Slashdot Mirror


White House: Use Metric If You Want, We Don't Care

Earlier this year we discussed a petition on the White House's 'We The People' site asking the administration to adopt the metric system as the standard system of measurement in the U.S. Today, the administration issued a disappointing response. Simply put: they're not going to do anything about it. They frame their response as a matter of preserving a citizen's choice to adopt whatever measurement system he wants. Quoting Patrick D. Gallagher of the National Institute of Standards and Technology: "... contrary to what many people may think, the U.S. uses the metric system now to define all basic units used in commerce and trade. At the same time, if the metric system and U.S. customary system are languages of measurement, then the United States is truly a bilingual nation. ... Ultimately, the use of metric in this country is a choice and we would encourage Americans to continue to make the best choice for themselves and for the purpose at hand and to continue to learn how to move seamlessly between both systems. In our voluntary system, it is the consumers who have the power to make this choice. So if you like, "speak" metric at home by setting your digital scales to kilograms and your thermometers to Celsius. Cook in metric with liters and grams and set your GPS to kilometers. ... So choose to live your life in metric if you want, and thank you for signing on."

76 of 1,145 comments (clear)

  1. Start here by GeoSanDiego · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A good place to start would be on all of the federal highway signs.

    1. Re:Start here by countach44 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, there are limited places in the US that do this: Metric Road Signs in the US I think this is something that could be voted on at the municipality/state level and could eventually work its way nationally.

    2. Re:Start here by UltraZelda64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "55 MPH" seems fine to me. I don't have a problem with adding KPH readings to the signs, but if they want to claim that they are truly "bilingual" with measurements, then having both MPH and KPH would make the most sense...

    3. Re:Start here by waddgodd · · Score: 4, Informative

      They did that once, ISTR the mileage (kilometerage?) sign on I-15 between Blackfoot and Pocatello, Idaho being in both Miles and Kilometers in about '75-'77ish (I was a bit young at the time), but since it was during the Carter administration, of course it HAD to be undone because fuck Democrats. I can't remember exactly when I-15 signs were changed over to strictly miles, but I think it was the late eighties. So until we get over this two-party backbiting festival in DC, it does us no good to even try to do good things.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
    4. Re:Start here by mark-t · · Score: 5, Informative

      When Canada was switching to metric, dual signage was common. The km/h value was shown first, and the mph was shown in a smaller (but still quite readable) font below it. Usage of "km/h" or "mph" was explicit, to ensure there was no ambiguity.

      This transition period lasted for quite some time, and after a while, the signs were ultimately replaced with speed limits listing strictly in km/h (and often the "km/h" was no longer present as well).

    5. Re:Start here by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Take your awkward, unnatural metric system back to europe where it belongs

      I agree this is nothing the USA can afford to do right now. After all, you need that money to fight the drug war and build more aircraft carriers.

      However, while the metric system is many things, 'awkward and unnatural' isn't one of them. You look up 'awkward' in the dictionary and there's the Imperial system. 5280 feet in a mile? 16 ounces in a pound? Water freezes at 32 degrees?

      What the hell? It's like if my toddler invented a system of weights and measures.

    6. Re:Start here by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not a waste of money if the Feds simply say that any new signs paid for with Federal highway funds must have SI units as their primary measure. They should also require auto manufacturers to mark speedometers with km/h (although most already do).

      The SI has officially been""the preferred system of weights and measures for United States trade and commerce" since 1975, so it's well past time to make that mean something.

      No sympathy for innumerates who find it difficult, because it is in fact much simpler.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    7. Re:Start here by RabidReindeer · · Score: 3, Informative

      "55 MPH" seems fine to me. I don't have a problem with adding KPH readings to the signs, but if they want to claim that they are truly "bilingual" with measurements, then having both MPH and KPH would make the most sense...

      They did that in Florida. People kept stealing the signs.

      Then they raised the speed limit and dropped the metric numbers.

    8. Re:Start here by Miamicanes · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Every time a state starts printing metric speed limits, it inevitably ends up rounding the limit DOWN.

      I remember one failed experiment where FDOT (Florida) tried to be cute and put up signs declaring "44kph" to be the metric equivalent of 30mph (it's only 27mph). The signs were SO hated, most of them got vandalized beyond recognition within a month, and pretty much ALL of them had the "44" spray painted, X'ed (with black markers), or shot out (with BBs, paintball pellets, or real honest-to-god bullets) by the time FDOT took them down and replaced them with 30mph signs. FDOT later admitted that it was a mistake.

      If you want the public to accept metric speed limits, roll them out with a big public campaign that emphasizes that the limits are being RAISED everywhere by up to 5mph. Instantly, metric speed limits will become popular and cool among drivers. Declare 115kph (71.45mph) to be the equivalent of 70mph, and drivers will like them. Round it up to 120kph (74.56mph), and drivers will LOVE them. Try pulling another FDOT stunt by putting up signs saying "70mph/111kph", and they'll get vandalized beyond recognition within days.

    9. Re:Start here by cdecoro · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That would be the last place to start, as it would cost a fortune to replace all of the highway signs. Not only that, but also all of the mile markers, for which most states have every 1/10 of a mile. Moreover, contrary to what some people have implied, the numbers are generally not painted on, they're fabricated from other materials and overlaid. And for what? So we can convert the length of our commute into a multiple of our height, or something else of the sort? Yes, it's absolutely absurd that there are 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in a yard, and I-don't-even-know-how-many yards in a mile (and yes, I've heard of Google/Wikipedia; but I just don't care). The truth is, I never need to convert inches into miles. You measure human-scale things in feet and inches, travelling distances in miles.

