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

The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

thefabricator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 422 posts

Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

#241

Post by childintime »

sarchertech wrote: post #78
jventura wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, 100…

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…

You're suggesting it's not convenient to know when temps are below zero, or above. A quite critical distinction on the road actually.

Choose your poison.

Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

#242

Post by beloch »

To those who cling to customary units because...

1. "They're more intuitive". They're not. You're just familiar with what 70 F feels like. If you're used to metric, 70 F is meaningless, but you intuitively know what 20 C feels like.

2. "Metric leads to lots of awkward numbers." All systems will fortuitously have round numbers in some contexts and awkward numbers in others. Customary units are different in that there are awkward numbers baked into the system. e.g. 5280 feet in a mile. 128 ounces in a gallon.

3. "It's too much trouble to change." You're already using metric units. U.S. customary units have, metrologically, been defined in terms of metric units since the Mendenhall order of 1893[1]. i.e. A meter is defined in terms of how far light can travel in a period of time defined by a hyperfine transition frequency of Caesium. If you needed to know exactly how long a meter is for a very precise measurement, a reference meter could be produced in a lab by aliens who have no idea what a meter is by using this definition. No such definition exists for a foot or yard. Nobody maintains physical reference yards (the old-school method) anymore. If you want those aliens to measure out a yard precisely, you tell them how to measure out a meter and then tell them 1 yard = 0.9144 m.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendenhall_Order

Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

#243

Post by vablings »

threemux wrote: post #62

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…

The UK uses miles and miles per (UK) gallon. We talk in feet, inchs lbs and stone for weight. But when it comes to engineering works it is ALL now in metric aside from the older builder, all of my schoolwork was in metric, and we never dealt with the hellish conversions it was all SI units, and we just had to know maybe one or two magic constants in physics and chemistry (molar and something else to do with joules in bond enthalpy)

I worked as an engineer and the only drawings specified in imperial were pre 1970s and all the CNC controls are programed in mm feed rates in mm/rev or mm/min

Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

#244

Post by NekkoDroid »

amelius wrote: post #97
mcntsh wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

1 foot is the distance light travels in one nanosecond. And 1/10 of an inch is a very common distance in electronics (PCBs)

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

I hope you can guess why that is, right? It could have just as well been .25cm instead.

Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

#245

Post by apocalyptic0n3 »

mcntsh wrote: post #85
sarchertech wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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…

It should be noted here that the daily high for a good 1/3-1/2 of America is below 0C/32F/freezing for a good 3-5 months each year. Our weather varies much more significantly than most (not all) of Europe. Even with Fahrenheit, it is not uncommon for places like Detroit to be sub-zero for days without getting into positive temperatures.

I've personally lived in Marquette, Michigan and now live in Phoenix, Arizona and have experience both -40F(-40C) and 118F(47.7C). To me, the 0 = really cold, 25 = cold, 50 = mild, 75 = comfortable, 100 = really hot scale makes sense having lived through those extremes. But you're right, that's largely because it's what I grew up with. And with that in mind, it is extremely unlikely America would ever transition away from it for that very reason.

Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

#246

Post by vablings »

beardyw wrote: post #18
pjc50 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

UK doesn't use cups in recipes and fuel is dispensed in litres. Road signs are still in miles.

Fuel is in litres but cars are in miles per gallon, I guess nobody wanted to do miles per litre or some unhinged calculation

Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

#247

Post by ivan_gammel »

spogbiper wrote: post #189
ivan_gammel wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 belo…

below zero days are really really crazy cold and above 100 days are really really crazy hot . I don't think the fact that things occasionally exceed the 100 point "normal" range makes it less useful, if anything the out of bounds numbers emphasize the severity of the temperature. it's common where I grew up in the midwest US to hear "wow its going to be BELOW ZERO" as a way to express extreme cold

For me personally “really really cold” starts below -30°C and crazy hot is above +30°C. It’s very subjective and outside of US many areas have climate where Fahrenheit doesn’t make sense at all.

Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

#248

Post by rkomorn »

humodz wrote: post #238
threemux wrote: post #62

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…

> The difference between 75 (usually a beautiful day) and 85 (hot) is 23.8C to 29.4C. If you convert a nice, round number from one system to the other, you'll end up with a more precise, less nice number, which will give the impression that Celsius is harder to use. In reality, people from metric countries just think in 5-degree increments: 25 is a beautiful day, 30 is hot. It doesn't feel any harder to read than Fah…

> I wonder if there are people that moved to the U.S., switched to Fahrenheit and now find it more intuitive than Celsius.

I've done the move twice in each direction. Neither is more intuitive.

When I moved back to C after 22 years in F, I had to adjust again. It took a few months. The other times were after fewer years, but still took (re)adjusting.

Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

#249

Post by zokier »

briffle wrote: post #190
AlotOfReading wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in construction, feet/inches/yards kinda sucks. 1:10 scale drawings are painful to do manually, division by 2 is a bit erratic, and bolt sizing is a horrible mess. Metric bolts are nice and consistent. With you on temperature though.

My wife was a surveyor in a past carreer. We have a tape measure in the garage that measures to the nearest hundredth of a foot. It is just so weird to see. Forcing decimal on a measurement that does not normally have it just makes me uncomfortable. https://surveysupplyinc.com/lufkin-12-foot-hi-viz-engineers-...

> My wife was a surveyor in a past carreer. We have a tape measure in the garage that measures to the nearest hundredth of a foot

Survey foot or international foot?

Re: The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

#250

Post by evil-olive »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #185
threemux wrote: post #62

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…

The extra precision is fake. They might have measured precisely at the weather station, but local variation in temperature makes that extra precision meaningless unless you are located exactly where the measurement happened. Even in a climate controlled room, there will be a degree or two of variation between different parts of the room.

for another example of this: a lot of people "know" that the average human body temperature is 98.6 degF.

that extra decimal point gives people false confidence about the measurement being more precise than it is.

because so much science (even in the US) happens using the metric system, the actual measured average [0] is 37 degC, and 37.0 degC == 98.6 degF. the nuance of the average being more of a confidence interval (37 +/- 0.5 degC, possibly larger) gets lost as well.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_body_temperature

Post reply on HN