this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
174 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15914 readers
12 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Link

The replies are hilarious michael-laugh, so many blue checks saying "abandon big tech!" while they pay for Twitter from the richest fascist in the world.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] xXthrowawayXx@hexbear.net 13 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Fabricated whole cloth by the French elites to satisfy their inability to perform simple arithmetic - good and proper!

Formed to be easy to use by centuries of laborers performing their work, beloved by all - verboten!

[–] Satanic_Mills@hexbear.net 19 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Formed to be easy to use by centuries of laborers performing their work, beloved by all - verboten!

That must be why customary measurements are consistent across all cultures, since they are defined by use- hang on, I'm getting a call from the foot:

It varied in length from country to country, from city to city, and sometimes from trade to trade. Its length was usually between 250 mm and 335 mm and was generally, but not always, subdivided into 12 inches or 16 digits.

Boy I'm glad we use natural and not arbitrarily defined measurements!

[–] CrushKillDestroySwag@hexbear.net 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Criticizing the metric system is not the same as criticizing standardization. Plenty of placed standardized their measurements before the metric system came along and replaced the original lengths of measure (that were based on useful lengths to work in, as determined by artisans through thousands of years of trial and error) with new ones (that were based on universal constants that were selected by an aristocrat to look nice on paper).

[–] Satanic_Mills@hexbear.net 15 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I'm so glad we use a system based on Big Clive from Camden's shoe size on a gouty Tuesday in 1754 rather than a measure utterly unrelated to my life, like the speed of the thing I use to see literally everything I interact with.

[–] xXthrowawayXx@hexbear.net 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Damn it must be so cool to use light and naturally understand its speed over distances similar to parts of your anatomy.

I struggle to comprehend the speed of light as a measure of distance over anything less than about 300 miles. You must just be built different.

[–] Venus@hexbear.net 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Honestly I struggle to think of light traveling any distance shorter than from the sun to here, which I know is like 5 mins. I couldn't possibly begin to tell you how far it travels in a second, or a tenth of a second, or whatever.

[–] xXthrowawayXx@hexbear.net 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

A second is around the equator about seven and a half times. A tenth of a second is three quarters of the equator. The moon is about one and a quarter seconds away from earth, you know, if you ever wanna use it for something.

E: this is all half remembered from radio operation and radio astronomy. I could be wrong.

[–] CrushKillDestroySwag@hexbear.net 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Do you regularly experience time dilation? If not, then I suspect that the average size of a person's foot is more intuitive to you than the speed of light.

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

are you doing an elaborate bit

[–] ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

(that were based on useful lengths to work in, as determined by artisans through thousands of years of trial and error)

Source. Also fuck you this is a stupid statement. Why in the goddamn fuck would a variable unit with multiple "standardisations" almost exclusively based on the whims of contemporary rulers have been determined by artisans, and some specific length that was useful to them? If they're so specifically useful lengths and divisions to work with why are they variably divided into 9, 12, or 16 parts depending on where you are in the world and history, and why does the specifically useful length vary across standardisations? If the standardised size is so valuable to artists then why did it change twice in 200 years because different English kings wanted credit for it? You think their artisan friends were begging them to make the foot a little shorter?

that were based on universal constants that were selected by an aristocrat to look nice on paper

Did you do any thinking at all before writing this? Can you not come up with a single possible reason why it might be advantageous to base measurements off an immutable aspects of the universe instead of "dave reckon's this is a good length*? Is it really that hard to connect a desire for standardisation to something that actually is the same every time?

[–] CrushKillDestroySwag@hexbear.net 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You seem to be operating under the assumption that the inch, foot, yard etc were pulled arbitrarily out of thin air by a king when he standardized the system. No, the system already existed, and it had been developed organically by working people for thousands of years. All the king did was come in and say "we're going to use this specific version of the system for standard's sake", he didn't make any meaningful changes to the lengths themselves.

You put far too much emphasis on the so-called "immutable aspects of the universe" that metric is supposedly based on. At one point in time the meter was based on a metal rod that they kept in Paris, they only stopped using that because they found that it was slowly shrinking over time. There's no reason that you couldn't determine what fraction of a light-second that a yard is and then retroactively define it as that, and then claim that the imperial system is "based on immutable aspects of the universe". It's all arbitrary at the end of the day.

[–] ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net 2 points 11 months ago

Ah, not quite - I'm operating on the assumption that the people working for thousands of years arbitrarily pulled them from thin air. Because, you know... That's literally how all definitions of measurement work. Try the cubit, somewhere between a foot and a half and 4 feet - what was so useful to people about those distances? At best ones like the foot and the chi came from using your forearm as a standard length, but once they're standardised the choice of whose forearm to use is completely arbitrary. Russian units were based on different ways of stretching your body parts - stuff like a hand span or arm span. Choosing what to use as a measurement is completely arbitrary, which then is standardised over time by people using the same thing as a measurement and it eventually getting defined as a single distance. The kings arbitrary choices were just building on the arbitrary choices of the past. There wasn't anything less arbitrary about the choice because lots of people used it.

Yes, they discovered the law as they understood it was mistaken, and so found more accurate ways to define it, which is why we're now using a fraction of a light second. If we find more precise definitions in future we'll define it by them.

Lastly, they already did that. The imperial and us customary measurement systems are both defined by metric distances now, specifically because metric distances, equally arbitrarily chosen as they are, shouldn't change. And if they do, we'll find something that doesn't.

[–] Abracadaniel@hexbear.net 15 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] xXthrowawayXx@hexbear.net 3 points 11 months ago

Why don’t you derive a unit of force from the decay of a cesium atom over it?

[–] PorkrollPosadist@hexbear.net 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

As an American machinist, there is nothing I hate more than multiplying or dividing numbers by ten.

[–] xXthrowawayXx@hexbear.net 5 points 11 months ago

Don’t worry, there’s a chart in the back of machinery’s handbook.

[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You, a soyjak: Nooooooo, we should base our measurements on the body parts of an inbred king.

Them, another soyjak: Noooooo, we should base our measurements on what a bunch of out-of-touch scientists who never picked up a hammer thought was good.

Me, a gigachad: kilofeet

[–] xXthrowawayXx@hexbear.net 4 points 11 months ago

The Illuminati monk at the right of the bell curve: mils