The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
thefabricator.com
The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
1–10 of 422 posts
Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
#2The metric systems's worse flaw was doubling down on base 10 instead of the plainly superior base 12.
Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
#3[flagged]
Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
#4> 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.
Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
#5The metric systems's worse flaw was doubling down on base 10 instead of the plainly superior base 12.
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.
Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
#6The metric systems's worse flaw was doubling down on base 10 instead of the plainly superior base 12.
Being able to count using fingers is more valuable than having one more prime factor.
Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
#7The metric systems's worse flaw was doubling down on base 10 instead of the plainly superior base 12.
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.
Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
#8> 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.
And in a few places they're different (US measuring "cup" vs UK, US gallon, etc)
Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
#9The 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.
Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)
#10The metric systems's worse flaw was doubling down on base 10 instead of the plainly superior base 12.
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.
Too bad there are 11 players on the pitch, otherwise US could switch entirely to the football fields measurement system.