6 ms·

I Will Never Use the Metric System [video]

9 points by warrenm 3y ago

Dig1t 3y ago
Pretty well done video, he sort of belabors the “imperial is so stupid and illogical” stuff. I think most people are aware of it already. Growing up in the US I have had so many teachers at every single layer of schooling launch into a speech how dumb our units of measurement are and how much better the metric system is. Yet we all still use it and it makes no difference in our everyday lives. I’ve never heard anyone say anything positive about the imperial system. I don’t care very much, but I don’t really mind it. A foot is a decently intuitive unit of measurement for everyday things, it’s helpful how “human” the units are. Like a tallish person is a nice round 6 feet, other body parts are 5, 6, 7 inches etc. Everyday objects are single digit roundish numbers in inches and pounds. I think that’s part of why it’s extra sticky here.
- WorldMaker 3y ago
  More often than not, you can get "single digit" numbers with the right metric prefixes, and you can pretend they are "nice and round" just about as easily. It's just another one of those "what you are used to" things. These sorts of "intuition" are largely cultural osmosis, everyone in your culture is used to it and everyone uses it in your culture so it seems more "human" and "sticky" because you are swimming in it at just about all times. (Which is mostly a paraphrase of the conclusion of the video, until "all" of us switch in the culture, none of us switch.)
- mvdtnz 3y ago
  5, 6, 7 are no more "round" numbers than 180cm or 15cm or 10cm. And besides, the only reason you value "roundness" is because your system of measure has trained you to, because it becomes unwieldy when fractional units are involved.
  - Dig1t 3y ago
    I get what you are saying and I’m not really disagreeing, but I would say that subjectively it’s a little easier to reason about single digits instead of double or triple digits for most normal people. Like saying “he is 6 feet tall” is slightly more ergonomic than saying “he is 1.83 meters tall” or “he is 182cm tall”. Both of the common metric versions of that measurement are less ergonomic than 6ft. cm feels too big and m feels too small. Another way to put it is that the range of measurements for many everyday things often fits on your two hands. Another example “I have a 7 inch penis” translated to, “I have a 17.78cm penis”, subjectively doesn’t feel the same in conversations. The number 7 subjectively fits in your mind a little easier than 17.78. Anyway, as I said I don’t disagree with you, the metric system is better in a lot of ways and I’m happy to use it when I can, but I do think that people spend far too much time talking about how superior their big brain unit of measurement is when it doesn’t really matter that much.
    - windmark 3y ago
      Your examples with even numbers in feet and odd in meters tell me that is what you’re used to. I can counter with that saying 180 cm is a lot easier than 5 feet 10.86 inches. No one says that, similar to that no one would say 17.78. What’s convenient with metric is that there isn’t any difference between saying 180 or 179 cm. You just say, “one seventy nine”, not “one hundred and seventy nine”. Here I am showing what I am used to.
      - Dig1t 3y ago
        Well my point with the examples was not the ".78" part, it was the "7" vs "17". In your counter example, I would just round the imperial units to 5 feet 11 inches or 6 feet in everyday conversation. My point is that whether it's 180 vs 18 vs 1.8 all of those powers of ten are just a little bit less ergonomic because they do not fit nicely onto my two counting hands. 5 and 6 do fit nicely on my hands (and in my head) and so are just a tiny bit nicer to use every day. To be honest, if the meter was closer to the size of a foot the metric system would have the same advantage. The powers of ten part is the good part of the system, not necessarily the absolute sizes of the base units. I agree that if I grew up with it I would think it is fine. It is just what you're used to. I'm just expressing an opinion, I don't know why everyone needs to downvote me, I keep saying that metric is better.
rhelz 3y ago
The problems with the metric system are largely the problems of using base-10 arithmetic. Say you are a carpenter; your boss hands you a meter stick and asks you to cut him a piece of wood 1/3 meter long. Well, there's no line on the stick for that. You go back to the boss, and say this meter stick isn't accurate enough; Its only marked to centimeters. So he grumbles, buys you one which is marked to millimeters, and you try again....still no line on the meter stick for 1/3rd of a meter... Wiki has a beautiful chart relating the olde-tymie english units like inches, barleycorns, and furlongs. These units were developed ad-hoc by people living in every kind of society from industrial stretching back to the paleolithic. And yet, they are remarkably coherent--once you notice it. What is striking is how often the factors of 2 and 3 are involved in converting one unit into another; e.g., three barleycorns is an inch, 6 picas is an inch, 3 feet is a yard, etc. Metric