More divisibility required - move the decimal point

[FatherMcGruder]

Metric/SI is the backward units. Decimal really does suck. Seriously, just look at history: people naturally see the benefit of, and move toward, bases 6*2 and 8*2, DESPITE writing them in base 5*2. People only go back to base 5*2 units when forced. It's obvious which is superior. Now the question is, why do people still use base 5*2 for writing?

You mean the use of base ten has nothing to do with the fact that most people have five digits on each of their two hands, that we will "naturally see the benefit of, and move toward" not counting our thumbs?

[Prze_koles]

1.0000 would be enough precision at the moment IMO

[MoonShadow]

Are you just being amusing, or do you really see any benefits in those crazy backwardds units?

In the course of my life I've had to use both systems quite extensively.  Base 10 and base 2 are great with regard to engineering and computers.  Yet they, at best, add nothing to the (general) halving of measurements that American Standard uses, and at worst make thinking in such metrics more difficult and therefore more prone to error.  This has nothing to do with Bitcoin, of course, since it's a computerized metric; but think  about it....

Even the metric system is based upon entirely arbitrary units, such as the meter, liter and gram.  AS is mostly taking an arbitrary unit and repeatedly halving it.  Some examples...

Dollar, half-dollar, quarter, bit (no longer used)  (The dime and nickel were introduced only due to decimalization, the same is generally true in British Pounds)

Peck (2 gallons), gallon, half-gallon, quart, pint, half-pint, cup, gill (4 fluid ounces)

If you grew up using meters as your primary unit of length, have you ever found yourself thinking in half-meters instead of 50 cm?  For example, measuring a wall of your house with a tape measure, if you need precision you write down meters and centimeters, but then you are really measuring in centimeters.  But if you are just shooting for a general measurement, say for example, judging the area of a flat you intend to rent to see if your funiture will fit, do you think in half meters?

For that matter, have you ever thought in half centimeters?

What about when you buy petrol?  Sure, the pump measures in liters and hundredths of a liter, but when the pump says 11.51 liters, do you think "eleven and a half liters"?

While driving, do you think of a driving distance as km's and meters?  Or do you think, "it's about 3 and a half kilometers to the next turn"? 

I'll concede that metric is much more uniform, and there is much to be said for that, but AS is easier to think within.

[LMGTFY]

In the course of my life I've had to use both systems quite extensively.  Base 10 and base 2 are great with regard to engineering and computers.  Yet they, at best, add nothing to the (general) halving of measurements that American Standard uses, and at worst make thinking in such metrics more difficult and therefore more prone to error.  This has nothing to do with Bitcoin, of course, since it's a computerized metric; but think  about it....

Even the metric system is based upon entirely arbitrary units, such as the meter, liter and gram.  AS is mostly taking an arbitrary unit and repeatedly halving it.  Some examples...

Dollar, half-dollar, quarter, bit (no longer used)  (The dime and nickel were introduced only due to decimalization, the same is generally true in British Pounds)

Peck (2 gallons), gallon, half-gallon, quart, pint, half-pint, cup, gill (4 fluid ounces)

If you grew up using meters as your primary unit of length, have you ever found yourself thinking in half-meters instead of 50 cm?  For example, measuring a wall of your house with a tape measure, if you need precision you write down meters and centimeters, but then you are really measuring in centimeters.  But if you are just shooting for a general measurement, say for example, judging the area of a flat you intend to rent to see if your funiture will fit, do you think in half meters?

For that matter, have you ever thought in half centimeters?

What about when you buy petrol?  Sure, the pump measures in liters and hundredths of a liter, but when the pump says 11.51 liters, do you think "eleven and a half liters"?

While driving, do you think of a driving distance as km's and meters?  Or do you think, "it's about 3 and a half kilometers to the next turn"? 

I'll concede that metric is much more uniform, and there is much to be said for that, but AS is easier to think within.

Couple of points (from someone who's pretty exclusively metric, but lives in a country that hasn't ever completely adopted the metric system - it still uses pints for beer, and miles for long distances).

Sterling isn't quite like the dollar, it uses 1, 2 and 5 rather than doubling. So... 1p, 2p, 5p, ... 10p, 20p, 50p, £1, £2, £5 for coins (£5 coins aren't that common), and for notes it follows the same pattern: £5, ... £10, £20, £50.

Centimetres are something of an aberration: normally SI units focus on 1000s. There are also decimetres, which don't seem to have gained any traction but which I remember from school rulers in the 1970s. This aberration only seems to exist with measuring distances, and only at the >1mm to <1m scale. There are no special words for 10 metres or 0.1mm, for example.

