
Pokémon Go Is Teaching Americans the Metric System - ahmedfromtunis
http://gizmodo.com/pokemon-go-is-secretly-teaching-americans-the-metric-sy-1783459191
======
nickcw
I always approximate the number of kilometers in a mile to phi (which it is
pretty nearly - it is about 5% out), then you can use the Fibonacci series to
convert between them.

1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 ...

So if you want to know what 5 km is, find 5 in the Fibonacci series and the
number of miles is the one just below - 3 in this case. Just use the next
higher for miles -> km, eg 5 miles is 8 km.

~~~
notatoad
that sounds a lot harder than multiplying by 1.6

~~~
adiabatty
Memorizing a sequence of ten numbers (or so) sounds way easier than
multiplying by 1.6 (or .62) without whipping out a calculator.

~~~
tzs
If you think of 1.6 as 1 + 1/2 + 1/10, then multiplying by it is pretty easy.
For example, 34 x 1.6 = 34 + 17 + 3.4 = 54.4.

The exact conversion is 1.609344, so to two places it is 1.61. That's only
slightly harder than 1.6. Think of it is 1 + 1/2 + 1/10 + 1/100\. So for my
prior example, 34 x 1.61 = 34 + 17 + 3.4 + 0.34 = 54.74.

The operations needs, taking 1/2, 1/10, and 1/100 of the original value are
generally easy in your head. The hardest thing is just keeping track of the
running sum as you do that.

If you want to go one step farther, you could add a -1/1000 term to bring it
to 1.609 but that is probably overkill in most circumstances. Even 1.61 is
probably overkill.

------
bigdubs
It is interesting that it would be trivial for them to localize the units, it
seems like they specifically didn't.

As a datapoint of one I was fine with thinking in kilometers because those are
generally the units I use when running (you don't typically enter 3.11 mile
races).

My sense of metric vs. imperial is that metric will seep into public conscious
slowly over time, and hopefully some time in the future, we'll realize it's
better for everyone to use the same units, and have a referendum.

~~~
madaxe_again
Please don't let's have a referendum - the entire planet will go back to
imperial - in the UK at least there's still a huge, possibly majority,
definitely passionate, group that prefer imperial units. Hence we still have
one foot in mph and pints.

There's talk of it happening regardless, as without the EU there's no
requirement here to use SI units - and one pundit even suggested a return to
pre-decimal currency.

Either way, people tend to value tradition more than progress or
rationalisation. Having a system of weights based on the weight of a grain of
emmer wheat is preferable to plenty of people, who don't have to write code or
multiply weights or do science, and just want familiar human-scale units.
Hell, I'm sure plenty of the aforementioned would prefer imperial too, for the
same reason.

~~~
my_first_acct
> Either way, people tend to value tradition more than progress or
> rationalisation.

Don't get me wrong, I'm pro-metric, but the old units are not entirely
irrational.

For instance, there are 12 inches in a foot, which may seem odd, unless you
need to measure 1/3 of a foot. You might argue that the foot represents a
future society that uses base-12, while metric lags behind, in the not-as-
divisible base-10 world.

It's also interesting to note that on rulers, in the US anyway, each inch is
subdivided into 16 sub-units, so measurements are usually given as, say, 3
3/16 inches rather than 3.1875 or (rounding) 3.2 inches. In other words,
hexadecimal rather than decimal.

~~~
CydeWeys
Imperial units would be a lot more defensible if they were consistent. But
just in your example we've got things being divided into 12 and 16 parts, and
many other random divisors are common. I'd be onboard with a system of units
where the divisor is always constant, but having it random is annoying.
Fortunately there is a system of units where the divisor is always constant -
SI! Yeah, it's 10 instead of 12, but it'll have to do.

~~~
my_first_acct
I agree that the Imperial system is a mess. 5,280 feet in a mile?

But my point is that people who prefer old units are not being entirely
irrational, or averse to change.

It's just that for their particular use case (making human-scale furniture out
of wood, for example), the Imperial system works pretty well, and perhaps
better than the base-10 metric system.

If they had to spend their days converting between acres and square feet
(43,560 of the latter go into the former, by the way), they might be more
inclined to switch to metric.

~~~
trothamel
One thousand paces in a mile, where each pace is two steps.

