Why do Americans use the weirdest dating system?

[latino666]

Originally posted by: SampSon
MM-DD-YYYY works just peachy for me.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
You know why we use Imperial measurements? Cause metric is stupid. Roger Bannister was the first man to run a mile in under 4 minutes.

Check that, he was the first man to run 1600 meters in 4 minutes. See? No drama attached to that sentence. Hell, it even begs the question...who was first under 4 minutes for 1500 or 1625 or 799? All distances become relative to the meter. You begin seeing things in relation to this small distance. When somebody says that a building is 40 meters tall, you need to extrapolate, in your mind, what 40 meters will look like. Same with 5000 meters or 2 meters. You've always got to keep going back to the meter.

A mile is a concept as much as a length. It isn't a distance easily run. It's hard to see things at that distance. It means something. Someone says a mile, you don't care, you just know that's damn far. Excuse us if we haven't sold our souls for inter-continental compliance.

Yep, that's right... use a system that's convoluted for everything else in life because it doesn't have enough drama for sports record.

Yeah, it's a wonder the United States has become the dominate superpower in the world using this "convoluted" system. :roll:

Well, part of the reason why it's become a superpower was because it was able to exploit slavery and used that cheap labor to build a strong base for the economy to build on. And because a lot of the people who came to America, had the type of spirit who would be willing to give up all their possessions in a world they knew and was safe in, to take a risk in a foreign land and start over, hoping to build a better life.

But i can see your point... since you can't argue on the issue, you're trying to cheerleader an issue that has nothing to do with it, because it would be senseless to argue on that. We all know how militarily strong a nation is compared to the rest of the world reflects how great a society it really is to live in. Yep, Russia is the second best country to live aside from the US.

Except, Russia's military really isn't that strong anymore, and their economy sucks balls... The United States, contrary to popular belief, has a relatively strong economy

Well, no arguments on that. But simply being a 'superpower' doesn't indicate how great a nation it is. China is becoming a superpower, but would you rather live in China or Canada or Australia?

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
The rest of the world did that too. Logic would tell you that, while the Imperial measurement system might not be what cused the success, it obviously didn't hinder it.

Funny you claim logic. I've taken 3 college courses on it. How many have you taken?

Funny, your "The plane does not take off" in another thread and the above post are just enough to indicate that, while you may have taken 3 whole logic courses in college, you obviously spent your time staring out the window and picking your nose.

Again, horse-drawn carriages obviously didn't "hinder" the US's success, so why aren't we still using them? Are you trying to tell me that we adopted a more efficient and streamlined system of transportation for no good reason? That it was "stupid" to upgrade because having 3 tons of horseflesh pulling us around was obviously "good enough" up to that point?

Try more thinking, and less ePeen waving, Mr "I went to college." :laugh:

That's what I thought.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
You know why we use Imperial measurements? Cause metric is stupid. Roger Bannister was the first man to run a mile in under 4 minutes.

Check that, he was the first man to run 1600 meters in 4 minutes. See? No drama attached to that sentence. Hell, it even begs the question...who was first under 4 minutes for 1500 or 1625 or 799? All distances become relative to the meter. You begin seeing things in relation to this small distance. When somebody says that a building is 40 meters tall, you need to extrapolate, in your mind, what 40 meters will look like. Same with 5000 meters or 2 meters. You've always got to keep going back to the meter.

A mile is a concept as much as a length. It isn't a distance easily run. It's hard to see things at that distance. It means something. Someone says a mile, you don't care, you just know that's damn far. Excuse us if we haven't sold our souls for inter-continental compliance.

Yep, that's right... use a system that's convoluted for everything else in life because it doesn't have enough drama for sports record.

Yeah, it's a wonder the United States has become the dominate superpower in the world using this "convoluted" system. :roll:

Well, part of the reason why it's become a superpower was because it was able to exploit slavery and used that cheap labor to build a strong base for the economy to build on. And because a lot of the people who came to America, had the type of spirit who would be willing to give up all their possessions in a world they knew and was safe in, to take a risk in a foreign land and start over, hoping to build a better life.

