Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple's amusingly round reuse figures

blog.jgc.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 101 posts

Re: Apple's amusingly round reuse figures

#81

Post by function_seven »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #79
function_seven wrote: post #68

My rant related to this: How It's Made[1] often has lines like, "The worker places the assembly in a oven that heats the metal to 1,292 degrees Fahrenheit". Which is an oddly-specfic temperature before you realize they just converted it from 700°C. Since it's highly doubtful the oven maintains precisely 700°C—and since it's not important to the viewer what the exact temperature is anyway—it annoys me that they don't…

Fun fact: the reason the human body temperature is said to be 98.6 °F is because of rounding between units. It originally was said to be 100 °F, which when converted to Celsius is 37.77 °C. Round that down to 37 °C and convert back and you get the oddly specific 98.6 °F (despite the fact the human body temperature can fluctuate quite a few degrees [Fahrenheit] throughout the day). I read this somewhere (credible), bu…

The fact that it converts perfectly to a round °C number is all the evidence I need. Thanks.

Re: Apple's amusingly round reuse figures

#82

Post by Symbiote »

function_seven wrote: post #68

My rant related to this: How It's Made[1] often has lines like, "The worker places the assembly in a oven that heats the metal to 1,292 degrees Fahrenheit". Which is an oddly-specfic temperature before you realize they just converted it from 700°C. Since it's highly doubtful the oven maintains precisely 700°C—and since it's not important to the viewer what the exact temperature is anyway—it annoys me that they don't…

When broadcast in Britain, the voiceover uses metric units. Presumably the Canadian version does too.

If I lived there, it would annoy me more that they don't say 700°C in the USA...

Re: Apple's amusingly round reuse figures

#83

Post by Symbiote »

maaaats wrote: post #28
soneil wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. For the UK they just say 1 tonne, 2 tonnes, etc - https://www.apple.com/uk/environment/resources/ So everyone’s trying to play this as some conspiracy of fictional numbers. All we’ve actually found is that Apple do localize their site, and possibly some weaknesses in how they do so.

Which is kinda interesting in itself.

Evidently so. This is the highest-rated comment I've ever written here.

Re: Apple's amusingly round reuse figures

#85

Post by function_seven »

Symbiote wrote: post #82
function_seven wrote: post #68

My rant related to this: How It's Made[1] often has lines like, "The worker places the assembly in a oven that heats the metal to 1,292 degrees Fahrenheit". Which is an oddly-specfic temperature before you realize they just converted it from 700°C. Since it's highly doubtful the oven maintains precisely 700°C—and since it's not important to the viewer what the exact temperature is anyway—it annoys me that they don't…

When broadcast in Britain, the voiceover uses metric units. Presumably the Canadian version does too. If I lived there, it would annoy me more that they don't say 700°C in the USA...

I think the same thing with length units. They're always saying, "The operator cuts the widget into four tenths of an inch increments" and I get unreasonably mad at the TV, shouting, "Ya mean a centimeter?!" If they were really using the imperial system, it would be 3/8", not 0.4.

But for temperature, I just can't relate to °C. I've been too indoctrinated in °F so long. But with higher values, like 700, it's not hard to double it in my head and get a reasonable approximation. So yeah, just give it to me in whatever unit the factory is actually using. Especially if there's a visible control panel in the shot.

Re: Apple's amusingly round reuse figures

#86

Post by make3 »

specialist wrote: post #48
skarap wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This reminds me of the elevation of Mt Everest as determined in 1856: Or the joke about the museum guide telling visitors the dinosaur skeleton is 100,000,005 years old, because when he started there 5 years ago, an expert told him it was 100 million years old.

I have Creationists in my family. I don't poke the bear. But I've always wanted to ask how the Earth is perpetually 6,000 years old. Another question, if the assorted Creationists can't agree on the true age, then why do they get huffy about science's varying estimates? Oh well.

trying to reason with a creationist is a lost cause. there is so much freely available information and proof available openly that anyone who is still creationist can't be thinking about it in a rational way

Re: Apple's amusingly round reuse figures

#87

Post by legohead »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #79
function_seven wrote: post #68

