Yes, it started as a 'fad'. If you look at what happened, the French
were beheading all the royalty just because "royalty is bad" and they
wanted a new measurement system because the old one could be traced back
to royalty so therefore that old measurement system was also "bad" by
association.
Sounds like the same thing that happens every season in Paris. The old
clothing is "out" and the new clothing is "in".
Like I said, "fads". (I wonder if the 'f' in fads should stand for
'French'?) :-)
Tony Thigpen
Bob Bridges wrote on 7/20/20 4:03 PM:
This interests me. I'm sort of on Seymour's side on this one, Tony; I
learned the metric system in high-school chemistry and mildly prefer it.
While I gotta admire anyone with the stick-to-it-iveness it takes to call it
a "fad" after two hundred years and 192 out of 195 countries, I'm persuaded
by the practical value of decimal units.
You say that's only "a small part of the 'standard' ", but I would have
said, if asked, that it was the whole point. What other reason would anyone
have to adopt SI units? Well, aside from the 192/195-countries thing, of
course, which I suppose ain't chopped liver - but that came later, so I
don't count it.
---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
/* A ship in harbour is safe. But that's not what a ship is for. */
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2020 08:38
We are no more immune to Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of
Crowds than any other country, and our society has massive conformity in
many areas. Even many who want to rebel find a marginal group to rebel in
conformity with. People accept the most ludicrous claims because others in
their in group accept them. Koolaid, anybody?
As to SI units, there are practical reasons for adopting them. Do we really
want to stick with a system of units that few of us understand, with the
same name denoting different quantities depending on context?
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Tony Thigpen
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2020 08:36
This is a fun Monday discussion. :-)
I did not say anything about decimal arithmetic, either for nor against.
I was discussing this fad called SI and how it was a standard looking
for a base. The fact that it uses base-10 arithmetic may add to it's
popularity, but that is only one small part of the 'standard'.
--- Martin Packer wrote on 7/20/20 8:13 AM:
So you don't rate decimal arithmetic? :-) So how do you explain dollars
and cents? :-)
---
From: Tony Thigpen <t...@vse2pdf.com>
Date: 20/07/2020 12:41
We are an independent sort of people. We don't blindly follow others
after the latest fad, like SI units. SI units are not really built on
something real, but instead are a unit that looked for a base item that
'fit' into the new perception of reality.
--- Wayne Bickerdike wrote on 7/20/20 12:50 AM:
Odd how the USA hangs on to impractical learnings. Even the UK moved to
SI units while I was at school in the 1960s.
Took me a while to get used to a gallon that isn't a gallon and a pint
that isn't a pint (16 oz vs 20 oz.). You also short changed the ton by
240 lbs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