      On the other hand, you know where we should start: volumetric measurements. I have frequently had a recipe that takes some number of teaspoons of a liquid, while having measuring cups measured in (naturally) cups, and nutritional information in ounces. Oh, and keep in mind that most tea spoons are significantly larger than a teaspoon. And then there's tablespoons, pints, quarts, gallons, barrels, and who knows what else. This is a lot harder to keep straight, and unlike miles to inches, sometimes you actually need to convert between these.

      Add into the mix the problem that pints differ from place to place (either 16 or 20 oz), and "ounce" is both a volumetric measure and a weight measure. Obviously, if you have something that's clearly a solid or a liquid, it's clear which is which. But what about, say, frozen yogurt. When the self-serve froyo place sells by the ounce, and posts calories by the ounce, it would only be reasonable to think that these are the same ounces. It would also be wrong.

      Moreover, in the case of volumetric measures, not only do you have a real problem, but an easier solution: most of the containers that hold liquids are disposable anyways, and constantly manufactured (i.e. food). All that would need to be done is to make containers that are metric-sized, and printed with metric labels, rather than Imperial. In fact, we're closer to that already. By law, all wine and distilled alcohol must be sold in one of several metric sizes (for distilled, it is 375 mL, 750 mL, 1L, 1.75 L, if I recall correctly). Soda is frequently sold in 2 L bottles.

      Do that, let people see that metric actually saves time and hassle, and then go about changing other measurements. Weight would probably be the easiest to transition next, followed by lengths for things other than highway signs. (No one will care that they can't easily convert meters into miles, just as they don't care that they can't convert feet into miles). But please don't try to start with highway signs. Or bother with highway signs at all, for that matter. They are the death of metricfication in the US, and insistence on them is only counterproductive to the rest of your goals.

    10. Re:Start here by Arancaytar · · Score: 4, Funny

      meters per second or nothing! :P

    11. Re:Start here by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 5, Funny

      it should be in km/s

      I can see the speed limit signs now: 1.94E-3 km/s.

    12. Re: Start here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not to mention that the imperial system is also from europe :)

    13. Re:Start here by Tuidjy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Kilometer means 1000 meters. Milli-, nano-, kilo-, terra- are ways to conveniently denote powers of ten. It's a system of prefixes, and yes, it is defined in the metric system.

      Si is a system of units. Abbreviation from SystÃme international des unités (I may be missing an 'e' or an accent, somewhere)

      The two are systems, both are quite French, but their origins are about a century apart, if I am not mistaken.

      --
      No good deed goes unpunished...
    14. Re:Start here by EvanED · · Score: 5, Funny

      Abbreviation from SystÃfme international des unitÃf©s (I may be missing an 'e' or an accent, somewhere)

      Don't worry, so is Slashcode.

    15. Re:Start here by msauve · · Score: 5, Interesting

      " It's like if my toddler invented a system of weights and measures." Unlike today, where many units are defined by fundamental physical properties which can be duplicated (to a high accuracy) anywhere, Imperial measurements came from the need to be able to specify units which would be suitably accurate across geographies.

      So, we ended up with a foot being, well, the length of a foot. A mile ("mille passus") being 1000 paces, etc. The needs were to measure small units (foot), or large distances (mile), so the conversion wasn't often needed (who builds a mile long building, or steps toe-to-heal across Europe?)

      Then you get a pound being equivalent to so many grains of wheat (or a different number of grains of barley), etc.

      It made sense at the time, and worked well enough.

      BTW, 16 oz in a lb is from binary powers, easily divisible. The history of temperature units is interesting and convoluted, but 32 for freezing is based on binary divisions (64 units) between that and human body temperature (96). 0 was ice+salt. So again, it was an attempt at units which could be duplicated independently.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    16. Re:Start here by AuMatar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except nobody's feet are exactly 1 foot. Nor is anyone's 1000 paces exactly 1 mile. If those were truly universal measurements, you'd have some point. As they're not, you don't. And in the long term we'd save money by being on the same system as literally every other country in the world by removing the possibility of tooling mistakes, idiocies like NASA Orbiter problem, and additional cost to companies trying to sell in the US of having to have both measurements in their workflows and computer systems.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    17. Re:Start here by camperdave · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You want further broken-ness? You cannot just measure the volume of a liquid in US customary units. Nor can you just plop a chunk of stuff on a scale to see how much it weighs. Why? Because different substances use different units. Wine uses different volume units than beer, which is in turn different than the units you would use for water. An ounce of gold is heavier than an ounce of steel, but a pound of gold is lighter than a pound of steel, because the pounds and ounces that you use to measure gold are different than the pounds and ounces you use to measure steel.

      Oh, and if you were to dig out your ruler and measure out two survey markers that are supposed to be ten miles apart, you'd find them to be 633601+1/4 inches apart, instead of the 633600 inches you'd expect, because again, the imperial system is broken. Survey miles are different than real miles.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    18. Re:Start here by rHBa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Moreover, in the case of volumetric measures, not only do you have a real problem, but an easier solution: most of the containers that hold liquids are disposable anyways, and constantly manufactured (i.e. food). All that would need to be done is to make containers that are metric-sized, and printed with metric labels, rather than Imperial.

