• Fal@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    The temperature measurement is true though. F describes the temperature scale that humans interact with much better than C does.

    • Slowy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Kind of, but not really. 0F doesn’t mean anything special in relation to human interaction, it relates to the freezing point of some random salt and water mixture (not seawater). 32 is a random number for the freezing point of freshwater which humans do care about, and 212 is nonsense for boiling temp of water which humans also care about and routinely use. The only part pertinent is that 100 is close to, but higher than human body temperature, but not quite where it counts as a fever… just the temperature of a sub-feverish human… how is that helpful! Sorry I really don’t care for the Fahrenheit system and I’m prepared to die on this hill

      • MidRomney@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        0 F is really cold to a human (but still livable), and 100 F is really hot to a human (but still livable). I honestly don’t really care what temperature water boils at in my every day life. I know that if I put fire under a pot of water, it will boil eventually. Why would I need to know the exact temperature?

          • DeepFriedDresden@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Do you add pasta when the water is boiling or do you add pasta when it’s 100°C? Because right now the boilng point of water for my location is 95.23°C. If I were to go skiing and wanted to boil some instant Ramen does it matter that the boiling point is 90.04°C in Leadville, CO? Or do I just put some water on the stove and wait till it boils?

            • SnipingNinja@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Coffee brewing, if I used boiling water my coffee would taste “burnt”, but if I use 80°C or so of hot water, it tastes perfect.

              • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                huh. I use an expensive coffee maker precisely because it heats just shy of boiling, 202 degrees/like 94c, and it turns out way better coffee than the 85 ish degree machines.

                • SnipingNinja@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Depends on your coffee, brewing method, etc

                  For coffee machines the temperature doesn’t matter as much, but for pour over, and some other filter coffee methods it can be important to measure water temperature.

                  • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    It absolutely matters, it’s why I paid so much. Walmart was selling a 50 dollar machine did the same thing, but the machines broke inside of 2 weeks. It made such good coffee I just returned it over and over till the customer service lady told me (she knew my name at this point) they’d returned what was left of the pallet. 300 dollar Zojirusha does the same thing and its a few years old now. Tried a few machines in between, just made mud it felt like, I’ve been ruined for crappy coffee tolerance.

          • Fal@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Explain how it’s useful in cooking. Considering it doesn’t actually boil at 100 degrees unless there’s very specific environmental conditions

        • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hard disagree. 0°F is colder than the pont it stopped being cool, but not yet really cold. 100°F is many degrees into dying of melting, but also a few degrees short of a fever worth noting.

          I don’t think I’ve ever seen either 0°F or 100°F used in any way to refer to actually temperature. It’s always defining the scale or comparing to °C. Maybe once when checking for a fever.

          • Fal@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t think I’ve ever seen either 0°F or 100°F used in any way to refer to actually temperature. It’s always defining the scale or comparing to °C. Maybe once when checking for a fever.

            What? Are you actually from somewhere that uses F? Because what kind of argument is this? You’re saying that 0F isn’t “really cold”? That’s a very specific take likely based on the very specific region you live in. The vast majority of the world would call 0F “really cold”.

            And likewise, as someone from arizona, 100F is hot but not “really hot”. That doesn’t start until after 110 or 115. So in general, out of the entire world, 0-100 is a pretty good range of “really cold” to “really hot”. Only the people who live in the specific places that regularly get much colder or hotter actually care. To most people, it doesn’t really matter if it’s 0 or -10 or -15, it’s all too fucking cold. Just like to you 100 or 110 or 115 doesn’t matter, it’s all too hot.

            • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The limits of “hot” and “cold” change with location and personal experience. 0°F is shorts weather for some, while 70°F is jacket time for others. Both live in my neighborhood.

              There are hundreds of millions of people who see negative double digits every year, and billions of people who have never seen snow (Mumbai has never seen below 50°F!). There is no scale that can claim to cover human’s experience of temperature in general, but some scales can be useful.

              The exact numbers don’t matter to people anyway, no one sees 70°F and estimates 70% hot, just like most of the world knows what 22°C means, even if it never freezes there. We could measure in yoctojoules (40.7) or simply relative to what the pope feels is hot and cold (85?). For daily use all temperature scales are arbitrary. Why not use one that’s useful?