A property of the US customary units is they tend to be more optimized for
specific uses at a given scales, with little thought given to changing scales.
Metric units make conversion easier, at the cost of often less suitable for
use at scale - how many steps does it take to go a kilometer?

~~~
CydeWeys
Unless you're in a military unit that is on the march, what does the number of
steps in a kilometer matter for at all? And there is a huge natural variation
in human stride length anyway -- you won't be surprised to know that the
figure you mentioned for miles is an average that only applies for adult males
of military height (i.e. not even shorter men). I think SI units are great for
measuring distance at scale. Nanometers, micrometers, millimeters,
centimeters, meters, and kilometers are all in common usage, and can represent
pretty much anything you'd need. By contrast, it's imperial that has the real
problems with use at scale, specifically down at tiny scales.

~~~
blahedo
> _Unless you 're in a military unit that is on the march, what does the
> number of steps in a kilometer matter for at all?_

Playing Pokemon Go?

~~~
CydeWeys
I do play Pokemon Go, and I don't see what the number of steps has to do with
anything. Nothing in the game is step-based; it's all kilometer based.

------
chriswarbo
Urgh, more discussions involving some contrived correspondence between 1 inch
and 0.01m, 1 foot and 1m, and 1 mile and 1000m. There is only the metre;
divide it up however you like, compare it to whatever imperial units you like,
but "centi", "kilo", etc. are just a different way of writing ÷100 and x1000.

The "real" reason to use metric is that all of the constants of
proportionality are defined as 1. "1m = 100cm" is trivially true, by the
definition of "centi", but 1m is _also_ equal to all of the following, which I
wouldn't even want to attempt to figure out in imperial units:

    
    
        1 metre
    
        1 Joule / 1 Newton  -- Applying 1N of force over a 1m distance requires 1J of energy
    
        1 Volt * 1 Coulomb / 1 Newton  -- 1 Volt is a potential difference of 1 Joule per Coulomb of charge
    
        1 Volt * (1 Amp / 1 second) / 1 Newton  -- 1 Amp of current is 1 Coulomb per second
    
        1 Volt * 1 Amp / 1 Newton * 1 second  -- (by rearranging)
    
        1 Watt / 1 second * 1 Newton  -- 1 Volt * 1 Amp gives 1 Watt of power
    
        1 Watt / 1 second * 1 kilogram * (1 metre / (1 second * 1 second))  -- From Newton, force is mass * acceleration
    
        1 Watt / (1 kilogram * 1 metre / 1 second)  -- (by rearranging)
    
        1 Watt * 1 second / 1 kilogram * 1 metre  -- (by rearranging)
    
        (1 Joule / 1 second) * 1 second / 1 kilogram * 1 metre  -- 1 Watt is 1 Joule per second
    

And so on. We just need to get rid of anachronisms like litres (1l =
0.001m^3), defining "kilogram" as the name of a unit, and of course prevent
the use of weird language-juggling like reporting the distance to Saturn as
"1000 million kilometres", or measuring energy in "kilowatt hours".

Genuine question: does the imperial system even have distinct units for mass
and force? I tend to see ounces, pounds, stones, etc. converted to kilograms,
which implies they measure mass; but pressure seems to be measured in pounds
per square inch, which would be a 2D density (e.g. used as a measure of paper
quality).

~~~
benkuykendall
If we just needed these quantities as the inputs to an equation, sure, we
should express them as 1E12 meters or (whatever x 3.6E6) Joules. But it turns
out units are not only used for computing, but for communication. I am
familiar with the kilometer because I know what it feels like to walk one. I
am exposed to watts because I have grown up using 60W lightbulbs. Now, you
could call this history and experience needless in the context of science. But
in the context of my comprehension of the results of science, they are
important, however "weird" they are to compute. I would much prefer for my
computer to multiply by an extra conversion factor than to re-calibrate my
mind to use "more efficient" units.

~~~
chriswarbo
> If we just needed these quantities as the inputs to an equation, sure, we
> should express them as 1E12 meters or (whatever x 3.6E6) Joules.

To be clear, I wasn't advocating against the use of km, cm, kW, etc.; only
against the common contrivance that "the cm", "the km", etc. are some sort of
independent units with remarkable power-of-ten conversion rules.

As an analogy, it's like claiming that the number ½ ("one half") is,
coincidentally, the same as the result of "1 ÷ 2" ("one divided by two"). In
fact, there is no coincidence; the 'claim' is just describing the intended
meaning of the "x over y" notation. Likewise, powers-of-ten are the intended
meaning of the "kilo", "centi", etc. notation.

In other words, expressing quantities in kilometres _is_ expressing them in
metres; there's no need to use, say, scientific notation to make it "more
metric".

My point about "1000 million kilometres" was simply that it's overly
complicated (3 different factors, written in 3 different ways: one with
digits, one in English and one as a prefix); why not "1 billion kilometres",
"1 trillion metres" or even "1 terametre" ;)

The problem with kilowatthours isn't the "kilo" or the "Watt", but the
"hours"; it introduces an unnecessary factor of 3600 compared to other units.
For example, a megawattsecond (AKA a megajoule) has the same order of
magnitude (1kWh = 3.6 MWs)

------
chillaxtian
> Unfortunately, there’s no way to change the in-game units in Pokémon Go.

i think they meant 'fortunately'

------
bunkydoo
Finally, a way to teach Americans the metric system that doesn't involve weed