calculations are ostensibly easier because we use base-10. If we used, say, base-6 or base-12, metric calculations would be as difficult to do in our heads as the English units are. But all those ancient English units would super-easy, because its super-easy to multiply or divide by 2 or 3 in base-6 or base-12. You can see this most clearly, ironically, in nations like, say, Japan, who have adopted the metric system the most throughly. There, they never use decimeters, or even centimeters. Every measurement is given in millimeters, and you tend to find lengths like 24 and 48 millimeters to be especially previlent--because they both have lots of factors of 2 and 3, making it easy to divide lengths into the most common ratios which are actually used. Its why eggs are sold by the dozen and beer comes in 6-packs.
- BillSaysThis 3y ago
  Why would a boss ask a carpenter for a piece of wood 1/3 of a meter long? What architect or engineer would specify this length instead of a number of millimeters?
  - rhelz 3y ago
    Why should my measuring stick prevent me from being able to divide a 1 meter length of wood into 3rds? Sure, they use millimeters....but this is an unfortunate workaround for a defect of the metric system. The proof is that if you look at the number of millimeters in the specified length, more often than not its something like 1,200 millimeters, viz, a number which is really big and divisible by 3.
resonator 3y ago
I've been slowing learning the imperial measurement system and I would say that it's now natural to me in a very limited sense. I grew up in Australia using the metric system. As a child, it was (and probably still is) common to throw around estimates in inches or yards, but anything precise was expressed in in mm or meters. So I've always had a sense of how big and inch or two is but like the presenter, for anything bigger I'd need to perform a quick conversions back to my natural metric measurements to understand what was meant. I'm also a woodworker and use many vintage tools, produced before the world adopted metric. I decided long ago that I would these tools as they were designed to be used and not try to mess with metric, too. At the time, I had no intuition at all about fractions of an inch. I didn't even know that 8ths and 16ths where how they were divided. I literally had no idea. I needed to pull out my maths brain to tell you whether 7/8 or 5/16 was bigger. I used imperial measurements almost exclusively while woodworking in my shed. This was possible because I don't need to communicate measures to anyone other than myself. I also don't often need to take measurements of odd things that don't fall nicely onto an imperial ruler. I'm now comfortable using inches for measuring things up to maybe 100" — I wonder if 100 is only an obvious stopping point because of my metric upbringing — I still have no concept of a mile or yard before converting to metric. But I do still do use metric when I need a precise measure of something that can't be expressed easily in inches. So I'd use 12" rather than 304mm, but I'd use 300mm rather than 11 and whatever inches. Also, it's made easier due to a lot of hangover in stock wood dimensions. It still comes in thicknesses that are more naturally expressed in inches, for example 19mm (3/4"), 25mm (1"). I've been working this way for about 10 years and can now think in inches without any conversion. I doubt I could flip all units of measure to imperial without changing the world I live in and the people I work with.
- mvdtnz 3y ago
  How is 3/4" any more or less "naturally expressed" than 19mm?
  - resonator 3y ago
    Dividing it by two gives you 3/8 rather than 9.5mm. Dividing it by 4 gives you 3/16 rather than 4.75mm. Both 3/8 and 3/16 are common sizes. You can drill holes cut grooves this size. You can use your 3/8 chisel to quickly find the centerline. It's not like you can't do any of this with the metric system, but you'll either need to measure things more, or round things. Often rounding is fine, but to me it feels like a compromise that is born out of the measuring system; a compromise that isn't needed when using the imperial system.
N19PEDL2 3y ago
A fun fact about my ignorance of the imperial system: I moved to UK some years ago and I started using Tinder to meet girls there. I noticed that everyone wrote their height in feet in the description, so I did too. I'm 181 cm (5'11), but since everyone lies about their height on Tinder, I wrote 5'12. This until a girl I matched pointed out that 5'12 is actually 6 ft.
warrenm 3y ago
The Imperial System definitely feels far more human-oriented ... (and not just because some measurements have body parts associated (foot, handspan, etc)) Temperatures are a good example of this, and I saw a wonderful graphic/meme a few years ago I can put here in print: --------- F - 0º 100º - pretty cold, pretty hot C - 0º 100º- cold, dead K - 0º 100º - dead, still dead --------- Imperial units are not objectively "better" than Metric units Neither are Metric units objectively "better" than Imperial units You can definitely tell Imperial is meant for "human" or "comfort" use vs Metric's "scientific" or "precision" use, though