But i can see your point... since you can't argue on the issue, you're trying to cheerleader an issue that has nothing to do with it, because it would be senseless to argue on that. We all know how militarily strong a nation is compared to the rest of the world reflects how great a society it really is to live in. Yep, Russia is the second best country to live aside from the US.

Except, Russia's military really isn't that strong anymore, and their economy sucks balls... The United States, contrary to popular belief, has a relatively strong economy

Well, no arguments on that. But simply being a 'superpower' doesn't indicate how great a nation it is. China is becoming a superpower, but would you rather live in China or Canada or Australia?

Of course, I understand. I'm more on your side than against you, but Russia just isn't a good example

 

[Pepsi90919]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: logic1485


That's what I'm saying is the proper system: dd/mm/yy (or yyyy if you prefer)

...........And that's how Americans do it....atleast most of us, from what I've seen.

That's how I've seen it most used.

day/month/year

and gatsby is a retard as usual

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
That's what I thought.

It's OK, HoP. You can feel better by taking a whole 33% more logic courses in college than I did, even if you can't apply it to everyday situations, much less an argument on an internet forum. :laugh:

Tell me one more time how this passes mustard in anything above the gradeschool playground:

"X can't suck because Y uses X, and Y is good!"

That's what I thought.

 

[tjaisv]

Originally posted by: logic1485
It's supposed to be dd/mm/yy, not mm/dd/yy! Why you guys gotta be the other way around?

Because AMERICA is #1!!!

USA!

USA!

USA!

USA!

 

[Pepsi90919]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
You know why we use Imperial measurements? Cause metric is stupid. Roger Bannister was the first man to run a mile in under 4 minutes.

Check that, he was the first man to run 1600 meters in 4 minutes. See? No drama attached to that sentence. Hell, it even begs the question...who was first under 4 minutes for 1500 or 1625 or 799? All distances become relative to the meter. You begin seeing things in relation to this small distance. When somebody says that a building is 40 meters tall, you need to extrapolate, in your mind, what 40 meters will look like. Same with 5000 meters or 2 meters. You've always got to keep going back to the meter.

A mile is a concept as much as a length. It isn't a distance easily run. It's hard to see things at that distance. It means something. Someone says a mile, you don't care, you just know that's damn far. Excuse us if we haven't sold our souls for inter-continental compliance.

Yep, that's right... use a system that's convoluted for everything else in life because it doesn't have enough drama for sports record.

Yeah, it's a wonder the United States has become the dominate superpower in the world using this "convoluted" system. :roll:

because you're too stupid to accept change?

 

[SampSon]

Originally posted by: DLeRium

Originally posted by: SampSon

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
You know why we use Imperial measurements? Cause metric is stupid. Roger Bannister was the first man to run a mile in under 4 minutes.

Check that, he was the first man to run 1600 meters in 4 minutes. See? No drama attached to that sentence. Hell, it even begs the question...who was first under 4 minutes for 1500 or 1625 or 799? All distances become relative to the meter. You begin seeing things in relation to this small distance. When somebody says that a building is 40 meters tall, you need to extrapolate, in your mind, what 40 meters will look like. Same with 5000 meters or 2 meters. You've always got to keep going back to the meter.

A mile is a concept as much as a length. It isn't a distance easily run. It's hard to see things at that distance. It means something. Someone says a mile, you don't care, you just know that's damn far. Excuse us if we haven't sold our souls for inter-continental compliance.

Yep, that's right... use a system that's convoluted for everything else in life because it doesn't have enough drama for sports record.

Who cares about everyone else? Not everyone has to use the same systems.

If everyone should have the same system then why don't we have a global currency? (gold doesn't count).

Uhhh flawed argument. What does 40 meters look like? Flip it around. What does 40 feet look like? Honestly, meters are more logical than feet.

Sure he ran 1600 metesr in 4 min, but he also ran 1.6 km in 4 minutes. If we didnt have the mile, we would be tlaking about how fast people run kilometers.

Thus. Dead even draw.