I tend to focus on one, appropriate, scale and stick to it. So I would never think of "1 metre and 50 centimetres" - it would always be 1.5 metres (or, I'll concede, 1 and a half metres - though to be honest I do tend to think in decimals rather than fractions: "half" is just short-hand for "0.5" to me). I wouldn't think of centimetres when dealing primarily with metres. (Incidentally, is that true for AS folk? Do people tend to work in feet, or use mixtures? I see things like 1' 2" which suggests units get mixed, but I don't know if that's just when written or if people think in mixtures as well).

My problem with AS is that the "number" keeps changing: 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in a yard, and I can never remember how many yards (or feet) in a mile. I can see potential advantages in using 12 instead of 10 - if there was a system that had 12 inches to a foot, 12 feet to a "bigyard", and 12 bigyards to a "twelvemile" then I could see some value in that. But 10, or - better - 1000, seems perfectly usable to me.

[MoonShadow]

In the course of my life I've had to use both systems quite extensively.  Base 10 and base 2 are great with regard to engineering and computers.  Yet they, at best, add nothing to the (general) halving of measurements that American Standard uses, and at worst make thinking in such metrics more difficult and therefore more prone to error.  This has nothing to do with Bitcoin, of course, since it's a computerized metric; but think  about it....

Even the metric system is based upon entirely arbitrary units, such as the meter, liter and gram.  AS is mostly taking an arbitrary unit and repeatedly halving it.  Some examples...

Dollar, half-dollar, quarter, bit (no longer used)  (The dime and nickel were introduced only due to decimalization, the same is generally true in British Pounds)

Peck (2 gallons), gallon, half-gallon, quart, pint, half-pint, cup, gill (4 fluid ounces)

If you grew up using meters as your primary unit of length, have you ever found yourself thinking in half-meters instead of 50 cm?  For example, measuring a wall of your house with a tape measure, if you need precision you write down meters and centimeters, but then you are really measuring in centimeters.  But if you are just shooting for a general measurement, say for example, judging the area of a flat you intend to rent to see if your funiture will fit, do you think in half meters?

For that matter, have you ever thought in half centimeters?

What about when you buy petrol?  Sure, the pump measures in liters and hundredths of a liter, but when the pump says 11.51 liters, do you think "eleven and a half liters"?

While driving, do you think of a driving distance as km's and meters?  Or do you think, "it's about 3 and a half kilometers to the next turn"? 

I'll concede that metric is much more uniform, and there is much to be said for that, but AS is easier to think within.

Couple of points (from someone who's pretty exclusively metric, but lives in a country that hasn't ever completely adopted the metric system - it still uses pints for beer, and miles for long distances).

Sterling isn't quite like the dollar, it uses 1, 2 and 5 rather than doubling. So... 1p, 2p, 5p, ... 10p, 20p, 50p, £1, £2, £5 for coins (£5 coins aren't that common), and for notes it follows the same pattern: £5, ... £10, £20, £50.

Centimetres are something of an aberration: normally SI units focus on 1000s. There are also decimetres, which don't seem to have gained any traction but which I remember from school rulers in the 1970s. This aberration only seems to exist with measuring distances, and only at the >1mm to <1m scale. There are no special words for 10 metres or 0.1mm, for example.

I tend to focus on one, appropriate, scale and stick to it. So I would never think of "1 metre and 50 centimetres" - it would always be 1.5 metres (or, I'll concede, 1 and a half metres - though to be honest I do tend to think in decimals rather than fractions: "half" is just short-hand for "0.5" to me). I wouldn't think of centimetres when dealing primarily with metres. (Incidentally, is that true for AS folk? Do people tend to work in feet, or use mixtures? I see things like 1' 2" which suggests units get mixed, but I don't know if that's just when written or if people think in mixtures as well).

My problem with AS is that the "number" keeps changing: 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in a yard, and I can never remember how many yards (or feet) in a mile. I can see potential advantages in using 12 instead of 10 - if there was a system that had 12 inches to a foot, 12 feet to a "bigyard", and 12 bigyards to a "twelvemile" then I could see some value in that. But 10, or - better - 1000, seems perfectly usable to me.

Length is an exception to the 'generally halving' rule, which is why I didn't include it.  It could stand to be fixed, and yes, most such measurements are mixed.  However, fine measurements are always measured in fractions of an inch (tool sizes for example) and tend to be significantly more precise and easier to think about than metric units, which can be rated in cm or mm and often do not mark which upon the tool.

