<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_24_1430236</id>
	<title>NASA Sticking To Imperial Units For Shuttle Replacement</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1245855660000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:jerry.kew@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">JerryQ</a> sends in a story at New Scientist about the criticism NASA is taking for deciding to <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17350-nasa-criticised-for-sticking-to-imperial-units.html">use Imperial units in the development of the Constellation program</a>, their project to replace the space shuttle. <i>"The sticking point is that Ares is a shuttle-derived design &mdash; it uses solid rocket boosters whose dimensions and technology are based on those currently strapped to either side of the shuttle's giant liquid fuel tank. And the shuttle's 30-year-old specifications, design drawings and software are rooted in pounds and feet rather than newtons and meters. ... NASA recently calculated that converting the relevant drawings, software and documentation to the 'International System' of units (SI) would cost a total of $370 million &mdash; almost half the cost of a 2009 shuttle launch, which costs a total of $759 million. 'We found the cost of converting to SI would exceed what we can afford,' says [NASA spokesman Grey Hautaluoma]."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>JerryQ sends in a story at New Scientist about the criticism NASA is taking for deciding to use Imperial units in the development of the Constellation program , their project to replace the space shuttle .
" The sticking point is that Ares is a shuttle-derived design    it uses solid rocket boosters whose dimensions and technology are based on those currently strapped to either side of the shuttle 's giant liquid fuel tank .
And the shuttle 's 30-year-old specifications , design drawings and software are rooted in pounds and feet rather than newtons and meters .
... NASA recently calculated that converting the relevant drawings , software and documentation to the 'International System ' of units ( SI ) would cost a total of $ 370 million    almost half the cost of a 2009 shuttle launch , which costs a total of $ 759 million .
'We found the cost of converting to SI would exceed what we can afford, ' says [ NASA spokesman Grey Hautaluoma ] .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>JerryQ sends in a story at New Scientist about the criticism NASA is taking for deciding to use Imperial units in the development of the Constellation program, their project to replace the space shuttle.
"The sticking point is that Ares is a shuttle-derived design — it uses solid rocket boosters whose dimensions and technology are based on those currently strapped to either side of the shuttle's giant liquid fuel tank.
And the shuttle's 30-year-old specifications, design drawings and software are rooted in pounds and feet rather than newtons and meters.
... NASA recently calculated that converting the relevant drawings, software and documentation to the 'International System' of units (SI) would cost a total of $370 million — almost half the cost of a 2009 shuttle launch, which costs a total of $759 million.
'We found the cost of converting to SI would exceed what we can afford,' says [NASA spokesman Grey Hautaluoma].
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455937</id>
	<title>What's the fuss?</title>
	<author>thethibs</author>
	<datestamp>1245870540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not too sure what the problem is. Up here in Canada, we use the American and French systems interchangeably. I buy a pound of butter and a liter of milk. It's a foot-long submarine sandwhich and it has 100 grams of meat in it, as does a Quarter-Pounder. We get water in half-liter bottles, and beer by the pint. We buy gas by the liter and our cars get good mileage with 35psi in the tires. </p><p>The only downside is that our toolboxes have twice as many tools in them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not too sure what the problem is .
Up here in Canada , we use the American and French systems interchangeably .
I buy a pound of butter and a liter of milk .
It 's a foot-long submarine sandwhich and it has 100 grams of meat in it , as does a Quarter-Pounder .
We get water in half-liter bottles , and beer by the pint .
We buy gas by the liter and our cars get good mileage with 35psi in the tires .
The only downside is that our toolboxes have twice as many tools in them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not too sure what the problem is.
Up here in Canada, we use the American and French systems interchangeably.
I buy a pound of butter and a liter of milk.
It's a foot-long submarine sandwhich and it has 100 grams of meat in it, as does a Quarter-Pounder.
We get water in half-liter bottles, and beer by the pint.
We buy gas by the liter and our cars get good mileage with 35psi in the tires.
The only downside is that our toolboxes have twice as many tools in them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456673</id>
	<title>$370M, what in God's name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245873480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, what? I just can't fathom that number. That much money... Jesus Christ. How much real, actual, physical, digestible FOOD could we produce and deliver to people across the world for that much money? How many tens of thousands of efficient vehicles could we manufacture? How many tens of millions of doses of malaria vaccine could we produce that would save many, many lives?</p><p>All that much money to... switch from one numbering system to another? Something is terribly fucking wrong at NASA if this is the real amount of money it would cost. Jesus Fuck. I'm sure glad they decided against doing that, because if they seriously spent this much money on something as ridiculously trivial, I would rage out of my mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , what ?
I just ca n't fathom that number .
That much money... Jesus Christ .
How much real , actual , physical , digestible FOOD could we produce and deliver to people across the world for that much money ?
How many tens of thousands of efficient vehicles could we manufacture ?
How many tens of millions of doses of malaria vaccine could we produce that would save many , many lives ? All that much money to... switch from one numbering system to another ?
Something is terribly fucking wrong at NASA if this is the real amount of money it would cost .
Jesus Fuck .
I 'm sure glad they decided against doing that , because if they seriously spent this much money on something as ridiculously trivial , I would rage out of my mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, what?
I just can't fathom that number.
That much money... Jesus Christ.
How much real, actual, physical, digestible FOOD could we produce and deliver to people across the world for that much money?
How many tens of thousands of efficient vehicles could we manufacture?
How many tens of millions of doses of malaria vaccine could we produce that would save many, many lives?All that much money to... switch from one numbering system to another?
Something is terribly fucking wrong at NASA if this is the real amount of money it would cost.
Jesus Fuck.
I'm sure glad they decided against doing that, because if they seriously spent this much money on something as ridiculously trivial, I would rage out of my mind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28464755</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245933900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm 42 and I was taught metric in school (in the UK), but I got to know what a gallon and a mile was by using them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm 42 and I was taught metric in school ( in the UK ) , but I got to know what a gallon and a mile was by using them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm 42 and I was taught metric in school (in the UK), but I got to know what a gallon and a mile was by using them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455603</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245869580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All manufacturing in the UK uses metric/SI units. This what the article is about. The whole world except the US (plus a few others) manufacture in SI. Come on US re-join the metric system. I say rejoin because many of railways built in the US in the 1800s used metric units.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All manufacturing in the UK uses metric/SI units .
This what the article is about .
The whole world except the US ( plus a few others ) manufacture in SI .
Come on US re-join the metric system .
I say rejoin because many of railways built in the US in the 1800s used metric units .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All manufacturing in the UK uses metric/SI units.
This what the article is about.
The whole world except the US (plus a few others) manufacture in SI.
Come on US re-join the metric system.
I say rejoin because many of railways built in the US in the 1800s used metric units.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460691</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>fiannaFailMan</author>
	<datestamp>1245847200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My older sister (11 years older than me) was taught imperial, I was taught metric.  I have this conversation with her sometimes.  I ask her how many pounds is x ounces, and she fumbles around, does a calculation in her head, and says, "there, that wasn't hard was it?"  I then say "1,200mm is the same as 1.2metres, or 120 centimetres.  I was able to tell you that while hardly even thinking about it, to say nothing of doing a calculation."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My older sister ( 11 years older than me ) was taught imperial , I was taught metric .
I have this conversation with her sometimes .
I ask her how many pounds is x ounces , and she fumbles around , does a calculation in her head , and says , " there , that was n't hard was it ?
" I then say " 1,200mm is the same as 1.2metres , or 120 centimetres .
I was able to tell you that while hardly even thinking about it , to say nothing of doing a calculation .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My older sister (11 years older than me) was taught imperial, I was taught metric.
I have this conversation with her sometimes.
I ask her how many pounds is x ounces, and she fumbles around, does a calculation in her head, and says, "there, that wasn't hard was it?
"  I then say "1,200mm is the same as 1.2metres, or 120 centimetres.
I was able to tell you that while hardly even thinking about it, to say nothing of doing a calculation.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457713</id>
	<title>Re:NASA not using Metric?</title>
	<author>the\_other\_chewey</author>
	<datestamp>1245834420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"We needed to wait until the second spacecraft was three dec<b>a</b>meters away before firing the main rocket engines, not three dec<b>i</b>meters, but someone typed in in wrong and that's why we lost the second spacecraft"</p></div><ul>
<li>neither deca (10) nor deci (1/10) are widely used - and the 1000^n prefixes are designed as to avoid those problems.</li>
<li> <i>deca</i> and <i>deci</i> are pronounced quite differently, despite their orthographical resemblence.</li>
</ul><p>
So the numbers used would be 30 meters vs. 0.3 meters. Not a problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" We needed to wait until the second spacecraft was three decameters away before firing the main rocket engines , not three decimeters , but someone typed in in wrong and that 's why we lost the second spacecraft " neither deca ( 10 ) nor deci ( 1/10 ) are widely used - and the 1000 ^ n prefixes are designed as to avoid those problems .
deca and deci are pronounced quite differently , despite their orthographical resemblence .
So the numbers used would be 30 meters vs. 0.3 meters .
Not a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We needed to wait until the second spacecraft was three decameters away before firing the main rocket engines, not three decimeters, but someone typed in in wrong and that's why we lost the second spacecraft"
neither deca (10) nor deci (1/10) are widely used - and the 1000^n prefixes are designed as to avoid those problems.
deca and deci are pronounced quite differently, despite their orthographical resemblence.
So the numbers used would be 30 meters vs. 0.3 meters.
Not a problem.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453539</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455065</id>
	<title>This pleases China and Taiwan immensely</title>
	<author>Sleepy</author>
	<datestamp>1245867960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is pure politics at it's most evil. Even if the budget allocated the conversion money to NASA, all the rightist wingnuts would say it's a UN conspiracy, and somehow serve as enough of a distraction or delay as to hurt other more pressing items, like healthcare reform.</p><p>Maintaining "imperial" measurements just gives away more jobs to emerging markets. Or rather, it SHOVES them away.</p><p>The US painted itself into a competitive corner long ago by clinging to "imperial" measurements.<br>If NASA can not do it, no other US agency will even try... no matter what the consequences are.</p><p>We just have to live with it for now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is pure politics at it 's most evil .
Even if the budget allocated the conversion money to NASA , all the rightist wingnuts would say it 's a UN conspiracy , and somehow serve as enough of a distraction or delay as to hurt other more pressing items , like healthcare reform.Maintaining " imperial " measurements just gives away more jobs to emerging markets .
Or rather , it SHOVES them away.The US painted itself into a competitive corner long ago by clinging to " imperial " measurements.If NASA can not do it , no other US agency will even try... no matter what the consequences are.We just have to live with it for now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is pure politics at it's most evil.
Even if the budget allocated the conversion money to NASA, all the rightist wingnuts would say it's a UN conspiracy, and somehow serve as enough of a distraction or delay as to hurt other more pressing items, like healthcare reform.Maintaining "imperial" measurements just gives away more jobs to emerging markets.
Or rather, it SHOVES them away.The US painted itself into a competitive corner long ago by clinging to "imperial" measurements.If NASA can not do it, no other US agency will even try... no matter what the consequences are.We just have to live with it for now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453751</id>
	<title>First read that as...</title>
	<author>sandmaninator</author>
	<datestamp>1245863400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nasa replacing the shuttle with TIE fighters... or maybe bombers...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nasa replacing the shuttle with TIE fighters... or maybe bombers.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nasa replacing the shuttle with TIE fighters... or maybe bombers...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454305</id>
	<title>Don't they store their data in computer files?</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1245865320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the data are stored in computer files, then it would be relatively easy to write a program that copies the file and converts the units from the imperial to the metric system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the data are stored in computer files , then it would be relatively easy to write a program that copies the file and converts the units from the imperial to the metric system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the data are stored in computer files, then it would be relatively easy to write a program that copies the file and converts the units from the imperial to the metric system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455469</id>
	<title>Funny</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1245869160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work as an ME in a US manufacturing company - though it is definitely not rocket science (at times it feels like a blacksmithy with CNC machines).  We rarely use metric as our customers rarely do either for the various reasons of backwards compatibilty, machinery, tooling, and especially that steel plate, bar, and tube warehouses only carry a handful of metric sizes.  And ordering a custom mill run requires around 3,000 pounds <i>per size</i>.<br> <br>

But I think another good reason we haven't changed to metric in the medium to small US manufacturing sphere is that no one has a real internal 'feel' for what is 30 kg, or how big is 140 mm.  We weren't raised in metric, so we have no comfortable frame of reference.  We could just take that leap and switch to metric - but our prices would be non-competitive and our customers (build to order, mind you) would reject them.<br> <br>

Ironically, while in Engineering Physics, I despised working the imperial unit problems (how many grindles in a kip again?0.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work as an ME in a US manufacturing company - though it is definitely not rocket science ( at times it feels like a blacksmithy with CNC machines ) .
We rarely use metric as our customers rarely do either for the various reasons of backwards compatibilty , machinery , tooling , and especially that steel plate , bar , and tube warehouses only carry a handful of metric sizes .
And ordering a custom mill run requires around 3,000 pounds per size .
But I think another good reason we have n't changed to metric in the medium to small US manufacturing sphere is that no one has a real internal 'feel ' for what is 30 kg , or how big is 140 mm .
We were n't raised in metric , so we have no comfortable frame of reference .
We could just take that leap and switch to metric - but our prices would be non-competitive and our customers ( build to order , mind you ) would reject them .
Ironically , while in Engineering Physics , I despised working the imperial unit problems ( how many grindles in a kip again ? 0 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work as an ME in a US manufacturing company - though it is definitely not rocket science (at times it feels like a blacksmithy with CNC machines).
We rarely use metric as our customers rarely do either for the various reasons of backwards compatibilty, machinery, tooling, and especially that steel plate, bar, and tube warehouses only carry a handful of metric sizes.
And ordering a custom mill run requires around 3,000 pounds per size.
But I think another good reason we haven't changed to metric in the medium to small US manufacturing sphere is that no one has a real internal 'feel' for what is 30 kg, or how big is 140 mm.
We weren't raised in metric, so we have no comfortable frame of reference.
We could just take that leap and switch to metric - but our prices would be non-competitive and our customers (build to order, mind you) would reject them.
Ironically, while in Engineering Physics, I despised working the imperial unit problems (how many grindles in a kip again?0.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454733</id>
	<title>This is a political problem, not a technical one.</title>
	<author>ngdbsdmn</author>
	<datestamp>1245866820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I think converting US to the metric system can be done in a very simple manner and the reason why it doesn't happen is primarily a political problem.
</p><p>-</p><p>
Imagine that the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.gov passes a law saying: In 5 years everyone must use the metric system exclusively.
</p><p>-</p><p>
The law includes the following action plan:
</p><p>-</p><p>
1. For the first year this law is made public through advertising on all kinds of media channels (tv spots (prime time not required), magazine ads, Internet ads, a prominent header with this decision and a countdown timer on ALL<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.gov website, etc.). Also, all<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.gov institutions where interaction with the citizens takes place must have on display at a prominent location special written explanations and physical reference measurement units.
</p><p>-</p><p>
2. At the city boundary points of all major highways a special kilometer will be drawn using a standard method so that all the cities have the same thing. For example a big, specially decorated pole can be erected with the sign "START of ONE kilometer" and then another pole can be erected at the other end with the sign "END of ONE kilometer". Ideally, you should see the ending pole from the position of the start pole. Since America is all about crawling with the car for 3h each day, everyone will be able to get a feeling of a kilometer at various speeds.
</p><p>-</p><p>
3. In all city centers a specially decorated 10m marker will be drawn with all the appropriate divisions. This will remind everyone that this thing is happening and it will also serve as a memorial in the years to come.
"- Hey grandpa what's that?
- Well sonny, your grandpa was alive and kicking in the great times when we switched to this meter thing!
- Whoa, you're a real American hero grandpa!
- Yes sirree."
</p><p>-</p><p>
4. At all gas station pumps a special bottle holding a 1 liter sample will be displayed. Also, a recipient with 1 tonne of water will be displayed somewhere near the gas station paying counter.
</p><p>-</p><p>
5. After the first year, all the citizens who have a social security number will receive a package from the US<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.gov in the mail. The package will contain a "metric conversion kit", a letter and a certificate of the type "Congratulations citizen #### for living in this great time when we'll switch to the metric system, a very big change for our great American country<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... red white and blue<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...".
</p><p>-</p><p>
The kit will also consist of the following items:
<br>- A specially decorated 1m ruler made out of wood and containing all the divisions.
<br>- A specially decorated glass bottle with all the divisions of a liter embossed in the glass.
<br>- A set of weights from grams to 1 Kg.
<br>- etc. (other measurement references)
</p><p>-</p><p>
That's the first version of the plan.
</p><p>-</p><p>
The key of this plan is that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.gov must make a special event out of this conversion and all the items involved must be special in that they must be of a high quality, nice design and have "collector value". They can license small shops where ma and pa can build these things by hand - which could be great in these times. Creating them this way will also convey the message that these things are American, made by Americans, in America so they are a good thing. Pushing for the feeling that this change is a "good thing" and it's "owned by us" will have a chain effect in all the smaller things of life and it will immediately start to cast a light of old and stupid on the previous units. Everyone wants a cool new thing.
</p><p>-</p><p>
And here is the problem. The US<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.gov is not interested primarily to operate for the greater good of all its people. Instead, it operates to keep them dumb, fat and entertained so that they are easy to control and rally behind great American success stories like Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, ? [to be continued].
</p><p>-</p><p>
Too bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think converting US to the metric system can be done in a very simple manner and the reason why it does n't happen is primarily a political problem .
- Imagine that the .gov passes a law saying : In 5 years everyone must use the metric system exclusively .
- The law includes the following action plan : - 1 .
For the first year this law is made public through advertising on all kinds of media channels ( tv spots ( prime time not required ) , magazine ads , Internet ads , a prominent header with this decision and a countdown timer on ALL .gov website , etc. ) .
Also , all .gov institutions where interaction with the citizens takes place must have on display at a prominent location special written explanations and physical reference measurement units .
- 2 .
At the city boundary points of all major highways a special kilometer will be drawn using a standard method so that all the cities have the same thing .
For example a big , specially decorated pole can be erected with the sign " START of ONE kilometer " and then another pole can be erected at the other end with the sign " END of ONE kilometer " .
Ideally , you should see the ending pole from the position of the start pole .
Since America is all about crawling with the car for 3h each day , everyone will be able to get a feeling of a kilometer at various speeds .
- 3 .
In all city centers a specially decorated 10m marker will be drawn with all the appropriate divisions .
This will remind everyone that this thing is happening and it will also serve as a memorial in the years to come .
" - Hey grandpa what 's that ?
- Well sonny , your grandpa was alive and kicking in the great times when we switched to this meter thing !
- Whoa , you 're a real American hero grandpa !
- Yes sirree .
" - 4 .
At all gas station pumps a special bottle holding a 1 liter sample will be displayed .
Also , a recipient with 1 tonne of water will be displayed somewhere near the gas station paying counter .
- 5 .
After the first year , all the citizens who have a social security number will receive a package from the US .gov in the mail .
The package will contain a " metric conversion kit " , a letter and a certificate of the type " Congratulations citizen # # # # for living in this great time when we 'll switch to the metric system , a very big change for our great American country ... red white and blue ... " .
- The kit will also consist of the following items : - A specially decorated 1m ruler made out of wood and containing all the divisions .
- A specially decorated glass bottle with all the divisions of a liter embossed in the glass .
- A set of weights from grams to 1 Kg .
- etc .
( other measurement references ) - That 's the first version of the plan .
- The key of this plan is that .gov must make a special event out of this conversion and all the items involved must be special in that they must be of a high quality , nice design and have " collector value " .
They can license small shops where ma and pa can build these things by hand - which could be great in these times .
Creating them this way will also convey the message that these things are American , made by Americans , in America so they are a good thing .
Pushing for the feeling that this change is a " good thing " and it 's " owned by us " will have a chain effect in all the smaller things of life and it will immediately start to cast a light of old and stupid on the previous units .
Everyone wants a cool new thing .
- And here is the problem .
The US .gov is not interested primarily to operate for the greater good of all its people .
Instead , it operates to keep them dumb , fat and entertained so that they are easy to control and rally behind great American success stories like Vietnam , Afghanistan , Iraq , ?
[ to be continued ] .
- Too bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I think converting US to the metric system can be done in a very simple manner and the reason why it doesn't happen is primarily a political problem.
-
Imagine that the .gov passes a law saying: In 5 years everyone must use the metric system exclusively.
-
The law includes the following action plan:
-
1.
For the first year this law is made public through advertising on all kinds of media channels (tv spots (prime time not required), magazine ads, Internet ads, a prominent header with this decision and a countdown timer on ALL .gov website, etc.).
Also, all .gov institutions where interaction with the citizens takes place must have on display at a prominent location special written explanations and physical reference measurement units.
-
2.
At the city boundary points of all major highways a special kilometer will be drawn using a standard method so that all the cities have the same thing.
For example a big, specially decorated pole can be erected with the sign "START of ONE kilometer" and then another pole can be erected at the other end with the sign "END of ONE kilometer".
Ideally, you should see the ending pole from the position of the start pole.
Since America is all about crawling with the car for 3h each day, everyone will be able to get a feeling of a kilometer at various speeds.
-
3.
In all city centers a specially decorated 10m marker will be drawn with all the appropriate divisions.
This will remind everyone that this thing is happening and it will also serve as a memorial in the years to come.
"- Hey grandpa what's that?
- Well sonny, your grandpa was alive and kicking in the great times when we switched to this meter thing!
- Whoa, you're a real American hero grandpa!
- Yes sirree.
"
-
4.
At all gas station pumps a special bottle holding a 1 liter sample will be displayed.
Also, a recipient with 1 tonne of water will be displayed somewhere near the gas station paying counter.
-
5.
After the first year, all the citizens who have a social security number will receive a package from the US .gov in the mail.
The package will contain a "metric conversion kit", a letter and a certificate of the type "Congratulations citizen #### for living in this great time when we'll switch to the metric system, a very big change for our great American country ... red white and blue ...".
-
The kit will also consist of the following items:
- A specially decorated 1m ruler made out of wood and containing all the divisions.
- A specially decorated glass bottle with all the divisions of a liter embossed in the glass.
- A set of weights from grams to 1 Kg.
- etc.
(other measurement references)
-
That's the first version of the plan.
-
The key of this plan is that .gov must make a special event out of this conversion and all the items involved must be special in that they must be of a high quality, nice design and have "collector value".
They can license small shops where ma and pa can build these things by hand - which could be great in these times.
Creating them this way will also convey the message that these things are American, made by Americans, in America so they are a good thing.
Pushing for the feeling that this change is a "good thing" and it's "owned by us" will have a chain effect in all the smaller things of life and it will immediately start to cast a light of old and stupid on the previous units.
Everyone wants a cool new thing.
-
And here is the problem.
The US .gov is not interested primarily to operate for the greater good of all its people.
Instead, it operates to keep them dumb, fat and entertained so that they are easy to control and rally behind great American success stories like Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, ?
[to be continued].
-
Too bad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453959</id>
	<title>Metric</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1245864180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It never ceases to amaze me the resistance to going to metric here in the states for measurements but no one bats an eyelash at the fact our money is basically metric (base 10).</p><p>It is in fact soo damn easy that we can instinctively give somone a $5 and a penny for something that costs $4.01 so we can get back a dollar rather then 3 quarters 2 dimes and 4 pennies....</p><p>Boo metric it's too damn easy to use! Forget cutting a board 1.46 meters in half. it's too damn hard to cut it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.73 meters! Better yet that 3 5/8th inch board needs to be cut in half so we need umm... err... need some scratch paper here....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It never ceases to amaze me the resistance to going to metric here in the states for measurements but no one bats an eyelash at the fact our money is basically metric ( base 10 ) .It is in fact soo damn easy that we can instinctively give somone a $ 5 and a penny for something that costs $ 4.01 so we can get back a dollar rather then 3 quarters 2 dimes and 4 pennies....Boo metric it 's too damn easy to use !
Forget cutting a board 1.46 meters in half .
it 's too damn hard to cut it .73 meters !