The only thing that makes more sense is the whole factor of 10s. I say its easier because everything is a multiple of 10. Other than that, for the mind to get used to either, it's about the same...

There is nothing flawed about it. Why isn't there a global currency? It makes logical sense to have everyone on the same page right? Europe did it, why can't the whole world?

I'm not agreeing with HeroOfPellinor on his evaluation of it. The understanding an utilization of a system is completely subjective and depends largely on what the individual grew up using. Imperical is the system Americans know and use. The people who use the imperical system have a better idea of what 40 feet is than 40 meters and on the other side thoes who use the metric system have a better idea what 40 meters is. I grew up using the imperical system and learned the metric system in school. So I will always default to the imperical system. A can of soda is 12oz not 375ml. I drive in miles not kilometers. I weigh myself in pounds not kilograms.

There is no right or wrong.

 

[Phlargo]

Originally posted by: tjaisv

Originally posted by: logic1485
It's supposed to be dd/mm/yy, not mm/dd/yy! Why you guys gotta be the other way around?

Because AMERICA is #1!!!

USA!

USA!

USA!

USA!

Stephen Colbert fan much?

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: DLeRium
The only thing that makes more sense is the whole factor of 10s. I say its easier because everything is a multiple of 10. Other than that, for the mind to get used to either, it's about the same...

And the fact that the units for different measurements are related, i.e. 1 mL = 1 cc = 1 gram of water.

 

[ballmode]

we are the wierdest people

 

[newParadigm]

Originally posted by: Baked
I thought you're talking about guy and girl going out.

Same here

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
You know why we use Imperial measurements? Cause metric is stupid. Roger Bannister was the first man to run a mile in under 4 minutes.

Check that, he was the first man to run 1600 meters in 4 minutes. See? No drama attached to that sentence. Hell, it even begs the question...who was first under 4 minutes for 1500 or 1625 or 799? All distances become relative to the meter. You begin seeing things in relation to this small distance. When somebody says that a building is 40 meters tall, you need to extrapolate, in your mind, what 40 meters will look like. Same with 5000 meters or 2 meters. You've always got to keep going back to the meter.

A mile is a concept as much as a length. It isn't a distance easily run. It's hard to see things at that distance. It means something. Someone says a mile, you don't care, you just know that's damn far. Excuse us if we haven't sold our souls for inter-continental compliance.

Yep, that's right... use a system that's convoluted for everything else in life because it doesn't have enough drama for sports record.

"I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles.."

It's not just sports, it's life.

 

[mrSHEiK124]

Metric > Imperial, no f*cking doubt about it. I was born here in the US, and lived here all my life. To this day I don't know how many feet a mile is, and I don't care either. Metric is easy as hell, 1000 mm = m, 1000 m = km. And ISO dates are the easiest to use, eliminates confusion. If you write YYYY first chances are MM follows.

 

[LeadMagnet]

I usually just say 5,643,324,356,647 days since the big bang

 

[RudeBoie]

Originally posted by: logic1485

Originally posted by: NFS4
How about this? Quit the bull**** arguing and use whatever is most efficient/proper for your needs.

No one way is right or wrong.

You, as a reporter should know the implications of this. Assume you want to have a internet conference at some point. Let's say the date is 01/02/03. That could mean either 1st February 2003 (dd/mm/yy), 2nd January 2003 (mm/dd/yy) or 3rd February 2001 (yy/mm/dd). I know it's common sense, but when looking at logs, you may want to know what happened when.

But he did say "use whatever is most efficient/proper for your needs"

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: DLeRium
Sure he ran 1600 metesr in 4 min, but he also ran 1.6 km in 4 minutes. If we didnt have the mile, we would be tlaking about how fast people run kilometers.

2 km in 5 minutes is the same pace. See? The "intuitive" grasp of units only depends on what you grew up with. But metric is better in other ways.

 

[Armitage]

What the hell does the metric system have to do with conventions for writing dates???

 

[HardcoreRobot]

yyyymmdd

 

[Cristatus]

Originally posted by: RudeBoie

Originally posted by: logic1485

Originally posted by: NFS4
How about this? Quit the bull**** arguing and use whatever is most efficient/proper for your needs.

