Welcome, Guest

Author Topic: systems  (Read 7408 times)

FiahOwl

  • *****
  • Posts: 1234
  • This is, to give a dog and in recompense desire my dog again.
systems
« on: July 14, 2012, 08:31:23 PM »

This message is only viewable with Universe Sandbox Galaxy Edition. Access it and much more with promo-code '76872'.

« Last Edit: March 22, 2021, 01:17:32 AM by FiahOwl »

Hellpotatoe

  • *****
  • Posts: 230
  • JooJ
Re: systems
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2012, 08:33:26 PM »
idk imperial units

atomic7732

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • caught in the river turning blue
    • Paladin of Storms
Re: systems
« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2012, 09:02:32 PM »
24-hour and metric

Cause logic.

Hellpotatoe

  • *****
  • Posts: 230
  • JooJ
Re: systems
« Reply #3 on: July 14, 2012, 09:03:07 PM »

Darvince

  • *****
  • Posts: 1842
  • 差不多
Re: systems
« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2012, 09:24:10 PM »

Bla

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • The stars died so you can live.

FiahOwl

  • *****
  • Posts: 1234
  • This is, to give a dog and in recompense desire my dog again.
Re: systems
« Reply #6 on: July 15, 2012, 05:14:55 AM »

This message is only viewable with Universe Sandbox Galaxy Edition. Access it and much more with promo-code '76916'.

« Last Edit: March 22, 2021, 01:17:22 AM by FiahOwl »

matty406

  • *****
  • Posts: 82
Re: systems
« Reply #7 on: July 15, 2012, 06:37:01 AM »
NO.
AM/PM IS FINE.
IMPERIAL MEASUREMENT IS UGLY.

Bla

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • The stars died so you can live.
Re: systems
« Reply #8 on: July 15, 2012, 08:19:57 AM »
AM/PM is like splitting the year in two, and calling the first six months January A, February A, March A, April A, May A and June A, and then the last six months January B, February B, March B, April B, May B and June B. 100% pointless. :P

Hellpotatoe

  • *****
  • Posts: 230
  • JooJ
Re: systems
« Reply #9 on: July 15, 2012, 08:21:41 AM »
AM/PM is like splitting the year in two, and calling the first six months January A, February A, March A, April A, May A and June A, and then the last six months January B, February B, March B, April B, May B and June B. 100% pointless. :P
+1

matty406

  • *****
  • Posts: 82
Re: systems
« Reply #10 on: July 15, 2012, 12:39:27 PM »
AM/PM is like splitting the year in two, and calling the first six months January A, February A, March A, April A, May A and June A, and then the last six months January B, February B, March B, April B, May B and June B. 100% pointless. :P
I just prefer, and find it easier, to have the time split into am/pm than having it carry on making me have to bind one number to another.
Also, it fits with how you vocalise time, "It's 8 o'clock" rather than "It's 20 o'clock"

atomic7732

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • caught in the river turning blue
    • Paladin of Storms
Re: systems
« Reply #11 on: July 15, 2012, 12:48:15 PM »
I just prefer, and find it easier, to have the time split into am/pm than having it carry on making me have to bind one number to another.
What number to another?

matty406

  • *****
  • Posts: 82
Re: systems
« Reply #12 on: July 15, 2012, 04:07:41 PM »
When the 24 hour passes over 12 and 1 becomes 13 and so on.

Bla

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • The stars died so you can live.
Re: systems
« Reply #13 on: July 15, 2012, 08:25:26 PM »
I care. Because "it's always been this way, we're used to it, it's the easiest not to change" is the classic conservative argument which is always used to stop us from changing to more logical, rational systems, whether it's the metric or any other system.

I'm not for 24 hour clocks at all. I'd be for implementing something with 10 or 100 hours pr. day since we have a number system based on 10 and not 60 now. It'll take some time to get used to, but I think people would by far prefer it in the future, because once you get used to it, it'll be easier.

