You had one job…

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Fahrenheit isn’t too bad IMO. It’s more granular so it’s usually sufficient to use whole numbers for everything. 0F to 100F is a temperature range a person might be subjected to in day-to-day life, with 0F being pretty cold and 100F being pretty hot.

      • thepreciousboar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I never undertand the more granular, the scale is in 180 because that’s the most precision they could use to manufacture scientific thermometers, nowadays it’s completely irrelevant. Celsius thermometers have a granularity of 0.1°C and that is useful soley when you want to differentiate between “almost a slight fever” and “maybe a slight fever”. Do you find yourself needing to differentiate between 45 °F and 46 °F?

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’m 100% on board with the us moving to metric, and in almost all cases I think it’s far easier to use.

      But fahrenheit is more intuitive: 100 too hot to work outside, 0 too cold to work outside. It’s just garbage for scientific use. I couldn’t care less if we switched to Celsius, but it’s problem is certainly not intuitiveness.

      I would say intuitiveness is more for all of the other measurements. Like 5280 feet in a mile? WTF is that BS.