5 ms·

Rented for about €1200 per month per toilet. 6MM/year for 420 of them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanisette#In_Paris https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanisette

Rented for about €1200 per month per toilet. 6MM/year for 420 of them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanisette#In_Paris https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanisette#In_Paris

bruce343434 4y ago
6 million million?
- david_allison 4y ago
  6 million. Slipped my mind that MM is industry specific. M is ambiguous between the Roman (M = 1,000), the SI prefix (M = 1,000,000), and metres (screen readers). $1MM (capitalized) or $1mn (more recent) reduces the ambiguity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MM#Units_of_measurement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MM#Units_of_measurement
  - programmer_dude 4y ago
    M is not ambiguous at all it stands for mega which is 1e6 (which happens to be a million). Meters is lowercase m. And nobody uses Roman numerals as a suffix. MM is just unnecessary.
    - qeternity 4y ago
      Well you're gonna be really disappointed to find out lots of people do use "mm" particularly in finance, and that Roman numerals have been used far longer than the SI system has existed. Just because you don't use them, or aren't aware they are used, does not make it unnecessary.
      - programmer_dude 4y ago
        By unnecessary I meant the second M in MM is redundant (since M = Mega = 1e6 is enough). And yes I am disappointed, probably just as much as people's use of imperial units :) Edit:... >Roman numerals have been used far longer than the SI system has existed Indeed it has. But has its use as a suffix existed for just as long? BTW I am also disappointed that the people still use Roman numerals :) (also completely unnecessary, the Indo-Arabic number system is "better").
    - david_allison 4y ago
      > An expense of $60,000 could be written as $60M. Internet advertisers are familiar with CPM which is the cost per thousand impressions. > The letter k is also used represent one thousand. For example, an annual salary of $60,000 might appear as $60k instead of $60M. [0] k and MM are unambiguous. You don't want to stop & think, and you definitely don't want to be off by a factor of 1000. So it makes sense to avoid typing 'M' if you have any risk of being misinterpreted. It's mostly about the reduction of risk, it's VERY rare to see M used in this way. [0] https://www.accountingcoach.com/blog/what-does-m-and-mm-stand-for https://www.accountingcoach.com/blog/what-does-m-and-mm-stan...
      - programmer_dude 4y ago
        > An expense of $60,000 could be written as $60M This is unfortunate. $60,000 is $60K (capital K not k) using SI suffixes. Please reject M=1000 today.
        david_allison 4y ago
        > Please reject M=1000 today. This is infeasible, and what does it mean to reject something in a written document? I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish here: you're arguing against an established convention in a sector of the market which you don't have experience with. The upside if you're successful is that I don't need to type an additional 'M'. The downside is that it requires enforcing a blanket standard on an industry, rather than letting it converge over time to an unambiguous standard.
        programmer_dude 4y ago
        Help the convergence along by objecting to the use of M=1000 wherever you see it. We already have an unambiguous standard (it is the SI system of units and suffixes if you are unsure). People should be using it.
      - bruce343434 4y ago
        As a European, I have never seen suffix M = 1000. It’s always a million. Is this one of those things America does different?
  - navane 4y ago
    If M is roman, wouldnt MM equal 2000? As in this year, MMXXII. Thanks for the explanation though. Next we'll get into how a european billion is 1000 times more than a US billion.
    - david_allison 4y ago
      Absolutely, but you're reducing the risk of communicating with people who may be using the roman suffix without writing in Roman numerals. In that situation, you'd see 2M rather than MM. The British billion went out in 1974/5 (Wilson/Healy). One billion is 1,000,000,000 and you shouldn't expect ambiguity there. In practical terms, it doesn't matter. It'd be extremely unusual to be at the scale of the old billion (1,000,000,000,000) ---- This is similar to a justification of using `i` as the variable for an iterator, or `x` and `xs` for head & tail. There are logical reasons, but it's mostly convention.
- acchow 4y ago
  MM = "mille mille" = "thousand thousand". You will be seeing this in many places.
  - programmer_dude 4y ago
    I'd rather not. The second M is redundant. M stands for mega (SI suffix) which is equal to 1e6.
    - lupire 4y ago
      M stands for 1000 in money. Finance isn't a natural science.

