Actual poster from 1917 that made me laugh. A lot.
Also, those motherfuckers are measuring the weight of those balls in kilograms, aren’t they?
“Hey could I borrow a drill bit?”
“Sure, what size?”
“Seventeen sixty-fourths”
“Fuck you”
Sorry man I think in 2024 you’re objectively wrong.
“hey can I borrow a drill bit?”
“Sure, what size?”
“0.33333333333333333333333333333333 centimeters”
Metric drill bits are measured in mm and hardy anybody needs that much (0.33333… mm/cm) precision. I have a set of metric drill bits in 0.1mm increments and I personally might not ever need greater precision than that. Maybe in some lab environments they need greater precision but I imagine once you’re on that level it would be custom anyway.
0.33333… is what happens when you try to divide 10 by 3. This is because 10 is such a broken number that 1/3rd (a pretty common fraction) becomes an infinitely repeating decimal. In base12, 1/3rd is 4.0. Metric is broken by design because it’s based on base10. Lets take the lessons learned from the metric system and invent something new, something better, something base12.
You’re pointing out the problem in base10 having too many fractions that don’t divide cleanly. This is why base10 is shit.
Low IQ Base10: 17/64 = 0.265625
Equivalent expression in Chad Base12: 15/54 = 0;323
This post is about the metric system, not base 10 vs base 12. Metric is superior to imperial.
Also 15/54 is in no way more convenient than 17/64, I’m assuming you’re joking.
And the metric system would be better still if it was base12. It’s time for a replacement.
It’s the same number in different bases and divides out to 3 dozets(I made this up) in base12 and 6 digits in base10. Our friend you replied to was pointing out that it was a mistake to adopt base10 measuring instead of throwing out base10 counting because base12 fractions divide more easily due to the increased factors. And he was right.