      FWIW, this became a legal requirement in the UK 20+(?) years ago when we joined the EU and we have just about assimilated metric measures of volume and weight when it comes to consumables.

      Also noteworthy, the building industry also works in metric these days, although there are many builders who still think in ft/in a lot of the materials are sold in metric sizes, i.e the width of a standard sheet of plaster board (sheet rock) dictates how you space your studs.

      However, street signs are still in MPH and most people still measure their body weight in Stones and their height in Feet and Inches.

      It takes a while but the ability to trade with neighbouring countries makes it worth it...

    19. Re:Start here by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I really don't think measurements are a political party thing. There's no major religious argument in favor of it (keword: major) akin to say evolution vs creationism, and there's no party line that we have to use X system. It's just that average joe's prefer things a certain way.

      Ever since I was in the Army, I've always written my dates as 12-FEB-09, and sometimes when I do so, somebody gives me shit because I don't use the same date format that "everybody else" uses, and it is never a conservative or liberal thing. I could see maybe if I wrote 12/02/09, which would easily be interpreted as either december 9th or february 12th, but I like that date format for the same reason that the Army uses it as standard: There is no ambiguity. No matter what day of the month it is, the date/month is obvious, but people still complain to me about it anyways.

      Likewise, I could see why they'd complain even more about measurements. It's hard to mentally picture units that you aren't used to thinking in without doing a manual conversion.

      And FFS I'm sick of this constant political divisiveness just for the sake of political divisiveness. Stop pointing fingers at the "other side" just because something doesn't go your way. If you stop to look for a second, you'll often find that members of the "other side" agree with you on more things than you realize.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    20. Re:Start here by VortexCortex · · Score: 5, Funny

      but if they want to claim that they are truly "bilingual" with measurements, then having both MPH and KPH would make the most sense...

      They did that in Florida. People kept stealing the signs.

      You might be a redneck if, your unit conversion chart is made of empty food boxes and stolen street signs...

    21. Re:Start here by CAIMLAS · · Score: 5, Informative

      When you see 1 1/4 cups, or 55 mph, or 3 1/2 miles to the exit - there's a good chance that the measurement is inexact or unnecessary. Nobody actually paced out exactly 18,480 feet and placed the "3.5 mile" sign at exactly that spot. They placed the sign and filled in the best available number in the most convenient unit.

      As someone who's done roadway surveying... yeah, um, that's a horribly ignorant statement. Maybe you live in CA or something, where that approach seems acceptable, but throughout most of the US, there is consistency in things like: distance between a stop sign and an intersection, roadway mile markers (some places it's a quarter mile, some places it's a mile, etc.). Believe it or not, a roadway where the speed limit is 55mph WILL be surveyed its full distance to within an inch of accuracy for elevation, the roadway bedding, incline, and curve - there's a lot of math that goes into it, and it's all thoroughly planned out.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    22. Re:Start here by otuz · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'd suggest just base36-formatting the epoch (unix) time. It's about mnbzcn when I'm writing this.

    23. Re:Start here by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

      This. I think most folks have the wrong idea about how a society actually changes. The people themselves don't change. Once someone is about in their mid-20s or 30s, their habits and preferences become ingrained and are highly unlikely to ever change for the rest of their lives. You're not going to be able to convince them to use metric, so don't even bother trying. Instead, you take advantage of the fact that people grow old and die, and are constantly replaced by younger people.

      You introduce a new system in a way that it doesn't upset the older generation while giving the younger generation a chance to get used to it. Then you wait for the older generation to die off. Then you abandon the old system. So introduce signage in both metric and English. Wait a generation or two until the bulk of the population is used to both systems. Then you phase out the English system.

    24. Re: Start here by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As parent said, lots of different speed limits. Also in rural areas there are road signs like

      "Last gas for 75 miles"

      "Next rest area 43 miles"

      "Road work begins in 33 miles. Trucks and cars with trailers must use alternate route 10 miles ahead. No gas stations on alternate route for 76 miles"

      These are particularly meaningful in parts of Eastern Oregon, Idaho, Montana, etc, where there is nothing between gas stations and rest areas but sage brush, a few jack rabbits, and even fewer coyotes.

      I heard tell of a billboard in the Mojave Desert that has an arrow pointing at the dirt under it and reads "Last shade for 150 miles." But that might be just crazy California talk.

      --
      Will
    25. Re:Start here by mark-t · · Score: 4, Informative

      They didn't wait a generation.... the conversion started in Canada, in earnest, in about 1971, and was completed over the course of about 10 years.

      Oddly enough, about 5 years after the decade-long process of Canada's conversion to Metric was completed, our then-prime minister ended up abolishing the regulations that really enabled the conversion to happen in the first place. Switching back, since it was not actually legislated any more, was simply too inconvenient, and Canada remained on the metric system ever since.

    26. Re:Start here by vux984 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A square mile is a "section", which is 640 acres. Now 640 acres...

      Canada managed to cope just fine. I used to live in a rural area where the road network was pretty much a grid, divided into square miles. Converting things to metric didn't bring about the end of the world. People still talk about acreage since the historic size of the plots were even acres - I lived on a 5 acre plot which as you noted were quite common, and since the intersections are a mile apart we'll still use miles when giving directions. And there is no reason to eradicate that.