~~~
stesch
Or landing on Mars.

------
fpgaminer
I switched to using primarily Celsius a year or two ago. It's been
tremendously useful for me, moreso than switching to metres (which I've been
doing as well, though not as aggressively). Like most tech companies we have
to frequently interact internationally, and everyone uses metric outside of
the U.S. Knowing Celsius has made even basic conversations easier. I mean,
"How's the weather where you are?" is such a common conversation starter, and
it's one I can actually meaningfully have with people outside the U.S. now. No
more "oh, pretty hot", instead I can just say "It's over 35 here!"

And as an engineer I obviously need to deal with metric for most everything
(except those damned PCBs; thou, really!?), so it's very useful to have an
intuitive understanding of what temperature my chip is at, or how thick 3mm is
without grabbing a ruler.

Switching to Celsius is also a lot easier than switching to metres. You can
get through a day using only Celsius, but you'll have a lot of trouble
traveling around in a car using metres.

~~~
aylons
If it is of any consolation for you, metric is becoming increasingly common in
PCB design. New ICs packages are all metric and even the traditional resistors
are being measured in metric (damned be the 0603).

------
p4wnc6
When I read the title of this post, I first imagined a happy and earnest
grade-school teacher saying it, perhaps sharing the story with some fellow
teachers in a teacher's lounge, all discussing it positively.

Then I imagined an angry state legislator slamming his or her hand down on a
brown lacquered table in some indiscriminate political conference room and
yelling, "Pokémon Go Is Teaching Americans the Metric System!" and a bunch of
interns scurrying in fright.

------
joezydeco
Metric is in a lot more places than you'd care to believe. And it's been there
for decades.

Ask any high school student if their science classes are in metric units or
English units.

What units does the AP Physics test use? How about the SAT? And college
chemistry 101?

~~~
return0
I still think the ,/. decimal separator issue is bigger deal.

------
fencepost
It's also teaching Americans to go ride bikes again, or it will be eventually.
I say this because I currently have 35km worth of eggs "stacked up" beyond the
2 that I'm gradually working on, and I'm sure that I'll accumulate more before
I manage to get rid of all of those.

On the upside, it's provided some gamification to the increased walking that I
was starting to do anyway, but it's also making me think about getting my bike
down from the garage ceiling where it's been hanging for a couple years.
Perhaps I'll start riding for quick trips out instead of driving......

~~~
fpgaminer
It isn't talked about much, but riding a bicycle is actually really dangerous.
I say that as someone who loves riding and has done quite a bit of it through
my years. It's the most dangerous mode of transportation between driving,
biking, and walking. That's based on my rough estimations of micromorts/hour
from
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromort;](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromort;)
0.26 micromorts/hr, 1.25 micromorts/hr, and 0.18 micromorts/hr respectively.
That makes walking the safest by a good margin, and biking is almost 5 times
more dangerous than driving. In fact, biking just 80 miles is roughly
equivalent to one hang gliding or skydiving session.

I don't really want to dissuade people from riding bikes; it can be a lot of
fun and healthy. But it's quite dangerous, and I gave up riding a few years
ago because of that and because everyone on the road hates you; cars, cops,
and peds alike. They all pretty much want you dead. (I've ridden mostly
suburbs, both in bike friendly cities and not)

~~~
kristianp
Even more dangerous if your attention is on the phone mounted on the
handlebars running Pokemon, as I saw on the weekend.

------
gpvos
Given the obesity epidemic, it would actually be reasonable to let Americans
walk 1.6 times as far.

------
spullara
Americans know the metric system. They just don't use it regularly for things
outside science and technology. Everyone has to learn it though.

------
imgabe
Anyone interested in running has known how many miles are in 5km for a long
time.