Better yet that 3 5/8th inch board needs to be cut in half so we need umm... err... need some scratch paper here... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It never ceases to amaze me the resistance to going to metric here in the states for measurements but no one bats an eyelash at the fact our money is basically metric (base 10).It is in fact soo damn easy that we can instinctively give somone a $5 and a penny for something that costs $4.01 so we can get back a dollar rather then 3 quarters 2 dimes and 4 pennies....Boo metric it's too damn easy to use!
Forget cutting a board 1.46 meters in half.
it's too damn hard to cut it .73 meters!
Better yet that 3 5/8th inch board needs to be cut in half so we need umm... err... need some scratch paper here....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28465799</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245941820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The interesting thing is, that all continental states in Europe already use the metric system. The French came up with the idea, but the rest of the European crowd adopted it. In Germany this was very important, because Germany was at that time divided in many different states, all with their own system. The introduction of the metric system allowed the Germans to improve the trading between states. And the same thing works between all European countries. However, the UK needs more time to accept that they are one state in Europe. The rest has already understood that. And even the French did not have any problem with that. They are still the "Grande Nation".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The interesting thing is , that all continental states in Europe already use the metric system .
The French came up with the idea , but the rest of the European crowd adopted it .
In Germany this was very important , because Germany was at that time divided in many different states , all with their own system .
The introduction of the metric system allowed the Germans to improve the trading between states .
And the same thing works between all European countries .
However , the UK needs more time to accept that they are one state in Europe .
The rest has already understood that .
And even the French did not have any problem with that .
They are still the " Grande Nation " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The interesting thing is, that all continental states in Europe already use the metric system.
The French came up with the idea, but the rest of the European crowd adopted it.
In Germany this was very important, because Germany was at that time divided in many different states, all with their own system.
The introduction of the metric system allowed the Germans to improve the trading between states.
And the same thing works between all European countries.
However, the UK needs more time to accept that they are one state in Europe.
The rest has already understood that.
And even the French did not have any problem with that.
They are still the "Grande Nation".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452911</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>Volante3192</author>
	<datestamp>1245860520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You make it sound so simple...when, in fact, this is quite literally rocket science here.</p><p>One of the common stories here is people needing to rewrite an entire project because of a new language fad.  The old project worked.  Rewriting it first means you have to replicate the old project and then deal with new bugs while the old project had all the bugs mostly ironed out.</p><p>Why do we insist NASA to reinvent the wheel when we're so against it in our own profession?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You make it sound so simple...when , in fact , this is quite literally rocket science here.One of the common stories here is people needing to rewrite an entire project because of a new language fad .
The old project worked .
Rewriting it first means you have to replicate the old project and then deal with new bugs while the old project had all the bugs mostly ironed out.Why do we insist NASA to reinvent the wheel when we 're so against it in our own profession ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You make it sound so simple...when, in fact, this is quite literally rocket science here.One of the common stories here is people needing to rewrite an entire project because of a new language fad.
The old project worked.
Rewriting it first means you have to replicate the old project and then deal with new bugs while the old project had all the bugs mostly ironed out.Why do we insist NASA to reinvent the wheel when we're so against it in our own profession?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455319</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245868740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I cant believe all the comments above that are so closed minded.  Everyone thinks since SI is forced upon them then there is no other reason to use another system.  What the OP is saying: if you have a 1 foot (12 inch) board for example and need to cut it into 2,3,4,6 equal pieces, you can do it without going to a infinitely long decimal from a base 10 system - try doing a 3 equal pieces from a meter you get what 3.3333dm.  Even the people that use SI don't use all there measurement available to them - who uses decimeters?</p><p>Oh and why have 60 seconds in a minute?  Shouldn't we use 100 seconds in a minute.  Oh and 12 months in a year stinks too.  How can that all be fixed?   360 degrees in a circle - wth why shouldn't it be 1000 degrees.  See you use the measurement system for the item you are using.  Standard units were made for everyday people.  We know what a foot is cause thats a measurement we see in height.  Miles, thats what we drive in.  Do i want to convert feet to miles - ehh I really don't care to do that cause ill never measure my height to miles.  The list goes on instead of forcing a 10 base system that everyone has to adhere to, you use the system for the job, ounces, yards, gallons, tons, w/e.</p><p>I just don't see why everyone thinks that since chemistry uses SI that its the best idea in the world.  Like chemists cant calculate scales huh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I cant believe all the comments above that are so closed minded .
Everyone thinks since SI is forced upon them then there is no other reason to use another system .
What the OP is saying : if you have a 1 foot ( 12 inch ) board for example and need to cut it into 2,3,4,6 equal pieces , you can do it without going to a infinitely long decimal from a base 10 system - try doing a 3 equal pieces from a meter you get what 3.3333dm .
Even the people that use SI do n't use all there measurement available to them - who uses decimeters ? Oh and why have 60 seconds in a minute ?
Should n't we use 100 seconds in a minute .
Oh and 12 months in a year stinks too .
How can that all be fixed ?
360 degrees in a circle - wth why should n't it be 1000 degrees .
See you use the measurement system for the item you are using .
Standard units were made for everyday people .
We know what a foot is cause thats a measurement we see in height .
Miles , thats what we drive in .
Do i want to convert feet to miles - ehh I really do n't care to do that cause ill never measure my height to miles .
The list goes on instead of forcing a 10 base system that everyone has to adhere to , you use the system for the job , ounces , yards , gallons , tons , w/e.I just do n't see why everyone thinks that since chemistry uses SI that its the best idea in the world .
Like chemists cant calculate scales huh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I cant believe all the comments above that are so closed minded.
Everyone thinks since SI is forced upon them then there is no other reason to use another system.
What the OP is saying: if you have a 1 foot (12 inch) board for example and need to cut it into 2,3,4,6 equal pieces, you can do it without going to a infinitely long decimal from a base 10 system - try doing a 3 equal pieces from a meter you get what 3.3333dm.
Even the people that use SI don't use all there measurement available to them - who uses decimeters?Oh and why have 60 seconds in a minute?
Shouldn't we use 100 seconds in a minute.
Oh and 12 months in a year stinks too.
How can that all be fixed?
360 degrees in a circle - wth why shouldn't it be 1000 degrees.
See you use the measurement system for the item you are using.
Standard units were made for everyday people.
We know what a foot is cause thats a measurement we see in height.
Miles, thats what we drive in.
Do i want to convert feet to miles - ehh I really don't care to do that cause ill never measure my height to miles.
The list goes on instead of forcing a 10 base system that everyone has to adhere to, you use the system for the job, ounces, yards, gallons, tons, w/e.I just don't see why everyone thinks that since chemistry uses SI that its the best idea in the world.
Like chemists cant calculate scales huh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467341</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>prefec2</author>
	<datestamp>1245949440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NASA once built a Mars-probe with part SI and part Imperial system. It was a failure. Also the boosters and the rocket are far more integrated than a truck and a boat.</p><p>I think it is doable, but may be it is too expensive. What I cannot understand. Why are they using boosters, which have been difficult to handle in the past?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA once built a Mars-probe with part SI and part Imperial system .
It was a failure .
Also the boosters and the rocket are far more integrated than a truck and a boat.I think it is doable , but may be it is too expensive .
What I can not understand .
Why are they using boosters , which have been difficult to handle in the past ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA once built a Mars-probe with part SI and part Imperial system.
It was a failure.
Also the boosters and the rocket are far more integrated than a truck and a boat.I think it is doable, but may be it is too expensive.
What I cannot understand.
Why are they using boosters, which have been difficult to handle in the past?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454743</id>
	<title>Leapfrog the French</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245866880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and use scaled Planck units. It doesn't make sense to explore the universe with non-universal units.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and use scaled Planck units .
It does n't make sense to explore the universe with non-universal units .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and use scaled Planck units.
It doesn't make sense to explore the universe with non-universal units.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456267</id>
	<title>Re:really?</title>
	<author>BlackSnake112</author>
	<datestamp>1245871920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they were not reusing certain parts (the boosters and the big fuel tank) they could have used all metric. Since I can't see how noting on the designs that the rocket boosters are 6 feet/1.8288 meters wide (just an example I do not know the size of the boosters) would cost 370 million. A complete redesign is more likely behind the figure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they were not reusing certain parts ( the boosters and the big fuel tank ) they could have used all metric .
Since I ca n't see how noting on the designs that the rocket boosters are 6 feet/1.8288 meters wide ( just an example I do not know the size of the boosters ) would cost 370 million .
A complete redesign is more likely behind the figure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they were not reusing certain parts (the boosters and the big fuel tank) they could have used all metric.
Since I can't see how noting on the designs that the rocket boosters are 6 feet/1.8288 meters wide (just an example I do not know the size of the boosters) would cost 370 million.
A complete redesign is more likely behind the figure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452639</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457925</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1245835320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you're dividing meters into centimeters, you can really only talk about tenths, hundreds, etc.</p></div><p>I'll keep in mind next time I'm asking half a kilo of something in the store.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're dividing meters into centimeters , you can really only talk about tenths , hundreds , etc.I 'll keep in mind next time I 'm asking half a kilo of something in the store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're dividing meters into centimeters, you can really only talk about tenths, hundreds, etc.I'll keep in mind next time I'm asking half a kilo of something in the store.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453295</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Angstroem</author>
	<datestamp>1245861900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When it comes to beer, I'd always prefer 22fl.oz over a pint...</htmltext>
<tokenext>When it comes to beer , I 'd always prefer 22fl.oz over a pint.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When it comes to beer, I'd always prefer 22fl.oz over a pint...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456085</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>orzetto</author>
	<datestamp>1245871260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why do we insist NASA to reinvent the wheel when we're so against it in our own profession?</p></div></blockquote><p>... because they are using a square wheel instead of a round one?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do we insist NASA to reinvent the wheel when we 're so against it in our own profession ? .. .
because they are using a square wheel instead of a round one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do we insist NASA to reinvent the wheel when we're so against it in our own profession?...
because they are using a square wheel instead of a round one?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453871</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245863880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article got my hopes up, for a second I thought NASA was going to stick with TIE Fighters, Star Destroyers and Death Stars!</p><p>Not this silly Rebellion Engineering!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article got my hopes up , for a second I thought NASA was going to stick with TIE Fighters , Star Destroyers and Death Stars ! Not this silly Rebellion Engineering !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article got my hopes up, for a second I thought NASA was going to stick with TIE Fighters, Star Destroyers and Death Stars!Not this silly Rebellion Engineering!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456195</id>
	<title>Disappointed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245871620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here I thought they were going to buy shuttles from Emperor Palpatine...oh well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here I thought they were going to buy shuttles from Emperor Palpatine...oh well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here I thought they were going to buy shuttles from Emperor Palpatine...oh well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455517</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Frools</author>
	<datestamp>1245869340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You missed out: <br>
4) Feet / inches - for measuring people<br>
<br>
When someone tells you how tall they are in the UK or what size trousers/shirt they are the measurements are generally in feet / inches. <br>
Although if someone asked me how tall a building was i'd probably answer in meters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You missed out : 4 ) Feet / inches - for measuring people When someone tells you how tall they are in the UK or what size trousers/shirt they are the measurements are generally in feet / inches .
Although if someone asked me how tall a building was i 'd probably answer in meters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You missed out: 
4) Feet / inches - for measuring people

When someone tells you how tall they are in the UK or what size trousers/shirt they are the measurements are generally in feet / inches.
Although if someone asked me how tall a building was i'd probably answer in meters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453143</id>
	<title>Crowd source please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245861360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't we just crowd source this and let all these bitching nerds do it?  For free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't we just crowd source this and let all these bitching nerds do it ?
For free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't we just crowd source this and let all these bitching nerds do it?
For free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454011</id>
	<title>Re:really?</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1245864360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm sure it would cost alot, but really. WTF 370 million? wow. I can only hope that we get away from the Imperial action sometime.</p></div></blockquote><p>While some units are the same, and even more have the same names despite being different (e.g., the gallon), the <b>US Customary</b> system of measures is a different system from the <b>Imperial</b> system.</p><p>So there is no "Imperial action" for us to get away from.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure it would cost alot , but really .
WTF 370 million ?
wow. I can only hope that we get away from the Imperial action sometime.While some units are the same , and even more have the same names despite being different ( e.g. , the gallon ) , the US Customary system of measures is a different system from the Imperial system.So there is no " Imperial action " for us to get away from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure it would cost alot, but really.
WTF 370 million?
wow. I can only hope that we get away from the Imperial action sometime.While some units are the same, and even more have the same names despite being different (e.g., the gallon), the US Customary system of measures is a different system from the Imperial system.So there is no "Imperial action" for us to get away from.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452639</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460153</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1245844560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I actually still convert back to Marks occasionally... but just when I'm about to buy something (relatively) expensive and want to double-check whether I really want to spend (Euros x 2) Marks on it.<br>
<br>
However, the changeover has really benn helped by the fact that prices over here have been adapted so nonlinearly that it's pretty difficult to compare pre-Euro prices with post-Euro ones.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually still convert back to Marks occasionally... but just when I 'm about to buy something ( relatively ) expensive and want to double-check whether I really want to spend ( Euros x 2 ) Marks on it .
However , the changeover has really benn helped by the fact that prices over here have been adapted so nonlinearly that it 's pretty difficult to compare pre-Euro prices with post-Euro ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually still convert back to Marks occasionally... but just when I'm about to buy something (relatively) expensive and want to double-check whether I really want to spend (Euros x 2) Marks on it.
However, the changeover has really benn helped by the fact that prices over here have been adapted so nonlinearly that it's pretty difficult to compare pre-Euro prices with post-Euro ones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454049</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245864480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the stupider comments I've read today.</p><p>What is it about metric that makes you think you can only divide it into factors of 10? A 16th of a meter? 6.25cm... Not so hard was it?</p><p>I grew up with metric in AU, but recently relocated to the US. I started dabbling in some woodworking and I find quarters, eights, sixteenths etc of inches to be infuriating. Do I have the right ruler? Is this one in 8ths or 16ths? Is that big notch there 5 8ths or 9 16th's?</p><p>Unless you're an absolute pro wood craftsman, a millimeter division is about as small as you're going to need to go.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the stupider comments I 've read today.What is it about metric that makes you think you can only divide it into factors of 10 ?
A 16th of a meter ?
6.25cm... Not so hard was it ? I grew up with metric in AU , but recently relocated to the US .
I started dabbling in some woodworking and I find quarters , eights , sixteenths etc of inches to be infuriating .
Do I have the right ruler ?
Is this one in 8ths or 16ths ?
Is that big notch there 5 8ths or 9 16th 's ? Unless you 're an absolute pro wood craftsman , a millimeter division is about as small as you 're going to need to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the stupider comments I've read today.What is it about metric that makes you think you can only divide it into factors of 10?
A 16th of a meter?
6.25cm... Not so hard was it?I grew up with metric in AU, but recently relocated to the US.
I started dabbling in some woodworking and I find quarters, eights, sixteenths etc of inches to be infuriating.
Do I have the right ruler?
Is this one in 8ths or 16ths?
Is that big notch there 5 8ths or 9 16th's?Unless you're an absolute pro wood craftsman, a millimeter division is about as small as you're going to need to go.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455653</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245869760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yep..</p><p>1/2, 1/4, 1/8, even 1/16 is a bit easier to visualize on an object than 1/1000</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yep..1/2 , 1/4 , 1/8 , even 1/16 is a bit easier to visualize on an object than 1/1000</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yep..1/2, 1/4, 1/8, even 1/16 is a bit easier to visualize on an object than 1/1000</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454265</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>xaxa</author>
	<datestamp>1245865200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Beer is imperial because it would take a major piece of legislation to change.</p></div><p>It would take a tiny piece of legislation to change it (and the rest of them). But the Daily Mail wouldn't like it, so it hasn't happened yet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Beer is imperial because it would take a major piece of legislation to change.It would take a tiny piece of legislation to change it ( and the rest of them ) .
But the Daily Mail would n't like it , so it has n't happened yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Beer is imperial because it would take a major piece of legislation to change.It would take a tiny piece of legislation to change it (and the rest of them).
But the Daily Mail wouldn't like it, so it hasn't happened yet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452801</id>
	<title>Now I know what NASA stands for...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245860040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Need Another Space Agency.</p><p>Seriously, just burn it down and start from scratch.  The shuttle is such an economic disaster.  It isn't even close to being competitive.  Why would we possibly want to build a new one?</p><p>And as far as anyone trying to do physics in Imperial units... it's just braindead.</p><p>It's mind-boggling that they say it could cost $370,000,000 to convert the drawings.  Aren't they stored in electronic form?  The cost should be almost zero if they are.  If not -- well I don't even know what to say -- it's just unbelievable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Need Another Space Agency.Seriously , just burn it down and start from scratch .
The shuttle is such an economic disaster .
It is n't even close to being competitive .
Why would we possibly want to build a new one ? And as far as anyone trying to do physics in Imperial units... it 's just braindead.It 's mind-boggling that they say it could cost $ 370,000,000 to convert the drawings .
Are n't they stored in electronic form ?
The cost should be almost zero if they are .
If not -- well I do n't even know what to say -- it 's just unbelievable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Need Another Space Agency.Seriously, just burn it down and start from scratch.
The shuttle is such an economic disaster.
It isn't even close to being competitive.
Why would we possibly want to build a new one?And as far as anyone trying to do physics in Imperial units... it's just braindead.It's mind-boggling that they say it could cost $370,000,000 to convert the drawings.
Aren't they stored in electronic form?
The cost should be almost zero if they are.
If not -- well I don't even know what to say -- it's just unbelievable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456789</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>blueg3</author>
	<datestamp>1245874080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If looking up the conversion ratios between oz and lb is slowing you down, you're probably a terrible engineer.</p><p>Not to mention that very, very little engineering work actually involves converting between units within a system. Often when you do, it's not for simple units (like metric megatons to kilos), but for complex ones (horsepower to foot-pounds per second, or ergs to joules) where you may not want to trust it to memory for SI, even.</p><p>That SI is based on powers of ten is probably the last thing on an engineer's mind. Rather, it's "what units do other parts and specifications use" and "what units do the tools and technicians use". In the US, (b) is generally Imperial units, although many shops can use both sets of units. The more important one is (a), since any earlier components made in the US will be in Imperial, many components purchased in the US will be Imperial, and any components or specifications from other countries will probably be in metric.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If looking up the conversion ratios between oz and lb is slowing you down , you 're probably a terrible engineer.Not to mention that very , very little engineering work actually involves converting between units within a system .
Often when you do , it 's not for simple units ( like metric megatons to kilos ) , but for complex ones ( horsepower to foot-pounds per second , or ergs to joules ) where you may not want to trust it to memory for SI , even.That SI is based on powers of ten is probably the last thing on an engineer 's mind .
Rather , it 's " what units do other parts and specifications use " and " what units do the tools and technicians use " .
In the US , ( b ) is generally Imperial units , although many shops can use both sets of units .
The more important one is ( a ) , since any earlier components made in the US will be in Imperial , many components purchased in the US will be Imperial , and any components or specifications from other countries will probably be in metric .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If looking up the conversion ratios between oz and lb is slowing you down, you're probably a terrible engineer.Not to mention that very, very little engineering work actually involves converting between units within a system.
Often when you do, it's not for simple units (like metric megatons to kilos), but for complex ones (horsepower to foot-pounds per second, or ergs to joules) where you may not want to trust it to memory for SI, even.That SI is based on powers of ten is probably the last thing on an engineer's mind.
Rather, it's "what units do other parts and specifications use" and "what units do the tools and technicians use".
In the US, (b) is generally Imperial units, although many shops can use both sets of units.
The more important one is (a), since any earlier components made in the US will be in Imperial, many components purchased in the US will be Imperial, and any components or specifications from other countries will probably be in metric.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453581</id>
	<title>Re:Do we really need metric?</title>
	<author>Shillo</author>
	<datestamp>1245862800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the unit of height is a Todd, and that's about 6'1", and that's how tall I am.  </p></div><p>Unfortunately, to make this measuring unit workable without having to use fractions, we'd need to introduce centitods (as 1/100 todds). This brings us back to metric.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the unit of height is a Todd , and that 's about 6'1 " , and that 's how tall I am .
Unfortunately , to make this measuring unit workable without having to use fractions , we 'd need to introduce centitods ( as 1/100 todds ) .
This brings us back to metric .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the unit of height is a Todd, and that's about 6'1", and that's how tall I am.
Unfortunately, to make this measuring unit workable without having to use fractions, we'd need to introduce centitods (as 1/100 todds).
This brings us back to metric.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460357</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Myrddin Wyllt</author>
	<datestamp>1245845460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spirits have not been sold in fractions of a gill since the 1980's, the standard pub measure is 25ml. Bottled beer is sold in ml, so are glasses of wine - in fact draught beer is the <b>only</b> drink still sold in imperial units, and the legislation required to change that would be as trivial as it was for wine and spirits. </p><p>I really don't care if draught beer goes metric (although apparently a lot of people do) - I just wish they would fill the bloody glass to the proper measure without being asked - most of the pubs in Britain are already serving half-litres of  beer and then charging you for a pint!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spirits have not been sold in fractions of a gill since the 1980 's , the standard pub measure is 25ml .
Bottled beer is sold in ml , so are glasses of wine - in fact draught beer is the only drink still sold in imperial units , and the legislation required to change that would be as trivial as it was for wine and spirits .
I really do n't care if draught beer goes metric ( although apparently a lot of people do ) - I just wish they would fill the bloody glass to the proper measure without being asked - most of the pubs in Britain are already serving half-litres of beer and then charging you for a pint !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spirits have not been sold in fractions of a gill since the 1980's, the standard pub measure is 25ml.
Bottled beer is sold in ml, so are glasses of wine - in fact draught beer is the only drink still sold in imperial units, and the legislation required to change that would be as trivial as it was for wine and spirits.
I really don't care if draught beer goes metric (although apparently a lot of people do) - I just wish they would fill the bloody glass to the proper measure without being asked - most of the pubs in Britain are already serving half-litres of  beer and then charging you for a pint!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454159</id>
	<title>Re:Do we really need metric?</title>
	<author>Scrameustache</author>
	<datestamp>1245864840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think the adoption of metric is ultimately just another statist thing.  If you ask me, every country should have its own unit of measurement. </p></div><p>Why stop there? Ever PERSON should have their own set of measurements! AND those should change according to time of day and weather.</p><p>If you're going to cause a civilization-stopping boondoggle, go for broke!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the adoption of metric is ultimately just another statist thing .
If you ask me , every country should have its own unit of measurement .
Why stop there ?
Ever PERSON should have their own set of measurements !
AND those should change according to time of day and weather.If you 're going to cause a civilization-stopping boondoggle , go for broke !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the adoption of metric is ultimately just another statist thing.
If you ask me, every country should have its own unit of measurement.
Why stop there?
Ever PERSON should have their own set of measurements!
AND those should change according to time of day and weather.If you're going to cause a civilization-stopping boondoggle, go for broke!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454897</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1245867420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I know how much a pint is. I know how much 1kg is, but I don't know how much is 1 pound in weight. </i></p><p>A pint of H2O weighs 1 pound.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know how much a pint is .
I know how much 1kg is , but I do n't know how much is 1 pound in weight .
A pint of H2O weighs 1 pound .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know how much a pint is.
I know how much 1kg is, but I don't know how much is 1 pound in weight.
A pint of H2O weighs 1 pound.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455547</id>
	<title>Re:So What?</title>
	<author>black\_lbi</author>
	<datestamp>1245869460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's this MM you're talking about? Were you trying to write the abbreviation for millimeter and your CAPS key got stuck?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's this MM you 're talking about ?
Were you trying to write the abbreviation for millimeter and your CAPS key got stuck ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's this MM you're talking about?
Were you trying to write the abbreviation for millimeter and your CAPS key got stuck?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454127</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453263</id>
	<title>Cars!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245861780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only units I would like to stick with in the U.S. are all automotive-Horsepower, Torque (foot pounds), PSI, Quarter Mile and 0-60mph. Yes 0-100kmph=0-62mph, but that's still not accurate. Some cars are designed to redline in second gear at 60mph so they only need one shift to do 0-60mph, while they may need to hit third for 100kmph. Otherwise, metric is fine for distances, weights, volume, etc. It makes doing technical business with international companies difficult, and although the U.S. doesn't want to change I believe it would be a good use of the stimulus money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only units I would like to stick with in the U.S. are all automotive-Horsepower , Torque ( foot pounds ) , PSI , Quarter Mile and 0-60mph .