Darvince

  • *****
  • Posts: 1842
  • 差不多
Re: systems
« Reply #14 on: July 15, 2012, 08:45:10 PM »
no let's switch to base 0x
it makes everything easier

atomic7732

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • caught in the river turning blue
    • Paladin of Storms
Re: systems
« Reply #15 on: July 15, 2012, 11:48:22 PM »
I care. Because "it's always been this way, we're used to it, it's the easiest not to change" is the classic conservative argument which is always used to stop us from changing to more logical, rational systems, whether it's the metric or any other system.
Yeah...

People too scared or too lazy to change.

If I had the choice the world would be using UTC as well. Because the world is so interconnected these days, it would benefit communications over long distances, especially those that are time-sensitive, depend on time, and involve time in any way. I don't care if you're used to getting up at 6/7/whatever to go to work. Time is time it's not going to matter if you call it 21:00 or 3:00 it's the same time relative to whatever the heck you might have to do in the next 2 hours (work, appointment, eat, sleep, watch a show, post something, etc.,).

As I stated in the IRC, there's no logical reason we should be using the imperial system, 12-hour time, and (to a lesser extent) time zones anymore. They're obsolete. We've developed better systems, it's time to move on.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2012, 12:00:53 AM by atomic7732 »

Darvince

  • *****
  • Posts: 1842
  • 差不多
Re: systems
« Reply #16 on: July 16, 2012, 01:05:23 AM »
No it should be based on UTC+1 because firenze, italia being at 0° would mean that the 180° would never interrupt land other than Antarctica.

or, we could switch to 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, A, B

matty406

  • *****
  • Posts: 82
Re: systems
« Reply #17 on: July 16, 2012, 07:00:32 AM »
In any case let's end this:
So people enjoy a system you don't.
Get over it, use the system you want to use.

Bla

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • The stars died so you can live.
Re: systems
« Reply #18 on: July 17, 2012, 12:39:02 PM »
End a discussion so people will continue to use the system they currently like? Why should we not discuss something in order to prevent people from being convinced of other things? :P
Just because something feels nice to believe, it doesn't make it any more true. :P Nobody is being forced to discuss anything or click this thread. Those who don't want to discuss it can simply do other things.

I'm not trying to stop people from using whatever system they prefer themselves in personal cases, but I think the most rational systems we can invent should be the official ones on the entire planet. The difference is that if a small family somewhere likes to refer to time based on their outdated time zone and time system, they can, but in the public sphere, the most rational systems will be used and encouraged, and hopefully replace the outdated ones over time.

The reason why I think we should transition to more rational systems is because we will benefit in the future. It will make calculations a lot easier. To convert a number from meter to kilometer is much easier than converting a number from furlong to mile, in a base 10 number system, which we use today, and defining power as energy pr. time unit, and simultaneously choose the unit 1 watt to be 1 joule pr. 1 second, makes things a lot easier than not thinking other units into the system, like horse-powers and calories.

I agree with Atomic that a worldwide, single time zone without shifting would be best, but I think we should change our time measuring to a base-10 system (if those people who should research into the efficiency of units in an ideal society would come to the conclusion that base-10 is actually the best number system for us to use).
Then again, it's hard to predict the future, but if we colonize other planets, a time based on Earthly days could quickly become irrelevant if most people lived elsewhere. Ofc the benefit might not be as great if we have to fundamentally change our systems every century.

atomic7732

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • caught in the river turning blue
    • Paladin of Storms
Re: systems
« Reply #19 on: July 17, 2012, 01:34:08 PM »
Ofc the benefit might not be as great if we have to fundamentally change our systems every century.
Not really, because if we hadn't made the system more "updated" then we'd just be further behind the optimal system to use, causing many many more problems and inconsistencies and inconveniences.

Like using an Earth sundial marked with the 12-hour scale on Enceladus.

Bla

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • The stars died so you can live.
Re: systems
« Reply #20 on: July 17, 2012, 01:47:03 PM »
Not really, because if we hadn't made the system more "updated" then we'd just be further behind the optimal system to use, causing many many more problems and inconsistencies and inconveniences.

