5 ms·

I think you might have missed that I already stated that it's an irrational thing to complain about because units in nature are arbitrary, but given that no one

by usui 5y ago

I think you might have missed that I already stated that it's an irrational thing to complain about because units in nature are arbitrary, but given that no one uses these units for the topic at hand, why use them at all? Just for relatability? > It may as well be in hectares or "multiples of some lake somewhere", it's a massive number. We're saying the same thing but arguing for the opposite. Like I said, no one in a technical capacity uses these units seriously. So then if the number is so conceptually massively big and the units don't matter, why go through the extra forced effort of converting to imperial? Just use the units that the specifications come in and the numbers that the factories use? The more you play with vast unit conversions like this, the more you risk losing information across sources/citations. What if I want to do my own research later on? It's more work if I'm searching for specific numbers on Google. We also know just how terrible Google Search results are getting nowadays, so... > We all get it, Americans with their imperial units, ha ha. I think this is an uncharitable interpretation of my comment. I'm not trying to make fun of Americans, I'm trying to understand what the extra efort is worth for?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
cptskippy 5y ago
> why use them at all? Just for relatability? Yes. Was that hard? The WSJ didn't write this article for you, it isn't an industry rag. This is like complaining that their scientific articles try to dumb it down for a layman's depth. A football field or soccer field is a perfectly reasonable unit of measure when you're simply trying to convey "a lot" to someone.
- trangus_1985 5y ago
  I don't particularly agree with the parent comment, but you are being oddly aggressive over something that is a real problem - communicating things is hard and it's a useful topic to consider in a world that increasingly runs on text-based communication.
  - cptskippy 5y ago
    Insulting and making fun of people because they have a problem isn't helpful but ok, but responding "aggressively" to insults is bad?
    - scrollaway 5y ago
      I don't see any insults or "making fun of people" in the comments you're responding to. You're choosing to see that. Apply the Principle of good faith and you'll see you're the one getting worked up over nothing...
      - cptskippy 5y ago
        I'm sorry you feel like I'm worked up but please don't put that on me. I've linked to the OP's original comment but to paraphrase: "LOL, I can't take anyone seriously when they use Imperial units. It's unprofessional." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28449058 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28449058
      - dang 5y ago
        Please don't perpetuate flamewars on HN, regardless of how badly someone else is behaving or you feel they are. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. They include: "Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- OJFord 5y ago
  > A football field or soccer field is a perfectly reasonable unit of measure when you're simply trying to convey "a lot" to someone. At least in the UK it's somewhat of a 'meme', a byword for a tabloid, in the same league as irrelevant mentions of age and house price, etc.
  - cptskippy 5y ago
    We measure trunk space in terms of bodies it can hold. It's funny and clearly relates the capacity.
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      We do? Depends on who "we" is, I suppose... I've seen golf bags mentioned quite often. But, come to think of it, that's about equivalent to a body, isn't it?
      - cptskippy 5y ago
        It's a common joke unit of measure to estimate the size of a small enclosed space. An example: https://youtu.be/J-falgJE1xg?t=211 https://youtu.be/J-falgJE1xg?t=211
- hermitdev 5y ago
  Pedantically, at least a standard US football field is an exact size (120yds long, 53 1/3 yds wide). Soccer pitches? Not so much ... FIFA states the field of play for international matches should be 100-110m long and 64-75m wide (tolerances are relaxed to 90-120m long by 45-90m wide - which oddly means you could have a square pitch). If one would like an example of a comically undersized pitch, look to NYFC playing at Yankee stadium - they had to get a special exemption from MLS, IIRC. Still useful, though, and I think a reasonable person with familiarity with either soccer or football would get a rough idea. Please don't take this as criticism ; it's not meant to be. The mention of football and soccer fields being used as a measure of size in the same sentence sparked recollection of some not-otherwise-useful knowledge stuck in my brain.