9 points by warrenm 3y ago

Pretty well done video, he sort of belabors the “imperial is so stupid and illogical” stuff. I think most people are aware of it already. Growing up in the US I have had so many teachers at every single layer of schooling launch into a speech how dumb our units of measurement are and how much better the metric system is. Yet we all still use it and it makes no difference in our everyday lives. I’ve never heard anyone say anything positive about the imperial system. I don’t care very much, but I don’t really mind it. A foot is a decently intuitive unit of measurement for everyday things, it’s helpful how “human” the units are. Like a tallish person is a nice round 6 feet, other body parts are 5, 6, 7 inches etc. Everyday objects are single digit roundish numbers in inches and pounds. I think that’s part of why it’s extra sticky here.

WorldMaker 3y ago
More often than not, you can get "single digit" numbers with the right metric prefixes, and you can pretend they are "nice and round" just about as easily. It's just another one of those "what you are used to" things. These sorts of "intuition" are largely cultural osmosis, everyone in your culture is used to it and everyone uses it in your culture so it seems more "human" and "sticky" because you are swimming in it at just about all times. (Which is mostly a paraphrase of the conclusion of the video, until "all" of us switch in the culture, none of us switch.)
mvdtnz 3y ago
5, 6, 7 are no more "round" numbers than 180cm or 15cm or 10cm. And besides, the only reason you value "roundness" is because your system of measure has trained you to, because it becomes unwieldy when fractional units are involved.
- Dig1t 3y ago
  I get what you are saying and I’m not really disagreeing, but I would say that subjectively it’s a little easier to reason about single digits instead of double or triple digits for most normal people. Like saying “he is 6 feet tall” is slightly more ergonomic than saying “he is 1.83 meters tall” or “he is 182cm tall”. Both of the common metric versions of that measurement are less ergonomic than 6ft. cm feels too big and m feels too small. Another way to put it is that the range of measurements for many everyday things often fits on your two hands. Another example “I have a 7 inch penis” translated to, “I have a 17.78cm penis”, subjectively doesn’t feel the same in conversations. The number 7 subjectively fits in your mind a little easier than 17.78. Anyway, as I said I don’t disagree with you, the metric system is better in a lot of ways and I’m happy to use it when I can, but I do think that people spend far too much time talking about how superior their big brain unit of measurement is when it doesn’t really matter that much.
  - windmark 3y ago
    Your examples with even numbers in feet and odd in meters tell me that is what you’re used to. I can counter with that saying 180 cm is a lot easier than 5 feet 10.86 inches. No one says that, similar to that no one would say 17.78. What’s convenient with metric is that there isn’t any difference between saying 180 or 179 cm. You just say, “one seventy nine”, not “one hundred and seventy nine”. Here I am showing what I am used to.
    - Dig1t 3y ago
      Well my point with the examples was not the ".78" part, it was the "7" vs "17". In your counter example, I would just round the imperial units to 5 feet 11 inches or 6 feet in everyday conversation. My point is that whether it's 180 vs 18 vs 1.8 all of those powers of ten are just a little bit less ergonomic because they do not fit nicely onto my two counting hands. 5 and 6 do fit nicely on my hands (and in my head) and so are just a tiny bit nicer to use every day. To be honest, if the meter was closer to the size of a foot the metric system would have the same advantage. The powers of ten part is the good part of the system, not necessarily the absolute sizes of the base units. I agree that if I grew up with it I would think it is fine. It is just what you're used to. I'm just expressing an opinion, I don't know why everyone needs to downvote me, I keep saying that metric is better.

rhelz 3y ago

The problems with the metric system are largely the problems of using base-10 arithmetic. Say you are a carpenter; your boss hands you a meter stick and asks you to cut him a piece of wood 1/3 meter long. Well, there's no line on the stick for that. You go back to the boss, and say this meter stick isn't accurate enough; Its only marked to centimeters. So he grumbles, buys you one which is marked to millimeters, and you try again....still no line on the meter stick for 1/3rd of a meter... Wiki has a beautiful chart relating the olde-tymie english units like inches, barleycorns, and furlongs. These units were developed ad-hoc by people living in every kind of society from industrial stretching back to the paleolithic. And yet, they are remarkably coherent--once you notice it. What is striking is how often the factors of 2 and 3 are involved in converting one unit into another; e.g., three barleycorns is an inch, 6 picas is an inch, 3 feet is a yard, etc. Metric calculations are ostensibly easier because we use base-10. If we used, say, base-6 or base-12, metric calculations would be as difficult to do in our heads as the English units are. But all those ancient English units would super-easy, because its super-easy to multiply or divide by 2 or 3 in base-6 or base-12. You can see this most clearly, ironically, in nations like, say, Japan, who have adopted the metric system the most throughly. There, they never use decimeters, or even centimeters. Every measurement is given in millimeters, and you tend to find lengths like 24 and 48 millimeters to be especially previlent--because they both have lots of factors of 2 and 3, making it easy to divide lengths into the most common ratios which are actually used. Its why eggs are sold by the dozen and beer comes in 6-packs.