Like using an Earth sundial marked with the 12-hour scale on Enceladus.
Yes, true in many cases, but it's not always that gradual improvements are possible. That's what I meant by "fundamentally". Like if we decide to change to, say, base 8 in society, because we for whatever find that base 8 is much more useful (think computer base 2 for example, and bytes). What if we then for some reason find out that base 12 or 16 would be even better one century later? If we then had changed our time system from this deeply obsolete system made in a base-60 context, now in our base-8 society (and let's say all other units too), if we changed them to base-8, it would (hardly) be better than the base-60 time system for time when we used base-10 in society. If you don't agree I'm sure there are other examples where it could be the case. Then changing often could become a bigger burden than using the outdated system.

Ok, here are a lot of bases and I can hardly understand what I'm reading myself. :P But my example:

Society is base 10. Time units are base 60. (Current)
Then:
Society changes to base 8. Time changes to base 8.
1 century later:
Society changes to base 12.

Here changing the time unit from base 60 to base 8 might not be an improvement.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2012, 01:52:58 PM by Bla »

atomic7732

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • caught in the river turning blue
    • Paladin of Storms
Re: systems
« Reply #21 on: July 17, 2012, 01:53:01 PM »
Okay that makes sense but a switch from any power of 2 to any power of 2 is extremely simple. (binary, octal, hexadecimal, quaternary, base-32, etc.,)

Bla

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • The stars died so you can live.
Re: systems
« Reply #22 on: July 17, 2012, 01:59:54 PM »
Yes, true. The only sensible argument against these radical unit changes I see currently, though, is that we can't predict the future, and if we don't invent proper systems we'll have to change lots of things again, possibly being more of a burden than if we had just waited.

Then there's the problem of, waiting for what? When have we understood the universe enough to know that the units we design now are perfect or will last so long that changing is definitely the best option? We probably never will. But I think it's a risk worth taking.

atomic7732

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • caught in the river turning blue
    • Paladin of Storms
Re: systems
« Reply #23 on: July 17, 2012, 02:44:20 PM »
Also, base-x systems are relevant for any measurements, so long as all measurements occur in that same base. So the best bet is some power of 2 or 10. But we all know 10 is lame

Bla

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1013
  • The stars died so you can live.
Re: systems
« Reply #24 on: July 17, 2012, 03:07:04 PM »
I agree with base-2, I made a base-8 number system for my Blaxian Blaist Bla-state thing on my wiki before I purged it. :P

I can agree with base 8 or 16. I'd probably go with 16 because it'd generally make numbers shorter than 8 and 16 is still a fairly small amount of characters which shouldn't be too hard to remember. Calculating in general, without calculators (kol who even does that anymore), I'm not sure whether having more numbers would make it harder to calculate in that case. At least if you use your memory while calculating, in the sense of dividing two numbers into parts, where you would probably remember the combinations of additions/subtractions/etc. between the numbers 0-9 in order to calculate as fast as possible.

Idk if message is foggy from caffeine-rush but it seems clear in my head so sorry if the sentences are too long and nonsensical. :P

Darvince

  • *****
  • Posts: 1842
  • 差不多
Re: systems
« Reply #25 on: July 17, 2012, 03:08:38 PM »
Calculating in general, without calculators (kol who even does that anymore), I'm not sure whether having more numbers would make it harder to calculate in that case.
all the little children that believe that prison schl is good for you

vh

  • formerly mudkipz
  • *****
  • Posts: 1140
  • "giving heat meaning"
Re: systems
« Reply #26 on: August 03, 2012, 02:24:56 PM »
I care. Because "it's always been this way, we're used to it, it's the easiest not to change" is the classic conservative argument which is always used to stop us from changing to more logical, rational systems, whether it's the metric or any other system.

I'm not for 24 hour clocks at all. I'd be for implementing something with 10 or 100 hours pr. day since we have a number system based on 10 and not 60 now. It'll take some time to get used to, but I think people would by far prefer it in the future, because once you get used to it, it'll be easier.

24 hour time is ok, but most people i interact with use 12 hour time, so it'd only cause more trouble to switch for me.

Quote
Imperial Units are awesome.
jackiechan.png x 1e900