Yes 0-100kmph = 0-62mph , but that 's still not accurate .
Some cars are designed to redline in second gear at 60mph so they only need one shift to do 0-60mph , while they may need to hit third for 100kmph .
Otherwise , metric is fine for distances , weights , volume , etc .
It makes doing technical business with international companies difficult , and although the U.S. does n't want to change I believe it would be a good use of the stimulus money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only units I would like to stick with in the U.S. are all automotive-Horsepower, Torque (foot pounds), PSI, Quarter Mile and 0-60mph.
Yes 0-100kmph=0-62mph, but that's still not accurate.
Some cars are designed to redline in second gear at 60mph so they only need one shift to do 0-60mph, while they may need to hit third for 100kmph.
Otherwise, metric is fine for distances, weights, volume, etc.
It makes doing technical business with international companies difficult, and although the U.S. doesn't want to change I believe it would be a good use of the stimulus money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28465549</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245940380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Please advise us on how you're going to train every machinist, and QC agent, just to name two job categories on how to measure 30.22mm with calipers that are intended to measure in Imperial? </p></div><p>Use metric calipers instead?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please advise us on how you 're going to train every machinist , and QC agent , just to name two job categories on how to measure 30.22mm with calipers that are intended to measure in Imperial ?
Use metric calipers instead ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please advise us on how you're going to train every machinist, and QC agent, just to name two job categories on how to measure 30.22mm with calipers that are intended to measure in Imperial?
Use metric calipers instead?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455183</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454229</id>
	<title>Inertia, incompetence or arrogance?</title>
	<author>videoBuff</author>
	<datestamp>1245865080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In isolation, some NASA engineers may be smart. But they may not be the people who probably are making these decisions. Highly likely that it is some internal group that is charged with consistency or similar title. They may loose power or may even become superfluous, if NASA goes metric.</p><p>On a different note, how much confidence do you have in an agency like NASA that is charged with exploring space, when they cannot even do what school kids all over world do with ease?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In isolation , some NASA engineers may be smart .
But they may not be the people who probably are making these decisions .
Highly likely that it is some internal group that is charged with consistency or similar title .
They may loose power or may even become superfluous , if NASA goes metric.On a different note , how much confidence do you have in an agency like NASA that is charged with exploring space , when they can not even do what school kids all over world do with ease ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In isolation, some NASA engineers may be smart.
But they may not be the people who probably are making these decisions.
Highly likely that it is some internal group that is charged with consistency or similar title.
They may loose power or may even become superfluous, if NASA goes metric.On a different note, how much confidence do you have in an agency like NASA that is charged with exploring space, when they cannot even do what school kids all over world do with ease?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453591</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe...</title>
	<author>Dog-Cow</author>
	<datestamp>1245862800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What does it say about PvtVoid when he is unable to demonstrate any intelligence, even though he would like to?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What does it say about PvtVoid when he is unable to demonstrate any intelligence , even though he would like to ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does it say about PvtVoid when he is unable to demonstrate any intelligence, even though he would like to?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28463305</id>
	<title>Re:I can definitely see their point, because</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245870420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is it more difficult to machine a part to 304.8 +/- 0.25mm (We aren't talking about making clothing here, so the use of cm is almost blasphemous) than to 300 +/- 0.25mm or any other number?  Any vaguely competent machinist shouldn't have any issues there, plenty of parts have 'messy' looking numbers for fit tolerances etc. anyway.  Besides, you could always express the dimensional tolerances as limits rather than a +/- figure - not like this is uncommon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is it more difficult to machine a part to 304.8 + /- 0.25mm ( We are n't talking about making clothing here , so the use of cm is almost blasphemous ) than to 300 + /- 0.25mm or any other number ?
Any vaguely competent machinist should n't have any issues there , plenty of parts have 'messy ' looking numbers for fit tolerances etc .
anyway. Besides , you could always express the dimensional tolerances as limits rather than a + /- figure - not like this is uncommon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is it more difficult to machine a part to 304.8 +/- 0.25mm (We aren't talking about making clothing here, so the use of cm is almost blasphemous) than to 300 +/- 0.25mm or any other number?
Any vaguely competent machinist shouldn't have any issues there, plenty of parts have 'messy' looking numbers for fit tolerances etc.
anyway.  Besides, you could always express the dimensional tolerances as limits rather than a +/- figure - not like this is uncommon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453095</id>
	<title>Imperial shuttles?</title>
	<author>MRe\_nl</author>
	<datestamp>1245861120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just double check those Imperial units to make sure they're not disguised Rebels,<br>or your shuttle could be used in a terrorist attack on the moon or whatnot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just double check those Imperial units to make sure they 're not disguised Rebels,or your shuttle could be used in a terrorist attack on the moon or whatnot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just double check those Imperial units to make sure they're not disguised Rebels,or your shuttle could be used in a terrorist attack on the moon or whatnot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28459995</id>
	<title>Obligatory xkcd reference</title>
	<author>whoisisis</author>
	<datestamp>1245843720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seeing the discussion here, I wonder why nobody has brought this up yet:<br><a href="http://xkcd.com/526/" title="xkcd.com" rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/526/</a> [xkcd.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seeing the discussion here , I wonder why nobody has brought this up yet : http : //xkcd.com/526/ [ xkcd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seeing the discussion here, I wonder why nobody has brought this up yet:http://xkcd.com/526/ [xkcd.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28459539</id>
	<title>Ares is a mistake.</title>
	<author>elkto</author>
	<datestamp>1245841380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is unfortunate, but the whole program is set for failure. The old guys who created the workable systems are gone and no one has stood up to take their place. Now the contractors who delivered working systems are now referred to as technicians and the politically empowered have seized control.
<br> <br>
Ares is a mistake. All it takes is one look and the untrained eye can pick up on it. Take a thin stick; put a heavy weight on one end and energetic vibrations on the other. Test found the vibrations delivered to the capsule to be possibly unacceptable, well no duh.
<br> <br>
The old guys sacrificed allot in the name of Country to create the marvels we see today. With the Cold War on, they put God and Country first. I just do not see the dedication anymore. More over, I do not believe they would have sacrificed their livelihood the way they did for this Country as it stands today.
<br> <br>
It is sad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is unfortunate , but the whole program is set for failure .
The old guys who created the workable systems are gone and no one has stood up to take their place .
Now the contractors who delivered working systems are now referred to as technicians and the politically empowered have seized control .
Ares is a mistake .
All it takes is one look and the untrained eye can pick up on it .
Take a thin stick ; put a heavy weight on one end and energetic vibrations on the other .
Test found the vibrations delivered to the capsule to be possibly unacceptable , well no duh .
The old guys sacrificed allot in the name of Country to create the marvels we see today .
With the Cold War on , they put God and Country first .
I just do not see the dedication anymore .
More over , I do not believe they would have sacrificed their livelihood the way they did for this Country as it stands today .
It is sad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is unfortunate, but the whole program is set for failure.
The old guys who created the workable systems are gone and no one has stood up to take their place.
Now the contractors who delivered working systems are now referred to as technicians and the politically empowered have seized control.
Ares is a mistake.
All it takes is one look and the untrained eye can pick up on it.
Take a thin stick; put a heavy weight on one end and energetic vibrations on the other.
Test found the vibrations delivered to the capsule to be possibly unacceptable, well no duh.
The old guys sacrificed allot in the name of Country to create the marvels we see today.
With the Cold War on, they put God and Country first.
I just do not see the dedication anymore.
More over, I do not believe they would have sacrificed their livelihood the way they did for this Country as it stands today.
It is sad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453171</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245861420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's not like they're building anything new or buying raw materials; they just need someone to re-draw plans with new measurements in a different system.</p> </div><p>Frankly, and without trying to be insulting, you're so ignorant of what the issue is that it's laughable that you even have an opinion on it.</p><p>This isn't a matter of trivia, where we are worried if plans are marked in inches or mm.  Change to metric, now every bolt must be metric pitch thread, every nut must be changed to accomodate.  Every calculation of mass and structural integrity has to be reexamined and recalculated for new components.  You don't just magically say "ok, our 3/8" bolts are now to be called 9.525mm bolts" and call it a day.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not like they 're building anything new or buying raw materials ; they just need someone to re-draw plans with new measurements in a different system .
Frankly , and without trying to be insulting , you 're so ignorant of what the issue is that it 's laughable that you even have an opinion on it.This is n't a matter of trivia , where we are worried if plans are marked in inches or mm .
Change to metric , now every bolt must be metric pitch thread , every nut must be changed to accomodate .
Every calculation of mass and structural integrity has to be reexamined and recalculated for new components .
You do n't just magically say " ok , our 3/8 " bolts are now to be called 9.525mm bolts " and call it a day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not like they're building anything new or buying raw materials; they just need someone to re-draw plans with new measurements in a different system.
Frankly, and without trying to be insulting, you're so ignorant of what the issue is that it's laughable that you even have an opinion on it.This isn't a matter of trivia, where we are worried if plans are marked in inches or mm.
Change to metric, now every bolt must be metric pitch thread, every nut must be changed to accomodate.
Every calculation of mass and structural integrity has to be reexamined and recalculated for new components.
You don't just magically say "ok, our 3/8" bolts are now to be called 9.525mm bolts" and call it a day.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453953</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245864180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4) Inches - Certain anatomical measurements are given in inches, this can lead to confusion when talking to people from Europe. This confusion can lead to the aformentioned European "laughing their ass off".... or so I am told.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4 ) Inches - Certain anatomical measurements are given in inches , this can lead to confusion when talking to people from Europe .
This confusion can lead to the aformentioned European " laughing their ass off " .... or so I am told .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4) Inches - Certain anatomical measurements are given in inches, this can lead to confusion when talking to people from Europe.
This confusion can lead to the aformentioned European "laughing their ass off".... or so I am told.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462007</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1245857100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That is just one very simple example in two very limited job categories where changing from SI to Metric would introduce horrible, and potentially disastrous, difficulties.</p></div><p>Why would converting from SI to metric be difficult at all? They both use the same units, so there isn't any conversion required.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is just one very simple example in two very limited job categories where changing from SI to Metric would introduce horrible , and potentially disastrous , difficulties.Why would converting from SI to metric be difficult at all ?
They both use the same units , so there is n't any conversion required .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is just one very simple example in two very limited job categories where changing from SI to Metric would introduce horrible, and potentially disastrous, difficulties.Why would converting from SI to metric be difficult at all?
They both use the same units, so there isn't any conversion required.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455183</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460643</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe...</title>
	<author>fiannaFailMan</author>
	<datestamp>1245846780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe they should be re-thinking their plan to use 30-year-old technology on their flagship 21st Century project.</p></div><p>I disagree.  Wheels are a pretty old technology, they work pretty well.</p><p>In fact, the Russian space program showed that sometimes it's better to use the same fundamental design that's been incrementally improved over decades of use, testing, and development.  I was pretty thrilled when Columbia first took off, but as time wore on it quickly became clear that the ability to re-use a spacecraft is not as easy as it sounds.  It's reusable in the same sense that a Formula 1 race car is reusable - i.e. it more or less has to be re-built with every race/flight.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they should be re-thinking their plan to use 30-year-old technology on their flagship 21st Century project.I disagree .
Wheels are a pretty old technology , they work pretty well.In fact , the Russian space program showed that sometimes it 's better to use the same fundamental design that 's been incrementally improved over decades of use , testing , and development .
I was pretty thrilled when Columbia first took off , but as time wore on it quickly became clear that the ability to re-use a spacecraft is not as easy as it sounds .
It 's reusable in the same sense that a Formula 1 race car is reusable - i.e .
it more or less has to be re-built with every race/flight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they should be re-thinking their plan to use 30-year-old technology on their flagship 21st Century project.I disagree.
Wheels are a pretty old technology, they work pretty well.In fact, the Russian space program showed that sometimes it's better to use the same fundamental design that's been incrementally improved over decades of use, testing, and development.
I was pretty thrilled when Columbia first took off, but as time wore on it quickly became clear that the ability to re-use a spacecraft is not as easy as it sounds.
It's reusable in the same sense that a Formula 1 race car is reusable - i.e.
it more or less has to be re-built with every race/flight.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454339</id>
	<title>to get ready to move</title>
	<author>hey</author>
	<datestamp>1245865380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They should make all their drawing/code unit independent.  Use "inches" instead of ticks for inches, etc.  Always have the units present.  Then when its time to switch its easier.  Also they can switch sizes they are whole numbers in metric.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should make all their drawing/code unit independent .
Use " inches " instead of ticks for inches , etc .
Always have the units present .
Then when its time to switch its easier .
Also they can switch sizes they are whole numbers in metric .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should make all their drawing/code unit independent.
Use "inches" instead of ticks for inches, etc.
Always have the units present.
Then when its time to switch its easier.
Also they can switch sizes they are whole numbers in metric.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457331</id>
	<title>Some mighty expensive scripts, apparently</title>
	<author>Eternal Annoyance</author>
	<datestamp>1245876180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have they gone nuts? Can't they make some scripts to do most work for them? A few days and nights of ruby, python or perl work should do wonders and spare them millions in the process.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have they gone nuts ?
Ca n't they make some scripts to do most work for them ?
A few days and nights of ruby , python or perl work should do wonders and spare them millions in the process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have they gone nuts?
Can't they make some scripts to do most work for them?
A few days and nights of ruby, python or perl work should do wonders and spare them millions in the process.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455383</id>
	<title>$350M of the price ...</title>
	<author>devleopard</author>
	<datestamp>1245868980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... is to pay George Lucas for use of the term "Imperial Units"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... is to pay George Lucas for use of the term " Imperial Units "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... is to pay George Lucas for use of the term "Imperial Units"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452867</id>
	<title>Pay me now</title>
	<author>MonsterTrimble</author>
	<datestamp>1245860280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pay Me Later.</p><p>The trick is that later will be twice the price.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pay Me Later.The trick is that later will be twice the price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pay Me Later.The trick is that later will be twice the price.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452945</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245860640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>say 5:1 at each level for management span of control. Figure 100 enginers, 20 supervisors, 4 middle managers, 1 project lead, 10 admin people, and another team about 20\% that big for QA. Each of these people costs twice as much as their salary, plus the cost of a building for a year to house 200 people. at 100 sq/ft per person and $20/sq ft/mo if they're in a decent area for office space, there's an extra chunk of money. it has to be contracted out, so the contractor has to make a profit on it, and carry a shitton of liability insurance. There's also the NASA guys to QA this. When changing the units, every rounding error has to be validated. Poof, you just blew through $300M or so in a few years. Congrats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>say 5 : 1 at each level for management span of control .
Figure 100 enginers , 20 supervisors , 4 middle managers , 1 project lead , 10 admin people , and another team about 20 \ % that big for QA .
Each of these people costs twice as much as their salary , plus the cost of a building for a year to house 200 people .
at 100 sq/ft per person and $ 20/sq ft/mo if they 're in a decent area for office space , there 's an extra chunk of money .
it has to be contracted out , so the contractor has to make a profit on it , and carry a shitton of liability insurance .
There 's also the NASA guys to QA this .
When changing the units , every rounding error has to be validated .
Poof , you just blew through $ 300M or so in a few years .
Congrats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>say 5:1 at each level for management span of control.
Figure 100 enginers, 20 supervisors, 4 middle managers, 1 project lead, 10 admin people, and another team about 20\% that big for QA.
Each of these people costs twice as much as their salary, plus the cost of a building for a year to house 200 people.
at 100 sq/ft per person and $20/sq ft/mo if they're in a decent area for office space, there's an extra chunk of money.
it has to be contracted out, so the contractor has to make a profit on it, and carry a shitton of liability insurance.
There's also the NASA guys to QA this.
When changing the units, every rounding error has to be validated.
Poof, you just blew through $300M or so in a few years.
Congrats.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453149</id>
	<title>Canada Uses Metric and Imperial</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245861360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here in Canada most regulators require measurements to be done in metric. Many people here still use imperial for common things, such as personal measurements (height, weight, waist size etc), but for any public projects people tend to use SI.  Its an awkward mix of the two systems, but for the most part people recognize that metric is easier and more accurate.  Temperature is probably the hardest one to convert.  I think if the US converted to metric it would eventually phase out all imperial measurements within a generation or two.  I'm rather shocked the scientists and engineers at NASA have been using imperial this whole time.<br>I think NASA should be considered for restructuring, as their budgets are incredibly bloated for what they're trying to accomplish.  I'm all for government funding going to successful space agencies and letting the under-performers die out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here in Canada most regulators require measurements to be done in metric .
Many people here still use imperial for common things , such as personal measurements ( height , weight , waist size etc ) , but for any public projects people tend to use SI .
Its an awkward mix of the two systems , but for the most part people recognize that metric is easier and more accurate .
Temperature is probably the hardest one to convert .
I think if the US converted to metric it would eventually phase out all imperial measurements within a generation or two .
I 'm rather shocked the scientists and engineers at NASA have been using imperial this whole time.I think NASA should be considered for restructuring , as their budgets are incredibly bloated for what they 're trying to accomplish .
I 'm all for government funding going to successful space agencies and letting the under-performers die out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here in Canada most regulators require measurements to be done in metric.
Many people here still use imperial for common things, such as personal measurements (height, weight, waist size etc), but for any public projects people tend to use SI.
Its an awkward mix of the two systems, but for the most part people recognize that metric is easier and more accurate.
Temperature is probably the hardest one to convert.
I think if the US converted to metric it would eventually phase out all imperial measurements within a generation or two.
I'm rather shocked the scientists and engineers at NASA have been using imperial this whole time.I think NASA should be considered for restructuring, as their budgets are incredibly bloated for what they're trying to accomplish.
I'm all for government funding going to successful space agencies and letting the under-performers die out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462073</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>tkw954</author>
	<datestamp>1245857520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Generally speaking things are moving to metric (thankfully) but it will take many many years for imperial to die here currently we are in one big measurement mess and we will be for some time, especially as every traffic sign is in imperial.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
I know of situations in Canada where they just painted a "k" on the pre-metric sign and moved it to the corresponding location.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Generally speaking things are moving to metric ( thankfully ) but it will take many many years for imperial to die here currently we are in one big measurement mess and we will be for some time , especially as every traffic sign is in imperial .
I know of situations in Canada where they just painted a " k " on the pre-metric sign and moved it to the corresponding location .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Generally speaking things are moving to metric (thankfully) but it will take many many years for imperial to die here currently we are in one big measurement mess and we will be for some time, especially as every traffic sign is in imperial.
I know of situations in Canada where they just painted a "k" on the pre-metric sign and moved it to the corresponding location.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462483</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>tkw954</author>
	<datestamp>1245860820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This isn't a matter of trivia, where we are worried if plans are marked in inches or mm. Change to metric, now every bolt must be metric pitch thread, every nut must be changed to accomodate. Every calculation of mass and structural integrity has to be reexamined and recalculated for new components. You don't just magically say "ok, our 3/8" bolts are now to be called 9.525mm bolts" and call it a day.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Sure you can.  Do you think NASA has drawings that just say "3/8 bolt" on them?  No, they have a part number from a specification. What's stopping them from writing a specification for a "9.525mm bolt" that is equivalent to their previous part or editing the old spec to give metric equivalents? My understanding is that this is exactly what happened with the 12.7x99mm NATO aka<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.50 BMG ammunition.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't a matter of trivia , where we are worried if plans are marked in inches or mm .
Change to metric , now every bolt must be metric pitch thread , every nut must be changed to accomodate .
Every calculation of mass and structural integrity has to be reexamined and recalculated for new components .
You do n't just magically say " ok , our 3/8 " bolts are now to be called 9.525mm bolts " and call it a day .
Sure you can .
Do you think NASA has drawings that just say " 3/8 bolt " on them ?
No , they have a part number from a specification .
What 's stopping them from writing a specification for a " 9.525mm bolt " that is equivalent to their previous part or editing the old spec to give metric equivalents ?
My understanding is that this is exactly what happened with the 12.7x99mm NATO aka .50 BMG ammunition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't a matter of trivia, where we are worried if plans are marked in inches or mm.
Change to metric, now every bolt must be metric pitch thread, every nut must be changed to accomodate.
Every calculation of mass and structural integrity has to be reexamined and recalculated for new components.
You don't just magically say "ok, our 3/8" bolts are now to be called 9.525mm bolts" and call it a day.
Sure you can.
Do you think NASA has drawings that just say "3/8 bolt" on them?
No, they have a part number from a specification.
What's stopping them from writing a specification for a "9.525mm bolt" that is equivalent to their previous part or editing the old spec to give metric equivalents?
My understanding is that this is exactly what happened with the 12.7x99mm NATO aka .50 BMG ammunition.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454925</id>
	<title>Cheaper in the Future</title>
	<author>repetty</author>
	<datestamp>1245867480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is a good call by NASA.<br><br>It will certainly be cheaper and simpler to convert to the metric system in the future, as opposed to doing it now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a good call by NASA.It will certainly be cheaper and simpler to convert to the metric system in the future , as opposed to doing it now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a good call by NASA.It will certainly be cheaper and simpler to convert to the metric system in the future, as opposed to doing it now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453135</id>
	<title>Re:Do we really need metric?</title>
	<author>Eevee</author>
	<datestamp>1245861300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sorry, but we already have the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot" title="wikipedia.org">Smoot</a> [wikipedia.org] for measurement of length. You'll just have to learn to live with being 1.09 Smoots tall.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry , but we already have the Smoot [ wikipedia.org ] for measurement of length .
You 'll just have to learn to live with being 1.09 Smoots tall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry, but we already have the Smoot [wikipedia.org] for measurement of length.
You'll just have to learn to live with being 1.09 Smoots tall.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453215</id>
	<title>Why not use slave labor?</title>
	<author>RabidMoose</author>
	<datestamp>1245861600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>$370 million to do undergrad-level (at most) grunt work? Isn't that what unpaid interns are for?</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 370 million to do undergrad-level ( at most ) grunt work ?
Is n't that what unpaid interns are for ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$370 million to do undergrad-level (at most) grunt work?
Isn't that what unpaid interns are for?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>kazade84</author>
	<datestamp>1245861540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm from the UK, and my mental image of measurements is fucked.</p><p>I know how much a pint is. I know how much 1kg is, but I don't know how much is 1 pound in weight. I know how tall I am in feet and inches, but not in meters.</p><p>All because we use metric for some reasons, and we are still stuck in imperial for others. My milk comes in bottles that are labelled 568ml although *everyone* refers to it as a pint, obviously our alcoholic drinks come in pints and half pints. Our speed limits are measured in miles per hour, yet we used to run the 100 meters at school. My height has always been given to me in feet and inches (while growing up by my parents) and if you speak to pretty much anyone they will also give their height in feet and inches, yet if I go to the doctor, they want me to know how high in meters. If you go under a low bridge, the height is given in feet.</p><p>When I go swimming the pool is in meters, when referring to medium distances anyone aged over 40 refers to yards, everyone below that refers to meters, at larger distances it's rare for anyone to use kilometers. Anyone over 40ish only understands Fahrenheit, everyone below uses degrees centigrade.</p><p>Generally speaking things are moving to metric (thankfully) but it will take many many years for imperial to die here currently we are in one big measurement mess and we will be for some time, especially as every traffic sign is in imperial.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm from the UK , and my mental image of measurements is fucked.I know how much a pint is .
I know how much 1kg is , but I do n't know how much is 1 pound in weight .
I know how tall I am in feet and inches , but not in meters.All because we use metric for some reasons , and we are still stuck in imperial for others .
My milk comes in bottles that are labelled 568ml although * everyone * refers to it as a pint , obviously our alcoholic drinks come in pints and half pints .
Our speed limits are measured in miles per hour , yet we used to run the 100 meters at school .
My height has always been given to me in feet and inches ( while growing up by my parents ) and if you speak to pretty much anyone they will also give their height in feet and inches , yet if I go to the doctor , they want me to know how high in meters .