      But the speed limit is 90km/h, farmers know how much property they have in hectares, and the measurements for all the properties in meters is available for legal property descriptions.

      OK fine, by all means define the foot in terms of metric; but remove it from all records and from the culture? No. Just. No.

      I don't think we need to actively eradicate it. But if we stop using it officially, it will gradually fade into the background. I doubt anyone in rural manitoba is ever going to completely stop using miles given the physical layout of the rural road network. But that's fine.

      Aside from that, the Metric system is no less arbitrary than our customary units. The only reason 10 matters is because we have 10 digits on our hands. An alien race might not.

      That is the opposite of arbitrary. Yes, we surely use base 10 due to the number of digits on our hands, but metric was designed to fit into base 10. That was not an arbitrary decision. We are not an alien race. Base 10 is natural for us; not arbitrary.

      Otherwise, all the metric arguments just boil down to "my arbitrary system is better than yours".

      The precise length of a meter is arbitrary; and we both use the same somewhat arbitrary unit of time (seconds) but pretty much everything else derives from that in a natural and logical way. Volume, mass, energy, speed, temperature, force. English units are not linked the same way. There is no defined relationship betwen a gallon and a foot the way there is between a meter and a liter. Or between a pound and a foot the way there is between a kilogram and a meter. A 4 liter jug of milk has a mass of 4 kilograms (for all practical purposes). To equate the arbitrariness of metric and imperial is just delusional.

      but Celcius? Fuggedaboutit. Each decade of the Fahrenheit scale has a readily associated "feel" that Celcius can't match.

      I've got no issues whatsoever with celsius. Instead of 10 degree feels, its more increments of 5. Its what you grow up with.

      They're both arbitrary systems, so it's really just one person's preferance vs. another.

      Metric is far less internally arbitrary, and pretty much all the rest of world uses it. Personal preference in my opinion seems to come down to what you grew up with; so raising the next generation in metric will take care of that. There's no real reason for -you- to change though.

    27. Re:Start here by arth1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Time is just made-up numbers on a made-up scale. Use GMT if you want. The rest of the world won't, because I like lunch at noon and dinner in the afternoon, not lunch at 7am and dinner at noon.

      So if you like to eat lunch at noon, I take it you eat it at 1 PM when DST is in effect?

    28. Re: Start here by Cimexus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not that the US system is hard to use, it's that you're the last outliers (among major developed countries at least) not to switch. It's for the sake of consistency rather than anything else. No more having to program two separate measurement systems into every bit of software. No more wondering WTF 'letter' size paper is anymore when your printer demands it for some reason (i.e. someone in the US has emailed you a document that wants to print on that size paper). Etc.

      It'd be no different if everyone ELSE used the US system, and the US were the only people using metric - it would make sense to change. It's not about which system is better, it's about being consistent.

      If there were several major countries not using metric yet, then I don't think there'd be the same 'annoyance' with the Americans. But you guys are literally the ... last ... ones. Cmon! :)

    29. Re:Start here by VGPowerlord · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As I recall, it was required nation-wide during the late 70s. Then Reagan happened.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    30. Re:Start here by Cimexus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here in metric-using Australia, I'm 178 cm, spoken "one seventy-eight". Barely any longer to say than the approximate equivalent "five eleven". Noone says "one point blah blah metres" - height is in centimetres (specifically to avoid using decimal points and/or mixing units).

      Also, as a Celsius-user, I think of each 5-degree increment as a "different sort of clothing" marker (or at least a "different type of weather feel"). Centered on 20 C (comfortable room temperature), which is no more difficult than thinking about departure from comfortable room temperature in F (i.e. ~70 F).

    31. Re:Start here by smellotron · · Score: 3, Informative

      Your post made me question what tied "noon" to 12:00 in the first place... The Internet says that noon originally meant 15:00, as the ninth hour of daylight (noon ~ nine). Contrast that with "high noon" which refers to the sun being directly overhead.

    32. Re:Start here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ever since I was in the Army, I've always written my dates as 12-FEB-09, and sometimes when I do so, somebody gives me shit because I don't use the same date format that "everybody else" uses, and it is never a conservative or liberal thing. I could see maybe if I wrote 12/02/09, which would easily be interpreted as either december 9th or february 12th, but I like that date format for the same reason that the Army uses it as standard: There is no ambiguity

      So is that 12th Feb 2009, or 9th Feb 2012?

    33. Re:Start here by staalmannen · · Score: 3, Informative

      Right now, there are only 3 countries in the world that are non-metric: US, Burma and Liberia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Metrication_by_year_map.svg). Some have made a partial conversion, Brittain officially changed to the metric system partially but their street signs are still in miles. I think a conversion in the modern society needs to take its time due to all the legacy material (maps, cars etc). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_Kingdom And seriously, the Britts got lots of other standards compliance issues which probably hurts its consumers by more expensive custom-made products for that market, like cars made for left traffic and their own type of electrical plugs compared to the rest of EU.

    34. Re:Start here by Sun · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Almost a decade ago, I was in a trip to the USA. I was very surprised to see Liter used for car engine sizes (here they usually use cubic centimeters, which are exactly 1/1000, so not a real problem).

      I remember strolling through a supermarket, and looking at the soda bottles, which were bigger than the 1.5L bottles common here. I picked one up to see what size it was. I guess most readers know the answer - it was 2 liters. I remember wondering how come Americans are willing to use a metric unit.