              • Fal@yiffit.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                0°F is shorts weather for some

                Only for those with medical issues or those being obstinate. It’s not a relevant data point when trying to agree on a scale. 99.9% of people will agree 0F = cold as fuck.

                There are hundreds of millions of people who see negative double digits every year

                So? The difference between 0F and -10F and -25F aren’t THAT significant. The VAST majority of people will treat those temperatures as similar unless they’re preparing for an outdoor adventure or something. But the difference between 65 and 75 is HUGE to most people that WILL impact how they prepare for interacting with the environment.

                For daily use all temperature scales are arbitrary. Why not use one that’s useful?

                This is just not accurate and is pure cope. A scale that’s 0-100 for the most important temperatures that humans interact with is an objectively good scale. With 10 degree bands that align pretty well to general human comfort and indicate the type of preparation required. Sure, some people might consider 60s t-shirt weather, but the point is the band is still relevant. 60-70, 70-80, 80-90. Those are useful, meaningful temperature ranges where the temperature inside those bands is similar enough

        • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          0 F is really cold to a human (but still livable), and 100 F is really hot to a human (but still livable)

          Oh wow two numbers with a really fuzzy meaning, how convenient

          I honestly don’t really care what temperature water boils at in my every day life

          How about freezing? Super useful info in places that have snow and ice

      • Fal@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        32 is a random number for the freezing point of freshwater which humans do care about, and 212 is nonsense for boiling temp of water which humans also care about and routinely use.

        Humans care about the fact that water boils or freezes. Not the temperature at which it happens

        Sorry I really don’t care for the Fahrenheit system and I’m prepared to die on this hill

        I’m prepared to die on the Farenheit system is better for describing environmental temperature hill

        • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          1 year ago

          Friend, what in Sam Hill are you on about? Celsius is obviously better for boiling water: It takes a lot more degrees to reach 212 than it does 100, so I get my ramen a lot sooner when boiling water in Celsius!

          since text loses the emotional content of speech

          this is a joke

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Humans care about the fact that water boils or freezes. Not the temperature at which it happens

          What? Humans care a whole lot about the temperature at which both those things happen.

          When I go outside in the morning, I know if road conditions are dangerous based on the freezing point of temperature.

          When I cook something, the boiling point of water is something I can easily recognise just by looking, which allows me to use temperatures around and below it for many purposes.

          • Fal@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            What? Humans care a whole lot about the temperature at which both those things happen.

            Explain how

            When I go outside in the morning, I know if road conditions are dangerous based on the freezing point of temperature.

            You’re getting a false sense of security. Do you think -1C = dangerous and 1C = safe or something?

            When I cook something, the boiling point of water is something I can easily recognise just by looking, which allows me to use temperatures around and below it for many purposes.

            Wtf? Explain how

            • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Explain how

              You mean the way I did in the parts you quoted after writing this?

              You’re getting a false sense of security. Do you think -1C = dangerous and 1C = safe or something?

              No? Did I write that? I know the freezing point of water, so I know when I have to be careful. That’s not strictly at the freezing point of water, but it is around that.

              Wtf? Explain how

              You should try to write actual questions, because I’m not sure what you’re confused about. Say I want to water around 80-90°C - I heat water to boiling and then wait a bit. What’s so difficult?

      • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        212 and 100 are both equally random numbers. There’s nothing special about either. Besides, water boils about 205/95 on my hill.

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, 212 and 100 are not equally random. Unless you’re trying to say that literally all numbers are equally random, 100 in the decimal system is much less random that 212.

            • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Assigning the number 100 to the temperature pure water boils at sea level under specific conditions is as random as it gets.

              No, it’s literally not. 212 is much more random. Any number like 10, 100, 1000 etc. is less random than any other number, simply by virtue of our decimal system. Just like 2,4, 8 etc. are less random in a binary system.

              • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                This isn’t kilometers, area, volume, distant measurement. It’s temperature. What that 100 is based on is random as fuck, and having the temperature of one elements boiling point at sea level divisible by 10 doesn’t really help anything. There is a 100 degree point in Farenhenheit too, you could simply use that for…well whatever reason you need ten to go in evenly.

                • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  My guy, I’m not arguing whether the boiling temperature of water is a random point (because it isn’t random in any way, and I’m not interested in arguing that). I’m arguing one simple thing: assigning something on a scale to 100 is much less random than assigning it to 212.

                  • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I don’t think you have a very clear grasp on what random means, and 212 wasn’t assigned.

    • This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      1 year ago

      F describes the temperature scale that humans interact with much better than C does.

      Only because you grew up with it.

      I have only had the temperature described to me in celcius so Fahrenhite makes no sense to me.

      • Fal@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have only had the temperature described to me in celcius so Fahrenhite makes no sense to me.

        What doesn’t make sense to you. You can think of F as a percentage of how hot it is. 0 is 0% hot, meaning cold as fuck. 100 is 100% hot, hot as fuck. Things in the middle are are in the middle. 85 is 85% hot.

            • TheKingBombOmbKiller@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              If 0 F is 0 % hot, and 100 F is 100 % hot; shouldn’t 50 F be the Goldilocks ideal of neither too hot or too cold at 50 %?

              And if 50 F isn’t the Goldilocks ideal, then where on the scale is it?

              • Fal@yiffit.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                That would depend on personal preference. Somewhere around the 70-80 mark most likely.

                You’re assuming humans have no preference for it being hot or cold. That’s the only way 50% would make more sense. But most people prefer it warm

        • BluesF@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          And -5 farenheit is… just a bit colder than fuck? I understand what temperatures I start feeling cold perfectly well in Celsius, I know roughly when I’ll need a jacket, when I’ll need a hat and scarf… Farenheit tells me nothing because I don’t know about it. Sure, 0 is very cold, but where is “cold enough to wear a jacket”? It’s most likely never going to reach 0°F where I live, and it won’t reach 100°F outside of very rare summer days… Beyond those extremes it’s not useful to me because I don’t know it.

          • Fal@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sure, 0 is very cold, but where is “cold enough to wear a jacket”?

            This is going to vary depending on everyone. I start wearing a jacket at around 60. My wife starts at like 75. So neither system is going to be able to tell you that information

            • ThisOne@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not nearly as hard as you are working to represent F in chat about personal preference

              • Fal@yiffit.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I WILL die on this hill. But preference is just what you do with the information, not the usefulness of the scale. 0-100 is the scale. Whether you wear jackets at 50-60 or 60-70 doesn’t mean that the scale isn’t objectively better.

                  • Fal@yiffit.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Cope harder. F is objectively better for environment. C is objectively better for scientific calculation

          • Fal@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            102%, aka hot as fuck. The whole point is that it describes human environmental temperature. If you’re dealing with melting metals, that’s a scientific application and C would be the better choice

    • edric@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The fever temperature, maybe. But the rest makes more sense in C. It’s so much easier when 0C is freezing and 100C is boiling. It works with cooking. Counting in increments of 5 or 10 also works for weather.

      <0C = below freezing

      0-10C = cold

      10-20C = cool (sweater or hoodie)

      20-30C = t-shirt weather

      30C and above = hot

      • Fal@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s so much easier when 0C is freezing and 100C is boiling. It works with cooking.

        Explain how this is useful in cooking

        20-30C = t-shirt weather

        68 to 86 is a GIGANTIC difference. 68 is cold for many many people, certainly not “t-shirt weather”. and 86 is hot, much more than “t-shirt weather”.

        • BiggestBulb@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          Who bundles up in 68F? It’s literally room temperature

          Also it’s useful in cooking because it’s an actual, useful scale. You know when it’s 90C it’s about to be boiling, just makes no sense why you gotta memorize 212F. Random number and all

          • Fal@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Never said “bundling up”. But that 10 degree range is so big as to be useless. 68 is not in the same category as 86.

            You know when it’s 90C it’s about to be boiling, just makes no sense why you gotta memorize 212F.

            What? How often are you putting thermometers in whatever it is you’re boiling? You just heat it until it boils. It doesn’t matter what the number is.

            • MidRomney@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Thank you for making sense lol. Who’s putting a meat thermometer in water to make sure it’s boiling? It’s boiling when it’s boiling.

              • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                people actually use boiling water to calibrate their meat thermometers, but they always forget to check their elevation. boiling point here is 205 degrees, and 7 degrees matters when say chicken is safe at 160 but you actually pulled it off at 155

          • BeardedSingleMalt@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            i dunno, 68F on a cloudy windy day isn’t as pleasant as 68F and sunny.

            But then again I’m from Ohio and I won’t bother to put on so much as a vest until it hits 50s

        • ThisOne@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          68f is for sure t-shirt weather. 86f is for sure T-shirt weather.

          Who TF bundles up if it’s 86 deg.

          Super confused, you bundle up at 68f for normal ideal summer temps? Or is 68-86 Gigantic enough you need long sleeves? Or like just low keyed afraid are you of the outdoors at 20c? Spoiler alert… It’s nice?

          • Fal@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            68f is for sure t-shirt weather.

            68 is not t-shirt weather for a lot of people.

            What is this about “bundling up”? Literally no one said anything about bundling up. But 68 and 86 are just fundamentally different temperature categories.

            you bundle up at 68f for normal ideal summer temps? Or is 68-86 Gigantic enough you need long sleeves?

            68 means you may or may not need a jacket, depending on the wind, fog, etc. It also means you should probably carry a jacket because it’s likely to drop down below “t-shirt” weather when the sun goes down. 86 means you’ll likely not need a jacket at all, even at night. And it means the wind will be refreshing rather than biting. And it might mean shorts as well.

            Like, I just don’t believe that you can’t understand how 68 and 86 are fundamentally different temperature categories

            • ThisOne@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              68 is shorts and T-shirt weather in my part of the world. No one carries a jacket around if it’s that warm. Maybe it’s cold to you if you live between the tropics? I can’t speak to that

              20-30c is a cool shortcut that F doesn’t really have. The original comment is just a decent guideline and “I just don’t believe that you can’t understand” what a guideline is.

              But if you need all this stuff to exist outside in nice weather maybe a quick guideline is not for you…

              • Fal@yiffit.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                20-30c is a cool shortcut that F doesn’t really have.

                What kind of shortcut? 68-80 are so massively different. Even if 68 is shorts and t-shirt for you, that means 86 is “uncomfortably hot”. And even if 68 is t-shirt weather, it means at night it’s going to drop probalby 10 degrees. So 68 is “tshirt weather right now, but bring a jacket”, and 86 is “tshirt weather but leave the jacket at home”. and the 10 degree bands of F are perfect for that. 60s is “cool, may or may not require a jacket depending on your preference”. 70s is “nice right now but prepare for cool when the sun goes down”, 80s is “warm, don’t bring a jacket”, etc.

                So sure, we don’t have the “20-30c” shortcut (again, way too big to be useful). We have EVERY 10 degree band as a shortcut

                • ThisOne@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  68-80 are similar temps. I’m comfy at both. I wear the same thing outdoors at both temps.

                  I’m sorry you don’t I guess and are offended that someone else is different than you.

                  20-30 is easier to understand than 68-80 for most people (obviously there’s an exception)

                  • Fal@yiffit.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yes, 68 to 80 are somewhat similar. I obviously meant 68-86.

                    But 68-80 IS similar, and it’s exactly why F is better, because we have the 70-80 band. But that’s exactly the point, 68 and 86 are NOT similar temps, hence being in separate 80-90 band.

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is a funny argument I see from Yanks all the time.

      Someone teach these Yanks about negative numbers, please!

      • Fal@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        What do negative numbers have to do with anything? -1F = cold as fuck

        • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          . F describes the temperature scale that humans interact with much better than C does.

          Usually this silly argument is about 0-100 thing. But Yanks don’t seem to understand that you can do negative numbers, you don’t have to be within 0-100 range.

          • Fal@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, negative numbers exist, and numbers beyond 100. But they’re not that important. 0 is basically the lowest temperature that matters in day to day life. If it’s colder, you don’t do anything different unless you’re preparing for an outdoor adventure. Same with 100. 100 is the hottest temperature that makes a difference. Beyond 100 it only matters if you’re preparing for an outdoor adventure. The 100 degree scale is about describing the normal range that humans interact with their environment in. Even if it can get extreme beyond that, that doesn’t mean the 0-100 scale isn’t useful.

            • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes, negative numbers exist, and numbers beyond 100. But they’re not that important.

              They kinda are though lol.

              The 100 degree scale is about describing the normal range that humans interact with their environment in

              But what about sauna. What about really cold weather. What about cooking. Hell, what about my PC. What about when I have a fever. What about really hot weather… The temperatures are about much more than the fuzzy idea about normal-ish weather in certain places on earth.

              Even if it can get extreme beyond that, that doesn’t mean the 0-100 scale isn’t useful.

              It just means it doesn’t have much benefit to it at all. The whole argument for it is silly.

                • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  They’ve started a holy war to preach the benefit of staying between 0-100. I admire their conviction, even if I think their argument is nonsense.

                  • ThisOne@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Ehhhh conviction isn’t super admirable if it’s something stupid.

                    I don’t think a flat earther’s conviction is admirable.

                    But at least theyre less stupid than flat earthers… So far…

              • Fal@yiffit.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                They kinda are though lol.

                Not really. Explain what you do differently in -10F temperatures that you wouldn’t do in 0F temperatures in normal life. I don’t want to hear about how you would choose a different sleeping bag or prepare your snow shoes differently or some shit. When your day consists of commuting to work, going to the grocery store, then going home, what meaningful difference do any values below 0F have.

                But what about sauna. What about it?

                What about really cold weather.

                What about it?

                What about cooking.

                What about it?

                Hell, what about my PC.

                What about it?

                What about when I have a fever

                This is actually the perfect example. Above 100 is a fever. Below is fine

                What about really hot weather

                What about it?

                The temperatures are about much more than the fuzzy idea about normal-ish weather in certain places on earth.

                Not in 99% of how people use the temperature.

                And your examples of cooking and your PC are not what we’re talking about. We’re talking about human environmental temperature. But in fact, cooking is another good use for F. You generally only care about a few specific temps. 350F and 400F. Anything else is nuance but basically only matter on the 25 degree marks. So 375, 425. It’s actually a pretty great scale for cooking, with broiling generally maxing out at 500 (unless you’re talking very specific application, like pizza ovens or some shit)

                • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Yes, negative numbers exist, and numbers beyond 100. But they’re not that important.

                  The 100 degree scale is about describing the normal range that humans interact with their environment in

                  “Well what about all these things outside of this range people use in their daily life?”

                  What about it?

                  LOL

                  And your examples of cooking and your PC are not what we’re talking about. We’re talking about human environmental temperature.

                  I’m making the case that your “human environmental temperature” is a shit reason to pick Fahrenheit because we have all these things that surprisingly don’t conform to it. So you’ll have to go outside the 0-100 range anyway. So you won’t get any “benefit” from it, even when the “benefit” was dubious to begin with.

                  But in fact, cooking is another good use for F. You generally only care about a few specific temps. 350F and 400F. Anything else is nuance but basically only matter on the 25 degree marks. So 375, 425. It’s actually a pretty great scale for cooking, with broiling generally maxing out at 500 (unless you’re talking very specific application, like pizza ovens or some shit)

                  Wait till you see international ovens and cooking manuals. It’s gonna blow your mind.

                  • Fal@yiffit.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I’m making the case that your “human environmental temperature” is a shit reason to pick Fahrenheit because we have all these things that surprisingly don’t conform to it. So you’ll have to go outside the 0-100 range anyway. So you won’t get any “benefit” from it, even when the “benefit” was dubious to begin with.

                    It’s better to pick the scale that does conform to it for the vast majority of applications, and then just deal with the others. Either by using C or just dealing with it. For every 1 time you need to deal with temps of your computer, you’ll interact with the environmental temperature a thousand times. And neither C or F are inherently better for describing CPU temps.

                    Wait till you see international ovens and cooking manuals. It’s gonna blow your mind.

                    Oh, I forgot to pull out my cooking manual. Yeah C is MUCH better.

                  • bermuda@beehaw.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Wait til you learn that there are other things to do in life than bitch about temperature systems.

      • Fal@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Explain how interacting with ovens and freezers requires knowledge of the specific temperature at which water freezes or boils at standard conditions

    • kaffiene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Rubbish. The rest of the world understands temperatures in Celsius perfectly well. You’re confusing familiarity with superiority