If you go under a low bridge , the height is given in feet.When I go swimming the pool is in meters , when referring to medium distances anyone aged over 40 refers to yards , everyone below that refers to meters , at larger distances it 's rare for anyone to use kilometers .
Anyone over 40ish only understands Fahrenheit , everyone below uses degrees centigrade.Generally speaking things are moving to metric ( thankfully ) but it will take many many years for imperial to die here currently we are in one big measurement mess and we will be for some time , especially as every traffic sign is in imperial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm from the UK, and my mental image of measurements is fucked.I know how much a pint is.
I know how much 1kg is, but I don't know how much is 1 pound in weight.
I know how tall I am in feet and inches, but not in meters.All because we use metric for some reasons, and we are still stuck in imperial for others.
My milk comes in bottles that are labelled 568ml although *everyone* refers to it as a pint, obviously our alcoholic drinks come in pints and half pints.
Our speed limits are measured in miles per hour, yet we used to run the 100 meters at school.
My height has always been given to me in feet and inches (while growing up by my parents) and if you speak to pretty much anyone they will also give their height in feet and inches, yet if I go to the doctor, they want me to know how high in meters.
If you go under a low bridge, the height is given in feet.When I go swimming the pool is in meters, when referring to medium distances anyone aged over 40 refers to yards, everyone below that refers to meters, at larger distances it's rare for anyone to use kilometers.
Anyone over 40ish only understands Fahrenheit, everyone below uses degrees centigrade.Generally speaking things are moving to metric (thankfully) but it will take many many years for imperial to die here currently we are in one big measurement mess and we will be for some time, especially as every traffic sign is in imperial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457019</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245874980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm 35 and was never taught imperial.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm 35 and was never taught imperial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm 35 and was never taught imperial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057</id>
	<title>I can definitely see their point, because</title>
	<author>jcochran</author>
	<datestamp>1245861000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the issue isn't just one of redoing the drawings along with the various checks and cross checks to make certain the units were converted properly. I'm sure they could that, but the resulting set of new drawings would be extremely prone to encouraging mistakes. As a minor example. Let's assume that on one piece they currently have a dimension of 12 inches +/- 0.01 inches. So they convert this dimension to metric giving a new value of 30.48 cm +/- 0.025 cm. Excuse me?!?!? That's a rather odd and strange dimensional target to hand off to the machinest. And you'll be getting these rather strange dimensions for everything on the original design. Frankly using the metric measurements would make that rocket utterly hell to construct. So the "proper" solution would be to use the original design and then stretch/shrink various dimensions in order to make the dimensions "rounder" and easier to manufacture. But upon doing that, they have effectively come up with a new design that has to be recertified.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the issue is n't just one of redoing the drawings along with the various checks and cross checks to make certain the units were converted properly .
I 'm sure they could that , but the resulting set of new drawings would be extremely prone to encouraging mistakes .
As a minor example .
Let 's assume that on one piece they currently have a dimension of 12 inches + /- 0.01 inches .
So they convert this dimension to metric giving a new value of 30.48 cm + /- 0.025 cm .
Excuse me ? ! ? ! ?
That 's a rather odd and strange dimensional target to hand off to the machinest .
And you 'll be getting these rather strange dimensions for everything on the original design .
Frankly using the metric measurements would make that rocket utterly hell to construct .
So the " proper " solution would be to use the original design and then stretch/shrink various dimensions in order to make the dimensions " rounder " and easier to manufacture .
But upon doing that , they have effectively come up with a new design that has to be recertified .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the issue isn't just one of redoing the drawings along with the various checks and cross checks to make certain the units were converted properly.
I'm sure they could that, but the resulting set of new drawings would be extremely prone to encouraging mistakes.
As a minor example.
Let's assume that on one piece they currently have a dimension of 12 inches +/- 0.01 inches.
So they convert this dimension to metric giving a new value of 30.48 cm +/- 0.025 cm.
Excuse me?!?!?
That's a rather odd and strange dimensional target to hand off to the machinest.
And you'll be getting these rather strange dimensions for everything on the original design.
Frankly using the metric measurements would make that rocket utterly hell to construct.
So the "proper" solution would be to use the original design and then stretch/shrink various dimensions in order to make the dimensions "rounder" and easier to manufacture.
But upon doing that, they have effectively come up with a new design that has to be recertified.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455575</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245869520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What "bugs" would have to be worked out?  For every number you see, erase it and put in the metric equivilant.  It's not like they're going to have to re-design the thing from scratch.</p><p>Just... X = Y.  Not exactly brain surgery.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What " bugs " would have to be worked out ?
For every number you see , erase it and put in the metric equivilant .
It 's not like they 're going to have to re-design the thing from scratch.Just... X = Y. Not exactly brain surgery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What "bugs" would have to be worked out?
For every number you see, erase it and put in the metric equivilant.
It's not like they're going to have to re-design the thing from scratch.Just... X = Y.  Not exactly brain surgery.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462765</id>
	<title>Re:NASA not using Metric?</title>
	<author>Andreas Mayer</author>
	<datestamp>1245864300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(We needed to wait until the second spacecraft was three <i>dec<b>a</b>meters</i> away before firing the main rocket engines, not three <i>dec<b>i</b>meters</i>, but someone typed in in wrong and that's why we lost the second spacecraft)</p></div><p>That's why you don't use decimeter *nor* decameter. All specifications have to be in meters or millimeters. And for larger distances maybe in kilometers; though '5000 m' is a perfectly fine specification.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( We needed to wait until the second spacecraft was three decameters away before firing the main rocket engines , not three decimeters , but someone typed in in wrong and that 's why we lost the second spacecraft ) That 's why you do n't use decimeter * nor * decameter .
All specifications have to be in meters or millimeters .
And for larger distances maybe in kilometers ; though '5000 m ' is a perfectly fine specification .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(We needed to wait until the second spacecraft was three decameters away before firing the main rocket engines, not three decimeters, but someone typed in in wrong and that's why we lost the second spacecraft)That's why you don't use decimeter *nor* decameter.
All specifications have to be in meters or millimeters.
And for larger distances maybe in kilometers; though '5000 m' is a perfectly fine specification.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453539</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454501</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>CharlieG</author>
	<datestamp>1245865980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Heck, you guys still often give weights in Stones, and we won't go into BA and Whitworth fasteners</p><p>Me?  My hobby is having a machine shop - I have no problems with someone saying something is 110.134 inches - it's as decimal as metric - we just don't use feet and the like</p><p>Then again, I do have to look up "what exactly IS the diameter of a #6 screw" (actually, I almost never care - I grab the drill index that has the slot for the #23 (i think off the top of my head) drill (wire gages - yea!) run it in, and tap the hole</p><p>We get to deal with all sorts of weird stuff - Inches, MM, wire gage, sheetmetal gage, B&amp;S gage (all different) - Morse tapers (and it's a different angle on every size), Jacob taper (a 33 is sized between a 2 and a 3)</p><p>I have one recurring job I do - mill a 3/4"x5/8"x.410" pocket into 1/2steel, then center drill the side wall with a #2 center drill, and finish with a 6mm holeto fit a 1/8" (3.5mm) jack, onto which I've soldered 26 gage wire  - How many different units of measue did I just use?</p><p>I love some of the fudged metric units "A4" paper - yeah, there is a metric measure for you - why not just use A sized?  I know - so that the A4 comes out even in MM, but still</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Heck , you guys still often give weights in Stones , and we wo n't go into BA and Whitworth fastenersMe ?
My hobby is having a machine shop - I have no problems with someone saying something is 110.134 inches - it 's as decimal as metric - we just do n't use feet and the likeThen again , I do have to look up " what exactly IS the diameter of a # 6 screw " ( actually , I almost never care - I grab the drill index that has the slot for the # 23 ( i think off the top of my head ) drill ( wire gages - yea !
) run it in , and tap the holeWe get to deal with all sorts of weird stuff - Inches , MM , wire gage , sheetmetal gage , B&amp;S gage ( all different ) - Morse tapers ( and it 's a different angle on every size ) , Jacob taper ( a 33 is sized between a 2 and a 3 ) I have one recurring job I do - mill a 3/4 " x5/8 " x.410 " pocket into 1/2steel , then center drill the side wall with a # 2 center drill , and finish with a 6mm holeto fit a 1/8 " ( 3.5mm ) jack , onto which I 've soldered 26 gage wire - How many different units of measue did I just use ? I love some of the fudged metric units " A4 " paper - yeah , there is a metric measure for you - why not just use A sized ?
I know - so that the A4 comes out even in MM , but still</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heck, you guys still often give weights in Stones, and we won't go into BA and Whitworth fastenersMe?
My hobby is having a machine shop - I have no problems with someone saying something is 110.134 inches - it's as decimal as metric - we just don't use feet and the likeThen again, I do have to look up "what exactly IS the diameter of a #6 screw" (actually, I almost never care - I grab the drill index that has the slot for the #23 (i think off the top of my head) drill (wire gages - yea!
) run it in, and tap the holeWe get to deal with all sorts of weird stuff - Inches, MM, wire gage, sheetmetal gage, B&amp;S gage (all different) - Morse tapers (and it's a different angle on every size), Jacob taper (a 33 is sized between a 2 and a 3)I have one recurring job I do - mill a 3/4"x5/8"x.410" pocket into 1/2steel, then center drill the side wall with a #2 center drill, and finish with a 6mm holeto fit a 1/8" (3.5mm) jack, onto which I've soldered 26 gage wire  - How many different units of measue did I just use?I love some of the fudged metric units "A4" paper - yeah, there is a metric measure for you - why not just use A sized?
I know - so that the A4 comes out even in MM, but still</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457207</id>
	<title>SAE - Standard American English</title>
	<author>cockpitcomp</author>
	<datestamp>1245875700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You buy a set of SAE or Metric wrenches to bloody you knuckles, not Imperial.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You buy a set of SAE or Metric wrenches to bloody you knuckles , not Imperial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You buy a set of SAE or Metric wrenches to bloody you knuckles, not Imperial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454561</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28458741</id>
	<title>Penny wise and pound foolish</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1245838080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It may be half the cost of a launch to convert, but what will it save in the long run?  Using English measurements (or at least the relevant miscommunication) has already cost an <a href="http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/" title="cnn.com">entire mission.  Better to just get it over with than pay for the continuous QA of double checking specifications, conversions, etc..</a> [cnn.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It may be half the cost of a launch to convert , but what will it save in the long run ?
Using English measurements ( or at least the relevant miscommunication ) has already cost an entire mission .
Better to just get it over with than pay for the continuous QA of double checking specifications , conversions , etc.. [ cnn.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It may be half the cost of a launch to convert, but what will it save in the long run?
Using English measurements (or at least the relevant miscommunication) has already cost an entire mission.
Better to just get it over with than pay for the continuous QA of double checking specifications, conversions, etc.. [cnn.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1245864300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you're dividing meters into centimeters, you can really only talk about tenths, hundreds, etc. If you're dividing yards into feet and inches, or pounds into ounces, etc. you have thirds, 16ths, 12ths, and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.</p></div><p>And that would be an advantage for the imperial system? Really? Having to keep in mind always different fractions, instead of just 1000 (as in kilo, mega, giga... and milli, micro, nano, pico...)?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're dividing meters into centimeters , you can really only talk about tenths , hundreds , etc .
If you 're dividing yards into feet and inches , or pounds into ounces , etc .
you have thirds , 16ths , 12ths , and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.And that would be an advantage for the imperial system ?
Really ? Having to keep in mind always different fractions , instead of just 1000 ( as in kilo , mega , giga... and milli , micro , nano , pico... ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're dividing meters into centimeters, you can really only talk about tenths, hundreds, etc.
If you're dividing yards into feet and inches, or pounds into ounces, etc.
you have thirds, 16ths, 12ths, and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.And that would be an advantage for the imperial system?
Really? Having to keep in mind always different fractions, instead of just 1000 (as in kilo, mega, giga... and milli, micro, nano, pico...)?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467531</id>
	<title>The US doesn't use imperial</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245950220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The US doesn't use imperial units.<br>Imperial is not the same system as US customary.<br>For example, a US pint (16 US fluid ounces, or 473mL) is not the same as an imperial pint (20 Imperial ounces, or 568mL).<br>Just because neither one is metric doesn't mean they're both the same.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US does n't use imperial units.Imperial is not the same system as US customary.For example , a US pint ( 16 US fluid ounces , or 473mL ) is not the same as an imperial pint ( 20 Imperial ounces , or 568mL ) .Just because neither one is metric does n't mean they 're both the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US doesn't use imperial units.Imperial is not the same system as US customary.For example, a US pint (16 US fluid ounces, or 473mL) is not the same as an imperial pint (20 Imperial ounces, or 568mL).Just because neither one is metric doesn't mean they're both the same.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457105</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>nogginthenog</author>
	<datestamp>1245875280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Spirits in the UK have been sold in 25 or 35ml measures for some time now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Spirits in the UK have been sold in 25 or 35ml measures for some time now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spirits in the UK have been sold in 25 or 35ml measures for some time now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452885</id>
	<title>Maybe...</title>
	<author>PvtVoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245860340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe they should be re-thinking their plan to use 30-year-old technology on their flagship 21st Century project. Really: what does it say about the technical competence of NASA that they admit to being <i>unable</i> to use SI units, even though they would like to?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they should be re-thinking their plan to use 30-year-old technology on their flagship 21st Century project .
Really : what does it say about the technical competence of NASA that they admit to being unable to use SI units , even though they would like to ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they should be re-thinking their plan to use 30-year-old technology on their flagship 21st Century project.
Really: what does it say about the technical competence of NASA that they admit to being unable to use SI units, even though they would like to?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454127</id>
	<title>So What?</title>
	<author>BCW2</author>
	<datestamp>1245864720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The U. S. went to the moon on the standard system. The only time there have been math errors is when a conversion to metrics was involved. Simple solution? Toss the metric system, it was only "adopted" by Congress to appease Europe anyway. Or make all mechanics buy a second set of tools.<br><br>That's it, it was the Snap-On lobby!<br><br>Isn't the metric system where they measure in Mickey Mouses (MM).<br><br>Now watch someone with no sense of humor mod this down. So Sad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The U. S. went to the moon on the standard system .
The only time there have been math errors is when a conversion to metrics was involved .
Simple solution ?
Toss the metric system , it was only " adopted " by Congress to appease Europe anyway .
Or make all mechanics buy a second set of tools.That 's it , it was the Snap-On lobby ! Is n't the metric system where they measure in Mickey Mouses ( MM ) .Now watch someone with no sense of humor mod this down .
So Sad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The U. S. went to the moon on the standard system.
The only time there have been math errors is when a conversion to metrics was involved.
Simple solution?
Toss the metric system, it was only "adopted" by Congress to appease Europe anyway.
Or make all mechanics buy a second set of tools.That's it, it was the Snap-On lobby!Isn't the metric system where they measure in Mickey Mouses (MM).Now watch someone with no sense of humor mod this down.
So Sad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453927</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245864120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's nowhere near as simple as you think it is. Every measurement for all the hundreds of thousands of parts (including computer circuitry) would have to be converted. Not only that but the manufacturers of all those parts will have to change their high precision tooling to metric which might include updates to automation programs. Some crappy engineers may have to be retrained. And once you are done all that you get to go over everything twice to make sure no one slipped in an extra zero. $370 million seems reasonable when you realize the scope of the task.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's nowhere near as simple as you think it is .
Every measurement for all the hundreds of thousands of parts ( including computer circuitry ) would have to be converted .
Not only that but the manufacturers of all those parts will have to change their high precision tooling to metric which might include updates to automation programs .
Some crappy engineers may have to be retrained .
And once you are done all that you get to go over everything twice to make sure no one slipped in an extra zero .
$ 370 million seems reasonable when you realize the scope of the task .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's nowhere near as simple as you think it is.
Every measurement for all the hundreds of thousands of parts (including computer circuitry) would have to be converted.
Not only that but the manufacturers of all those parts will have to change their high precision tooling to metric which might include updates to automation programs.
Some crappy engineers may have to be retrained.
And once you are done all that you get to go over everything twice to make sure no one slipped in an extra zero.
$370 million seems reasonable when you realize the scope of the task.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749</id>
	<title>$370 million?</title>
	<author>sanosuke001</author>
	<datestamp>1245859800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What the hell are they spending this money on? If they paid their engineers $150,000/year, they could hire almost 2500 engineers for a year-long project. It's not like they're building anything new or buying raw materials; they just need someone to re-draw plans with new measurements in a different system. The fitting/testing for the Ares should already be budgeted for so it shouldn't fit in with this cost. No wonder we're in debt...</htmltext>
<tokenext>What the hell are they spending this money on ?
If they paid their engineers $ 150,000/year , they could hire almost 2500 engineers for a year-long project .
It 's not like they 're building anything new or buying raw materials ; they just need someone to re-draw plans with new measurements in a different system .
The fitting/testing for the Ares should already be budgeted for so it should n't fit in with this cost .
No wonder we 're in debt.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the hell are they spending this money on?
If they paid their engineers $150,000/year, they could hire almost 2500 engineers for a year-long project.
It's not like they're building anything new or buying raw materials; they just need someone to re-draw plans with new measurements in a different system.
The fitting/testing for the Ares should already be budgeted for so it shouldn't fit in with this cost.
No wonder we're in debt...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453539</id>
	<title>NASA not using Metric?</title>
	<author>readin</author>
	<datestamp>1245862680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I assumed NASA had been using Metric for decades.  Isn't Metric supposed to be the system of science and - just as importantly for the space program - international work?
<br> <br>
Sure, Metric has serious drawbacks like all the names sounding the same and the dangers caused by typos (We needed to wait until the second spacecraft was three <i>dec<b>a</b>meters</i> away before firing the main rocket engines, not three <i>dec<b>i</b>meters</i>, but someone typed in in wrong and that's why we lost the second spacecraft), and the ease of getting a decimal in the wrong place when making conversions, but whatever it's problems, our space program should have settled on a single standard by now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I assumed NASA had been using Metric for decades .
Is n't Metric supposed to be the system of science and - just as importantly for the space program - international work ?
Sure , Metric has serious drawbacks like all the names sounding the same and the dangers caused by typos ( We needed to wait until the second spacecraft was three decameters away before firing the main rocket engines , not three decimeters , but someone typed in in wrong and that 's why we lost the second spacecraft ) , and the ease of getting a decimal in the wrong place when making conversions , but whatever it 's problems , our space program should have settled on a single standard by now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I assumed NASA had been using Metric for decades.
Isn't Metric supposed to be the system of science and - just as importantly for the space program - international work?
Sure, Metric has serious drawbacks like all the names sounding the same and the dangers caused by typos (We needed to wait until the second spacecraft was three decameters away before firing the main rocket engines, not three decimeters, but someone typed in in wrong and that's why we lost the second spacecraft), and the ease of getting a decimal in the wrong place when making conversions, but whatever it's problems, our space program should have settled on a single standard by now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28475489</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>scruffie</author>
	<datestamp>1245937500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Canada here, in my experience, at the pub beer comes as pints (22 UK fl. oz.), half-pints (12 UK fl. oz. -- yes, it's not really one half of a pint), sometimes as "schooners" (16 UK fl. oz.)*, and various bottles (341 ml, 500 ml) and cans (not sure, 355 ml?, plus some bigger ones).</p><p>* I've only seen this in BC, and it's rare enough that I'm not sure about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Canada here , in my experience , at the pub beer comes as pints ( 22 UK fl .
oz. ) , half-pints ( 12 UK fl .
oz. -- yes , it 's not really one half of a pint ) , sometimes as " schooners " ( 16 UK fl .
oz. ) * , and various bottles ( 341 ml , 500 ml ) and cans ( not sure , 355 ml ? , plus some bigger ones ) .
* I 've only seen this in BC , and it 's rare enough that I 'm not sure about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Canada here, in my experience, at the pub beer comes as pints (22 UK fl.
oz.), half-pints (12 UK fl.
oz. -- yes, it's not really one half of a pint), sometimes as "schooners" (16 UK fl.
oz.)*, and various bottles (341 ml, 500 ml) and cans (not sure, 355 ml?, plus some bigger ones).
* I've only seen this in BC, and it's rare enough that I'm not sure about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</id>
	<title>There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>reed</author>
	<datestamp>1245862140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only real valid arguments I've ever heard for using metric are that (a) it's easy to learn the conversions, and (b) everyone else uses it for all science and egineering.</p><p>(b) is the reason that NASA should just use metric... And anyone else in the world doing any kind of science or engineering.</p><p>But for everyday life, imperial or American units turn out to have a lot of utility that most people aren't aware of, because most of us of the younger generation have just relied on calculators doing decimal calculations for us most of the time.  If instead you picture fractions in your head, imerial or American units are quite handy. They also often match real world objects a bit closer.  If you're dividing meters into centimeters, you can really only talk about tenths, hundreds, etc.  If you're dividing yards into feet and inches, or pounds into ounces, etc. you have thirds, 16ths, 12ths, and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.  Find a carpenter who is good at this to see what I mean.  Same with volume and weight; if you do a lot of cooking and modifying quantities in recipes you can get good at those conversions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only real valid arguments I 've ever heard for using metric are that ( a ) it 's easy to learn the conversions , and ( b ) everyone else uses it for all science and egineering .
( b ) is the reason that NASA should just use metric... And anyone else in the world doing any kind of science or engineering.But for everyday life , imperial or American units turn out to have a lot of utility that most people are n't aware of , because most of us of the younger generation have just relied on calculators doing decimal calculations for us most of the time .
If instead you picture fractions in your head , imerial or American units are quite handy .
They also often match real world objects a bit closer .
If you 're dividing meters into centimeters , you can really only talk about tenths , hundreds , etc .
If you 're dividing yards into feet and inches , or pounds into ounces , etc .
you have thirds , 16ths , 12ths , and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions .
Find a carpenter who is good at this to see what I mean .
Same with volume and weight ; if you do a lot of cooking and modifying quantities in recipes you can get good at those conversions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only real valid arguments I've ever heard for using metric are that (a) it's easy to learn the conversions, and (b) everyone else uses it for all science and egineering.
(b) is the reason that NASA should just use metric... And anyone else in the world doing any kind of science or engineering.But for everyday life, imperial or American units turn out to have a lot of utility that most people aren't aware of, because most of us of the younger generation have just relied on calculators doing decimal calculations for us most of the time.
If instead you picture fractions in your head, imerial or American units are quite handy.
They also often match real world objects a bit closer.
If you're dividing meters into centimeters, you can really only talk about tenths, hundreds, etc.
If you're dividing yards into feet and inches, or pounds into ounces, etc.
you have thirds, 16ths, 12ths, and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.
Find a carpenter who is good at this to see what I mean.
Same with volume and weight; if you do a lot of cooking and modifying quantities in recipes you can get good at those conversions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452835</id>
	<title>metric is too hard</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245860160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Obviously, the metric system is too difficult for Americans. I can't count the times I've seen people struggle with the concepts of multiplying and dividing by *gasp* <b>TEN</b>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Obviously , the metric system is too difficult for Americans .
I ca n't count the times I 've seen people struggle with the concepts of multiplying and dividing by * gasp * TEN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obviously, the metric system is too difficult for Americans.
I can't count the times I've seen people struggle with the concepts of multiplying and dividing by *gasp* TEN.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913</id>
	<title>Do we really need metric?</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1245860520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Metric's good for making some calculations by hand, but, any more, the alignment of metric units, like all relations around water to its mass and volume, all don't really hold that accurately any more, and you still need goofy constants.  It's like, everything is "kinda based around 10", rather than, is based on ten.</p><p>As a consumer, I'm not really sure what the advantage to me is having to switch from getting gasoline or water in gallons and quarts, rather than in liters.  Regardless of the unit of measure, the more important number, the $, is going to be the same.</p><p>I think the adoption of metric is ultimately just another statist thing.  If you ask me, every country should have its own unit of measurement.  Modern software can fix it all up.</p><p>I vote to start a country of Todds, where everything is measured in Todds.</p><p>the unit of mass of liquid measure, is a Todd, and that is based on how many sodas I drink in a day. You could say two 64 ouncers, or, 128 ounces.</p><p>the unit of height is a Todd, and that's about 6'1", and that's how tall I am.  If I was a porn star, I would have a unit of length roughly about 1 foot, but, I'm not, so oh well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Metric 's good for making some calculations by hand , but , any more , the alignment of metric units , like all relations around water to its mass and volume , all do n't really hold that accurately any more , and you still need goofy constants .