      So I asked a vendor. His answer was "This isn't a metric unit. It's liter".
      So I asked him how much was a liter, and his answer was something along the lines of "33.8 ounces" (without blinking of stopping to think about it).

      Which, of course, got me my answer. The reason Americans are using a metric unit is because they don't know it's metric.

      The problem with your proposal is that, if implemented that way, means just adding another unit to the mix, without exposing people to the main advantage that the metric system has to offer. That does not bode well for a "migration path".

      You should add to that the fact that volume realization is hard. I'll give a couple of examples. First, bear in mind that the two units people are, more or less, familiar with are a milliliter (1 cubic centimeter = 1/1000 of a liter) and a liter.

      The first was when a company I worked for ordered a certain amount of boxes for their product. We were trying to figure out whether we have where to store them. I made the calculation, based on box size, and figured the entire bunch would require a little less than 2 cubic meters (around 1.8). We sort of made a hand gesture estimate and figured it was not that much. Boy, were we wrong. We ended up using up every spare cabinet and space in the office. Lesson learned: a cubic meter is a lot.

      The happened just yesterday. I was telling my wife we will have to remove some soil from our garden to make space for extra flooring. She said "we'll be giving that to friends, right?". I told her it was about 500 liters of soil. I then made a quick mental calculation. We'll need about 12 squared meter of flooring, and the base is about half a meter deep. 6000 liters. Assuming soil is half as dense than water (it was while driving, so I couldn't look it up), you get 3 tons of soil. My instinct was off by a factor of 10, and her instinct was off by a factor of 1000.

      This doesn't mean this is useless. Can you make this same calculation, off the top of your head, using imperial units? Metric does simplify things quite considerably. It's just that, specifically for volumes, that is a hard problem to solve.

      Shachar

    35. Re:Start here by KGIII · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Unfortunately, in America, those without digital dashboards have the k/ph text in a much smaller font and on a much smaller scale making precision nearly impossible or, at best, difficult. Mandating the reverse would be a good idea but the number of old cars on the road means that's still a problem. It isn't an insurmountable problem but a problem nonetheless. I still, of course, support a complete switch to metric and (oddly enough, I am usually very opposed to any additional legislation with few exceptions, this being one of them) wouldn't mind it being federally mandated.

      A part of me thinks it should be mandated just so I can hear the various sides howl like banshees at each other. Did I mention that I'm easily amused? My countrymen are straight up retarded for the most part and, unfortunately, that is bipartisan.

      Anyhow, I think the simplest means of advocating the metric unit of measurement is this:

      Using just your head, what is 16.2% of a meter?
      Using just your head, what is 16.2% of a yard?

      Simpler means fewer chances to have errors. As an American I can say, with complete certainty, that we need simplicity here.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    36. Re:Start here by KGIII · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's funny. Also, don't forget drugs. Drugs have been teaching our kids the metric scale for quite some time.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    37. Re:Start here by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Reagan said it was a waste of money, so the government spent a lot of money to take the signs down again.

    38. Re:Start here by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Funny

      All you have to do is make the speed limit either 55mph or 100km/h (driver's choice...)

      Pretty soon you'll have most of America swearing they were driving at 100km/h.

      --
      No sig today...
    39. Re:Start here by dskoll · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Fahrenheit is quite useful when you are thinking in terms of human comfort and safety.

      Really? Maybe it's because I grew up with only the metric system, but I have absolutely no feeling for fahrenheit. I know that 20 Celsius is a nice summer day, 15 is cool, and -30 is about as cold as it gets where I live. I wouldn't have a clue what "80" or "60" or "20" means in Fahrenheit.

      It's all a matter of what you're used to. The US is one of the most conservative and reactionary societies on earth, so I expect it'll still be using Imperial units 50 years from now and probably still retain the penny when you need ten thousand of them to buy a loaf of bread.

  2. The metric system is the tool of the devil! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The metric system is the tool of the devil! My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it.
    ----
    The Simpsons, Abraham Simpson

    1. Re:The metric system is the tool of the devil! by jrmcferren · · Score: 4, Funny

      Mod Parent +5 funny! Anyway as of the last time I was in my auto I was getting 532,224 rods per hogshead which is low compared to 544320. Of course I've been driving where the speed limit ranges from 27,200 furlongs per fortnight to 107,520 furlongs per fortnight. However when the school zone lights are flashing it is a piddly ass 40320 furlongs per fortnight even in a 107,520 furlongs per fortnight zone.

      --
      sudo mod me up
  3. WTF is the administration supposed to do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The petition site isn't a method for legislative fiat. If you want the metric system adopted talk to your Congress person. The president can't force adoption of the metric system. Jesus, people, the president can't even enter bills into Congress and you want him to just pass the fucking law personally? You have representatives for that.

  4. Makes perfect sense to me by bokmann · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The country doesn't have a national language, despite the fact that the majority speak English... so why do we think the Federal government could just mandate metric? Hell, even if they tried, a bunch of angry southern congressman would probably cry 'states rights'. Thanks Obama.

    The cooking channel, the car dealers, gas stations and everyone reading this response could start speaking metric tomorrow if they wanted too... about the only thing that would seem awkward on the green highway mile markers and speed limit signs... and we already largely ignore those...

    If you think you care so much about metric, why can't you tell me how many liters per 100 km your car takes? Its *your* car... no one is stopping you.

