The metric system sucks
in [Math]
|
Prev: connecting Luminet-Poincare Dodecahedral Space with AP-Reverse -Concavity for 10% #379 Correcting Math
Next: Cantor's Diagonal?
From: Bart Goddard on 10 Feb 2010 23:29 Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18(a)verizon.invalid> wrote in news:hkvs6q$324$1(a)news- int2.gatech.edu: > Just because a language is the official language does not mean that most > people in the country can speak it. But the basis of the arguement is the parallel about dealing (trading) with other countries. If English is the official language of India, then that is the language with which we must conduct business with them. Let every country declare what language they will do business with, and then count the numbers. English will win in a landslide. And of course, the point is that this arguement somehow doesn't care the same oomph as when the same reasoning is made about the metric system, even though it's much easier to translate between measuring systems than between languages. B. -- Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.
From: Andrew Usher on 11 Feb 2010 00:25 On Feb 10, 1:25 pm, "Bob Myers" <nospample...(a)address.invalid> wrote: > Androcles wrote: > >> So, you'll want to export your "inched" equipment and machines to > >> where? Are you taking into account the clients' will in your sales > >> dpt? > > > Machines today are CNC, so you can have both. > > Wow, and you say the drills and other tooling will also > automagically change to the system in use without having > to produce/stock/maintain both types? Imagine that... Drills already have interchangeable bits, having two systems may mean you need to stock more bits but they won't wear out as fast (being used less each). Unless you have drills made to one fixed size only (which is not a units issue), you dont need more machines. Andrew Usher
From: Andrew Usher on 11 Feb 2010 00:36 On Feb 10, 1:34 pm, Darwin123 <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > I detect a little socialism here of the nationalist variety. I do hope you're only calling me a national socialist and not a National Socialist. Even so, I don't think you're right. > So it isn't just government regulation that bothers you. In your > opinion, any American that decides to switch to metric is being > "Leftist," even if he does so for his own self interest. According to > you, technology and economics haven't changed for so long that "anyone > who had good reasons unrelated to ideology would have done so > already." I do think it's a little bit treasonous, yes. > If an American businessman decides to go metric to sell to > Europeans, he is doing it for "ideological reasons." Or maybe he sees > a market that hasn't opened up till reasons. Again, anywhere that metric is necessary to serve the global market, it would have already been adopted, wouldn't it? > And you do agree with Leftists on economic matters. Then you > obviously feel the metric system is bad for moral reasons. > You sound like a type of socialist. Only the word "nationalist" > belongs in front. You love government regulation when it puts money in > your pocket. Well, I love money in my pocket regardless of where it comes from ;) But I assure you that I have no monetary interest in this issue. But no, I'm not generally a nationalist. Only when it comes to the English language, the English weights and measures, and a few cultural and legal things that I have independent reasons for believing in, do I get defensive like this. Andrew Usher
From: jmfbahciv on 11 Feb 2010 10:09 Bob Myers wrote: > Androcles wrote: > >>> So, you'll want to export your "inched" equipment and machines to >>> where? Are you taking into account the clients' will in your sales >>> dpt? >> Machines today are CNC, so you can have both. > > Wow, and you say the drills and other tooling will also > automagically change to the system in use without having > to produce/stock/maintain both types? Imagine that... > and then the indoor plumbing breaks. All ideology if forgotten. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 11 Feb 2010 10:14
Bob Myers wrote: > jmfbahciv wrote: >> Bob Myers wrote: >>> Darwin123 wrote: >>>> How about removing all regulations concerning units and see what >>>> individuals and companies would do? >>> That's the most sensible solution I've seen here yet - which, >>> of course, is why it will probably never happen! >>> >> The only reason you are able to read these posts is because >> we introduced and developed standards. don't throw the >> bath water out with the babies. > > While (as noted earlier) my original comment was at least > half in jest, I am prompted to ask re this one: who is this > "we" you're talking about? People who wrote the code to make the hardware work. >Many - probably most - of the > most successful standards in use today were developed by > industry groups responding to market needs, not through > government regulation. The government regulation happened after the standards were made. This is what creates unique standards rather than forcing the buyers of the products to choose between a dozen, or dozens, of standards. > > I've spent more than my fair share of time working in such > groups, and would MUCH rather deal with industry > standardization efforts than government or quasi-governmental > regulation. > But the it's the governments' choices of which standard will be used when deciding procurements. After that, the laws about regulations happen if the industry isn't adept to changing needs of the populace. A good example is the telephone industry ;-). Another one is the airplane business. /BAH |