It 's like , everything is " kinda based around 10 " , rather than , is based on ten.As a consumer , I 'm not really sure what the advantage to me is having to switch from getting gasoline or water in gallons and quarts , rather than in liters .
Regardless of the unit of measure , the more important number , the $ , is going to be the same.I think the adoption of metric is ultimately just another statist thing .
If you ask me , every country should have its own unit of measurement .
Modern software can fix it all up.I vote to start a country of Todds , where everything is measured in Todds.the unit of mass of liquid measure , is a Todd , and that is based on how many sodas I drink in a day .
You could say two 64 ouncers , or , 128 ounces.the unit of height is a Todd , and that 's about 6'1 " , and that 's how tall I am .
If I was a porn star , I would have a unit of length roughly about 1 foot , but , I 'm not , so oh well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Metric's good for making some calculations by hand, but, any more, the alignment of metric units, like all relations around water to its mass and volume, all don't really hold that accurately any more, and you still need goofy constants.
It's like, everything is "kinda based around 10", rather than, is based on ten.As a consumer, I'm not really sure what the advantage to me is having to switch from getting gasoline or water in gallons and quarts, rather than in liters.
Regardless of the unit of measure, the more important number, the $, is going to be the same.I think the adoption of metric is ultimately just another statist thing.
If you ask me, every country should have its own unit of measurement.
Modern software can fix it all up.I vote to start a country of Todds, where everything is measured in Todds.the unit of mass of liquid measure, is a Todd, and that is based on how many sodas I drink in a day.
You could say two 64 ouncers, or, 128 ounces.the unit of height is a Todd, and that's about 6'1", and that's how tall I am.
If I was a porn star, I would have a unit of length roughly about 1 foot, but, I'm not, so oh well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455809</id>
	<title>Re:I can definitely see their point, because</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245870180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It shouldn't matter to a machinst.  If the machinery they're working with is incapable of being as accurate as one or two decimal places, then maybe there's deeper problems than just what the number is.  It's not like these parts are machined by someone with a metal file and a set of calipers.  You punch a number into a computer, and let the machine do its thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It should n't matter to a machinst .
If the machinery they 're working with is incapable of being as accurate as one or two decimal places , then maybe there 's deeper problems than just what the number is .
It 's not like these parts are machined by someone with a metal file and a set of calipers .
You punch a number into a computer , and let the machine do its thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It shouldn't matter to a machinst.
If the machinery they're working with is incapable of being as accurate as one or two decimal places, then maybe there's deeper problems than just what the number is.
It's not like these parts are machined by someone with a metal file and a set of calipers.
You punch a number into a computer, and let the machine do its thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453319</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>dkf</author>
	<datestamp>1245861960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system, so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience?</p></div><p>Almost everything now metric. Exceptions are for beer and milk (pints, though milk is also sold in metric units; total muddle), spirits (fractions of a gill) and road distances (miles). Next to nobody uses imperial weight measures any more.</p><p>Beer and spirits are imperial because it would take a major piece of legislation to change. (English law is very very strict there, and pints and gills do have precise metric definitions these days...)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system , so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience ? Almost everything now metric .
Exceptions are for beer and milk ( pints , though milk is also sold in metric units ; total muddle ) , spirits ( fractions of a gill ) and road distances ( miles ) .
Next to nobody uses imperial weight measures any more.Beer and spirits are imperial because it would take a major piece of legislation to change .
( English law is very very strict there , and pints and gills do have precise metric definitions these days... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system, so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience?Almost everything now metric.
Exceptions are for beer and milk (pints, though milk is also sold in metric units; total muddle), spirits (fractions of a gill) and road distances (miles).
Next to nobody uses imperial weight measures any more.Beer and spirits are imperial because it would take a major piece of legislation to change.
(English law is very very strict there, and pints and gills do have precise metric definitions these days...)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453943</id>
	<title>Unit nazis == losers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245864180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know how many times I've tried to read a science forum only to have these "should be in metric" unit Nazi losers fill the thing up with pointless posts.  Please, if you have nothing to contribute to a science article...just don't post.  We also don't care about the billionth stupid post of "but but but, the earth is only 6,000 years old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know how many times I 've tried to read a science forum only to have these " should be in metric " unit Nazi losers fill the thing up with pointless posts .
Please , if you have nothing to contribute to a science article...just do n't post .
We also do n't care about the billionth stupid post of " but but but , the earth is only 6,000 years old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know how many times I've tried to read a science forum only to have these "should be in metric" unit Nazi losers fill the thing up with pointless posts.
Please, if you have nothing to contribute to a science article...just don't post.
We also don't care about the billionth stupid post of "but but but, the earth is only 6,000 years old.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454371</id>
	<title>Re:Do we really need metric?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245865440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is everything "kinda based around 10?" Name one [commonly used] SI unit besides temperature that isn't based around 10 precisely. "Goofy constants?" Yeah, it's almost as if our universe is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plank's\_constant" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">based around constants</a> [wikipedia.org] or something! If every country had different measurement systems no international cooperation would be possible on science and engineering terms. What about 25 years ago when computers weren't as common? I guess you're going to go back in time and bring software conversions to the dark ages? Your whole comment exposes your total lack of understanding in this issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is everything " kinda based around 10 ?
" Name one [ commonly used ] SI unit besides temperature that is n't based around 10 precisely .
" Goofy constants ?
" Yeah , it 's almost as if our universe is based around constants [ wikipedia.org ] or something !
If every country had different measurement systems no international cooperation would be possible on science and engineering terms .
What about 25 years ago when computers were n't as common ?
I guess you 're going to go back in time and bring software conversions to the dark ages ?
Your whole comment exposes your total lack of understanding in this issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is everything "kinda based around 10?
" Name one [commonly used] SI unit besides temperature that isn't based around 10 precisely.
"Goofy constants?
" Yeah, it's almost as if our universe is based around constants [wikipedia.org] or something!
If every country had different measurement systems no international cooperation would be possible on science and engineering terms.
What about 25 years ago when computers weren't as common?
I guess you're going to go back in time and bring software conversions to the dark ages?
Your whole comment exposes your total lack of understanding in this issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460297</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>gilgongo</author>
	<datestamp>1245845220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system, so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience?</p></div><p>Nah - <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6988521.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">we got special treatment in the end</a> [bbc.co.uk]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system , so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience ? Nah - we got special treatment in the end [ bbc.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system, so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience?Nah - we got special treatment in the end [bbc.co.uk]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456073</id>
	<title>Imperial System != US Customary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245871200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Imperial System of measurements is not the same as the customary measurements used in the United States. The legal arbiter of measurements in the United States is the National Institute of Standards and Technology. <a href="http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasures/Publications/upload/AppendB-09-HB44-FINAL.pdf" title="nist.gov">Apendixes B [<b>PDF</b>]</a> [nist.gov] <a href="http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasures/Publications/upload/AppendC-09-HB44-FINAL.pdf" title="nist.gov">and C [<b>PDF</b>]</a> [nist.gov] to their Handbook 44 provide a good overview of the structure of the respective standards and their relationship to SI (the science based International System, which was based on the Metric System).</p><p>The word system seems misleading when applied to US customary measures. For example:</p><blockquote><div><p>Appendix B. Section 2.2.5. From 1893 until 1959, the yard was defined as equal exactly to 3600/3937 meter. In 1959, a small change was made in the definition of the yard to resolve discrepancies both in this country and abroad. Since 1959, we define the yard as equal exactly to 0.9144 meter; the new yard is shorter than the old yard by exactly two parts in a million. At the same time, it was decided that any data expressed in feet derived from geodetic surveys within the United States would continue to bear the relationship as defined in 1893 (one foot equals 1200/3937 meter). We call this foot the U. S. Survey Foot, while the foot defined in 1959 is called the International Foot. Measurements expressed in U. S. statute miles, survey feet, rods, chains, links, or the squares thereof, and acres should be converted to the corresponding metric values by using pre-1959 conversion factors if more than five significant figure accuracy is required.</p></div></blockquote><p>Does this make a difference? From one viewpoint, no, when do you ever need to keep something accurate within 2 mm over a mile? From another, yes, repeated iterations of computations based on incorrect conversions can produce just plain gibberish. Another bit of measurement chaos to keep in mind:</p><blockquote><div><p>Appendix B. Section 2.3. British and United States Systems of Measurement.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... In the customary British system, the units of dry measure are the same as those of liquid measure. In the United States these two are not the same; the gallon and its subdivisions are used in the measurement of liquids and the bushel, with its subdivisions, is used in the measurement of certain dry commodities. The U. S. gallon is divided into four liquid quarts and the U. S. bushel into 32 dry quarts. All the units of capacity or volume mentioned thus far are larger in the customary British system than in the U. S. system. But the British fluid ounce is smaller than the U. S. fluid ounce, because the British quart is divided into 40 fluid ounces whereas the U. S. quart is divided into 32 fluid ounces.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>
1 U. S. fluid ounce = 1.041 British fluid ounces<br>
1 British fluid ounce = 0.961 U. S. fluid ounce<br>
1 U. S. gallon = 0.833 British Imperial gallon<br>
1 British Imperial gallon = 1.201 U. S. gallons</p></div></blockquote><p>We also must remember that NASA has proven itself incapable of managing the different systems of measurement before. <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16422070.900-schoolkid-blunder-brought-down-mars-probe.html" title="newscientist.com">Ten years ago NASA crashed a Mars bound probe</a> [newscientist.com] because of botched conversions from customary to SI units. You would think that having paid $125 million for that lesson, they would want to avoid a recurrence. But, I suppose that they are from the government and they do not have to care.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Imperial System of measurements is not the same as the customary measurements used in the United States .
The legal arbiter of measurements in the United States is the National Institute of Standards and Technology .
Apendixes B [ PDF ] [ nist.gov ] and C [ PDF ] [ nist.gov ] to their Handbook 44 provide a good overview of the structure of the respective standards and their relationship to SI ( the science based International System , which was based on the Metric System ) .The word system seems misleading when applied to US customary measures .
For example : Appendix B. Section 2.2.5 .
From 1893 until 1959 , the yard was defined as equal exactly to 3600/3937 meter .
In 1959 , a small change was made in the definition of the yard to resolve discrepancies both in this country and abroad .
Since 1959 , we define the yard as equal exactly to 0.9144 meter ; the new yard is shorter than the old yard by exactly two parts in a million .
At the same time , it was decided that any data expressed in feet derived from geodetic surveys within the United States would continue to bear the relationship as defined in 1893 ( one foot equals 1200/3937 meter ) .
We call this foot the U. S. Survey Foot , while the foot defined in 1959 is called the International Foot .
Measurements expressed in U. S. statute miles , survey feet , rods , chains , links , or the squares thereof , and acres should be converted to the corresponding metric values by using pre-1959 conversion factors if more than five significant figure accuracy is required.Does this make a difference ?
From one viewpoint , no , when do you ever need to keep something accurate within 2 mm over a mile ?
From another , yes , repeated iterations of computations based on incorrect conversions can produce just plain gibberish .
Another bit of measurement chaos to keep in mind : Appendix B. Section 2.3 .
British and United States Systems of Measurement .
... In the customary British system , the units of dry measure are the same as those of liquid measure .
In the United States these two are not the same ; the gallon and its subdivisions are used in the measurement of liquids and the bushel , with its subdivisions , is used in the measurement of certain dry commodities .
The U. S. gallon is divided into four liquid quarts and the U. S. bushel into 32 dry quarts .
All the units of capacity or volume mentioned thus far are larger in the customary British system than in the U. S. system .
But the British fluid ounce is smaller than the U. S. fluid ounce , because the British quart is divided into 40 fluid ounces whereas the U. S. quart is divided into 32 fluid ounces .
.. . 1 U. S. fluid ounce = 1.041 British fluid ounces 1 British fluid ounce = 0.961 U. S. fluid ounce 1 U. S. gallon = 0.833 British Imperial gallon 1 British Imperial gallon = 1.201 U. S. gallonsWe also must remember that NASA has proven itself incapable of managing the different systems of measurement before .
Ten years ago NASA crashed a Mars bound probe [ newscientist.com ] because of botched conversions from customary to SI units .
You would think that having paid $ 125 million for that lesson , they would want to avoid a recurrence .
But , I suppose that they are from the government and they do not have to care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Imperial System of measurements is not the same as the customary measurements used in the United States.
The legal arbiter of measurements in the United States is the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Apendixes B [PDF] [nist.gov] and C [PDF] [nist.gov] to their Handbook 44 provide a good overview of the structure of the respective standards and their relationship to SI (the science based International System, which was based on the Metric System).The word system seems misleading when applied to US customary measures.
For example:Appendix B. Section 2.2.5.
From 1893 until 1959, the yard was defined as equal exactly to 3600/3937 meter.
In 1959, a small change was made in the definition of the yard to resolve discrepancies both in this country and abroad.
Since 1959, we define the yard as equal exactly to 0.9144 meter; the new yard is shorter than the old yard by exactly two parts in a million.
At the same time, it was decided that any data expressed in feet derived from geodetic surveys within the United States would continue to bear the relationship as defined in 1893 (one foot equals 1200/3937 meter).
We call this foot the U. S. Survey Foot, while the foot defined in 1959 is called the International Foot.
Measurements expressed in U. S. statute miles, survey feet, rods, chains, links, or the squares thereof, and acres should be converted to the corresponding metric values by using pre-1959 conversion factors if more than five significant figure accuracy is required.Does this make a difference?
From one viewpoint, no, when do you ever need to keep something accurate within 2 mm over a mile?
From another, yes, repeated iterations of computations based on incorrect conversions can produce just plain gibberish.
Another bit of measurement chaos to keep in mind:Appendix B. Section 2.3.
British and United States Systems of Measurement.
... In the customary British system, the units of dry measure are the same as those of liquid measure.
In the United States these two are not the same; the gallon and its subdivisions are used in the measurement of liquids and the bushel, with its subdivisions, is used in the measurement of certain dry commodities.
The U. S. gallon is divided into four liquid quarts and the U. S. bushel into 32 dry quarts.
All the units of capacity or volume mentioned thus far are larger in the customary British system than in the U. S. system.
But the British fluid ounce is smaller than the U. S. fluid ounce, because the British quart is divided into 40 fluid ounces whereas the U. S. quart is divided into 32 fluid ounces.
...
1 U. S. fluid ounce = 1.041 British fluid ounces
1 British fluid ounce = 0.961 U. S. fluid ounce
1 U. S. gallon = 0.833 British Imperial gallon
1 British Imperial gallon = 1.201 U. S. gallonsWe also must remember that NASA has proven itself incapable of managing the different systems of measurement before.
Ten years ago NASA crashed a Mars bound probe [newscientist.com] because of botched conversions from customary to SI units.
You would think that having paid $125 million for that lesson, they would want to avoid a recurrence.
But, I suppose that they are from the government and they do not have to care.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28458191</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1245836340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought a bit more about your post, and realized that it makes even less sense than I thought initially. And the reason is: even in imperial units, you end up using metric subdivisions. Example: the median distance between the Sun and the Earth is 92.58 MILLION MILES. Note the decimal point. Note the millions. You could also say 92.58 mega miles. So, all those fancy-ass 16ths and 12ths went right out the window. No use for them.</p><p>But, let's look into the sub-inch world, and I don't mean 1/32th of an inch, I mean smaller. What do you guys use? Oh, that's right, you use MILS! Yep, one mil is 1/1000 of an inch. For a nation that hates the metric system, you sure are a bit inconsistent, huh?</p><p>And when it comes to even smaller sizes, not only do you give up on fancy 12ths - you are forced to forgo the beloved inches, feet, yards and miles altogether: the micro, nano and picometers reign supreme and undisputed. (BTW, same goes for volume and mass).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought a bit more about your post , and realized that it makes even less sense than I thought initially .
And the reason is : even in imperial units , you end up using metric subdivisions .
Example : the median distance between the Sun and the Earth is 92.58 MILLION MILES .
Note the decimal point .
Note the millions .
You could also say 92.58 mega miles .
So , all those fancy-ass 16ths and 12ths went right out the window .
No use for them.But , let 's look into the sub-inch world , and I do n't mean 1/32th of an inch , I mean smaller .
What do you guys use ?
Oh , that 's right , you use MILS !
Yep , one mil is 1/1000 of an inch .
For a nation that hates the metric system , you sure are a bit inconsistent , huh ? And when it comes to even smaller sizes , not only do you give up on fancy 12ths - you are forced to forgo the beloved inches , feet , yards and miles altogether : the micro , nano and picometers reign supreme and undisputed .
( BTW , same goes for volume and mass ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought a bit more about your post, and realized that it makes even less sense than I thought initially.
And the reason is: even in imperial units, you end up using metric subdivisions.
Example: the median distance between the Sun and the Earth is 92.58 MILLION MILES.
Note the decimal point.
Note the millions.
You could also say 92.58 mega miles.
So, all those fancy-ass 16ths and 12ths went right out the window.
No use for them.But, let's look into the sub-inch world, and I don't mean 1/32th of an inch, I mean smaller.
What do you guys use?
Oh, that's right, you use MILS!
Yep, one mil is 1/1000 of an inch.
For a nation that hates the metric system, you sure are a bit inconsistent, huh?And when it comes to even smaller sizes, not only do you give up on fancy 12ths - you are forced to forgo the beloved inches, feet, yards and miles altogether: the micro, nano and picometers reign supreme and undisputed.
(BTW, same goes for volume and mass).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456323</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>SlashBugs</author>
	<datestamp>1245872220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes. You can divide a yard (36 inches) by 2, 3, 4, 6, 9 or 12 and get a low integer answer, usually one that's easy to sub-divide. Sure it's hard to divide by ten, but in a mostly base-12 system you shouldn't need to much. On "human" scales that you're likely to use for e.g. a DIY project, it can make the maths much easier to handle.<br> <br>

That's a big part of why our clocks are based around the numbers 12 and 60: A 60 minute hour is easily divided into halves, thirds, quarters, sixths, tenths or twelfths and still give you an integer number.<br> <br>

I'm one of the generation of Brits who were taught exclusively in metric units, and always think in them except for speed when driving (I'm a lab scientist, so I always think about liquid volumes in metric, even in pubs). I barely understand Imperial, especially weights (16 oz/lb, 14lb/stone, 112lb in a cwt, WTF?) and have no clue how many yards are in a mile, but I can see that non-decimal units make certain calculations much easier. Imperial units are a nightmare for science but, for the vast majority of people, that doesn't matter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
You can divide a yard ( 36 inches ) by 2 , 3 , 4 , 6 , 9 or 12 and get a low integer answer , usually one that 's easy to sub-divide .
Sure it 's hard to divide by ten , but in a mostly base-12 system you should n't need to much .
On " human " scales that you 're likely to use for e.g .
a DIY project , it can make the maths much easier to handle .
That 's a big part of why our clocks are based around the numbers 12 and 60 : A 60 minute hour is easily divided into halves , thirds , quarters , sixths , tenths or twelfths and still give you an integer number .
I 'm one of the generation of Brits who were taught exclusively in metric units , and always think in them except for speed when driving ( I 'm a lab scientist , so I always think about liquid volumes in metric , even in pubs ) .
I barely understand Imperial , especially weights ( 16 oz/lb , 14lb/stone , 112lb in a cwt , WTF ?
) and have no clue how many yards are in a mile , but I can see that non-decimal units make certain calculations much easier .
Imperial units are a nightmare for science but , for the vast majority of people , that does n't matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
You can divide a yard (36 inches) by 2, 3, 4, 6, 9 or 12 and get a low integer answer, usually one that's easy to sub-divide.
Sure it's hard to divide by ten, but in a mostly base-12 system you shouldn't need to much.
On "human" scales that you're likely to use for e.g.
a DIY project, it can make the maths much easier to handle.
That's a big part of why our clocks are based around the numbers 12 and 60: A 60 minute hour is easily divided into halves, thirds, quarters, sixths, tenths or twelfths and still give you an integer number.
I'm one of the generation of Brits who were taught exclusively in metric units, and always think in them except for speed when driving (I'm a lab scientist, so I always think about liquid volumes in metric, even in pubs).
I barely understand Imperial, especially weights (16 oz/lb, 14lb/stone, 112lb in a cwt, WTF?
) and have no clue how many yards are in a mile, but I can see that non-decimal units make certain calculations much easier.
Imperial units are a nightmare for science but, for the vast majority of people, that doesn't matter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453983</id>
	<title>So if conversions are so easy, answer this</title>
	<author>DevConcepts</author>
	<datestamp>1245864240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>1 kilonewton = 224.8089431 pound force, <br>
and 224.8089431 pound force = 1000 newtons,<br>
and 1 newton = 3.5969 ounce force,<br>
How many figs are in a newton?</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 kilonewton = 224.8089431 pound force , and 224.8089431 pound force = 1000 newtons , and 1 newton = 3.5969 ounce force , How many figs are in a newton ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 kilonewton = 224.8089431 pound force, 
and 224.8089431 pound force = 1000 newtons,
and 1 newton = 3.5969 ounce force,
How many figs are in a newton?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454603</id>
	<title>Estimated future savings?</title>
	<author>acooks</author>
	<datestamp>1245866280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Converting to SI would require a deep review of all the designs. We know how much that would cost, but have they estimated the potential future savings when considering the discovery previously unknown flaws and optimisations?</p><p>If these specs are really 30 years old as the article suggests, I'd say a deep review is long overdue, since the people who wrote it most likely aren't around anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Converting to SI would require a deep review of all the designs .
We know how much that would cost , but have they estimated the potential future savings when considering the discovery previously unknown flaws and optimisations ? If these specs are really 30 years old as the article suggests , I 'd say a deep review is long overdue , since the people who wrote it most likely are n't around anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Converting to SI would require a deep review of all the designs.
We know how much that would cost, but have they estimated the potential future savings when considering the discovery previously unknown flaws and optimisations?If these specs are really 30 years old as the article suggests, I'd say a deep review is long overdue, since the people who wrote it most likely aren't around anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453821</id>
	<title>Flame Troll Or Just Damn Funny?</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1245863700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I blame Bush for forcing NASA to use Imperial Units, Clinton for under funding NASA, Carter for drafting the requirement, and Cheney for inventing it!</p><p>If only Obama had invented metric earlier then Cheney could this all have been averted!</p><p>DAMN YOU REGAN FOR INVENTING SPACE FLIGHT!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I blame Bush for forcing NASA to use Imperial Units , Clinton for under funding NASA , Carter for drafting the requirement , and Cheney for inventing it ! If only Obama had invented metric earlier then Cheney could this all have been averted ! DAMN YOU REGAN FOR INVENTING SPACE FLIGHT ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I blame Bush for forcing NASA to use Imperial Units, Clinton for under funding NASA, Carter for drafting the requirement, and Cheney for inventing it!If only Obama had invented metric earlier then Cheney could this all have been averted!DAMN YOU REGAN FOR INVENTING SPACE FLIGHT!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453661</id>
	<title>Re:Do we really need metric?</title>
	<author>loufoque</author>
	<datestamp>1245863100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Metric's good for making some calculations by hand, but, any more, the alignment of metric units, like all relations around water to its mass and volume, all don't really hold that accurately any more, and you still need goofy constants.</p></div></blockquote><p>How could you link mass and volume without a mass-per-volume material-specific constant that also depends on atmospheric pressure and temperature?<br>Magic?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Metric 's good for making some calculations by hand , but , any more , the alignment of metric units , like all relations around water to its mass and volume , all do n't really hold that accurately any more , and you still need goofy constants.How could you link mass and volume without a mass-per-volume material-specific constant that also depends on atmospheric pressure and temperature ? Magic ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Metric's good for making some calculations by hand, but, any more, the alignment of metric units, like all relations around water to its mass and volume, all don't really hold that accurately any more, and you still need goofy constants.How could you link mass and volume without a mass-per-volume material-specific constant that also depends on atmospheric pressure and temperature?Magic?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453847</id>
	<title>Imperial Units or U.S. Customary Units?</title>
	<author>Me! Me! 42</author>
	<datestamp>1245863820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I seriously doubt that NASA is using Imperial Gallons for capacity in place of U.S. Gallons. (Capacity, I believe, is the main area where the two systems diverge.)<br>
That said, they should be using SI.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I seriously doubt that NASA is using Imperial Gallons for capacity in place of U.S. Gallons. ( Capacity , I believe , is the main area where the two systems diverge .