    1. Re:Makes perfect sense to me by Chuckstar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed. Why is this response considered so "disappointing"?

    2. Re:Makes perfect sense to me by timmyf2371 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why bother to convert though? The natural way to "speak a language" such as metric is to use it as your first language; not convert between the two.

      Most car manufacturers publish fuel consumption figures in metric and imperial, so the natural way would be to know what your litres per 100 would be, and what this actually means in reality.

      We have a weird situation here in the UK. All fuel is sold by the litre - but no one knows what litres per 100km means or how the cost of a litre of gas will affect them. We all refer to MPG and we know that a gallon is about 4.5x the cost of a litre (yes, our gallons have more litres than yours).

      --

      Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
    3. Re:Makes perfect sense to me by Strider- · · Score: 3, Informative

      Where L/100km makes an infinite amount of sense is when comparing the fuel efficiency of different vehicles. What is better, upgrading a 35mpg car to 42mpg, or upgrading a 15mpg SUV to one that gets 20mpg? If we look at this in L/100km, it becomes pretty damned easy. The 35mpg car gets 6.72L/100km. Upgrading it to a car that gets 42mpg will mean you're now burning 5.6L/100km, saving approximately 1.1L for every 100km you travel. Conversely, the 15mpg SUV gets 15.68L/100km, while its 20mpg replacement burns 11.76L/100km, a savings of 3.92L for every 100km. So even in the first case, despite increasing your mileage by 7mpg, you're only saving 1.1L, while in the second case you're only increasing your milage by 5mpg, but saving 3.92L.

      The fundamental reality here is that for most people, the only time they ever look at the fuel efficiency figures is when they're shopping for a new vehicle. Specifying the fuel usage in L/100km (or hell, Gallons/100mi) provides a much more accurate and useful comparison. The easy solution to your problem is to just publish a number for range. I know that my Jetta gets 725km per tank in city driving, and ~1000 or so in highway driving.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
  5. Makes sense by knotprawn · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not yielding an inch, are they? Imagine the impact it would have on Subway.

    1. Re:Makes sense by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 3, Insightful

      that use of the word "sandwich" is an Americanism too far.

      Ah yes, the Earl of Sandwich was truly one of the great Americans, wasn't he?

  6. We used to have those. by Molochi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Be we decided that provinciality was a smaller sacrifice than the cost of the paint.

    --
    "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
  7. Really Already Metric by iggymanz · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Omnibus Foreign Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 amended the Metric Conversion Act of 1975 and stated the metric system was "the Preferred system of weights and measures for United States trade and commerce". Also said the federal government has a responsibility to assist industry and especially small business, as it voluntarily converts to the metric system .

    Metric system is of course taught in U.S. schools, even since the early 70s (yes, I was there)

  8. Re:The Spin was Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Only a left wing extremist, America hating, Kenyan, terroristic, neo-communist, piece of scum like Obama would be pushing this hard for a multicultural approach to a system of measurement. I demand that my representatives in the House and Senate do everything they can to stop the President in this latest push to destroy what few remaining decent things remain in this once great nation. We should immediately adopt the metric system as a means to protest this naked grab for power by a mean spirited and hateful administration bent on the destruction of democracy and the last remnants of a Christian faith that sustain us. (We should also outlaw counting by base 12... just because.)

  9. Re:first by Beerdood · · Score: 4, Funny

    first

    That must be a imperial first, not a metric first.

    --
    Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
  10. Re:both are bastardized. by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Frankly, decimal is kind of a cruddy system. It was a bad call in the first place to use base 10. Yeah, it's good for counting on your fingers, but it's only cleanly divisible by 1, 2, 5 and 10. Base 12 would have been a much better choice, it's cleanly divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12.

    I say we ditch metric, imperial and the decimal system as well.

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  11. no free choice for gov't info like speed limits by mrvan · · Score: 5, Informative

    I agree that no laws should be passed that force e.g. a supermarket to use specific weights or measures. If people are annoyed by the choice of a supermarket they can bring their business elsewhere.

    However, the "free choice" argument does not work for monopoly players, especially the government itself. The last time I was in the US, miles were used in the interstate system to indicate both distances/exit numbers and maximum speeds. You can't choose to pick the other road that goes the same place but uses metric, because there is no real competition in the road network.

    I don't know whether other official communication of the state(s) uses metric or not, I could imagine many laws and forms that refer to land area, volumes of water, weight (e.g. of cars) that could use either non-metric or metric. They can't hide behind a "free choice" argument there, and a real "bimetric" system requires the government to provide information, like speed limits, in both systems, just like a blingual government publishes laws etc. in two languages.

    1. Re:no free choice for gov't info like speed limits by camperdave · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, you MUST have laws forcing supermarkets to use specific weights or measures. Otherwise, Shady-Joe's meat market could just shave down their scales and sell you 14 oz of beef instead of a full pound. This is the entire reason we have standardized weights and measures in the first place.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  12. The White House has the right idea. by Sydin · · Score: 5, Funny

    Maybe before we rush to adopt the Metric system, we should stop to consider the consequences of blithely giving this measurement system such a central position in our lives.

  13. Good by chihowa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think that this is a perfectly adequate solution.