My rant related to this: How It's Made[1] often has lines like, "The worker places the assembly in a oven that heats the metal to 1,292 degrees Fahrenheit". Which is an oddly-specfic temperature before you realize they just converted it from 700°C. Since it's highly doubtful the oven maintains precisely 700°C—and since it's not important to the viewer what the exact temperature is anyway—it annoys me that they don't…

Fun fact: the reason the human body temperature is said to be 98.6 °F is because of rounding between units. It originally was said to be 100 °F, which when converted to Celsius is 37.77 °C. Round that down to 37 °C and convert back and you get the oddly specific 98.6 °F (despite the fact the human body temperature can fluctuate quite a few degrees [Fahrenheit] throughout the day). I read this somewhere (credible), bu…

A few comments.. When I measure my temperature I consistently get 98.6. However, my wife usually measures higher, often slightly above 99.

Back to my wife. She is a native Russian, and when I asked her what they check for in Russia, she said 36.6 celcius, so that would help support your theory.

Re: Apple's amusingly round reuse figures

#88

Post by CognitiveLens »

13of40 wrote: post #58
fredwu wrote: post #13

In metric countries (like Australia) Apple does publish the numbers in kg: https://www.apple.com/au/environment/resources/ :)

As an American, I feel it's a little bit condescending for them to assume we can't consume the numbers in metric units. I also kind of wonder how much gold they actually recovered. Marketing logic says they rounded up, but what if they only recovered, say, ten bushels worth, do they still round up to a tonne?

It may be condescending, but I would be astounded if the majority of Americans could estimate the value of 1000kg in lbs within an order of magnitude.

Re: Apple's amusingly round reuse figures

#89

Post by madeofpalk »

qzervaas wrote: post #71
madeofpalk wrote: post #30

I find it very amusing that Apple is boasting about reducing the size of packaging, but they're still shipping accessories from their online store out in boxes about 15 times larger than required. http://i.imgur.com/sMyvO6o.jpg I've noticed this not only with their packaging for third party accessories, but also for first party ones like the new Magic Mouse 2

I would assume this is to create greater logistical efficiencies in ways we don't see. Side note, I'd be quite interested to see the details of their contracts with courier companies (e.g. TNT deliver all of their new products here in Australia, although AusPost send/receive product replacements)

Yeah, I always assumed it was to make other efficiencies elsewhere, but it's difficult to appreciate that when you get an order shipped in two massive boxes and an envelope when it would easily ship in one http://imgur.com/a/Yv9wD

> I'd be quite interested to see the details of their contracts with courier companies

This is always something that has interested me. Most of the time I get my orders from TNT, but sometimes they'll also come from Startrack. I once had a single order spread over both TNT and Startrack, and a friend ordered iPhone at the same time as me (during launch) and his came via Startrack and mine came via TNT. For what it's worth, Apple uses TNT to ship stuff internally to its retail stores.

Re: Apple's amusingly round reuse figures

#90

Post by 3JPLW »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #79
function_seven wrote: post #68

My rant related to this: How It's Made[1] often has lines like, "The worker places the assembly in a oven that heats the metal to 1,292 degrees Fahrenheit". Which is an oddly-specfic temperature before you realize they just converted it from 700°C. Since it's highly doubtful the oven maintains precisely 700°C—and since it's not important to the viewer what the exact temperature is anyway—it annoys me that they don't…

Fun fact: the reason the human body temperature is said to be 98.6 °F is because of rounding between units. It originally was said to be 100 °F, which when converted to Celsius is 37.77 °C. Round that down to 37 °C and convert back and you get the oddly specific 98.6 °F (despite the fact the human body temperature can fluctuate quite a few degrees [Fahrenheit] throughout the day). I read this somewhere (credible), bu…

I don't think that's true.

The Fahrenheit scale was originally defined to have 0° at the coldest measurable value at the lab bench (salt-water slurry), 32° at the freezing point of water, and 96° for human body temperature. Why use those numbers? It's really easy to make even gradations with with powers of two: just half the length each time. Pretty clever, but of course this has a problem in that there's no guarantee that the three points are co-linear. So it was eventually redefined to simply be defined based upon the freezing/boiling points of water — from 32-212, based upon approximate extrapolations of the scale at the time. They may have even aimed for an even 180 degree separation between the two points. And this leads to the exact 9/5ths conversion ratio (212-32 / 100) from Celsius.

I think the 37°C -> 98.6°F is just a coincidence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#History

Post reply on HN