BillSaysThis 3y ago
Why would a boss ask a carpenter for a piece of wood 1/3 of a meter long? What architect or engineer would specify this length instead of a number of millimeters?
- rhelz 3y ago
  Why should my measuring stick prevent me from being able to divide a 1 meter length of wood into 3rds? Sure, they use millimeters....but this is an unfortunate workaround for a defect of the metric system. The proof is that if you look at the number of millimeters in the specified length, more often than not its something like 1,200 millimeters, viz, a number which is really big and divisible by 3.

resonator 3y ago

I've been slowing learning the imperial measurement system and I would say that it's now natural to me in a very limited sense. I grew up in Australia using the metric system. As a child, it was (and probably still is) common to throw around estimates in inches or yards, but anything precise was expressed in in mm or meters. So I've always had a sense of how big and inch or two is but like the presenter, for anything bigger I'd need to perform a quick conversions back to my natural metric measurements to understand what was meant. I'm also a woodworker and use many vintage tools, produced before the world adopted metric. I decided long ago that I would these tools as they were designed to be used and not try to mess with metric, too. At the time, I had no intuition at all about fractions of an inch. I didn't even know that 8ths and 16ths where how they were divided. I literally had no idea. I needed to pull out my maths brain to tell you whether 7/8 or 5/16 was bigger. I used imperial measurements almost exclusively while woodworking in my shed. This was possible because I don't need to communicate measures to anyone other than myself. I also don't often need to take measurements of odd things that don't fall nicely onto an imperial ruler. I'm now comfortable using inches for measuring things up to maybe 100" — I wonder if 100 is only an obvious stopping point because of my metric upbringing — I still have no concept of a mile or yard before converting to metric. But I do still do use metric when I need a precise measure of something that can't be expressed easily in inches. So I'd use 12" rather than 304mm, but I'd use 300mm rather than 11 and whatever inches. Also, it's made easier due to a lot of hangover in stock wood dimensions. It still comes in thicknesses that are more naturally expressed in inches, for example 19mm (3/4"), 25mm (1"). I've been working this way for about 10 years and can now think in inches without any conversion. I doubt I could flip all units of measure to imperial without changing the world I live in and the people I work with.

mvdtnz 3y ago
How is 3/4" any more or less "naturally expressed" than 19mm?
- resonator 3y ago
  Dividing it by two gives you 3/8 rather than 9.5mm. Dividing it by 4 gives you 3/16 rather than 4.75mm. Both 3/8 and 3/16 are common sizes. You can drill holes cut grooves this size. You can use your 3/8 chisel to quickly find the centerline. It's not like you can't do any of this with the metric system, but you'll either need to measure things more, or round things. Often rounding is fine, but to me it feels like a compromise that is born out of the measuring system; a compromise that isn't needed when using the imperial system.

N19PEDL2 3y ago

A fun fact about my ignorance of the imperial system: I moved to UK some years ago and I started using Tinder to meet girls there. I noticed that everyone wrote their height in feet in the description, so I did too. I'm 181 cm (5'11), but since everyone lies about their height on Tinder, I wrote 5'12. This until a girl I matched pointed out that 5'12 is actually 6 ft.

warrenm 3y ago

The Imperial System definitely feels far more human-oriented ... (and not just because some measurements have body parts associated (foot, handspan, etc)) Temperatures are a good example of this, and I saw a wonderful graphic/meme a few years ago I can put here in print: --------- F - 0º 100º - pretty cold, pretty hot C - 0º 100º- cold, dead K - 0º 100º - dead, still dead --------- Imperial units are not objectively "better" than Metric units Neither are Metric units objectively "better" than Imperial units You can definitely tell Imperial is meant for "human" or "comfort" use vs Metric's "scientific" or "precision" use, though