    I'm a scientist and use metric for everything at work, but I can drive in miles and get groceries by the pound, too. It's really not that hard to effectively use both systems, and given time we can slowly move to using metric all of the time if we want. The most effective change happens so slowly that you can't pinpoint when exactly it happened. Since there's no urgency here, it will be fine if it takes another generation or so to fully transition.

    Look at the progress we've made since the seventies. Today, anyone in science, engineering, medicine, the military, and many other fields are already proficient with both systems. There's no rush, so why not let it happen organically?

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  14. Re:English system is fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I actually think the English system is better for daily use, the measurement units seem more natural to me than the metric ones.

    O_o

    Natural for what? The only advantage the English system has is that lots of lazy-brained people are accustomed to it.

  15. Re:Missing the Point? by Antipater · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Not really, no. If you actually read what happened, the "metric mixup" was a contributing factor but not the critical factor, especially since the people knew it was off course and decided not to correct course. From the very article you linked:

    The discrepancy between calculated and measured position, resulting in the discrepancy between desired and actual orbit insertion altitude, had been noticed earlier by at least two navigators, whose concerns were dismissed. A meeting of trajectory software engineers, trajectory software operators (navigators), propulsion engineers, and managers, was convened to consider the possibility of executing Trajectory Correction Maneuver-5, which was in the schedule. Attendees of the meeting recall an agreement to conduct TCM-5, but it was ultimately not done.

    But "We mixed up feet and meters! Whoopsie!" while embarrassing, is not quite so embarrassing as "We canceled the scheduled maneuver that would have saved the ship, even though we knew something was very wrong." Plus, it was an easy headline for the media. There were a legion of problems with the Mars Climate Orbiter that had nothing to do with unit systems. NASA was just in full-on derp mode at that time. Likewise, the Mars Polar Lander, which did not have a similar unit-conversion error, also crashed a few months later.

    --
    Everything is better with chainsaws.
  16. Re:Sure beats jail time... by moderators_are_w*nke · · Score: 3, Informative

    The EU single market mandates that you must be able to buy and sell in metric, which is logical since you can't really have a common market without common units. You can also use whatever other units you like and as such many places use imperial units in preference to metric units, reverting to them only when necessary.

    Road signs are still mph, horse races are still miles and furlongs and beer is sold by the pint so I think we're happily confused on matters of units this side of the pond.

    --
    "XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, use more." - Anonymous Coward
  17. Re:The Spin was Awesome! by fustakrakich · · Score: 3, Funny

    No, no, you're not trolling at all. You carry the 'white man's burden' with total aplomb and grace.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  18. Re:The Spin was Awesome! by peragrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I see your problem you think the president of the USA is actually a useful position. The president of the USA is actually the least powerful, least effective job in the USA.

    The president doesn't make laws congress does, the president doesn't decide which laws are fair or balanced the judicial system does. The president doesn't even decide details of policy only vague generalities.

    The president( i don't care which ones you like they all fall into this) can't make decisions. he can only choose between choices others make for him. he has three basic tools Force(military or civilian), Legal(lawyers), or Diplomatic(Negotations, etc) However he can't use force for anything but quick attacks or else congress must intervene. He can use legal but lawyers aren't useful for much. Diplomatic only works when the other party actually is willing to change.(that's why you can't negotiate with palenstine/isreal or the tea party, neither side can look at things from anyone else's view)

    There is a reason why Presidents go into office looking healthy and come out Physically healthy but looking like they went through a meet grinder. Because they get all the blame, very little of the credit, and can actually change very little.

    The president controls the price of oil about as much I do. The president controls the budget of the country about as much I do.

    If your curious look up what the president is actually allowed to do in most cases all he can do is advise someone else to look into the problem and report back. Take the IRS scandal. I would be willing to bet the president knew about it a while ago. however he couldn't actually change the policies or punish people because congress ultimately controls those positions.

    This true of every president they can at best suggest. whether or not they get listened to is another story.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  19. Re:both are bastardized. by stud9920 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    well, if it had been base twelve, it would have been divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 10

  20. 2x4 by DragonWriter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Putting up a wall? We're gonna need some 2x4s and 4x8s

    Which, incidentally, don't seem use American Customary units of length for those dimensions, but whacky industry units where 1" (board measure other than length) is approximately equal to 7/8" (US customary).

  21. US and the Metric System by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Informative

    The US is converting gradually to the metric system, and NIST towards that for decades. The definitions of official US units in metric terms was one of those steps.

    A lot of things sold in the US are sold in metric containers, for example 2L soft drink containers, many food packages and so on.

    The US has also been signatory to every metric measurement treaty.

    The petition is really rather silly. Changing the measurement system of a nation is a long and slow process. Even the French had to put it aside for a while (Napolean discontinued the process for a while).

    The real shame is the US didn't start this process sooner. Thomas Jefferson actually advocated a decimal system of measures well before the French adopted the metric system but Congress (setting an alarming precedent) failed to act on the proposal. Later Jefferson was successful in getting the US to use a decimal currency, which was the first of it's type in the world.

    Is it in contemplation with the House of Representatives to arrange our measures and weights [the same as the coinage] in a decimal ratio? The facility which this would introduce into the vulgar arithmetic would, unquestionably, be soon and sensibly felt by the whole mass of the people, who would thereby be enabled to compute for themselves whatever they should have occasion to buy, to sell, or to measure, which the present complicated and difficult ratios place beyond their computation for the most part

    --Thomas Jefferson

  22. US not ready for globalization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am european mechanical engineer who worked and lived on 3 continents. The metric system is way superior than the imperial system in many ways but the most important is that it is used everywhere and it is a consistent system*. A lot of companies here in the US have switched to metric (at least for this reason), but soon when asian industrial power will swamp the US market with metric product and parts (in the same way that IKEA did) a lot people in this forum will be lost and realize that a dual system is completly stupid.

