is not the same size between us and uk Sumthin sumthin breakfast cup
        • ljfan hour ago
          It has been a long time since fuel was sold here in the UK in gallons, but most cars still are spoken of in terms of MPG (miles driven per gallon of fuel). There are steps to move this to L per 100km - but most people here still use MPG.

          We also use Pints in pubs, which are a different size to US pints.

          • GJiman hour ago
            > We also use Pints in pubs

            And so we should.

            A British pint is 568 ml. We will switch to metric 500 ml 'half-litre' beers over my dead body.

            All other imperial measurements can bugger off to the history books where they rightly belong.

          • veltasan hour ago
            It's worth pointing out the convenient imperial units are the ones that are hardest to get rid of. The "pints" in pubs is because a pint is about how much a drink should be, in fact I've often found drinking 500ml to be just slightly too little to drink, probably because I'm used to the pint, but "1 unit" is also just a lot easier to keep than "500 units" or "50 units".
            • ljf26 minutes ago
              I would have agreed with you for a long time (especially when I was very aware of how many pints I could drink and still work well the next day), but since homebrewing and having my own beer taps, I now drink any amount I want. I have a few half pint jugs I use, but often I'll pour myself a drink that would be less than this, as that is what I actually fancy drinking at that time.

              That said, I exclusively drink pints in pubs.

          • beardywan hour ago
            Engines have been in litres since forever it feels.
            • bluGillan hour ago
              Everywhere. All the car companies in the us switched to metric in the 1980s. You find some inch stuff once ina while - but only when the part hasn't been changed in the last 40 years.
      • ch_123an hour ago
        As someone who generally uses metric units, but grew up around English Imperial units - if an American says that a person weighs a certain number of pounds, I need to convert to stone and pounds in my head in order to get a meaningful mental model of how much that person weighs.
  • cupofjoakim2 hours ago
    The US being stuck in imperial is such a meme nowadays with "freedum units" and the like. It's yet another odd thing that makes it easy for the rest of the world to laugh at the US. In these isolationist times I doubt this will change soon though, but it'd definitely help international collaboration.
    • yurishimoan hour ago
      Everyone who wants to collaborate internationally is already doing it. Science in the US is entirely metric. Construction and domestic measurements are the two biggest holdouts and honestly they’re both negligible. Given the proliferation of global manufacturing, most businesses are converting at the end before retail for US customers.

      If the government was competent, they could rip off the bandaid and everyone would adapt within a year or two, but we need to wait at least 3 years for that to even begin to become a possibility again.

      • t-3an hour ago
        Honestly, I don't think anyone would raise much of a fuss over changing distance measurements to metric. Both centimeters and inches are easy enough to eyeball or rule-of-thumb, meters and yards are basically the same, and larger units are only relevant for speed limits and travel planning. Metric lacks a good "foot", but I guess people would get used to eyeballing things in ~50cm increments instead.

        Weights are even easier as pretty much everyone uses grams as the smallest daily unit and most people can convert to and from metric on the fly for ounces, lbs, kgs. Liters aren't uncommon, and ml<->gram equivalence for water is well-known. Traditional kitchen volumes probably wouldn't be displaced because metric has no answer for those in first place.

        Temperature is where metric will fail to gain adoption because Celsius totally sucks unless your daily life consists only of boiling or freezing water at sea level. No advantages over Fahrenheit except maybe arguably for science, because it's Kelvin with an offset.

        • shoxidizer18 minutes ago
          > Metric lacks a good "foot", but I guess people would get used to eyeballing things in ~50cm increments instead.

          Perhaps as a compromise we could adopt the meter but divide it by halves, quarters, and so on. Binary fractions are so much more universal than arbitrary base ten ;)

      • mgoetzkean hour ago
        The fact that canadian lumber companies seem to be switching their machinery to metric is funny though. https://woodcentral.com.au/canadas-sawmills-weigh-metric-swi...
      • neutronicusan hour ago
        Construction is negligible?