No one way is right or wrong.

You, as a reporter should know the implications of this. Assume you want to have a internet conference at some point. Let's say the date is 01/02/03. That could mean either 1st February 2003 (dd/mm/yy), 2nd January 2003 (mm/dd/yy) or 3rd February 2001 (yy/mm/dd). I know it's common sense, but when looking at logs, you may want to know what happened when.

But he did say "use whatever is most efficient/proper for your needs"

Yes, but if you are e-mailing other people, it's a bit difficult. You may have to write the date, and then add in brackets the format. Granted, that my example is not quite possible in real, but again, looking back at logs, it would be difficult to understand them.

Motion to make YYYY-MM-DD the official format of dates. Anyone found using any other formats should be banned . Maybe there should be a law to have websites state all their dates in YYYY-MM-DD?

 

[Lazy8s]

How is the day the most important? It's the 4th! Of.......

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
You know why we use Imperial measurements? Cause metric is stupid. Roger Bannister was the first man to run a mile in under 4 minutes.

Check that, he was the first man to run 1600 meters in 4 minutes. See? No drama attached to that sentence. Hell, it even begs the question...who was first under 4 minutes for 1500 or 1625 or 799? All distances become relative to the meter. You begin seeing things in relation to this small distance. When somebody says that a building is 40 meters tall, you need to extrapolate, in your mind, what 40 meters will look like. Same with 5000 meters or 2 meters. You've always got to keep going back to the meter.

A mile is a concept as much as a length. It isn't a distance easily run. It's hard to see things at that distance. It means something. Someone says a mile, you don't care, you just know that's damn far. Excuse us if we haven't sold our souls for inter-continental compliance.

Yep, that's right... use a system that's convoluted for everything else in life because it doesn't have enough drama for sports record.

"I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles.."

It's not just sports, it's life.

"I would walk 500 miles."

 

[BrokenVisage]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
You know why we use Imperial measurements? Cause metric is stupid. Roger Bannister was the first man to run a mile in under 4 minutes.

Check that, he was the first man to run 1600 meters in 4 minutes. See? No drama attached to that sentence. Hell, it even begs the question...who was first under 4 minutes for 1500 or 1625 or 799? All distances become relative to the meter. You begin seeing things in relation to this small distance. When somebody says that a building is 40 meters tall, you need to extrapolate, in your mind, what 40 meters will look like. Same with 5000 meters or 2 meters. You've always got to keep going back to the meter.

A mile is a concept as much as a length. It isn't a distance easily run. It's hard to see things at that distance. It means something. Someone says a mile, you don't care, you just know that's damn far. Excuse us if we haven't sold our souls for inter-continental compliance.

Yep, that's right... use a system that's convoluted for everything else in life because it doesn't have enough drama for sports record.

"I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles.."

It's not just sports, it's life.

"I would walk 500 miles."

*puts in his Don Henley - Actual Miles CD*

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: BrokenVisage

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
You know why we use Imperial measurements? Cause metric is stupid. Roger Bannister was the first man to run a mile in under 4 minutes.

Check that, he was the first man to run 1600 meters in 4 minutes. See? No drama attached to that sentence. Hell, it even begs the question...who was first under 4 minutes for 1500 or 1625 or 799? All distances become relative to the meter. You begin seeing things in relation to this small distance. When somebody says that a building is 40 meters tall, you need to extrapolate, in your mind, what 40 meters will look like. Same with 5000 meters or 2 meters. You've always got to keep going back to the meter.

A mile is a concept as much as a length. It isn't a distance easily run. It's hard to see things at that distance. It means something. Someone says a mile, you don't care, you just know that's damn far. Excuse us if we haven't sold our souls for inter-continental compliance.

Yep, that's right... use a system that's convoluted for everything else in life because it doesn't have enough drama for sports record.

"I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles.."

It's not just sports, it's life.

"I would walk 500 miles."

*puts in his Don Henley - Actual Miles CD*

Breaks out the Miles Davis.