= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Nornagest comments on The Majority Is Always Wrong - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (50)
Wow, I had never heard any claims of superiority for the English measurement system. I think that with respect to temperature, 1C clearly comes closer to the minimum perceptible temperature difference than 1F does. 1cm is clearly better for "something small" than 1 inch, though 1 caliber is possibly better for "something really tiny" than 1mm but aren't used much. Meters are better than feet for large things. Liters than pints for practical fluid volume, grams are a bit small, kilograms a bit large, and Newtons "just right" but not widely used.
Nitpick: "caliber" has several different meanings, all of which (confusingly) relate to a gun's barrel dimensions. The one you're using is a measure of internal barrel diameter, essentially a shorthand for inches (i.e. .22 caliber); the decimal point often gets dropped in that context, though. It's equally correct to speak of caliber in terms of some other unit, like millimeters. When you're talking about large weapons, though, the word means the length of the weapon's barrel as a multiple of its internal diameter; a tank gun might be 120 mm 55 caliber, making it 6.6 meters long.
The American customary system doesn't as far as I know have a general-use length unit in the millimeter range. There are a couple of typographical units defined in terms of the customary system, but they haven't really escaped into the wild.
Nope, the equivalent unit is x/2^n inches.
For example, metric wrenches might be 4mm or12mm, while "standard" (imperial) might be 5/32'' or 1/2''.
Please don't use URL shorteners. I want to upvote this for informativeness but aagh...
I wouldn't have, but the markup here interacts badly with URLs containing close parentheses. If you know of a workaround, I'd be happy to hear it.
EDIT: ...or I could just look at the extended markup help. There, fixed.
Simply put a backslash before the closing parenthesis. I.E. to link to "http://example.com/foo(bar)" type "[link](http://example.com/foo(bar\))"