• PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Do Europeans really give their height in cm? You’d think they short hand it like to like 1.7m or whatever since height is one of those things that doesn’t really need to be exact and will change by a cm or so based on the kind of shoes you are wearing, or wearing shoes at all.

    • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      5 months ago

      In my native language we say the equivalent of ‘one and eighty-five’ to refer to 185 cm of height, so basically we give it in meters.

    • none@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Unless you happen to be 2 meters tall, yes, you would give your height in cm. You might round it, but you’d never say you’re 1.8m tall.

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        1.8 is too imprecise. It includes both 1.80 and 1.89. do you think it’s fine to approximate your height to the nearest 4 inches?

        Why ever would a 6’ 2" person bother with the 2"?

        • ripcord@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Never ask why never.

          Not when it comes to height measurement.

          …Not when it comes to height measurement.

        • Instigate@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Where I’m from, some people will still use feet/inches only for heights of human beings (weird, I know), but the most common response is in cm. For instance, if you asked me how tall I am I’d say 173cm, but I would say it like “I’m about a hundred and seventy-three” or “one-seven-three” - you don’t really have to say the units. Much the same as you’d say “I’m five foot seven” and you don’t need to specify “inches”.

        • zout@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Well, where I live, 1,85 m is less than average height, 1,90 m is more than average. It’s also a noticable difference, especially if you’re in the same height range.

        • Ephera@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Well, if someone asks you about it, they’d like to hear a more precise number. They can easily estimate your height at a precision of 10cm.

    • Ethalis@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      5 months ago

      In France it’s generally in meters with two decimals, so basically the same as giving it in cm

    • Annoyed_🦀 @monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Not europe but yes, we do it in cm. Never heard people rounding up or down to the tenth though, so 164cm is 164cm, not 160cm.

      • huf [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        continental europeans who know their height in feet must number in the hundreds! (my dad and i happen to be two because of Karl May reasons, but i doubt anyone else bothers…)

    • PostingInPublic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 months ago

      176cm would be given as “eins-sechsundsiebzig” in German, literally translating to one six and seventy (yeah it’s backwards), which works exactly like currency.

    • Vaquedoso@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Not European, but from a country that also uses the metric system. We give out our height in meters, as you said. Saying it in cm would be okey for medical reasons I suppose. Also there isn’t much difference in what unit you use, you just have to multiply/divide by 100, which is easily done in your head

    • unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      You always do it in cm wherever I’ve been. It’s either directly in cm, as in 172 cm or phrased in meters, as in 1.72 m. You cab say you’re around 170 cm tall or around 1.7 m tall, but the ‘default precision level’ is 1 cm

    • WoodenDing@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Germans do go with meters when talking about their height but they’ll give you two decimal places.

      • SomeoneElse@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        I use a wheelchair on occasion - when I’m unwell and use my wheelchair I measure about 3cm taller than when I’m well and have been walking!

    • palordrolap@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Do North Americans really give their weight in lb? You’d think they’d short hand it like to like 15 stone or whatever since weight is one of those things that doesn’t really need to be exact and will change by a lb or so based on the time of day and what you’ve eaten.

      • PapaStevesy@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        No, we give our weight in pounds instead of ounces because weight is one of those things that doesn’t really need to be exact and will change by a couple dozen ounces or so based on the time of day and what you’ve eaten.

        • palordrolap@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          No, see, here ounces compare to millimetres. If height and weight fluctuate over centimetres and pounds, and they do, lesser units should be disregarded, right?

          • PapaStevesy@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            5 months ago

            Stone isn’t a measurement in America, it’s inorganic material. The next-heighest commonly known weight is a ton, or 2000 lbs. Not very helpful.

      • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        A better example would be if europeans really gave their weight in grams. I don’t think they do, they use kilo’s cause they don’t really need the precision of a gram for something like that.

    • Linssiili@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      When using feet and inches, its fine to use precision of 1 inch as it’s much smaller unit than 0.1 m.

      If one says that they are 5’11" (180.34 cm), they can be 5’10.5" (179.07 cm) to 5’11.5" (181.61 cm) tall. That’s 1.4% variance.

      If using meters with one decimal place, and say they are 1.8 m (5’10.9"), they can be 175 cm (5’8.9") to 185 cm (6’0.8") tall. That’s 5.6% variance.

      Thus it’s not really viable to use only one decimal place when using metres as unit, so in many languages it’s easier to just say the length in centimeters compared to use two deeimal places.

      • ElderWendigo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        That also explains why the guy in the comic is being an ass or an idiot by listing his height to the nearest hundredth of a centimeter. A half inch or whole centimeter are more appropriate precisions for human heights. In your example even, a real-world measurement of 5’ 11" can’t just be blindly translated to 180.34cm because it adds precision that was not there in the 5’ 11" measurement unless otherwise specified. 180cm would be more appropriate but is still overstating the precision a bit. Using SI units without appropriate scientific notation and without respect to significant digits is kind of like watching a 3D movie with one eye closed.

    • CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I guess its just because saying “one-seventy-nine” rolls better off the tongue than “one point seventy nine” or “one point eight”

    • VeganCheesecake@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      In German, you’d probably say 1 Metre 85 (Ein Meter Fünfundachtzig), or 1 85 (Eins Fünfundachtzig) to be more brief. I’m relatively certain that it very much differs from language to language, and probably regionally within languages.

    • bandwidthcrisis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      When the metric system was introduced in the UK, the schools taught decimeters, decameters and hectometers, not knowing that no one would ever bother with those.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Even if they are used rarely, they are still named.

        So it is good to know they exist in order to explain the metric system.

        I was still taught them back in the day in Belgium.

    • Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      You can round it to 10’s or 5’s.

      My licence says 183 cm. I’ll usually say 180.

      Edit: so the cartoon guy would probably just say 190cm