  - cptskippy 5y ago
    I don't think anyone uses them as exact units of measure but rather to communicate a size in relatable terms. When you relate scale to something familiar it elicits connotations from an individual's experience that makes things easier to comprehend. Most people have seen a football or soccer field and understand the approximate size.
- imtringued 5y ago
  If everyone uses a different unit then it may not appear to be a lot at all. Nobody is measuring office space in football fields so how am I supposed to know how a football field sized manufacturing plant compares to an office building?
  - cptskippy 5y ago
    In general conversation, or general news articles people don't need exact units of measure because they're not acting upon that information. You use an approximation like football fields because it elicits a connotation and can help people easily grasp the scale.
elefanten 5y ago
Yes, in short it's for relatability. You're talking about a general circulation newspaper -- and one of the very biggest at that. At the end of the day, their customer is the general American news consumer, and what they read has to make sense to them. A technical or industry-aware American probably won't go to WSJ first for their technical / industry news.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
cptskippy 5y ago
> I'm not trying to make fun of Americans, I'm trying to understand what the extra efort is worth for? Quit being dishonest. You're not trying to understand because it's really fucking easy to understand. If you really truly want an answer, it's relatablity. If you ask the vast majority of Americans how many centimeters are in a foot, you'll get blank stares. If you ask them how long 30 centimeters are you'll get blank stares. If you ask them how long a foot is they'll hold up their hands about a foot apart. Americans use imperial units because it's what they used daily, what they're familiar with, and what they know. It's really not that hard to understand. Think about if you had to switch from Metric to Imperial. Just think about all the wonky units and how overwhelming it would be. That's how Americans think about the Metric system. But it's easy you say, everything is 100 up or down. So? That doesn't help with the simple fact that it's completely unrelatable.
- usui 5y ago
  > Quit being dishonest. You're not trying to understand because it's really fucking easy to understand. Again, being very disingenuous. I'm sorry that it's so offensive to you that I was reading the article in Japanese and found it very strange that imperial units were leaking across not only domain topics (semiconductors), but language itself. If you ask me, it's more obtrusive this way than the other way around. I thought it wouldn't be too much of an ask to use the original units that the entire industry uses This touts a certain kind of agenda that Americans should be pandered to, and I think your aggressive tone reflects that. I hope you're aware that a very well-supported Japanese edition of The Wall Street Journal exists, and its target audience is Japanese readers. It usually handles localization extremely well. I was reading the non-English article and saw it was using imperial units both in the text and graphs and I had to do a double take. This is the entire reason why I found it interesting. https://jp.wsj.com/articles/the-chip-shortage-has-made-a-star-of-this-little-known-component-11630992492 https://jp.wsj.com/articles/the-chip-shortage-has-made-a-sta... As previously mentioned, the scale is massively big. Does the WSJ think its viewers will perceive 17,187,062 square meters as small?
  - cptskippy 5y ago
    > I'm sorry that it's so offensive to you Let's clarify. You're sorry that I find your insults offensive? > Lol every time I see the word "feet" I'm reminded that this article isn't targeted to anyone but Americans > I absolutely have never had to use those units in a serious professional context. > Any time I see a technically-sounding article use units like "feet" and "football fields" I subconsciously find it very difficult to take anything afterward seriously. You basically said "the American units of measure are unprofessional and I can't take anyone seriously when they use them" and you wonder why that might be offensive? You're reading an American newspaper about things topical to Americans. Are you reading it for laughs then? I don't understand. It's ok to not like the Imperial system, most Americans hate it too. And we're stuck with it until momentum can built to change that fact. But what you're exhibiting is elitism and snobbery.