) That said , they should be using SI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seriously doubt that NASA is using Imperial Gallons for capacity in place of U.S. Gallons. (Capacity, I believe, is the main area where the two systems diverge.
)
That said, they should be using SI.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454123</id>
	<title>It's sad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245864720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's sad that half the price of a single shuttle launch is significant when compared with the budget for the DESIGN of the shuttle's replacement. To think that the reusable shuttle was originally chosen as a cheaper means of reaching space than disposable rockets.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's sad that half the price of a single shuttle launch is significant when compared with the budget for the DESIGN of the shuttle 's replacement .
To think that the reusable shuttle was originally chosen as a cheaper means of reaching space than disposable rockets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's sad that half the price of a single shuttle launch is significant when compared with the budget for the DESIGN of the shuttle's replacement.
To think that the reusable shuttle was originally chosen as a cheaper means of reaching space than disposable rockets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453699</id>
	<title>Homage to Star Wars</title>
	<author>ewg</author>
	<datestamp>1245863280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Imperial" "shuttle" sounds like an homage to George Lucas to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Imperial " " shuttle " sounds like an homage to George Lucas to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Imperial" "shuttle" sounds like an homage to George Lucas to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455935</id>
	<title>Tough noogies</title>
	<author>(arg!)Styopa</author>
	<datestamp>1245870540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The US uses Imperial Measurements for just about everything.</p><p>This makes the rest of the world cry. (Shrug)</p><p>If you want to ride on our rocket, cope.<br>If you really insist on the metric system, then hey, build your own space program.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US uses Imperial Measurements for just about everything.This makes the rest of the world cry .
( Shrug ) If you want to ride on our rocket , cope.If you really insist on the metric system , then hey , build your own space program .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US uses Imperial Measurements for just about everything.This makes the rest of the world cry.
(Shrug)If you want to ride on our rocket, cope.If you really insist on the metric system, then hey, build your own space program.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452601</id>
	<title>Oh the Humanity!</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1245859260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>

How many <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundredweight" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">cwts</a> [wikipedia.org] of <a href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=99/09/30/1437217" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Mars Orbiters</a> [slashdot.org] must be lost before we learn?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many cwts [ wikipedia.org ] of Mars Orbiters [ slashdot.org ] must be lost before we learn ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

How many cwts [wikipedia.org] of Mars Orbiters [slashdot.org] must be lost before we learn?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455615</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>nametaken</author>
	<datestamp>1245869640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pushing 30, lived in the US my whole life, and we never used anything but metric in school.  The problem was everything in school was metric but when we left for the day everything was imperial.</p><p>At least you can't blame our educational system for this one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pushing 30 , lived in the US my whole life , and we never used anything but metric in school .
The problem was everything in school was metric but when we left for the day everything was imperial.At least you ca n't blame our educational system for this one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pushing 30, lived in the US my whole life, and we never used anything but metric in school.
The problem was everything in school was metric but when we left for the day everything was imperial.At least you can't blame our educational system for this one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455143</id>
	<title>Re:Not ****IMPERIAL**** NOT!!!</title>
	<author>OneSmartFellow</author>
	<datestamp>1245868200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><em>"English units"</em> <br> <br>Or you could refer to the US system by it's correct name, Avoirdupois</htmltext>
<tokenext>" English units " Or you could refer to the US system by it 's correct name , Avoirdupois</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"English units"  Or you could refer to the US system by it's correct name, Avoirdupois</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454561</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455559</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>AmiMoJo</author>
	<datestamp>1245869460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My mother remembers how back in the early 70s when we changed to decimalised money (before there was 240 pennies in a &pound;, and lots of other apparently random and certainly stupid coins in between), there were interviews with old people on the TV who were refusing to change and wanted to stay with the old system. Quite how they expected to pay for anything I don't know, and I bet calculating their mortgage repayments was fun.</p><p>Flash forward to today and we are still stuck half way. Short distances are usually given in meters on signs (especially pedestrian ones), but most road signs still use miles. My sat nav is at least clever enough to give me distances in metric but speed limits around speed cameras in imperial.</p><p>By law everything must be sold in metric units, but can optionally include imperial measures too (and they usually do). At least they have largely stopped giving temperatures in Fahrenheit on the TV weather reports, but on the longer ones they still creep in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My mother remembers how back in the early 70s when we changed to decimalised money ( before there was 240 pennies in a   , and lots of other apparently random and certainly stupid coins in between ) , there were interviews with old people on the TV who were refusing to change and wanted to stay with the old system .
Quite how they expected to pay for anything I do n't know , and I bet calculating their mortgage repayments was fun.Flash forward to today and we are still stuck half way .
Short distances are usually given in meters on signs ( especially pedestrian ones ) , but most road signs still use miles .
My sat nav is at least clever enough to give me distances in metric but speed limits around speed cameras in imperial.By law everything must be sold in metric units , but can optionally include imperial measures too ( and they usually do ) .
At least they have largely stopped giving temperatures in Fahrenheit on the TV weather reports , but on the longer ones they still creep in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My mother remembers how back in the early 70s when we changed to decimalised money (before there was 240 pennies in a £, and lots of other apparently random and certainly stupid coins in between), there were interviews with old people on the TV who were refusing to change and wanted to stay with the old system.
Quite how they expected to pay for anything I don't know, and I bet calculating their mortgage repayments was fun.Flash forward to today and we are still stuck half way.
Short distances are usually given in meters on signs (especially pedestrian ones), but most road signs still use miles.
My sat nav is at least clever enough to give me distances in metric but speed limits around speed cameras in imperial.By law everything must be sold in metric units, but can optionally include imperial measures too (and they usually do).
At least they have largely stopped giving temperatures in Fahrenheit on the TV weather reports, but on the longer ones they still creep in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457131</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>cockpitcomp</author>
	<datestamp>1245875400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If fractions are so hard, explain the European paper sizes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If fractions are so hard , explain the European paper sizes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If fractions are so hard, explain the European paper sizes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457337</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1245876180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I gave you a 2x4 and asked you to cut it in half, in thirds or in quarters and didn't provide a ruler, you could do it fairly accurately. Now try to cut it in 10ths just as precisely. Powers of 10 might be nice for mental math, but they aren't intuitive in all cases. You may need little more mental math with the imperial system, but you are less reliant upon measurement devices.<br> <br>
I'm studying mechanical engineering, and as much as I hate working in imperial units when working out calculations, I still find them convenient for everyday use or quick tasks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I gave you a 2x4 and asked you to cut it in half , in thirds or in quarters and did n't provide a ruler , you could do it fairly accurately .
Now try to cut it in 10ths just as precisely .
Powers of 10 might be nice for mental math , but they are n't intuitive in all cases .
You may need little more mental math with the imperial system , but you are less reliant upon measurement devices .
I 'm studying mechanical engineering , and as much as I hate working in imperial units when working out calculations , I still find them convenient for everyday use or quick tasks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I gave you a 2x4 and asked you to cut it in half, in thirds or in quarters and didn't provide a ruler, you could do it fairly accurately.
Now try to cut it in 10ths just as precisely.
Powers of 10 might be nice for mental math, but they aren't intuitive in all cases.
You may need little more mental math with the imperial system, but you are less reliant upon measurement devices.
I'm studying mechanical engineering, and as much as I hate working in imperial units when working out calculations, I still find them convenient for everyday use or quick tasks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452845</id>
	<title>Conversion Adversion</title>
	<author>BStorm</author>
	<datestamp>1245860220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"the shuttle's 30-year-old specifications, design drawings and software are rooted in pounds and feet rather than newtons and meters.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... NASA recently calculated that converting the relevant drawings, software and documentation to the "International System" of units (SI) would cost a total of $370 million" Nearly half a billion dollars to convert into SI units (I've added the required cost overruns)?! Wouldn't all the relevant drawings, software and documentation have to be converted into machine readable formats that are more appropiate for use with today's sofware and document management systems? Is the estimated cost for the SI conversion, or more likely as I suspect the cost of bringing the design information into more appropiate formats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" the shuttle 's 30-year-old specifications , design drawings and software are rooted in pounds and feet rather than newtons and meters .
... NASA recently calculated that converting the relevant drawings , software and documentation to the " International System " of units ( SI ) would cost a total of $ 370 million " Nearly half a billion dollars to convert into SI units ( I 've added the required cost overruns ) ? !
Would n't all the relevant drawings , software and documentation have to be converted into machine readable formats that are more appropiate for use with today 's sofware and document management systems ?
Is the estimated cost for the SI conversion , or more likely as I suspect the cost of bringing the design information into more appropiate formats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"the shuttle's 30-year-old specifications, design drawings and software are rooted in pounds and feet rather than newtons and meters.
... NASA recently calculated that converting the relevant drawings, software and documentation to the "International System" of units (SI) would cost a total of $370 million" Nearly half a billion dollars to convert into SI units (I've added the required cost overruns)?!
Wouldn't all the relevant drawings, software and documentation have to be converted into machine readable formats that are more appropiate for use with today's sofware and document management systems?
Is the estimated cost for the SI conversion, or more likely as I suspect the cost of bringing the design information into more appropiate formats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456245</id>
	<title>Re:Do we really need metric?</title>
	<author>jgostling</author>
	<datestamp>1245871860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...the $, is going to be the same.</p></div><p>I wouldn't bet on that.<br>
<br>
Cheers!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...the $ , is going to be the same.I would n't bet on that .
Cheers !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the $, is going to be the same.I wouldn't bet on that.
Cheers!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453479</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245862500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't they just hire unpaid interns to do this sort of work?  Many college students would love an internship with NASA, even if they were just crunching numbers all day...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't they just hire unpaid interns to do this sort of work ?
Many college students would love an internship with NASA , even if they were just crunching numbers all day.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't they just hire unpaid interns to do this sort of work?
Many college students would love an internship with NASA, even if they were just crunching numbers all day...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452869</id>
	<title>America Fuck yeah</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1245860280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course they have to use the imperial system, in order to differentiate themselves from the rest of the world. Because they certainly aren't managing it by "innovation" nowadays.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course they have to use the imperial system , in order to differentiate themselves from the rest of the world .
Because they certainly are n't managing it by " innovation " nowadays .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course they have to use the imperial system, in order to differentiate themselves from the rest of the world.
Because they certainly aren't managing it by "innovation" nowadays.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457189</id>
	<title>Machinist?</title>
	<author>Kupfernigk</author>
	<datestamp>1245875640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If NASA is still having things made on turret lathes and manual mills by machinists, no wonder everything costs so much. This is \., for Pete's sake. Doesn't anybody know how stuff gets made nowadays? CAD/CAM driven workcenters and CNC lathes is how. They don't care what the dimensions are: a Bridgeport doesn't give any special significance to integer dimensions. Numbers in, cut metal out.<p>Advanced workcenters machining exotic alloys even have force sensors so they can predict when the tools will need changing, and can identify faults such as incorrectly annealed materials. My guess is that in reality this is about not wanting to have to first replace all the drawings, and then recode all the machining tapes. As I note, the machine doesn't care what system of units it is using; they're just numbers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If NASA is still having things made on turret lathes and manual mills by machinists , no wonder everything costs so much .
This is \ . , for Pete 's sake .
Does n't anybody know how stuff gets made nowadays ?
CAD/CAM driven workcenters and CNC lathes is how .
They do n't care what the dimensions are : a Bridgeport does n't give any special significance to integer dimensions .
Numbers in , cut metal out.Advanced workcenters machining exotic alloys even have force sensors so they can predict when the tools will need changing , and can identify faults such as incorrectly annealed materials .
My guess is that in reality this is about not wanting to have to first replace all the drawings , and then recode all the machining tapes .
As I note , the machine does n't care what system of units it is using ; they 're just numbers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If NASA is still having things made on turret lathes and manual mills by machinists, no wonder everything costs so much.
This is \., for Pete's sake.
Doesn't anybody know how stuff gets made nowadays?
CAD/CAM driven workcenters and CNC lathes is how.
They don't care what the dimensions are: a Bridgeport doesn't give any special significance to integer dimensions.
Numbers in, cut metal out.Advanced workcenters machining exotic alloys even have force sensors so they can predict when the tools will need changing, and can identify faults such as incorrectly annealed materials.
My guess is that in reality this is about not wanting to have to first replace all the drawings, and then recode all the machining tapes.
As I note, the machine doesn't care what system of units it is using; they're just numbers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455649</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>QuantumRiff</author>
	<datestamp>1245869760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would be against nasa inventing a new rocket just because they wanted to switch to metric, which would be like what you described.. However, they are already making a new rocket.  In your analogy, that's like saying you have to write a brand new program from scratch in Cobol, because the system it is replacing (and might share some use with during the staged deployment) uses it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would be against nasa inventing a new rocket just because they wanted to switch to metric , which would be like what you described.. However , they are already making a new rocket .
In your analogy , that 's like saying you have to write a brand new program from scratch in Cobol , because the system it is replacing ( and might share some use with during the staged deployment ) uses it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would be against nasa inventing a new rocket just because they wanted to switch to metric, which would be like what you described.. However, they are already making a new rocket.
In your analogy, that's like saying you have to write a brand new program from scratch in Cobol, because the system it is replacing (and might share some use with during the staged deployment) uses it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455395</id>
	<title>English Engineering Units</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1245868980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slugs, poundals, what's the difference ?</p><p>First, I was taught that on this side of the pond they are called English Engineering Units.</p><p>Second, the cost of the Mars orbiter lost due to conversion issues was about that of the estimated conversion cost. This<br>foolishness will go on until another mission is lost, then the money will magically be found. Let's hope no one gets killed this time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slugs , poundals , what 's the difference ? First , I was taught that on this side of the pond they are called English Engineering Units.Second , the cost of the Mars orbiter lost due to conversion issues was about that of the estimated conversion cost .
Thisfoolishness will go on until another mission is lost , then the money will magically be found .
Let 's hope no one gets killed this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slugs, poundals, what's the difference ?First, I was taught that on this side of the pond they are called English Engineering Units.Second, the cost of the Mars orbiter lost due to conversion issues was about that of the estimated conversion cost.
Thisfoolishness will go on until another mission is lost, then the money will magically be found.
Let's hope no one gets killed this time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454109</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245864660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is 1/12 or 1/16 any more useful than 1/10 or 1/100? I don't see the logic here. We use a decimal number system for almost everything, not hexadecimal or duodecimal. A carpenter is probably good at using twelfths because he has always used it. Are you saying no good carpenters exist outside the US? How do Imperial units match real world objects any better than metric units? Your argument is the same as saying that cars should have square tires because "it looks cool." No logic at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is 1/12 or 1/16 any more useful than 1/10 or 1/100 ?
I do n't see the logic here .
We use a decimal number system for almost everything , not hexadecimal or duodecimal .
A carpenter is probably good at using twelfths because he has always used it .
Are you saying no good carpenters exist outside the US ?
How do Imperial units match real world objects any better than metric units ?
Your argument is the same as saying that cars should have square tires because " it looks cool .
" No logic at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is 1/12 or 1/16 any more useful than 1/10 or 1/100?
I don't see the logic here.
We use a decimal number system for almost everything, not hexadecimal or duodecimal.
A carpenter is probably good at using twelfths because he has always used it.
Are you saying no good carpenters exist outside the US?
How do Imperial units match real world objects any better than metric units?
Your argument is the same as saying that cars should have square tires because "it looks cool.
" No logic at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453669</id>
	<title>Re:Do we really need metric?</title>
	<author>Volante3192</author>
	<datestamp>1245863100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And when you get down to needing +/-0.0021mm of tolerance, it really doesn't matter how nice the base units interact because the numbers you actually end up dealing with aren't human friendly in the first place.</p><p>The right machine can cut to within 0.00008268 inches just as easily as 0.0021mm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And when you get down to needing + /-0.0021mm of tolerance , it really does n't matter how nice the base units interact because the numbers you actually end up dealing with are n't human friendly in the first place.The right machine can cut to within 0.00008268 inches just as easily as 0.0021mm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And when you get down to needing +/-0.0021mm of tolerance, it really doesn't matter how nice the base units interact because the numbers you actually end up dealing with aren't human friendly in the first place.The right machine can cut to within 0.00008268 inches just as easily as 0.0021mm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28495731</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246125960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>If you're dividing meters into centimeters, you can really only talk about tenths, hundreds, etc. If you're dividing yards into feet and inches, or pounds into ounces, etc. you have thirds, 16ths, 12ths, and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.</p></div><p>And that would be an advantage for the imperial system? Really? Having to keep in mind always different fractions, instead of just 1000 (as in kilo, mega, giga... and milli, micro, nano, pico...)?</p></div><p>Um, yes, it can be an advantage. Just because you don't have the experience to imagine something does not mean it cannot exist.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're dividing meters into centimeters , you can really only talk about tenths , hundreds , etc .
If you 're dividing yards into feet and inches , or pounds into ounces , etc .
you have thirds , 16ths , 12ths , and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.And that would be an advantage for the imperial system ?
Really ? Having to keep in mind always different fractions , instead of just 1000 ( as in kilo , mega , giga... and milli , micro , nano , pico... ) ? Um , yes , it can be an advantage .
Just because you do n't have the experience to imagine something does not mean it can not exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're dividing meters into centimeters, you can really only talk about tenths, hundreds, etc.
If you're dividing yards into feet and inches, or pounds into ounces, etc.
you have thirds, 16ths, 12ths, and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.And that would be an advantage for the imperial system?
Really? Having to keep in mind always different fractions, instead of just 1000 (as in kilo, mega, giga... and milli, micro, nano, pico...)?Um, yes, it can be an advantage.
Just because you don't have the experience to imagine something does not mean it cannot exist.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454561</id>
	<title>Not ****IMPERIAL**** NOT!!!</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1245866160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Somehow the idea that U.S. units are called "Imperial" units has taken root. That term only applies to a system used in the British Empire/Commonwealth (hence the name) before they went metric. The U.S system is "English units" (because it's based on units that were widely used in England at the time of American independence) or "U.S. Customary Units." The two systems are very close (length and weight are the same) but not identical (volume units are quite different, even thought the names are the same).</p><p>In most other contexts, I'd just say, "OK, sloppy usage eventually becomes the standard, like 'broadband' instead of 'high-bitrate'. Been happening since language was invented, not going to change."</p><p>But in this case you have terms that are defined in <i>standards</i>. And miscommunication can cause much wackiness. For example, suppose I need 10 gallons of something. The nearest store is just across the border in Canada, and they're metric, so I use Google to <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=10+imperial+gallons+in+liters" title="google.com">convert units</a> [google.com] and come up with 45.5 liters. Nice and simple, right?</p><p>Wrong. I only needed a little less than <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=10+us+gallons+in+liters" title="google.com">38 liters</a> [google.com]. The U.S. gallon is 20\% smaller!</p><p>OK, this particular example is kind of artificial, because most people would just say "gallon" and Google assumes that "gallon" means "U.S. gallon". Still, you need to be careful with this stuff. Like, suppose you're putting <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli\_Glider" title="wikipedia.org">fuel in an airplane</a> [wikipedia.org]!</p><p>Of course, all this extra confusion is yet another reason for the U.S. to go metric. I work for for a computer manufacturer that not only sells widely in metric countries, our actual production is outsourced to companies that are mostly in metric countries. Does this cause headaches? You bet!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Somehow the idea that U.S. units are called " Imperial " units has taken root .
That term only applies to a system used in the British Empire/Commonwealth ( hence the name ) before they went metric .
The U.S system is " English units " ( because it 's based on units that were widely used in England at the time of American independence ) or " U.S. Customary Units .
" The two systems are very close ( length and weight are the same ) but not identical ( volume units are quite different , even thought the names are the same ) .In most other contexts , I 'd just say , " OK , sloppy usage eventually becomes the standard , like 'broadband ' instead of 'high-bitrate' .
Been happening since language was invented , not going to change .
" But in this case you have terms that are defined in standards .
And miscommunication can cause much wackiness .
For example , suppose I need 10 gallons of something .
The nearest store is just across the border in Canada , and they 're metric , so I use Google to convert units [ google.com ] and come up with 45.5 liters .
Nice and simple , right ? Wrong .
I only needed a little less than 38 liters [ google.com ] .
The U.S. gallon is 20 \ % smaller ! OK , this particular example is kind of artificial , because most people would just say " gallon " and Google assumes that " gallon " means " U.S. gallon " . Still , you need to be careful with this stuff .
Like , suppose you 're putting fuel in an airplane [ wikipedia.org ] ! Of course , all this extra confusion is yet another reason for the U.S. to go metric .
I work for for a computer manufacturer that not only sells widely in metric countries , our actual production is outsourced to companies that are mostly in metric countries .
Does this cause headaches ?
You bet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somehow the idea that U.S. units are called "Imperial" units has taken root.
That term only applies to a system used in the British Empire/Commonwealth (hence the name) before they went metric.
The U.S system is "English units" (because it's based on units that were widely used in England at the time of American independence) or "U.S. Customary Units.
" The two systems are very close (length and weight are the same) but not identical (volume units are quite different, even thought the names are the same).In most other contexts, I'd just say, "OK, sloppy usage eventually becomes the standard, like 'broadband' instead of 'high-bitrate'.
Been happening since language was invented, not going to change.
"But in this case you have terms that are defined in standards.
And miscommunication can cause much wackiness.
For example, suppose I need 10 gallons of something.
The nearest store is just across the border in Canada, and they're metric, so I use Google to convert units [google.com] and come up with 45.5 liters.
Nice and simple, right?Wrong.
I only needed a little less than 38 liters [google.com].
The U.S. gallon is 20\% smaller!OK, this particular example is kind of artificial, because most people would just say "gallon" and Google assumes that "gallon" means "U.S. gallon". Still, you need to be careful with this stuff.
Like, suppose you're putting fuel in an airplane [wikipedia.org]!Of course, all this extra confusion is yet another reason for the U.S. to go metric.
I work for for a computer manufacturer that not only sells widely in metric countries, our actual production is outsourced to companies that are mostly in metric countries.
Does this cause headaches?
You bet!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454221</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245865020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they paid their engineers $150,000/year, they could hire almost 2500 engineers for a year-long project.</p></div><p>Or, pay 10 engineers to make sure that the adapter between the (imperial) boosters and (metric) Ares is properly sized and be done with it.  If you're pulling a boat behind a truck, you don't care if the truck engine's bolts are metric and the boat's are imperial because they don't have anything to do with each other.  As long as the hitch pieces are compatible, you're golden.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they paid their engineers $ 150,000/year , they could hire almost 2500 engineers for a year-long project.Or , pay 10 engineers to make sure that the adapter between the ( imperial ) boosters and ( metric ) Ares is properly sized and be done with it .
If you 're pulling a boat behind a truck , you do n't care if the truck engine 's bolts are metric and the boat 's are imperial because they do n't have anything to do with each other .
As long as the hitch pieces are compatible , you 're golden .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they paid their engineers $150,000/year, they could hire almost 2500 engineers for a year-long project.Or, pay 10 engineers to make sure that the adapter between the (imperial) boosters and (metric) Ares is properly sized and be done with it.
If you're pulling a boat behind a truck, you don't care if the truck engine's bolts are metric and the boat's are imperial because they don't have anything to do with each other.
As long as the hitch pieces are compatible, you're golden.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28469799</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>segway fault</author>
	<datestamp>1245958620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe not in imperial, but those integer results deriving from fractions using a 60-base system can come in pretty handy- we use this awkward system not only for degrees (360 in a circle, 180 in most triangles) but also time! all of you forgot about time, didn't ya? And I bet most of you dont have 60 fingers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe not in imperial , but those integer results deriving from fractions using a 60-base system can come in pretty handy- we use this awkward system not only for degrees ( 360 in a circle , 180 in most triangles ) but also time !
all of you forgot about time , did n't ya ?