        I guess you imagine we’ll all be calling half inch pipe twelve seven after this year adjustment period?

        I guess people do it with bullet calibers.

        • criddell30 minutes ago
          I believe 1/2" pipe is exactly the same as DN15 pipe. 1/2" and 15mm are both just nominal sizes. Calipers will only help you if you happen to know the pipe schedule.
        • bluGillan hour ago
          There is nothing half inch in a half inch pipe. One inch emt is not one inch, it is 27mm outside diameter (for some reason I know that one)
        • strkenan hour ago
          You might eventually end up calling 15mm pipe half-inch, depending on where the cheapest pipe can be sourced from.
      • kevin_thibedeauan hour ago
        The US has gone almost fully metric on plywood thickness due to globalization.
      • FridayoLearyan hour ago
        They got rid of the penny. Just suggest that the Imperial system is some leftist conspiracy and they'll have moved over by the end of the month.
    • deadbabean hour ago
      Most likely the current administration will pass executive orders banning the use of metric system, and then force other countries to switch to imperial or face heavy tariffs.
  • Kim_Bruning38 minutes ago
    An argument can be made that we should blame Pirates of the Carribean for the fact that the USA is not metric. O:-)

    https://www.nist.gov/blogs/taking-measure/pirates-caribbean-...

  • bryanrasmussen25 minutes ago
    I read once that all the educational materials produced to help people move from the old system to metric would cover 3 football fields and weigh more than 28 elephants, so it's nice to see it starting to have some effect.
  • alkonautan hour ago
    Having converted science, manufacturing etc, what's the first (or next) true consumer facing thing that could change?
    • mschildan hour ago
      Grocery sizes. In fact, a lot of them already have it on the items. Typically because a lot of products are also sold in Canada so they put the ml measurement next to the gallons.
      • alkonaut5 minutes ago
        Yeah is fl.oz on consumer containers _really_ seen as a volume measurement, i.e. thought of in terms of conversion "How many of these to a gallon", "what does a 6-pack weigh" and so on?

        Or are they more like t-shirt sizes "I know I want a 16oz can to drink and I know how big they are"?

    • sevensoran hour ago
      > manufacturing

      This is sadly far from the truth. Manufacturing is nowhere near metric conversion. Horsepower, foot-pounds, and my all time least favorite unit, the mil, are everywhere. And relatedly, manufacturing execution systems that use localtime internally cause all manner of hilarity twice a year. It’s like we’re just deliberately trying to be bad at measuring things.

      • ghaff32 minutes ago
        Force and mass is what always drove me crazy in engineering school. I assume that courses in the US have largely given up trying to pay some lip service to common older units but sorting out pounds-mass, pounds-force, and slugs? Pretty sure I couldn't do it today.
  • hk1337an hour ago
    Seems like the U.S. uses metric for most of the important areas and just lets everyone continue to use imperial, whatever they want everywhere else.
  • sarchertechan hour ago
    The problem is that Fahrenheit is a bit more convenient for describing the weather. Inches and feet are a bit more convenient for measuring human scale things and for being easily divisible by more numbers. And we’re used to the rest of it.

    Unless someone comes along and forces it on you, for the average person, there’s not enough incentive to switch.

    • jventuraan hour ago
      As someone born and living in a country that uses the metric system, I do not understand a bit of what inches and feets mean. Tell me something has 10-15 cm, and I know what it means. I measure 173cm, I know what one meter is about. 5'10? What the hell is that?! 5 feet and 10 inches? Some people have small feet, some have larger. And what is an "inch"? :)

      Oh, and fahrenheit, what the hell it means? 0ºC means ice, 100ºC means boiling water, 40º feels summer around here..

      I guess I'm saying that you understand the values of the imperial system because you're used to them, as I'm used to values in the metric system..

