this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2026
757 points (93.8% liked)
memes
21511 readers
2372 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The fraction allows you to communicate length and tolerance in a single number. A decimal implies precision to the last number, a measure with a fraction can show 1/8 as more granular than 1/16. 1/8 of a cm is less precise than a mm, but if you wrote 1.125 cm, you are now implying sub mm level precision.
This matters because the level needed in building generally doesn't line up to 1/10 measurements. For example if you had a brick wall and a row had 1 cm height differences between bricks in a row it would be extremely obvious and look terrible. A 1mm height difference would be impossible to notice, but is also overkill to get that level. Ideal is about 5/8 cm or 6.35 mm difference over 3 meters of wall. The fractional measure often ends up easier to work with in practice.
I don't see how that isn't true of decimals, too. 0.1 indicates a precision of 1 digit, 0.12 indicates a precision of 2, 0.120 indicates a precision of three.
How do you account for doubling precision? Decimal only records 10-fold steps.
In any context where it's important, you'd note it with +/-. Not really a problem.
I guess there's nothing wrong with saying 1/8th metre, 1/8th centimetre, 15/16th metre either. Just as some people might use 0.356 inches.
I'd be a big fan of fractional metric.
Although if we really wanted to go crazy (this will never happen), we'd ditch base-10. It's a stupid base that we only use because of our fingers. Base 12 is superior and is actually the strongest defense of feet and inches (though yards can fuck right off). It has 6 divisors whereas 10 only has 4.
Base 60 is also cool (divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, 30, and 60), but that would also be significantly more difficult to teach children - it takes them long enough to learn the order of 26 letters.
And being a geographer, I adore 360 because it's fucking awesome to work with, and you don't get a better composite until 2520, which is just too much to deal with.
yeah, a duodecimal metric system would have been better. Still, it's more important to have a standard system than it is for it to be ideal. It's the strongest argument for US customary system within the USA, as well - but that argument breaks down when you widen the scope to the world.
In the 18th century context, and its dozens of competing measurement systems, something like the metric system was sorely needed just for standardization. We're just lucky that it was something more or less sensible. Had the US customary system won out, I think we'd be objectively worse off.
So it could have been better, but it could also have been MUCH much much worse.
Exactly like my example above. 1/8 implies +or- 1/16. While .125 implies +or- .0005, but it was only measured to +or- .0625, which is 2 orders of magnitude different.