[LMGTFY]

Length is an exception to the 'generally halving' rule, which is why I didn't include it.  It could stand to be fixed, and yes, most such measurements are mixed.  However, fine measurements are always measured in fractions of an inch (tool sizes for example) and tend to be significantly more precise and easier to think about than metric units, which can be rated in cm or mm and often do not mark which upon the tool.

Ah, interesting about mixing.

For fine measurements in metric, (I assume you mean for something like carpentry or metalworking?) mm would be used almost exclusively - I had a crusty old carpentry teacher who shouted at the class if anyone used centimetres! I presume there are (commonly used) fractions of inches that are smaller than millimetres, and that's where the precision comes from? I always found mm precise enough, but I was never much of a carpenter...

[Luke-Jr]

There are no special words for 10 metres or 0.1mm, for example.

10 metres = decametre

Do people tend to work in feet, or use mixtures? I see things like 1' 2" which suggests units get mixed, but I don't know if that's just when written or if people think in mixtures as well).

Honestly, I don't measure enough to work in any unit really. When I measure stuff, I find something I can easily work with (eg, pillow-lengths to measure bedrooms) on the spot. I do plan to order some nice Tonal rules, though...

My problem with AS is that the "number" keeps changing: 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in a yard, and I can never remember how many yards (or feet) in a mile. I can see potential advantages in using 12 instead of 10 - if there was a system that had 12 inches to a foot, 12 feet to a "bigyard", and 12 bigyards to a "twelvemile" then I could see some value in that. But 10, or - better - 1000, seems perfectly usable to me.

There is such a system. It's called TGM.

[LMGTFY]

There are no special words for 10 metres or 0.1mm, for example.

10 metres = decametre

Doh! I knew that. It's not a unit I've ever encountered outside primary school, however. I suspect when Britain "went metric" (ahem!) back in the early 70s they assumed we'd need and use centimetres, decimetres and decametres, but only centimetres stuck (probably due to the - rough - correlation with inches).

Do people tend to work in feet, or use mixtures? I see things like 1' 2" which suggests units get mixed, but I don't know if that's just when written or if people think in mixtures as well).

Honestly, I don't measure enough to work in any unit really. When I measure stuff, I find something I can easily work with (eg, pillow-lengths to measure bedrooms) on the spot. I do plan to order some nice Tonal rules, though...

My problem with AS is that the "number" keeps changing: 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in a yard, and I can never remember how many yards (or feet) in a mile. I can see potential advantages in using 12 instead of 10 - if there was a system that had 12 inches to a foot, 12 feet to a "bigyard", and 12 bigyards to a "twelvemile" then I could see some value in that. But 10, or - better - 1000, seems perfectly usable to me.

There is such a system. It's called TGM.

Why does that not surprise me? ;-) If it had the traction that AS has, I'd consider it - to my mind it's preferable to AS but metric's widespread usage still wins out for me. Except when it comes to beer: 500ml of beer is just wrong.

[FatherMcGruder]

For fine measurements in metric, (I assume you mean for something like carpentry or metalworking?) mm would be used almost exclusively - I had a crusty old carpentry teacher who shouted at the class if anyone used centimetres! I presume there are (commonly used) fractions of inches that are smaller than millimetres, and that's where the precision comes from? I always found mm precise enough, but I was never much of a carpenter...

Anyone ever use decimal fractions of an inch? I have.

[MoonShadow]

For fine measurements in metric, (I assume you mean for something like carpentry or metalworking?) mm would be used almost exclusively - I had a crusty old carpentry teacher who shouted at the class if anyone used centimetres! I presume there are (commonly used) fractions of inches that are smaller than millimetres, and that's where the precision comes from? I always found mm precise enough, but I was never much of a carpenter...

Anyone ever use decimal fractions of an inch? I have.

Yes, but only in an engineering context, using a micrometer.  Even then, the workmen tend to object to decimal fractions, and insist on plans using halving fractions.  Even tool/die makers hate using decimal fractions, and they almost have to because if modern machinery isn't made in Germany, it's designed there and made in Japan.

[MoonShadow]

Length is an exception to the 'generally halving' rule, which is why I didn't include it.  It could stand to be fixed, and yes, most such measurements are mixed.  However, fine measurements are always measured in fractions of an inch (tool sizes for example) and tend to be significantly more precise and easier to think about than metric units, which can be rated in cm or mm and often do not mark which upon the tool.

Ah, interesting about mixing.

