Google| Subject | Re: ISO value names are becoming ridiculous |
| From | Whisky-dave |
| Date | 01/08/2016 15:53 (01/08/2016 06:53) |
| Message-ID | <d5c4a4c9-9a4b-4313-b928-c1145db3ef10@googlegroups.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | nospam |
On Thursday, 7 January 2016 16:48:38 UTC, nospam wrote:
nospamWe went metric with money in 1971, we planned to have a gradual transformation whicjh later included weights and measure and then speed and distances. But we didn't much like km or kg so ran dual systems until today where the govenrment don;t want to push the issue of completely going metric as it wouldn;t have been popular with the voters.
In article <91034459-6929-484d-89b7-b85f55d9dbde@googlegroups.com>, Whisky-dave <whisky.dave@gmail.com>wrote:nospamWhisky-davenospamEric Stevensphilonospam
A linear system would now make more sense
definitely not. it would only confuse things.
it's a bit like converting to metric. not gonna happen.
It's already happening.
definitely not.
the usa tried converting to metric long ago and it did not work.
When did it try that ?
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_Conversion_Act> The Metric Conversion Act is an Act of Congress that U.S. President Gerald Ford signed into law on December 23, 1975.[1] It declared the Metric system "the preferred system of weights and measures for United States trade and commerce", but permitted the use of United States customary units in non-business activities. there's still one highway with metric signage, which was built during the metric conversion days, and not surprisingly, there is some resistance to switch: <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/15/us/15highway.html?_r=0>
What size coke cans do you have ?
Here we have 330ml beer bottles come in all sorts of sizes from the tiny 250ml to 330ml, 450ml, 500ml, 568ml, 70cl and 75cl 1 L ... etc...
Makes me wonder why the USA sticks with it's 'own' systemn even you're gallons are difernt to ours.Whisky-davenospam
Maybe USAins are just not bright enough to understand it after all there's only a couple of oher countries which haven't been able to convert to at least some extent those countries are Myanmar (Burma) and Liberia. That should mean something.
it means nothing.
yes we in the UK still use both, but obviously the older generation tend to have more problems. But if you don't start with the young things might never change.nospamthere's also nothing wrong with imperial measurements.Whisky-dave
othe rthan most of teh wold has gone metric and for a lot of things it's easier to use in calculations. But I admit I still use both and can understand both. I do find the metric system easier than remmebr what a fatham is and how long a furloing is and chains and drams, and fliud onouces and gallons, quarts, bushels, hectares, the hand, olympic swimming pools, car lenghs, Cow's grass, a football field.......
it's not that hard to learn for those who work with it every day. if not, it's not that hard to calculate. it's whatever people get used to.
switching to a new system needs to offer a significant advantage, and it doesn't.It seems to for most countries. NASA seems to think that way too.
The U.S. is the only industrialized nation that has yet to widely convert to the metric system. In fact our refusal to convert our own measurements dates back to the very creation of the country.
Though colonists were accustomed to the Imperial system of measurements used by the British, early founders introduced their own tweaks under the Constitution's Article I, Section 8 that states Congress holds the power "to coin money...and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures." Despite calls to convert in 1821, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams saw no need, and affirmed America's metric system snub.
You manageed to create your on syetem based on ours in 1821 guess people were cleverer then, and more stubbon now simialar to with instigating new gunb control laws plenty claiming tehre's no advantage in restricting guns, you can even sell them to teh mentally ill if at a gun show can;t you. seems weird to me.
Yes so, the ameraicans had to catch up to teh russian in the early 1960s. Don't forget america didn't invent the imperial system either.nospamthink about which country put people on the moon, put spacecraft on mars, did a flyby of pluto and landed a spacecraft on an asteroid.Whisky-dave
hint: it was a country that uses imperial measurements.
http://www.space.com/3332-nasa-finally-metric.html
that's dated 2007, which is well after the moon landing and mars landing.
yes best to stick with one when possible, makes you wonder why NASA has chosen the metric systemn doesn't it ?Whisky-davenospam
What country crashed a probe into mars because they got the units wrong, and it was ESA not NASA that landed a spacecraft on an asteroid.
the problem with that probe was they used *two* systems, not one. that's just asking for problems.
Luckily the USA didn;t set up it;s own stadards for the WWW by calling it teh american web and used a differnt protocols
was London UK mostley and I guess they thought they make a better job of it or teh USA didn't have what was needed.Whisky-davenospam
Where did the USA go for it';s specail effects for the star wars film ?
who cares. wherever they went should have told them how stupid the movie is and refused to have anything to do with it on principle.
01/06/2016-
