5 ms·
Yeah, they just did the conversion and slapped it on there. Should have said "about 2200 mph".
by bena 2y ago
Yeah, they just did the conversion and slapped it on there. Should have said "about 2200 mph".
- JoshTriplett 2y agoIt's unfortunate that the only written mechanism we have for expressing a lack of precision is scientific notation, which tends to be obfuscating for numbers at this scale: if you write "3.6e3 kph (2.2e3 mph)", you make it clear approximately how much precision you do and don't have, but it's less obvious-at-a-glance for the target audience of an article like this.
- carlmr 2y agoOr use kps and not lose additional precision every time you translate units?
- kingds 2y ago2200 would improperly add an extra significant figure, "about 2000" would be okay.
- bena 2y agoI had figured since km/h was NN00, the same would be good for mph.
- olddustytrail 2y agoNaw, it's already been false precisioned to hell. The original would have been "about 1000 metres/second". That got translated to 3600 km/h etc. Check how much it charges if it was really 800 m/s. Or 1200 m/s.