And I bet most of you dont have 60 fingers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe not in imperial, but those integer results deriving from fractions using a 60-base system can come in pretty handy- we use this awkward system not only for degrees (360 in a circle, 180 in most triangles) but also time!
all of you forgot about time, didn't ya?
And I bet most of you dont have 60 fingers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453975</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1245864240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What the hell are they spending this money on?  It's not like they're building anything new or buying raw materials; they just need someone to re-draw plans with new measurements in a different system.</p></div></blockquote><p>And once the drawings are re-drawn, you have to verify the individual drawings.  Then you have to verify the interfaces to make sure that vendor 'A' didn't round his tolerances in a direction that means his part will no longer properly mate with a part from vendor 'B'.  Then you have to withdraw the old drawings from service and replace them with the new in an orderly fashion.  Somewhere along the way you also have to not only update the references between drawings, but also the hundreds of thousands of pages of documentation, specifications, etc... that reference these drawings.<br>
&nbsp; <br>The individual steps are bone simple - but there are a <i>lot</i> of individual steps and they interact in various complicated ways.<br>
&nbsp; <br>An additional problem is that all this has to be done while those drawings, specifications, etc... etc... are in daily use at facilities scattered across the country, which means you have a fairly difficult problem not only in making these changes - but in ensuring everybody is 'on the same page'...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What the hell are they spending this money on ?
It 's not like they 're building anything new or buying raw materials ; they just need someone to re-draw plans with new measurements in a different system.And once the drawings are re-drawn , you have to verify the individual drawings .
Then you have to verify the interfaces to make sure that vendor 'A ' did n't round his tolerances in a direction that means his part will no longer properly mate with a part from vendor 'B' .
Then you have to withdraw the old drawings from service and replace them with the new in an orderly fashion .
Somewhere along the way you also have to not only update the references between drawings , but also the hundreds of thousands of pages of documentation , specifications , etc... that reference these drawings .
  The individual steps are bone simple - but there are a lot of individual steps and they interact in various complicated ways .
  An additional problem is that all this has to be done while those drawings , specifications , etc... etc... are in daily use at facilities scattered across the country , which means you have a fairly difficult problem not only in making these changes - but in ensuring everybody is 'on the same page'.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the hell are they spending this money on?
It's not like they're building anything new or buying raw materials; they just need someone to re-draw plans with new measurements in a different system.And once the drawings are re-drawn, you have to verify the individual drawings.
Then you have to verify the interfaces to make sure that vendor 'A' didn't round his tolerances in a direction that means his part will no longer properly mate with a part from vendor 'B'.
Then you have to withdraw the old drawings from service and replace them with the new in an orderly fashion.
Somewhere along the way you also have to not only update the references between drawings, but also the hundreds of thousands of pages of documentation, specifications, etc... that reference these drawings.
  The individual steps are bone simple - but there are a lot of individual steps and they interact in various complicated ways.
  An additional problem is that all this has to be done while those drawings, specifications, etc... etc... are in daily use at facilities scattered across the country, which means you have a fairly difficult problem not only in making these changes - but in ensuring everybody is 'on the same page'...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453223</id>
	<title>I'll do it!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245861600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll do the job for only $170 Million, and I'll get it done on time and within budget, something that NASA is not used to.<br> <br>

For an extra $30 Million, I'll even make sure it's accurate!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll do the job for only $ 170 Million , and I 'll get it done on time and within budget , something that NASA is not used to .
For an extra $ 30 Million , I 'll even make sure it 's accurate !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll do the job for only $170 Million, and I'll get it done on time and within budget, something that NASA is not used to.
For an extra $30 Million, I'll even make sure it's accurate!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467469</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>prefec2</author>
	<datestamp>1245949980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And we need some genetics work, so we have 12 fingers in future.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And we need some genetics work , so we have 12 fingers in future .
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And we need some genetics work, so we have 12 fingers in future.
;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453045</id>
	<title>Space programs rarely have the choice</title>
	<author>Audiophyle</author>
	<datestamp>1245860940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most systems engineers in the space industry know that it's difficult to completely use metric for space missions.  There are usually many components and subsystems that are designed by different vendors that have their own paradigms set up.  These paradigms are usually kept do a legacy of proven use, and engineers will agree with me that if a product works well on-orbit, why on earth would you want to change a product simply due to unit conversions.  You simply take note of the units and move on.  I never thought I'd have to deal with microinches, to be honest, but it's no big deal since everyone knows 1 uin = 0.0254 microns.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most systems engineers in the space industry know that it 's difficult to completely use metric for space missions .
There are usually many components and subsystems that are designed by different vendors that have their own paradigms set up .
These paradigms are usually kept do a legacy of proven use , and engineers will agree with me that if a product works well on-orbit , why on earth would you want to change a product simply due to unit conversions .
You simply take note of the units and move on .
I never thought I 'd have to deal with microinches , to be honest , but it 's no big deal since everyone knows 1 uin = 0.0254 microns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most systems engineers in the space industry know that it's difficult to completely use metric for space missions.
There are usually many components and subsystems that are designed by different vendors that have their own paradigms set up.
These paradigms are usually kept do a legacy of proven use, and engineers will agree with me that if a product works well on-orbit, why on earth would you want to change a product simply due to unit conversions.
You simply take note of the units and move on.
I never thought I'd have to deal with microinches, to be honest, but it's no big deal since everyone knows 1 uin = 0.0254 microns.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28461037</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245849480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I grew up in the UK and at school (back in the 80's/ 90's) we were taught only in metric (S.I.) measurements - we never covered old Imperial measurements at all. However in day to day life people still used old imperial for some things (e.g. miles per hour for speed limits, stones for people's weight, feet and inches for height) and I always struggled a bit with this, having never actually been formally taught to use them. I now live in New Zealand which is fully metric (as is every other country I have travelled to apart from the U.S.A.) and it's certainly much better from my point of view.</p><p>As the guy above from Holland points out, people will complain about having to change to a new system, but actually they adapt to it pretty quickly. My parents remember the U.K. switching from the old imperial currency (pounds, sixpence and shillings) to decimal currency (pounds and pence) back in 1969 - people thought it would all end in chaos then, but these days decimal currency is taken for granted and the country is probably better off for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I grew up in the UK and at school ( back in the 80 's/ 90 's ) we were taught only in metric ( S.I .
) measurements - we never covered old Imperial measurements at all .
However in day to day life people still used old imperial for some things ( e.g .
miles per hour for speed limits , stones for people 's weight , feet and inches for height ) and I always struggled a bit with this , having never actually been formally taught to use them .
I now live in New Zealand which is fully metric ( as is every other country I have travelled to apart from the U.S.A. ) and it 's certainly much better from my point of view.As the guy above from Holland points out , people will complain about having to change to a new system , but actually they adapt to it pretty quickly .
My parents remember the U.K. switching from the old imperial currency ( pounds , sixpence and shillings ) to decimal currency ( pounds and pence ) back in 1969 - people thought it would all end in chaos then , but these days decimal currency is taken for granted and the country is probably better off for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I grew up in the UK and at school (back in the 80's/ 90's) we were taught only in metric (S.I.
) measurements - we never covered old Imperial measurements at all.
However in day to day life people still used old imperial for some things (e.g.
miles per hour for speed limits, stones for people's weight, feet and inches for height) and I always struggled a bit with this, having never actually been formally taught to use them.
I now live in New Zealand which is fully metric (as is every other country I have travelled to apart from the U.S.A.) and it's certainly much better from my point of view.As the guy above from Holland points out, people will complain about having to change to a new system, but actually they adapt to it pretty quickly.
My parents remember the U.K. switching from the old imperial currency (pounds, sixpence and shillings) to decimal currency (pounds and pence) back in 1969 - people thought it would all end in chaos then, but these days decimal currency is taken for granted and the country is probably better off for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462539</id>
	<title>Re:I can definitely see their point, because</title>
	<author>tkw954</author>
	<datestamp>1245861360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Let's assume that on one piece they currently have a dimension of 12 inches +/- 0.01 inches. So they convert this dimension to metric giving a new value of 30.48 cm +/- 0.025 cm. Excuse me?!?!? That's a rather odd and strange dimensional target to hand off to the machinest.</p></div></blockquote><p>
If your machinist/QA people can't understand 30.48 cm +/- 0.025 cm, you probably aren't a supplier to NASA.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's assume that on one piece they currently have a dimension of 12 inches + /- 0.01 inches .
So they convert this dimension to metric giving a new value of 30.48 cm + /- 0.025 cm .
Excuse me ? ! ? ! ?
That 's a rather odd and strange dimensional target to hand off to the machinest .
If your machinist/QA people ca n't understand 30.48 cm + /- 0.025 cm , you probably are n't a supplier to NASA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's assume that on one piece they currently have a dimension of 12 inches +/- 0.01 inches.
So they convert this dimension to metric giving a new value of 30.48 cm +/- 0.025 cm.
Excuse me?!?!?
That's a rather odd and strange dimensional target to hand off to the machinest.
If your machinist/QA people can't understand 30.48 cm +/- 0.025 cm, you probably aren't a supplier to NASA.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452899</id>
	<title>Sir Winston Churchill</title>
	<author>IdleTime</author>
	<datestamp>1245860400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The old British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill once said: "You can depend on the Americans to do the right thing once all other options have been exhausted!"<br>
No offense, Sir Winston, but after over a decade of living and working in the US, I have to change it to: "You can NOT depend on the Americans to do the right thing once all other options have been exhausted!"<br>
Get on with the program and get rid of the antiquated foot, inches lbs and what not and move into the 21st century!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The old British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill once said : " You can depend on the Americans to do the right thing once all other options have been exhausted !
" No offense , Sir Winston , but after over a decade of living and working in the US , I have to change it to : " You can NOT depend on the Americans to do the right thing once all other options have been exhausted !
" Get on with the program and get rid of the antiquated foot , inches lbs and what not and move into the 21st century !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The old British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill once said: "You can depend on the Americans to do the right thing once all other options have been exhausted!
"
No offense, Sir Winston, but after over a decade of living and working in the US, I have to change it to: "You can NOT depend on the Americans to do the right thing once all other options have been exhausted!
"
Get on with the program and get rid of the antiquated foot, inches lbs and what not and move into the 21st century!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28464657</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245932100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Anyone over 40ish only understands Fahrenheit, everyone below uses degrees centigrade.</i></p><p>Excuse me, but I'm 45 and my Wife is 55 and we both use Celcius (not Centigrade) quite happily all the time (and can also cope with F if necessary). My parents (76 and 83) are happier with F but can get along OK with C.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone over 40ish only understands Fahrenheit , everyone below uses degrees centigrade.Excuse me , but I 'm 45 and my Wife is 55 and we both use Celcius ( not Centigrade ) quite happily all the time ( and can also cope with F if necessary ) .
My parents ( 76 and 83 ) are happier with F but can get along OK with C .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone over 40ish only understands Fahrenheit, everyone below uses degrees centigrade.Excuse me, but I'm 45 and my Wife is 55 and we both use Celcius (not Centigrade) quite happily all the time (and can also cope with F if necessary).
My parents (76 and 83) are happier with F but can get along OK with C.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452887</id>
	<title>Time to Clean House</title>
	<author>ks*nut</author>
	<datestamp>1245860340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>NASA is trying desperately to hang on to its past glory and the accomplishments of the past 50 years. But it is time to move on and embrace the challenges of the future. It is time to dump the pipe dream of returning to the Moon and using it as a base from which to travel to Mars. At the same time we need to assess what it is exactly that we want to accomplish with continued funding and support of ISS.

And the whole country, not just NASA, should be embracing the SI system as a step to take into the future. But NASA should be leading the way, not looking for excuses to continue using the Imperial System. When will they ever learn?</htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA is trying desperately to hang on to its past glory and the accomplishments of the past 50 years .
But it is time to move on and embrace the challenges of the future .
It is time to dump the pipe dream of returning to the Moon and using it as a base from which to travel to Mars .
At the same time we need to assess what it is exactly that we want to accomplish with continued funding and support of ISS .
And the whole country , not just NASA , should be embracing the SI system as a step to take into the future .
But NASA should be leading the way , not looking for excuses to continue using the Imperial System .
When will they ever learn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA is trying desperately to hang on to its past glory and the accomplishments of the past 50 years.
But it is time to move on and embrace the challenges of the future.
It is time to dump the pipe dream of returning to the Moon and using it as a base from which to travel to Mars.
At the same time we need to assess what it is exactly that we want to accomplish with continued funding and support of ISS.
And the whole country, not just NASA, should be embracing the SI system as a step to take into the future.
But NASA should be leading the way, not looking for excuses to continue using the Imperial System.
When will they ever learn?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456511</id>
	<title>Re:I can definitely see their point, because</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1245872940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nobody uses centimetres.  Things in metric are generally stepped in powers of 1000: millimetres to metres to kilometres.  Your part should be 304.8mm +/- 0.25mm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody uses centimetres .
Things in metric are generally stepped in powers of 1000 : millimetres to metres to kilometres .
Your part should be 304.8mm + /- 0.25mm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody uses centimetres.
Things in metric are generally stepped in powers of 1000: millimetres to metres to kilometres.
Your part should be 304.8mm +/- 0.25mm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455757</id>
	<title>Tooling and gaging</title>
	<author>ComputerInsultant</author>
	<datestamp>1245870000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Finally some sanity. There are places in the tooling and gaging where the tolerances are tight and a change over to metric requires a complete re-engineering of the tolerance stackup. <br> <br>
Even still, there is no reason why the project should be driven by US customary units for every thing.  <br> <br>
Re-state the external interfaces in Metric.<br>
Build everything that is new in Metric.<br>
Retain US customary units in unchanged assemblies.
  <br> <br>
DO THE PROGRAM LEVEL WORK IN METRIC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally some sanity .
There are places in the tooling and gaging where the tolerances are tight and a change over to metric requires a complete re-engineering of the tolerance stackup .
Even still , there is no reason why the project should be driven by US customary units for every thing .
Re-state the external interfaces in Metric .
Build everything that is new in Metric .
Retain US customary units in unchanged assemblies .
DO THE PROGRAM LEVEL WORK IN METRIC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally some sanity.
There are places in the tooling and gaging where the tolerances are tight and a change over to metric requires a complete re-engineering of the tolerance stackup.
Even still, there is no reason why the project should be driven by US customary units for every thing.
Re-state the external interfaces in Metric.
Build everything that is new in Metric.
Retain US customary units in unchanged assemblies.
DO THE PROGRAM LEVEL WORK IN METRIC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453413</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>blackcoot</author>
	<datestamp>1245862260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's not actually $370mil that gets spent on labor.</p><p>step 1: pull out overhead and profit. i'll be generous and estimate at 150\% (this is probably *way* low). now you're down to 987 engineers for a year @ 150k per engineer per year<br>step 2: pull out irrelevant direct charges (project management, accounting, etc.). assuming this explains 10\% of billing (again, quite generous), you're now left with 888 engineers.<br>etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's not actually $ 370mil that gets spent on labor.step 1 : pull out overhead and profit .
i 'll be generous and estimate at 150 \ % ( this is probably * way * low ) .
now you 're down to 987 engineers for a year @ 150k per engineer per yearstep 2 : pull out irrelevant direct charges ( project management , accounting , etc. ) .
assuming this explains 10 \ % of billing ( again , quite generous ) , you 're now left with 888 engineers.etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's not actually $370mil that gets spent on labor.step 1: pull out overhead and profit.
i'll be generous and estimate at 150\% (this is probably *way* low).
now you're down to 987 engineers for a year @ 150k per engineer per yearstep 2: pull out irrelevant direct charges (project management, accounting, etc.).
assuming this explains 10\% of billing (again, quite generous), you're now left with 888 engineers.etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455529</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245869400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm from Canada and I have a similar issue. I think distance in km, height in feet, speed in km/h and volume in litres. Depth also in feet. However, the key is, i can convert back and forth to other messurments in my head.  So if I know my car uses 40km/L of fuel, I can convert to miles/gallon.</p><p>It seems everyone should learn both and use SI in official documents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm from Canada and I have a similar issue .
I think distance in km , height in feet , speed in km/h and volume in litres .
Depth also in feet .
However , the key is , i can convert back and forth to other messurments in my head .
So if I know my car uses 40km/L of fuel , I can convert to miles/gallon.It seems everyone should learn both and use SI in official documents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm from Canada and I have a similar issue.
I think distance in km, height in feet, speed in km/h and volume in litres.
Depth also in feet.
However, the key is, i can convert back and forth to other messurments in my head.
So if I know my car uses 40km/L of fuel, I can convert to miles/gallon.It seems everyone should learn both and use SI in official documents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456193</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245871620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the point being made, and it is a valid one, is that in everyday life we don't often simply increase or decrease things by an order of magnitude.  When I make chili, for example, I know that I prefer a tablespoon of hot sauce, but my wife likes the recipe much better when I only add a teaspoon.  Very often in every day life we use fractions that are not 1/10, and the Imperial system does, I submit, provide names to the common fractionals that we most often use.  So a teaspoon is a third of a tablespoon, 4 tablespoons make a quarter cup, a cup is a half pint, a pint is half a quart, a quart is a quarter gallon, and a gallon is about the limit you really want to carry around in a single container.  These units, I submit, are much more useful as common units than 1L, 0.5L, 0.25L etc.  In fact, as many will no doubt point out, they are so useful that there are metric equivalents: 5ml as a metric teaspoon, 15ml as a metric tablespoon, 250ml as a metric cup.  But even this leads to weird results, with there being 16.67 tablespoons in a cup.</p><p>And, for what its worth, the Celsius scale, while great for scientific endeavor, sucks for talking about the weather.  Transitional states of water aren't really significant elements of my life, the Fahrenheit scale which is gauged (slightly inaccurately) to biological processes makes for a much more reasonable answer to the question of "how does it feel out side"; we can answer on a scale from 0-100, while Celsius requires a range of -20 to 35.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the point being made , and it is a valid one , is that in everyday life we do n't often simply increase or decrease things by an order of magnitude .
When I make chili , for example , I know that I prefer a tablespoon of hot sauce , but my wife likes the recipe much better when I only add a teaspoon .
Very often in every day life we use fractions that are not 1/10 , and the Imperial system does , I submit , provide names to the common fractionals that we most often use .
So a teaspoon is a third of a tablespoon , 4 tablespoons make a quarter cup , a cup is a half pint , a pint is half a quart , a quart is a quarter gallon , and a gallon is about the limit you really want to carry around in a single container .
These units , I submit , are much more useful as common units than 1L , 0.5L , 0.25L etc .
In fact , as many will no doubt point out , they are so useful that there are metric equivalents : 5ml as a metric teaspoon , 15ml as a metric tablespoon , 250ml as a metric cup .
But even this leads to weird results , with there being 16.67 tablespoons in a cup.And , for what its worth , the Celsius scale , while great for scientific endeavor , sucks for talking about the weather .
Transitional states of water are n't really significant elements of my life , the Fahrenheit scale which is gauged ( slightly inaccurately ) to biological processes makes for a much more reasonable answer to the question of " how does it feel out side " ; we can answer on a scale from 0-100 , while Celsius requires a range of -20 to 35 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the point being made, and it is a valid one, is that in everyday life we don't often simply increase or decrease things by an order of magnitude.
When I make chili, for example, I know that I prefer a tablespoon of hot sauce, but my wife likes the recipe much better when I only add a teaspoon.
Very often in every day life we use fractions that are not 1/10, and the Imperial system does, I submit, provide names to the common fractionals that we most often use.
So a teaspoon is a third of a tablespoon, 4 tablespoons make a quarter cup, a cup is a half pint, a pint is half a quart, a quart is a quarter gallon, and a gallon is about the limit you really want to carry around in a single container.
These units, I submit, are much more useful as common units than 1L, 0.5L, 0.25L etc.
In fact, as many will no doubt point out, they are so useful that there are metric equivalents: 5ml as a metric teaspoon, 15ml as a metric tablespoon, 250ml as a metric cup.
But even this leads to weird results, with there being 16.67 tablespoons in a cup.And, for what its worth, the Celsius scale, while great for scientific endeavor, sucks for talking about the weather.
Transitional states of water aren't really significant elements of my life, the Fahrenheit scale which is gauged (slightly inaccurately) to biological processes makes for a much more reasonable answer to the question of "how does it feel out side"; we can answer on a scale from 0-100, while Celsius requires a range of -20 to 35.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456399</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>squizzar</author>
	<datestamp>1245872520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot elephants.  Elephants come in pints.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot elephants .
Elephants come in pints .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot elephants.
Elephants come in pints.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453915</id>
	<title>Post the drawings and reduce costs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245864060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Post the drawings online, and let the community work at it.  Use the reCaptcha approach to prevent people messing things up.  I can see every high school and intro college physics class being given the assignment of converting one shuttle drawing from imperial to metric units.  Great context to use the probe fiasco as an example of why units are important.</p><p>Government money is paying for all this stuff anyway - let the public have the (non-security sensitive) drawings and we can start to do the metric conversion for them.  They'll only have to validate that the results make sense (which should be done for ANY conversion, by anybody - pro or not; in fact, the original drawings need that sort of validation too for this sort of project) and do the ITAR restricted/security sensitive stuff themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Post the drawings online , and let the community work at it .
Use the reCaptcha approach to prevent people messing things up .
I can see every high school and intro college physics class being given the assignment of converting one shuttle drawing from imperial to metric units .
Great context to use the probe fiasco as an example of why units are important.Government money is paying for all this stuff anyway - let the public have the ( non-security sensitive ) drawings and we can start to do the metric conversion for them .
They 'll only have to validate that the results make sense ( which should be done for ANY conversion , by anybody - pro or not ; in fact , the original drawings need that sort of validation too for this sort of project ) and do the ITAR restricted/security sensitive stuff themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Post the drawings online, and let the community work at it.
Use the reCaptcha approach to prevent people messing things up.
I can see every high school and intro college physics class being given the assignment of converting one shuttle drawing from imperial to metric units.
Great context to use the probe fiasco as an example of why units are important.Government money is paying for all this stuff anyway - let the public have the (non-security sensitive) drawings and we can start to do the metric conversion for them.
They'll only have to validate that the results make sense (which should be done for ANY conversion, by anybody - pro or not; in fact, the original drawings need that sort of validation too for this sort of project) and do the ITAR restricted/security sensitive stuff themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453141</id>
	<title>imperial fighters</title>
	<author>e**(i pi)-1</author>
	<datestamp>1245861300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I seriously expected
<a href="http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/181st\_Imperial\_Fighter\_Wing" title="wikia.com">imperial fighter units</a> [wikia.com]
to be developed by NASA first, when reading the title.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I seriously expected imperial fighter units [ wikia.com ] to be developed by NASA first , when reading the title .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seriously expected
imperial fighter units [wikia.com]
to be developed by NASA first, when reading the title.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453437</id>
	<title>Only NASA or the Navy could spend that much</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245862380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What?? $370 million to convert the drawings? No wonder a door knob or toilet seat costs $1 million. Oh sorry. I guess the toilet seat doesn't really apply to NASA, because of certain other parameters for that item. I'll leave that cost strictly as a Navy expenditure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What ? ?
$ 370 million to convert the drawings ?
No wonder a door knob or toilet seat costs $ 1 million .
Oh sorry .
I guess the toilet seat does n't really apply to NASA , because of certain other parameters for that item .
I 'll leave that cost strictly as a Navy expenditure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What??
$370 million to convert the drawings?
No wonder a door knob or toilet seat costs $1 million.
Oh sorry.
I guess the toilet seat doesn't really apply to NASA, because of certain other parameters for that item.
I'll leave that cost strictly as a Navy expenditure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453165</id>
	<title>Re:Do we really need metric?</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1245861420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Metric's good for making some calculations by hand, but, any more, the alignment of metric units, like all relations around water to its mass and volume, all don't really hold that accurately any more, and you still need goofy constants</p></div><p>To simplify, lets see lenght. Is better to have one constant (meter) from which all the others derive in a very simple relationship (powers of 10), than have a lot of constant (inch, feet, mile, etc) where you need even more constants to see how each one compares with the other</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Metric 's good for making some calculations by hand , but , any more , the alignment of metric units , like all relations around water to its mass and volume , all do n't really hold that accurately any more , and you still need goofy constantsTo simplify , lets see lenght .