For fine measurements in metric, (I assume you mean for something like carpentry or metalworking?)

Among other things, yes. 

mm would be used almost exclusively

Almost being the operative word.  I know for a fact that not all metric tool manufacturers stick with mm, and not all of them are up front about it.  Chinese tool manufacturers are particularly bad about this, in addition to sloppy fit in general, but they also happen to be the cheapest toolmakers in the world.  In my experience, Chinese tools following the American Standard aren't as bad about fit, but that might just be me.

 - I had a crusty old carpentry teacher who shouted at the class if anyone used centimetres!

I can imagine why.  This can only be because he has experienced the order of magnitude error that can occur because of this.

I presume there are (commonly used) fractions of inches that are smaller than millimetres, and that's where the precision comes from?

Well, there is no such thing as 'common' sizes smaller than a mm in any context, but yes.  The procession of dimminishing sizes is very orderly, and can be understood intuitively to anyone that has experience with the larger tools that use fractions of an ich.

I always found mm precise enough, but I was never much of a carpenter...

That pretty much says it all, right there.

[LMGTFY]

mm would be used almost exclusively

Almost being the operative word.  I know for a fact that not all metric tool manufacturers stick with mm, and not all of them are up front about it.  Chinese tool manufacturers are particularly bad about this, in addition to sloppy fit in general, but they also happen to be the cheapest toolmakers in the world.  In my experience, Chinese tools following the American Standard aren't as bad about fit, but that might just be me.

Sure, here in the UK you can easily buy rulers that show centimetres - particularly the (plastic) kind used in schools, but the more serious kind too. But wouldn't that fall under the "a poor workman..." case? When I measure something I make sure I'm using the unit I should be using. Anyway, my point was that - while a ruler might show centimetres and inches, the serious worker would stick to mm.

- I had a crusty old carpentry teacher who shouted at the class if anyone used centimetres!

I can imagine why.  This can only be because he has experienced the order of magnitude error that can occur because of this.

Indeed. That, for me, is the main reason to avoid the non-standard SI units - centimetres, decimetres, etc.

I presume there are (commonly used) fractions of inches that are smaller than millimetres, and that's where the precision comes from?

Well, there is no such thing as 'common' sizes smaller than a mm in any context, but yes.  The procession of dimminishing sizes is very orderly, and can be understood intuitively to anyone that has experience with the larger tools that use fractions of an ich.

What fractions in particular? Father McGruder mentioned decimalised inches, which would be 2.54mm for 1/10th of an inch, and seems fairly useless to me. I'm assuming something in the order of 1/32" or 1/64"? I remember rulers with inches divided into 12s and 16s, but powers of 2 seem logical (possibly due to too much binary) - is that how it works?

I always found mm precise enough, but I was never much of a carpenter...

That pretty much says it all, right there.

[grue]

I don't like the idea of 'preserving the familiar'. If we did that, America would still be using feet and inches... oh, wait.

Feet and inches are far better than the common alternative of metres. The latter is based on decimal, one of the worst possible radices, and has only ever been adopted by force. America deserves credit for not forcing people to use an inferior system.

[citation needed]

[MoonShadow]

mm would be used almost exclusively

Almost being the operative word.  I know for a fact that not all metric tool manufacturers stick with mm, and not all of them are up front about it.  Chinese tool manufacturers are particularly bad about this, in addition to sloppy fit in general, but they also happen to be the cheapest toolmakers in the world.  In my experience, Chinese tools following the American Standard aren't as bad about fit, but that might just be me.

Sure, here in the UK you can easily buy rulers that show centimetres - particularly the (plastic) kind used in schools, but the more serious kind too. But wouldn't that fall under the "a poor workman..." case?

I guess I'm not being clear.  Every tape measure that I've seen in the US has both inches and cm.  When I say 'tooling' I'm not refering to measuring devices, but to actual machine tools designed and built with the intent to be used with a particular part, in turn designed to fit withing a particular system of measurement.  A common example is a socket wrench set.

I presume there are (commonly used) fractions of inches that are smaller than millimetres, and that's where the precision comes from?

Well, there is no such thing as 'common' sizes smaller than a mm in any context, but yes.  The procession of dimminishing sizes is very orderly, and can be understood intuitively to anyone that has experience with the larger tools that use fractions of an ich.

What fractions in particular? Father McGruder mentioned decimalised inches, which would be 2.54mm for 1/10th of an inch, and seems fairly useless to me.

He's not talking about conversion from AS to Metric, but about the division of an inch into hundredths.  At least that is what I thought that he was talking about.