      • sarchertech43 minutes ago
        That’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying that a system where the majority of air temperatures in the vast majority of the country fall between 0 and 100 is slightly more convenient than one in which they fall between -17 and 37. 0 is really cold it doesn’t frequently get colder than that in most of the country. 100 is really hot, in most places it doesn’t get hotter than that.

        Feet are slightly more convent for declining human sized things because meters are just a little too big to describe human height and centimeters are a bit you

        If you were designing a system to describe humans with no other consideration you’d probably pick one where 10 units was the average human height. And feet is closer to that than meters. Also you can divide 12 by 6 and 3.

        I’m not saying that customary is superior just that it does has certain advantages.

        • mcntsh34 minutes ago
          You're just saying this because you're American and accustomed to it.

          To you, a 0-100 scale makes sense but to me it doesn't because 0f (-17c) is way rarer of a temp than 100f (38c).

          Anyway, from the metric perspective, most people look at it like... 0 is coat and boots weather, + 10 degrees is jacket weather, + 10 degrees is t-shirt weather, and + 10 degrees is hot. IMO, using "freezing" as the reference kinda makes sense...

          • amelius22 minutes ago
            1 foot is the distance light travels in one nanosecond.

            And 1/10 of an inch is a very common distance in electronics (PCBs)

    • plagunaan hour ago
      "Fahrenheit is a bit more convenient for describing the weather" - you might need to show us an example here that is not biased. Because to me, Celsius is a bit more convenient for describing the weather.
      • sarchertechan hour ago
        On the Fahrenheit scale, the majority of daily temperatures in the vast majority of the US fall between 0 and 100, which is -17 and 37 Celsius, and it’s more granular without introducing a decimal point.
        • vinc20 minutes ago
          I enjoyed reading this exchange, it's really a matter of perspective.

          For someone like me living in a country with the metric system there's no issues with negative values for the temperature. It just mean it's below freezing, which is cold, the more below freezing it is, the colder it is. And inversely the more above freezing it is, the hotter it is. For me 20C feels good, 30C is too hot, 40C is at the point where I can't work anymore, and anything above that doesn't exist around here. 100C is where water is boiling at sea level. Easy.

          Another thing that's interesting to me is that going from 300m to 0.3km is automatic, it maps to exactly the same concept to me in my mind, I don't feel like I'm doing any conversion at all and one is not harder to use than the other.

        • ivan_gammel34 minutes ago
          In metric world nobody cares about decimal points in temperature outside. Measuring precision is not that good because of wind, humidity, exposure to sun etc. We just don’t need that granularity, so it is really hard to understand why would you need that. Is there really any difference between 56°F and 57°F that you can feel and want to measure?

          And choice of 0/100 for weather is absolutely baseless. You do have below-zero days and in some places it can be over 100. With Celsius you know when it’s going to be ice on the roads and when rain becomes snow.

      • bluGillan hour ago
        It is what you are used to for both of you. you could make your own measurement system and it would work fine once you get used to it - until you need to communicate with someone else who isn't used to it.
        • ghaffan hour ago
          A big part of it is certainly what you're used to.

          The other part, which I'm sympathetic to, is that for human scale everyday things, Fahrenheit 0 degrees lines up with really darned cold, 100 degrees with really hot outside of an oven, and the degree size is about twice as granular as Celsius.

          And while Celsius degree size is indeed widely used in engineering calculations, you're often using Kelvin as the absolute temperature scale. (Which does use Celsius degree increments of course.)

          • bryanlarsen11 minutes ago
            > and the degree size is about twice as granular as Celsius.

            And then they'll argue that the inch is more convenient than the centimeter because it's twice as large.

            That's backwards. Fractions of an inch are in far more common usage than fractions of a centigrade.

          • graemep9 minutes ago
            0 lines up with freezing point is very intuitive.
      • bryanlarsenan hour ago
        Not as laughable as "metric is more convenient for human scale things". "Human scale things" includes fractions of an inch and fractions of a mile, which are horrible in customary units, and includes both the foot and yard which are used confusingly interchangeably. Metric is far superior for human scale measurements.