Rented for about €1200 per month per toilet. 6MM/year for 420 of them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanisette#In_Paris https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanisette#In_Paris

bruce343434 4y ago

6 million million?

david_allison 4y ago
6 million. Slipped my mind that MM is industry specific. M is ambiguous between the Roman (M = 1,000), the SI prefix (M = 1,000,000), and metres (screen readers). $1MM (capitalized) or $1mn (more recent) reduces the ambiguity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MM#Units_of_measurement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MM#Units_of_measurement
- programmer_dude 4y ago
  M is not ambiguous at all it stands for mega which is 1e6 (which happens to be a million). Meters is lowercase m. And nobody uses Roman numerals as a suffix. MM is just unnecessary.
  - qeternity 4y ago
    Well you're gonna be really disappointed to find out lots of people do use "mm" particularly in finance, and that Roman numerals have been used far longer than the SI system has existed. Just because you don't use them, or aren't aware they are used, does not make it unnecessary.
    - programmer_dude 4y ago
      By unnecessary I meant the second M in MM is redundant (since M = Mega = 1e6 is enough). And yes I am disappointed, probably just as much as people's use of imperial units :) Edit:... >Roman numerals have been used far longer than the SI system has existed Indeed it has. But has its use as a suffix existed for just as long? BTW I am also disappointed that the people still use Roman numerals :) (also completely unnecessary, the Indo-Arabic number system is "better").
  - david_allison 4y ago
    > An expense of $60,000 could be written as $60M. Internet advertisers are familiar with CPM which is the cost per thousand impressions. > The letter k is also used represent one thousand. For example, an annual salary of $60,000 might appear as $60k instead of $60M. [0] k and MM are unambiguous. You don't want to stop & think, and you definitely don't want to be off by a factor of 1000. So it makes sense to avoid typing 'M' if you have any risk of being misinterpreted. It's mostly about the reduction of risk, it's VERY rare to see M used in this way. [0] https://www.accountingcoach.com/blog/what-does-m-and-mm-stand-for https://www.accountingcoach.com/blog/what-does-m-and-mm-stan...
    - programmer_dude 4y ago
      > An expense of $60,000 could be written as $60M This is unfortunate. $60,000 is $60K (capital K not k) using SI suffixes. Please reject M=1000 today.
      - david_allison 4y ago
        > Please reject M=1000 today. This is infeasible, and what does it mean to reject something in a written document? I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish here: you're arguing against an established convention in a sector of the market which you don't have experience with. The upside if you're successful is that I don't need to type an additional 'M'. The downside is that it requires enforcing a blanket standard on an industry, rather than letting it converge over time to an unambiguous standard.
        programmer_dude 4y ago
        Help the convergence along by objecting to the use of M=1000 wherever you see it. We already have an unambiguous standard (it is the SI system of units and suffixes if you are unsure). People should be using it.
    - bruce343434 4y ago
      As a European, I have never seen suffix M = 1000. It’s always a million. Is this one of those things America does different?
- navane 4y ago
  If M is roman, wouldnt MM equal 2000? As in this year, MMXXII. Thanks for the explanation though. Next we'll get into how a european billion is 1000 times more than a US billion.
  - david_allison 4y ago
    Absolutely, but you're reducing the risk of communicating with people who may be using the roman suffix without writing in Roman numerals. In that situation, you'd see 2M rather than MM. The British billion went out in 1974/5 (Wilson/Healy). One billion is 1,000,000,000 and you shouldn't expect ambiguity there. In practical terms, it doesn't matter. It'd be extremely unusual to be at the scale of the old billion (1,000,000,000,000) ---- This is similar to a justification of using `i` as the variable for an iterator, or `x` and `xs` for head & tail. There are logical reasons, but it's mostly convention.
acchow 4y ago
MM = "mille mille" = "thousand thousand". You will be seeing this in many places.
- programmer_dude 4y ago
  I'd rather not. The second M is redundant. M stands for mega (SI suffix) which is equal to 1e6.
  - lupire 4y ago
    M stands for 1000 in money. Finance isn't a natural science.