    * if your not convince ask yourself why in a imperial system electrical power unit is Watt and but heat power it is in Btu/h....

  23. Re:What were you expecting? by Stormwatch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Did you expect that the White House administration was going to somehow force businesses and residents of the US to start using metric?

    Why not? With three exceptions, EVERY country in the world did it at some point.

  24. It is a broken system by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It would a frivolous waste of money we dont have to fix something thats not broken.

    Ah but it is broken. For a start there is no agreed upon standard for several of the units e.g. fluid ounce for which the Imperial unit is not the same as the US unit which is then further compounded by the fact that there are 20 fluid ounces in a UK pint and only 16 in a US pint. As such it is a completely broken unit system you not only have to memorize an insane number of relationships between units you even have to remember whose imperial-based unit scheme you are using.

    However, what makes it s truly broken unit system is that it uses the unit pound for both mass and weight. Yes there have been "hacks" of the system to bring them inline with physical reality so you have the "avoirdupois pound" meaning a mass and the "pound" meaning force. However this means that the units are not clear: when you say "pound" do you mean force or mass? If you need to tweak your unit system to make it consistent with physics that's not really a good sign is it?

    If that's still not enough to convince you that there is a problem then consider that there are only three countries in the world still using the old imperial-based system: Liberia, Burma and the USA. There are not many things that practically the entire planet agree upon but apparent metric units is one of them and it is not without good reason!

  25. Re:The Spin was Awesome! by Anarchduke · · Score: 4, Funny

    Outlaw base 12? Give me A good reasons!

    --
    who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
  26. No need for units by mypalmike · · Score: 4, Funny

    Given that relativity is well established, those signs should be unitless. Instead of 55 mph, just have them say 0.000000082.

    --
    There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
  27. costly and difficult to convert machine tools by PhantomHarlock · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have a machine shop in my garage, which includes a large mill and a lathe. Both have lead screws set to work in thousands of an inch, so one revolution of a handle is a certain subset of inches (.05) with individual tick marks at .001. It is essentially baked into the hardware, and you have to replace the feed wheel dials and lead screws to change it, among other things.

    I purchase metal stock that comes in US units as well (1/2" bar stock for example) which corresponds to stock needed for drawings that give all their dimensions in inches. There is a cascading chain of things, all of which need to change.

    You will not see me switching my shop to metric in my lifetime most likely.

    Converting a large industrial economy over to metric has a lot of hidden costs that make it very difficult to do, because all valves, pipes, fittings, metal stock, screws etc. offerings have to be changed, and imperial parts need to be offered for many decades to come to service older equipment.

    The idea itself is a good one as ultimately metric is a more scientifically advanced and clear set of standards than imperial. It's nice to work in a consistently matched base-10 for all scales.

    In the case of smaller economies, it is easier to support the change due to much smaller scale and very small industrial base. New Zealand as a country switched over to metric in a single day, after much preparation.

    Although the US auto industry has largely gone over to metric, I do not think that the rest of the US is currently in a position to swallow that pill easily. I believe that no matter how much ideologically it makes sense, that it is still political dynamite.

    It would be nice if everyone taking up this topic had machine shop and fabrication experience so they would understand just how much it impacts the pipeline from raw stock to finished product. Politicians tend to think in abstracts and statistics and do not always consider all of the consequences. Most of the rest of the population is so far removed from it that they A. don't understand the entirety of the impact and B. as others have said would not benefit significantly from the change.

    -PH

  28. What's all the whining about, just get it done. by H0p313ss · · Score: 5, Informative

    I lived in Canada before, during and after the transition.

    Over 30 years later we're all wondering why you're all still whining like little bitches. We'd tell you but you might decide to invade our socialist paradise.

    --
    XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
  29. Re:English? by smash · · Score: 5, Informative

    The second worst thing about non-metric systems is that the measure for a pound, a gallon, a foot, etc is not actually standardized between countries. Calling the US measurements "english" is a bit wrong, as an imperial gallon and a US gallon are two different amounts.

    The worst thing obviously being insane conversions between different units of distance, volume, weight, etc.

    We count/do maths in base 10. We have 10 digits. Our measurement system should reflect that. The rest of the world, and the scientific community get it.

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  30. DIN A4 is meaningful by fritsd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Different standards for paper sizes might be annoying, but it has nothing to do with "metric conversion".

    That's incorrect: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-paper.html (read it; it's very informative!)

    1 A0 sheet of paper has an area of 1 m^2, so if it is "normal" paper of 80 g / m^2 then the A0 sheet weighs 80g and the 8 A3 sheets you can cut from that without any paper loss weigh 10 g each, and each of the 16 "standard" A4 sheets you can cut from it again, without any paper loss weighs 5 g.
    It's so perfect that probably aliens use the same ratio 1 : sqrt(2) on their paper :-)

    --
    To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
  31. Re: metrication is nobody's business by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Mandating for industry would be an economic boon, since we'd be on the same standardized system as the entire world, and outer space. Keeping an isolationist perspective is damaging.