        And that's only length. It gets worse outside of length. Like WTF is an ounce?

    • MarkusWandelan hour ago
      Oddly enough as a person born in a metric country, now living in Canada which is metric, and always educated in metric, I agree with you on the feet and inches. "A couple of inches" doesn't imply nearly the precision that "5 centimeters" (using the US spelling on purpose) implies. Similarly my own height of 5'10 is much more "human scale" than the 178cm that it says on my passport.

      Not for engineering though!!! Being able to add 1/64 and 5/16 and 17/32 etc. in your head without stumbling is a skill that I did not acquire.

      Don't agree on the Fahrenheit though and for the same reason! Degrees are just the right scale, and besides, anchored at freezing (0) and typical boiling (100) points. But that's just habits. Probably if I'd grown up with Fahrenheit, I'd prefer it too. And besides the oven defaulted to Fahrenheit and we never changed it. 350F...

      • bluebarbet25 minutes ago
        And I would come the opposite conclusion to you.

        On Fahrenheit, the Americans are surely right. For describing the weather, a system where the usual range is 30-100 is clearly more useful than one where it's 0-37, because you can say "high 70s" instead of the weirdly specific "about 27", and "low 40s" instead of the awkward "around 5 to 7".

        I say this as a European who has never used Fahrenheit.

  • prmoustachean hour ago
    funny related video from Loic Suberville.

    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/XiEM57ifX54

  • rob742 hours ago
    Oh, he means that companies are adopting metric internally. If there would have been significant progress in adoption of the metric system in any public-facing field lately, Trump would have surely railed against it, same as he does against renewable energy and other subjects he perceives as "progressive"...
    • c048an hour ago
      I've heared Americans, unironically, state that the metric system is less precise than the imperial system.

      I have no clue what the origin is of this myth, but at this point I wouldn't be surprised if Trump held this belief too.

      • bluGillan hour ago
        Depends on the field - it happens that 1\1000 inch is a good tolerance for many machining operations, while metric doesn't have a convient round number close enough to that range to be useful. That doesn't slow down mathinists though, they know the fraction of mm tolerance they need to use and it is what is marked on their tools.
        • c048an hour ago
          So do I understand correctly that it's from a tooling issue? If so, thanks for that insight.
      • vpolan hour ago
        > origin is of this myth

        poor education system

  • altern8an hour ago
    Why change? Imperial was Washington's dream, after all... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYqfVE-fykk
  • NuclearPMan hour ago
    [flagged]
    • rf15an hour ago
      ah, if only the french would've lead with that, we would be all on the same page by now
  • jxdxbx2 hours ago
    The metric systems's worse flaw was doubling down on base 10 instead of the plainly superior base 12.
    • c0482 hours ago
      Only in certain fields. For most interactions divide by 10 is far easier than divide by 12, and you'd end up with far, far more "eyeballed" measurements.

      So no, as a human being, I'm fine with base 10.

      • rob742 hours ago
        Or you'd have to go all in and write numbers in base 12 too, then dividing by 12 would be easier...
    • fainpulan hour ago
      Obviously base 60 is superior to all

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9m2jck1f90

    • duskdozeran hour ago
      Base 12? That's a small number. Now base 13? 13's a big number. The biggest number, perhaps. That's what they're saying at least. Base 13, 13 colonies, now that's America.
      • thomasmgan hour ago
        The PDF standard uses base 85 encoding (Ascii 85).
    • kstenerudan hour ago
      The metric system is the tool of the devil! My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it!
      • bluGillan hour ago
        Someone else must be paying for your fuel. Nobody who pays for their own fuel likes that.
    • kalleboo2 hours ago
      The right time to fix that mistake wasn't in metric, it was while creating our numbering system.
    • vidarhan hour ago
      Unless everyone worked in base 12 numbers too, that'd be a mess. Part of the beauty of metric is how often calculations devolve to shifting the decimal point.
    • tom_2 hours ago
      This can make sense for currency, but units of weight and distance and so on are infinitely divisible. You can just have a third of a metre if you like. Or 333 mm if the inaccuracy is acceptable. And so on.
      • wongarsuan hour ago
        And it's not like 1 is some special value. If you start from a base of 120cm you get enough even divisions that you rarely run into the need for fractions
    • altern8an hour ago
      Isn't base 10 easier because you just add/remove zeros, and also we have 10 fingers to count..?
      • bluGillan hour ago
        No, converting units is not a useful evercise. airplanes are measured in mm - even the full lenght is in mm not decameters or even hecameters (i had to look those prefives up)
    • jabl2 hours ago
      As long as we count in base 10, it makes sense for the unit system to also be based on base 10.

