Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 14th Feb 2009 09:13 UTC, submitted by stickster
Thread beginning with comment 349121
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: The USA wonders why it is slipping into irrelevance?
by StephenBeDoper on Sun 15th Feb 2009 23:52
in reply to "RE[5]: The USA wonders why it is slipping into irrelevance?"
And let's face it, kilograms suck - something that heavy needs to have something larger than a gram as in intermediary - even when we were learning this stuff, being told that something was about 500 grams made no sense at all.
Agreed there. I've often thought the same thing about metric distance measurements - centimetres are too small, metres are too large. Canada standardized on the metric system long ago, but most of us know our height in feet rather than centimetres.
There is the "decimetre" unit (1 decimetere == 10 centimetres), and I assume there is an equivalent for mass (decigrams?) - but they're almost never used outside of elementary school math & science exercises.
RE[7]: The USA wonders why it is slipping into irrelevance?
by Soulbender on Mon 16th Feb 2009 05:56
in reply to "RE[6]: The USA wonders why it is slipping into irrelevance?"
There is the "decimetre" unit (1 decimetere == 10 centimetres), and I assume there is an equivalent for mass (decigrams?) - but they're almost never used outside of elementary school math & science exercises.
That's a Canadian problem. The decimeter is frequently used in other places. I've never heard anyone having problems with meters and grams being too small.
I cant help but wonder how you two can work with computers since, you know, there are just way too many bytes to a kilobyte. Where's the decibyte (or perhaps ounce of bytes) when you need it?
RE[7]: The USA wonders why it is slipping into irrelevance?
by unclefester on Mon 16th Feb 2009 14:00
in reply to "RE[6]: The USA wonders why it is slipping into irrelevance?"
The kg is actually a very convenient measure. A litre of water weighs very close to 1kg. In Australia we simply ask for 1/2kg of chicken or say some one is 1.8m tall.
In Australia (like Britain) we never measured height in just inches but always feet and inches eg 6'1" not 73 inches. Weight of people was always expressed in stones (14 pounds) and pounds not just pounds eg 10st 5lbs not 145 lbs.
RE[7]: The USA wonders why it is slipping into irrelevance?
by dagw on Mon 16th Feb 2009 14:33
in reply to "RE[6]: The USA wonders why it is slipping into irrelevance?"
There is the "decimetre" unit (1 decimetere == 10 centimetres), and I assume there is an equivalent for mass (decigrams?) - but they're almost never used outside of elementary school math & science exercises.
Really? Certainly here in Sweden decimeters and hektograms( 100 g ) are used all the time. Hektograms are for example a common unit when buying things like food by weight.
But to be honest I've never seen it as a problem to talk about 400 grams or 170 cm, nor have I ever heard anybody complain about it before.





Member since:
2005-07-08
Speaking as a child of the 70s who was forced to learn both systems in public school, I can tell you that learning wasn't the major issue, it was the fact that nothing besides the rulers we used t measure things changed. No speed limit signs were changed to reflect mph/kph, no gages were changed to reflect gallons/liters, etc. It was learned, but for all intents and purposes, useless (kind of like the OSI model :-P).
And let's face it, kilograms suck - something that heavy needs to have something larger than a gram as in intermediary - even when we were learning this stuff, being told that something was about 500 grams made no sense at all.