by usui 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

cptskippy 5y ago

> why use them at all? Just for relatability? Yes. Was that hard? The WSJ didn't write this article for you, it isn't an industry rag. This is like complaining that their scientific articles try to dumb it down for a layman's depth. A football field or soccer field is a perfectly reasonable unit of measure when you're simply trying to convey "a lot" to someone.

trangus_1985 5y ago
I don't particularly agree with the parent comment, but you are being oddly aggressive over something that is a real problem - communicating things is hard and it's a useful topic to consider in a world that increasingly runs on text-based communication.
- cptskippy 5y ago
  Insulting and making fun of people because they have a problem isn't helpful but ok, but responding "aggressively" to insults is bad?
  - scrollaway 5y ago
    I don't see any insults or "making fun of people" in the comments you're responding to. You're choosing to see that. Apply the Principle of good faith and you'll see you're the one getting worked up over nothing...
    - cptskippy 5y ago
      I'm sorry you feel like I'm worked up but please don't put that on me. I've linked to the OP's original comment but to paraphrase: "LOL, I can't take anyone seriously when they use Imperial units. It's unprofessional." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28449058 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28449058
    - dang 5y ago
      Please don't perpetuate flamewars on HN, regardless of how badly someone else is behaving or you feel they are. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. They include: "Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
OJFord 5y ago
> A football field or soccer field is a perfectly reasonable unit of measure when you're simply trying to convey "a lot" to someone. At least in the UK it's somewhat of a 'meme', a byword for a tabloid, in the same league as irrelevant mentions of age and house price, etc.
- cptskippy 5y ago
  We measure trunk space in terms of bodies it can hold. It's funny and clearly relates the capacity.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    We do? Depends on who "we" is, I suppose... I've seen golf bags mentioned quite often. But, come to think of it, that's about equivalent to a body, isn't it?
    - cptskippy 5y ago
      It's a common joke unit of measure to estimate the size of a small enclosed space. An example: https://youtu.be/J-falgJE1xg?t=211 https://youtu.be/J-falgJE1xg?t=211
hermitdev 5y ago
Pedantically, at least a standard US football field is an exact size (120yds long, 53 1/3 yds wide). Soccer pitches? Not so much ... FIFA states the field of play for international matches should be 100-110m long and 64-75m wide (tolerances are relaxed to 90-120m long by 45-90m wide - which oddly means you could have a square pitch). If one would like an example of a comically undersized pitch, look to NYFC playing at Yankee stadium - they had to get a special exemption from MLS, IIRC. Still useful, though, and I think a reasonable person with familiarity with either soccer or football would get a rough idea. Please don't take this as criticism ; it's not meant to be. The mention of football and soccer fields being used as a measure of size in the same sentence sparked recollection of some not-otherwise-useful knowledge stuck in my brain.
- cptskippy 5y ago
  I don't think anyone uses them as exact units of measure but rather to communicate a size in relatable terms. When you relate scale to something familiar it elicits connotations from an individual's experience that makes things easier to comprehend. Most people have seen a football or soccer field and understand the approximate size.
imtringued 5y ago
If everyone uses a different unit then it may not appear to be a lot at all. Nobody is measuring office space in football fields so how am I supposed to know how a football field sized manufacturing plant compares to an office building?
- cptskippy 5y ago
  In general conversation, or general news articles people don't need exact units of measure because they're not acting upon that information. You use an approximation like football fields because it elicits a connotation and can help people easily grasp the scale.

elefanten 5y ago

Yes, in short it's for relatability. You're talking about a general circulation newspaper -- and one of the very biggest at that. At the end of the day, their customer is the general American news consumer, and what they read has to make sense to them. A technical or industry-aware American probably won't go to WSJ first for their technical / industry news.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

cptskippy 5y ago

> I'm not trying to make fun of Americans, I'm trying to understand what the extra efort is worth for? Quit being dishonest. You're not trying to understand because it's really fucking easy to understand. If you really truly want an answer, it's relatablity. If you ask the vast majority of Americans how many centimeters are in a foot, you'll get blank stares. If you ask them how long 30 centimeters are you'll get blank stares. If you ask them how long a foot is they'll hold up their hands about a foot apart. Americans use imperial units because it's what they used daily, what they're familiar with, and what they know. It's really not that hard to understand. Think about if you had to switch from Metric to Imperial. Just think about all the wonky units and how overwhelming it would be. That's how Americans think about the Metric system. But it's easy you say, everything is 100 up or down. So? That doesn't help with the simple fact that it's completely unrelatable.

usui 5y ago
> Quit being dishonest. You're not trying to understand because it's really fucking easy to understand. Again, being very disingenuous. I'm sorry that it's so offensive to you that I was reading the article in Japanese and found it very strange that imperial units were leaking across not only domain topics (semiconductors), but language itself. If you ask me, it's more obtrusive this way than the other way around. I thought it wouldn't be too much of an ask to use the original units that the entire industry uses This touts a certain kind of agenda that Americans should be pandered to, and I think your aggressive tone reflects that. I hope you're aware that a very well-supported Japanese edition of The Wall Street Journal exists, and its target audience is Japanese readers. It usually handles localization extremely well. I was reading the non-English article and saw it was using imperial units both in the text and graphs and I had to do a double take. This is the entire reason why I found it interesting. https://jp.wsj.com/articles/the-chip-shortage-has-made-a-star-of-this-little-known-component-11630992492 https://jp.wsj.com/articles/the-chip-shortage-has-made-a-sta... As previously mentioned, the scale is massively big. Does the WSJ think its viewers will perceive 17,187,062 square meters as small?
- cptskippy 5y ago
  > I'm sorry that it's so offensive to you Let's clarify. You're sorry that I find your insults offensive? > Lol every time I see the word "feet" I'm reminded that this article isn't targeted to anyone but Americans > I absolutely have never had to use those units in a serious professional context. > Any time I see a technically-sounding article use units like "feet" and "football fields" I subconsciously find it very difficult to take anything afterward seriously. You basically said "the American units of measure are unprofessional and I can't take anyone seriously when they use them" and you wonder why that might be offensive? You're reading an American newspaper about things topical to Americans. Are you reading it for laughs then? I don't understand. It's ok to not like the Imperial system, most Americans hate it too. And we're stuck with it until momentum can built to change that fact. But what you're exhibiting is elitism and snobbery.