------
chriswarbo
I don't know much of the imperial system, but since the metric system only has
one unit of length (the metre) it would presumably be easiest to convert
_that_ directly into imperial, rather than choosing arbitrary multiples (e.g.
1000m).

In fact, the metre coincides quite nicely with 1 yard (or 1.1 yards if you
want more precision; which is still "just ones"). That seems much easier to
remember than, say, 1610 metres/mile, or 0.62 miles/1000m.

Once you're in imperial you can presumably use the various conversion rules to
get feet, miles, inches, furlongs, etc.

~~~
iainmerrick
I grew up with a mix of metric and imperial (like most people in the UK), but
the imperial conversions are all really weird and hard to remember -- 1760
yards to the mile?? For me it's easier to remember "a yard is a little less
than a meter" and "a mile is about 1⅔ km", and then use the most natural
metric unit for figuring out estimates.

------
fma
More importantly people, Americans are now walking 5km...maybe there will be a
small dip in obesity rate while the all is trending.

~~~
ars
It's unlikely. Unless you carefully control your eating more exercise leads to
weight gain, not loss.

Exercise is great for general health, but it's useless for weight loss unless
you are also on a carefully controlled diet. (i.e. if you exercise you will
want to eat more. Unless you force yourself not to, you eat up gaining
weight.)

------
mhartl
Next thing you know we'll be buying soda in two-liter bottles and measuring
our pills in milligrams.

------
beefield
I think the world would be a much better place if we compromised so that US
moves to SI and rest of the world gets rid of the decimal comma and starts to
use the decimal point.

And as an icing to the cake, everyone could switch to ISO 8601 date formatting
everywhere.

~~~
jazoom
This is how it's been in Australia for many decades. I guess the world truly
is a better place here.

------
iainmerrick
The Fibonacci sequence is a pretty good rule of thumb for converting between
miles and kilometres. 2 miles is about 3km, 3 miles is 5km, 5 miles is 8km,
etc.

------
truantbuick
So are drugs.

~~~
danmaz74
Lol why?

~~~
Nexxxeh
From what I understand, cocaine and other harder drugs are sold by the gram at
an end-user level, and by the kilogram at the street distribution level.

~~~
madaxe_again
Conversely you by weed in imperial units, pretty much everywhere - except
Amsterdam, where you buy in 7g increments (28.3g in an Oz).

~~~
Symbiote
I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure it's sold per gram in the UK.

The American units sound very unfamiliar to most British people under about 40
years old. 3/8 oz?

Road speed is still given in miles per hour, but anything where fractions or
calculation might get involved (cooking, measuring furniture, drinking
spirits) is done using metric units.

~~~
ascorbic
In the early noughties it was certainly in ounces, though it may have changed
in the past decade.

------
ragebol
Finally!

------
ap22213
Shopping for groceries outside of the U.S. is so straight-forward, the U.S.
food industry should worry about loss of profits in moving to metric.

Imperial:

$4.49 / lb

0.67 lbs

≈ ???

Metric:

$9.89 / kg

$0.3 kg

≈ $3.00

~~~
thaumasiotes
Whatever point you're trying to make is beyond me. Why is multiplying by 0.3
easier than multiplying by 2/3?

~~~
ap22213
Yeah, my comment didn't make sense. Terrible example. Was running out the
door.

I meant to say that in the U.S. things are marked in ounces. So, it's like
calculating (10 oz / 16 oz.) * price. Whereas, elsewhere it's usually 100
grams.

------
free2rhyme214
No it's not. People just ask Google or Siri. They still don't know that 1km
equals 0.62 miles.

~~~
lfowles
Sure, but once you do that for the 4th or 5th time you'll remember that it's
"sorta close to half a mile".

------
sandworm101
No it isn't. At most it is teaching a single unit, not the system. And if all
it's doing is teaching them how to convert that unit into something they know,
rather than them actually use the kilometer for what it is, then it teaches
nothing.

Until you live with americans you don't appreciate how focused they are on
accent and vocabulary. Social groups are defined by their vocab. Someone using
the wrong synonym for the context betrays their foreignness. I remember once
using the phrase "by whatever metric" in a lecture only to be informed that he
correct wording was "by whatever measurement". Even the word is a red flag.
The was a law lecture. Had it been a physics lecture my choice would have been
apt. It isn't a lack of knowledge that holds them back. It's a class system in
which the use of the metric system is an important identifier.

Also, pokemon can do nothing in comparison to the US military's increased use
of metric, but even there its use in casual conversation remains an identifier
of background/rank history.