I'm assuming something in the order of 1/32" or 1/64"? I remember rulers with inches divided into 12s and 16s, but powers of 2 seem logical (possibly due to too much binary) - is that how it works?

Inches are normally shown divided into eighths on a common ruler, which is simply three halvings.  Furthur precision is gained by continuing this process; one-sixteenth, one thirty-secondth, one sixty-fourth, and so on.  The precision is base 2 and infinite.  I've not seen a tweevlth used on any such measuring device within my career.  I'm not saying that they don't exist, but they are not really an American Standard issue, perhaps a throwback to British Imperial?

[FatherMcGruder]

What fractions in particular? Father McGruder mentioned decimalised inches, which would be 2.54mm for 1/10th of an inch, and seems fairly useless to me.

He's not talking about conversion from AS to Metric, but about the division of an inch into hundredths.  At least that is what I thought that he was talking about.

I have a pair of calipers at work that goes to thousandths of an inch. I think you need a micrometer to get any more precise. I recall having to machine something down to a ten thousandths of an inch tolerance in a class once.

[LMGTFY]

Sure, here in the UK you can easily buy rulers that show centimetres - particularly the (plastic) kind used in schools, but the more serious kind too. But wouldn't that fall under the "a poor workman..." case?

I guess I'm not being clear.  Every tape measure that I've seen in the US has both inches and cm.  When I say 'tooling' I'm not refering to measuring devices, but to actual machine tools designed and built with the intent to be used with a particular part, in turn designed to fit withing a particular system of measurement.  A common example is a socket wrench set.

Ah, got it - dodgy tool manufactures using metric but labelling in AS. In my defence it's been a long day...

What fractions in particular? Father McGruder mentioned decimalised inches, which would be 2.54mm for 1/10th of an inch, and seems fairly useless to me.

He's not talking about conversion from AS to Metric, but about the division of an inch into hundredths.  At least that is what I thought that he was talking about.

That's what I thought, too, I just imagined it as 10th of an inch. 100ths make more sense, particularly in light of the callipers/micrometer comment later.

I'm assuming something in the order of 1/32" or 1/64"? I remember rulers with inches divided into 12s and 16s, but powers of 2 seem logical (possibly due to too much binary) - is that how it works?

Inches are normally shown divided into eighths on a common ruler, which is simply three halvings.  Furthur precision is gained by continuing this process; one-sixteenth, one thirty-secondth, one sixty-fourth, and so on.  The precision is base 2 and infinite.  I've not seen a tweevlth used on any such measuring device within my career.  I'm not saying that they don't exist, but they are not really an American Standard issue, perhaps a throwback to British Imperial?

Ah, not sure I've ever seen 8ths of an inch on a British ruler. Base 2 makes sense, though. I wouldn't swear to seeing 12ths, though I'm reasonably certain - it was 16ths (which makes sense to me) and something "odd" - probably 12ths, possibly something else that wasn't a power of 2.

Anyway... apologies for dragging this hugely off-topic, and thanks for providing your insight.

[MoonShadow]

[Ah, got it - dodgy tool manufactures using metric but labelling in AS.

Actually, more likely the other way around.  Said dodgy tool manufactures originaly sold vastly more AS toolsets than Metric sets, although that's likely no longer so.

Anyway... apologies for dragging this hugely off-topic, and thanks for providing your insight.

You're quite welcome.

[marcus_of_augustus]

So after all that .... any update on opinions of how bitcoin should be commonly measured?

[Alex Beckenham]

So after all that .... any update on opinions of how bitcoin should be commonly measured?

In Libraries of Congress of course.

[LMGTFY]

So after all that .... any update on opinions of how bitcoin should be commonly measured?

One useful aspect of the discussion on measuring wood and metal in AS is that it got me thinking about how the US regulates this compared to metric countries. As I understand it, the US doesn't regulate it: folk are free to use AS or metric as they choose (possibly subject to "not misleading people by using dubious measurements"?)

This seems to me to be the best approach. We can't anticipate what needs different groups of users with different customs will have. All we can do is expect that those needs will differ. A group selling a boat to another group in Somalia, pointing RPGs and AK47s at each other while they wait for the transaction to confirm, is going to use different units to an individual making a micropayment to buy a postage stamp online in Germany.

If we start creating our own units - satoshis, bitcents, whatever - we create something additional to understand before bitcoin can be used. If we stick with The One True Unit (BTC) we can leave creation of units to the end user, and they can use what they feel comfortable with.