      As for changing the world to counting in base 12, yes there would be some advantages, but really, good luck with that.

      • pornel2 hours ago
        Too bad there are 11 players on the pitch, otherwise US could switch entirely to the football fields measurement system.
    • p-e-w2 hours ago
      Being able to count using fingers is more valuable than having one more prime factor.
      • jabl2 hours ago
        You can actually count to 12 on your fingers using one hand. Use the thumb as a pointer, then for each of your other fingers you have three joints. So 3*4=12.
        • JamesTRexxan hour ago
          This is why men are superior to women, we can always count to one higher. (or two including the tip, as someone suggested with the fingers) :-p ducks
        • adornKeyan hour ago
          But all the techniques to multiply numbers with your fingers are more confusing in base 12.

          https://www.wikihow.com/Multiply-With-Your-Hands

          Those techniques can be useful. If you add toes, multiplying numbers up to 20 (like 16x18) is easy.

        • hans_castorp2 hours ago
          Or use a hand as a 5-bit integer, then you can count to 31 :)
          • t-3an hour ago
            It's hard to actually count using more than 4 bits/hand though. The quickest methods that require the least dexterity are those that count the knuckles (which are actually used in some counting traditions, unlike binary finger-counting).
        • wongogue2 hours ago
          If you include the tip, you can do base 16.

          Let’s go hexadecimal all the way.

        • an hour ago
          undefined
    • atoav2 hours ago
      Consider marking it with /s next time.
    • unglaublichan hour ago
      Lol sure, in no A0 years!
  • ecommerceguyan hour ago
    Aren't imperial units considerably easier to calculate on the fly in construction and when squaring? They seem to come more natural for me.
    • gdwatson6 minutes ago
      Units based on base 12 or base 2, as U.S. standard measures tend to be, are easier to divide in many ways.

      Now if we used base 12 numbers instead of base 10, and we had a system of units based on that, I bet we’d have the best of both worlds. No idea if Napoleon could have imposed base 12 arithmetic on most of Europe the way he did metric, though.

    • Ronsenshian hour ago
      Can you give an example? I can't imagine calculating conversions between inches and feet to be easier than using millimeters/centimeters/meters. Or using mostly millimeters in construction in Europe. You have one unit to deal with that generally tends to be integer value. No need to fractions.
      • bluGillan hour ago
        You don't convert. Airplanes are designed in mm and you never need meters. Houses are in inches - we say 92 5/8. Or sometimes 2 feet 3 inches. Our measurement tools have both marks so we can do it without coversion.
    • bluGillan hour ago
      Depends. they are designed so the whole units are easy for the common things you do with that size. this is a common case for things will still do today like we did 200 years ago (like build houses). But even in those areas a lot of things are not round units.

      When things are not nice round units though both systems are equally hard. This is common in the modern world where we do a lot of things impossible 200 years ago.

      in reality you almost never calculate on the job. You measure what is on the print and anything not on the print is figured out 'when you get there' by measuring the space left when you get there - which also corrects for previous measurement errors

    • pineappleoreosan hour ago
      When one of familiar with something, it always feels more natural.
    • NuclearPMan hour ago
      No. They are only more natural to you because you are used to it.