Is better to have one constant ( meter ) from which all the others derive in a very simple relationship ( powers of 10 ) , than have a lot of constant ( inch , feet , mile , etc ) where you need even more constants to see how each one compares with the other</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Metric's good for making some calculations by hand, but, any more, the alignment of metric units, like all relations around water to its mass and volume, all don't really hold that accurately any more, and you still need goofy constantsTo simplify, lets see lenght.
Is better to have one constant (meter) from which all the others derive in a very simple relationship (powers of 10), than have a lot of constant (inch, feet, mile, etc) where you need even more constants to see how each one compares with the other
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452639</id>
	<title>really?</title>
	<author>buckadude</author>
	<datestamp>1245859440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure it would cost alot, but really.  WTF 370 million?  wow.  I can only hope that we get away from the Imperial action sometime.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure it would cost alot , but really .
WTF 370 million ?
wow. I can only hope that we get away from the Imperial action sometime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure it would cost alot, but really.
WTF 370 million?
wow.  I can only hope that we get away from the Imperial action sometime.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28464983</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245936720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>in fact draught beer is the only drink still sold in imperial units</i></p><p>No, you've forgotten cider and perry - both available on draught in imperial only!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in fact draught beer is the only drink still sold in imperial unitsNo , you 've forgotten cider and perry - both available on draught in imperial only !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in fact draught beer is the only drink still sold in imperial unitsNo, you've forgotten cider and perry - both available on draught in imperial only!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245859740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't buy it</p><p>I lived in guilders all my life, and the first couple years in Eurotime I could only "imagine" a price by converting back to guilders and thinking whether the price sounded right. Now, I can only "imagine" a guilders price by converting it to euros</p><p>I've lived in the UK and US for 1.5 and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.5 years, respectively, and I started thinking natively in most units pretty quickly, esp. inches and miles, and of course pints in the UK. Some units are more difficult, either because they have an offset as well as a scale difference (fahrenheit) or because they just don't make any sense (a 22 fluid ounces drink?? gimme a pint, damnit!)</p><p>I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system, so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't buy itI lived in guilders all my life , and the first couple years in Eurotime I could only " imagine " a price by converting back to guilders and thinking whether the price sounded right .
Now , I can only " imagine " a guilders price by converting it to eurosI 've lived in the UK and US for 1.5 and .5 years , respectively , and I started thinking natively in most units pretty quickly , esp .
inches and miles , and of course pints in the UK .
Some units are more difficult , either because they have an offset as well as a scale difference ( fahrenheit ) or because they just do n't make any sense ( a 22 fluid ounces drink ? ?
gim me a pint , damnit !
) I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system , so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't buy itI lived in guilders all my life, and the first couple years in Eurotime I could only "imagine" a price by converting back to guilders and thinking whether the price sounded right.
Now, I can only "imagine" a guilders price by converting it to eurosI've lived in the UK and US for 1.5 and .5 years, respectively, and I started thinking natively in most units pretty quickly, esp.
inches and miles, and of course pints in the UK.
Some units are more difficult, either because they have an offset as well as a scale difference (fahrenheit) or because they just don't make any sense (a 22 fluid ounces drink??
gimme a pint, damnit!
)I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system, so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454273</id>
	<title>drug dealers have switched</title>
	<author>hey</author>
	<datestamp>1245865200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>drug dealers generally sell cocaine by the gram and pot by the ounce.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>drug dealers generally sell cocaine by the gram and pot by the ounce .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>drug dealers generally sell cocaine by the gram and pot by the ounce.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28459587</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245841560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I hire you to translate stuff into spanish, you would come up with "Buenos Day Mister!" wouldn't you?</p><p>You very much <b>do</b> magically just convert everything into metrics and that's it.<br>And yes, you have to take care that you do convert <b>everything</b>.</p><p>Now if the plans are flawed, and don't state units, you would have a point.<br>But then the problem is not converting the plans. The problem is that the plans lack units.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I hire you to translate stuff into spanish , you would come up with " Buenos Day Mister !
" would n't you ? You very much do magically just convert everything into metrics and that 's it.And yes , you have to take care that you do convert everything.Now if the plans are flawed , and do n't state units , you would have a point.But then the problem is not converting the plans .
The problem is that the plans lack units .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I hire you to translate stuff into spanish, you would come up with "Buenos Day Mister!
" wouldn't you?You very much do magically just convert everything into metrics and that's it.And yes, you have to take care that you do convert everything.Now if the plans are flawed, and don't state units, you would have a point.But then the problem is not converting the plans.
The problem is that the plans lack units.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460885</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Falconhell</author>
	<datestamp>1245848340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WTF?</p><p>Whats wrong with 1/2 metre, or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.5ft.</p><p>The system has no beraing on whether figures are expressed in decimal or fractions. There is no reason that either method can be used for both systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF ? Whats wrong with 1/2 metre , or .5ft.The system has no beraing on whether figures are expressed in decimal or fractions .
There is no reason that either method can be used for both systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF?Whats wrong with 1/2 metre, or .5ft.The system has no beraing on whether figures are expressed in decimal or fractions.
There is no reason that either method can be used for both systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659</id>
	<title>If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1245859500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, a lot of Europeans probably think that U.S. reluctance to embrace the metric system is just another example of our arrogance. But a lot of Americans (like me) are genuinely interested in adopting this system. We even <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric\_Conversion\_Act" title="wikipedia.org">passed a law</a> [wikipedia.org] in 1975 trying to mandate it.
</p><p>The real problem is that it is surprisingly hard to embrace a new system of measurement when you've spent your entire life thinking in different terms. Try as I might, I still can't picture a kilometer without converting it to a mile first, and still can't picture a centimeter without converting it to inches. The meter is a lot easier because it's pretty analogous to the yard. I think maybe your brain gets locked into a certain measurement pattern pretty early in life and it's very difficult to get out of it, even though many of us would happily embrace it. I'm still trying to think more in metric, but it requires a surprising amount mental effort to do so.
</p><p>
It's not that Americans are really all that arrogant or stubborn about the imperial system. We've actually been <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication\_in\_the\_United\_States" title="wikipedia.org">trying to embrace the metric system</a> [wikipedia.org] for some time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , a lot of Europeans probably think that U.S. reluctance to embrace the metric system is just another example of our arrogance .
But a lot of Americans ( like me ) are genuinely interested in adopting this system .
We even passed a law [ wikipedia.org ] in 1975 trying to mandate it .
The real problem is that it is surprisingly hard to embrace a new system of measurement when you 've spent your entire life thinking in different terms .
Try as I might , I still ca n't picture a kilometer without converting it to a mile first , and still ca n't picture a centimeter without converting it to inches .
The meter is a lot easier because it 's pretty analogous to the yard .
I think maybe your brain gets locked into a certain measurement pattern pretty early in life and it 's very difficult to get out of it , even though many of us would happily embrace it .
I 'm still trying to think more in metric , but it requires a surprising amount mental effort to do so .
It 's not that Americans are really all that arrogant or stubborn about the imperial system .
We 've actually been trying to embrace the metric system [ wikipedia.org ] for some time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, a lot of Europeans probably think that U.S. reluctance to embrace the metric system is just another example of our arrogance.
But a lot of Americans (like me) are genuinely interested in adopting this system.
We even passed a law [wikipedia.org] in 1975 trying to mandate it.
The real problem is that it is surprisingly hard to embrace a new system of measurement when you've spent your entire life thinking in different terms.
Try as I might, I still can't picture a kilometer without converting it to a mile first, and still can't picture a centimeter without converting it to inches.
The meter is a lot easier because it's pretty analogous to the yard.
I think maybe your brain gets locked into a certain measurement pattern pretty early in life and it's very difficult to get out of it, even though many of us would happily embrace it.
I'm still trying to think more in metric, but it requires a surprising amount mental effort to do so.
It's not that Americans are really all that arrogant or stubborn about the imperial system.
We've actually been trying to embrace the metric system [wikipedia.org] for some time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>FTWinston</author>
	<datestamp>1245860820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system, so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience?</p></div><p>Unfortunately, not really. All street signs <i>still</i> measure distance in miles, and eighths of miles, and the like, and half the population think that the metric system is (like the euro) just another damn frenchie scheme to undermine our sovereignty. We have a long history (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid\_inch" title="wikipedia.org">this</a> [wikipedia.org], for instance) of coming up with crazy conspiricies to demonstrate why the imperial system is our God-given right, and why the French would like nothing better than to force their evil organised system of measurement upon us.
<br> <br>
Meanwhile, for at least a couple of decades now, kids grow up being taught nothing but metric, and wonder why the grown ups still insist on using imperial, and what on earth a fluid ounce actually is. Cos everyone seems to use it, but I don't think anyone under 25 has actually been taught it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system , so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience ? Unfortunately , not really .
All street signs still measure distance in miles , and eighths of miles , and the like , and half the population think that the metric system is ( like the euro ) just another damn frenchie scheme to undermine our sovereignty .
We have a long history ( this [ wikipedia.org ] , for instance ) of coming up with crazy conspiricies to demonstrate why the imperial system is our God-given right , and why the French would like nothing better than to force their evil organised system of measurement upon us .
Meanwhile , for at least a couple of decades now , kids grow up being taught nothing but metric , and wonder why the grown ups still insist on using imperial , and what on earth a fluid ounce actually is .
Cos everyone seems to use it , but I do n't think anyone under 25 has actually been taught it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the UK is busy converting mostly to metric system, so maybe some UKians can chime in with their experience?Unfortunately, not really.
All street signs still measure distance in miles, and eighths of miles, and the like, and half the population think that the metric system is (like the euro) just another damn frenchie scheme to undermine our sovereignty.
We have a long history (this [wikipedia.org], for instance) of coming up with crazy conspiricies to demonstrate why the imperial system is our God-given right, and why the French would like nothing better than to force their evil organised system of measurement upon us.
Meanwhile, for at least a couple of decades now, kids grow up being taught nothing but metric, and wonder why the grown ups still insist on using imperial, and what on earth a fluid ounce actually is.
Cos everyone seems to use it, but I don't think anyone under 25 has actually been taught it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454647</id>
	<title>Get out your checkbooks</title>
	<author>danwesnor</author>
	<datestamp>1245866520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The cost will be higher than that - almost the entire US space industry uses Imperial units.  If NASA changes, everybody else will have to, also.

And remember - it was the Germans who started this mess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The cost will be higher than that - almost the entire US space industry uses Imperial units .
If NASA changes , everybody else will have to , also .
And remember - it was the Germans who started this mess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The cost will be higher than that - almost the entire US space industry uses Imperial units.
If NASA changes, everybody else will have to, also.
And remember - it was the Germans who started this mess.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456899</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe...</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1245874560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The effort to convert to SI would be better spent making a new system. You can develop a new rocket with the newest alloys and nano-tech carbon fiber composites, but you will likely have a parts list that is mostly made up of custom components. Those rockets are big and I won't venture to guess how many parts go into them, but each custom part means a lot of extra money and time, and you quickly have an unfeasable project. Given the low demand for space-capable rockets, if you want to draw from currently available parts, guess what? You are looking at the parts list of the rockets used with the space shuttle, along with those of rockets used by the handful of other space programs out there. Unless you are working with new technology, you had best stick with existing models. NASA could use an SI-based rocket from a foreign program, or a rocket they designed and are acutely familiar with.<br> <br>
As much as I think NASA should go SI, it will have to be when rockets go obsolete and they have to start from scratch anyways.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The effort to convert to SI would be better spent making a new system .
You can develop a new rocket with the newest alloys and nano-tech carbon fiber composites , but you will likely have a parts list that is mostly made up of custom components .
Those rockets are big and I wo n't venture to guess how many parts go into them , but each custom part means a lot of extra money and time , and you quickly have an unfeasable project .
Given the low demand for space-capable rockets , if you want to draw from currently available parts , guess what ?
You are looking at the parts list of the rockets used with the space shuttle , along with those of rockets used by the handful of other space programs out there .
Unless you are working with new technology , you had best stick with existing models .
NASA could use an SI-based rocket from a foreign program , or a rocket they designed and are acutely familiar with .
As much as I think NASA should go SI , it will have to be when rockets go obsolete and they have to start from scratch anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The effort to convert to SI would be better spent making a new system.
You can develop a new rocket with the newest alloys and nano-tech carbon fiber composites, but you will likely have a parts list that is mostly made up of custom components.
Those rockets are big and I won't venture to guess how many parts go into them, but each custom part means a lot of extra money and time, and you quickly have an unfeasable project.
Given the low demand for space-capable rockets, if you want to draw from currently available parts, guess what?
You are looking at the parts list of the rockets used with the space shuttle, along with those of rockets used by the handful of other space programs out there.
Unless you are working with new technology, you had best stick with existing models.
NASA could use an SI-based rocket from a foreign program, or a rocket they designed and are acutely familiar with.
As much as I think NASA should go SI, it will have to be when rockets go obsolete and they have to start from scratch anyways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452763</id>
	<title>obligatory simpsons quote</title>
	<author>gregg</author>
	<datestamp>1245859920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Abe Simpson: The metric system is the tool of the devil! My car gets forty rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Abe Simpson : The metric system is the tool of the devil !
My car gets forty rods to the hogshead and that 's the way I likes it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Abe Simpson: The metric system is the tool of the devil!
My car gets forty rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467197</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245948900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You missed the point, which was that fractions are actually *easier* for some of us to handle.  Just because schools don't emphasize such skills don't mean they've lost their utility.  Learning real-world math skills is much more practical than the button-pushing they seem to teach in public schools.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You missed the point , which was that fractions are actually * easier * for some of us to handle .
Just because schools do n't emphasize such skills do n't mean they 've lost their utility .
Learning real-world math skills is much more practical than the button-pushing they seem to teach in public schools .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You missed the point, which was that fractions are actually *easier* for some of us to handle.
Just because schools don't emphasize such skills don't mean they've lost their utility.
Learning real-world math skills is much more practical than the button-pushing they seem to teach in public schools.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457597</id>
	<title>Two Reasons</title>
	<author>paleo2002</author>
	<datestamp>1245834000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are two reasons the US has not yet converted to the Metric System.  1) Americans are too lazy to bother learning a new system of measurements and 2) America is the wealthiest nation in the world, so nobody can force us to switch.  But, as I tell my students at the beginning of the obligatory "Intro. to Earth Science - Lab 1:  The Metric System", if we continue being lazy, we'll stop being the wealthiest nation in the world.</p><p>And, honestly, I think that came true about 10 years ago anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are two reasons the US has not yet converted to the Metric System .
1 ) Americans are too lazy to bother learning a new system of measurements and 2 ) America is the wealthiest nation in the world , so nobody can force us to switch .
But , as I tell my students at the beginning of the obligatory " Intro .
to Earth Science - Lab 1 : The Metric System " , if we continue being lazy , we 'll stop being the wealthiest nation in the world.And , honestly , I think that came true about 10 years ago anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are two reasons the US has not yet converted to the Metric System.
1) Americans are too lazy to bother learning a new system of measurements and 2) America is the wealthiest nation in the world, so nobody can force us to switch.
But, as I tell my students at the beginning of the obligatory "Intro.
to Earth Science - Lab 1:  The Metric System", if we continue being lazy, we'll stop being the wealthiest nation in the world.And, honestly, I think that came true about 10 years ago anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467183</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>prefec2</author>
	<datestamp>1245948780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because we replace old parts by new parts in new projects. Also we try to migrate technology. So old services can still run for a while in new systems.</p><p>However, software engineering is far away from being comparable to other engineering disciplines. While other engineers can calculate if something breaks (e.g. statics) we cannot do this with the same accuracy, because our tools are not that far developed.</p><p>Also, NASA will have to do the migration some time in the future. So why not do it now. The SI system won't change in the foreseeable future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because we replace old parts by new parts in new projects .
Also we try to migrate technology .
So old services can still run for a while in new systems.However , software engineering is far away from being comparable to other engineering disciplines .
While other engineers can calculate if something breaks ( e.g .
statics ) we can not do this with the same accuracy , because our tools are not that far developed.Also , NASA will have to do the migration some time in the future .
So why not do it now .
The SI system wo n't change in the foreseeable future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because we replace old parts by new parts in new projects.
Also we try to migrate technology.
So old services can still run for a while in new systems.However, software engineering is far away from being comparable to other engineering disciplines.
While other engineers can calculate if something breaks (e.g.
statics) we cannot do this with the same accuracy, because our tools are not that far developed.Also, NASA will have to do the migration some time in the future.
So why not do it now.
The SI system won't change in the foreseeable future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455083</id>
	<title>My ignorance is cause for surprise.</title>
	<author>CherniyVolk</author>
	<datestamp>1245868020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>France first adopted the Metric System in 1791 (according to Wikipedia).  Let me repeat that... 1791.</p><p>The first public, commercial, industrial use of the Metric System in America was Coca-Cola; Coca-Cola bottles have always displayed their volume in metrics, and they have been around since 1886.  Let me repeat that... 1886.</p><p>First shuttle flight was in 1977.</p><p>Now here's the surprise on my part.  For as long as I have been alive, all science and math text always focused on the metric system.  Aside from off-tasks in grade school of converting Celsius to Farhenheit(sp?) or inches to centimeter... gallons to liters... everything has always been in metrics.  Growing up, the total icon of science and math has been primarily NASA.  It is very hard to for me to conceive, that given the adoption of the metric system in acadamia and almost exclusive to intellectuals and professionals... that NASA has for so long, and so widespread throughout any of their projects, adopted anything other than the metric system.  Had this article not been published, I would have refuted any claim that NASA didn't use the metric system.  All I can say in 2009 is "wow".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>France first adopted the Metric System in 1791 ( according to Wikipedia ) .
Let me repeat that... 1791.The first public , commercial , industrial use of the Metric System in America was Coca-Cola ; Coca-Cola bottles have always displayed their volume in metrics , and they have been around since 1886 .
Let me repeat that... 1886.First shuttle flight was in 1977.Now here 's the surprise on my part .
For as long as I have been alive , all science and math text always focused on the metric system .
Aside from off-tasks in grade school of converting Celsius to Farhenheit ( sp ?
) or inches to centimeter... gallons to liters... everything has always been in metrics .
Growing up , the total icon of science and math has been primarily NASA .
It is very hard to for me to conceive , that given the adoption of the metric system in acadamia and almost exclusive to intellectuals and professionals... that NASA has for so long , and so widespread throughout any of their projects , adopted anything other than the metric system .
Had this article not been published , I would have refuted any claim that NASA did n't use the metric system .
All I can say in 2009 is " wow " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>France first adopted the Metric System in 1791 (according to Wikipedia).
Let me repeat that... 1791.The first public, commercial, industrial use of the Metric System in America was Coca-Cola; Coca-Cola bottles have always displayed their volume in metrics, and they have been around since 1886.
Let me repeat that... 1886.First shuttle flight was in 1977.Now here's the surprise on my part.
For as long as I have been alive, all science and math text always focused on the metric system.
Aside from off-tasks in grade school of converting Celsius to Farhenheit(sp?
) or inches to centimeter... gallons to liters... everything has always been in metrics.
Growing up, the total icon of science and math has been primarily NASA.
It is very hard to for me to conceive, that given the adoption of the metric system in acadamia and almost exclusive to intellectuals and professionals... that NASA has for so long, and so widespread throughout any of their projects, adopted anything other than the metric system.
Had this article not been published, I would have refuted any claim that NASA didn't use the metric system.
All I can say in 2009 is "wow".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457893</id>
	<title>Re:Do we really need metric?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1245835200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Metric's good for making some calculations by hand, but, any more, the alignment of metric units, like all relations around water to its mass and volume, all don't really hold that accurately any more, and you still need goofy constants. It's like, everything is "kinda based around 10", rather than, is based on ten.</p></div><p>Can you give any examples? For all practical reasons, unless you're an engineer or a scientist, 1L of water <em>is</em> 1kg. The precision is more than enough.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>As a consumer, I'm not really sure what the advantage to me is having to switch from getting gasoline or water in gallons and quarts, rather than in liters.</p></div><p>The sole reason (but it's a damn good reason) why metric is good for an average person is that it reuses your basic arithmetic skills for all unit conversions. If you understand decimal, then you understand SI. US units require one to learn their own rules, especially as the ratios are not only not base-10, but aren't consistent between themselves either; for example, 12 inches in a foot, but 16 oz in a pint; 3 feet in a yard, but 2 pints in a quart; etc.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Metric 's good for making some calculations by hand , but , any more , the alignment of metric units , like all relations around water to its mass and volume , all do n't really hold that accurately any more , and you still need goofy constants .
It 's like , everything is " kinda based around 10 " , rather than , is based on ten.Can you give any examples ?
For all practical reasons , unless you 're an engineer or a scientist , 1L of water is 1kg .
The precision is more than enough.As a consumer , I 'm not really sure what the advantage to me is having to switch from getting gasoline or water in gallons and quarts , rather than in liters.The sole reason ( but it 's a damn good reason ) why metric is good for an average person is that it reuses your basic arithmetic skills for all unit conversions .
If you understand decimal , then you understand SI .
US units require one to learn their own rules , especially as the ratios are not only not base-10 , but are n't consistent between themselves either ; for example , 12 inches in a foot , but 16 oz in a pint ; 3 feet in a yard , but 2 pints in a quart ; etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Metric's good for making some calculations by hand, but, any more, the alignment of metric units, like all relations around water to its mass and volume, all don't really hold that accurately any more, and you still need goofy constants.
It's like, everything is "kinda based around 10", rather than, is based on ten.Can you give any examples?
For all practical reasons, unless you're an engineer or a scientist, 1L of water is 1kg.
The precision is more than enough.As a consumer, I'm not really sure what the advantage to me is having to switch from getting gasoline or water in gallons and quarts, rather than in liters.The sole reason (but it's a damn good reason) why metric is good for an average person is that it reuses your basic arithmetic skills for all unit conversions.
If you understand decimal, then you understand SI.
US units require one to learn their own rules, especially as the ratios are not only not base-10, but aren't consistent between themselves either; for example, 12 inches in a foot, but 16 oz in a pint; 3 feet in a yard, but 2 pints in a quart; etc.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460453</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>fiannaFailMan</author>
	<datestamp>1245846000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> half the population think that the metric system is (like the euro) just another damn frenchie scheme to undermine our sovereignty.</p> </div><p>Funny thing is, it was an Englishman who proposed the Metric system, and the Imperial system was devised by a Norman.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>half the population think that the metric system is ( like the euro ) just another damn frenchie scheme to undermine our sovereignty .
Funny thing is , it was an Englishman who proposed the Metric system , and the Imperial system was devised by a Norman .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> half the population think that the metric system is (like the euro) just another damn frenchie scheme to undermine our sovereignty.
Funny thing is, it was an Englishman who proposed the Metric system, and the Imperial system was devised by a Norman.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28465009</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>RedWizzard</author>
	<datestamp>1245936900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Frankly, and without trying to be insulting, you're so ignorant of what the issue is that it's laughable that you even have an opinion on it.</p></div><p>You must be new here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Frankly , and without trying to be insulting , you 're so ignorant of what the issue is that it 's laughable that you even have an opinion on it.You must be new here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frankly, and without trying to be insulting, you're so ignorant of what the issue is that it's laughable that you even have an opinion on it.You must be new here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455183</id>
	<title>Re:$370 million?</title>
	<author>Buelldozer</author>
	<datestamp>1245868260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please advise us on how you're going to train every machinist, and QC agent, just to name two job categories on how to measure 30.22mm with calipers that are intended to measure in Imperial? If they can't do this, do it reliably, and do it accurately then you're going to have some funny fitting parts on those Ares.</p><p>That is just one very simple example in two very limited job categories where changing from SI to Metric would introduce horrible, and potentially disastrous, difficulties.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please advise us on how you 're going to train every machinist , and QC agent , just to name two job categories on how to measure 30.22mm with calipers that are intended to measure in Imperial ?
If they ca n't do this , do it reliably , and do it accurately then you 're going to have some funny fitting parts on those Ares.That is just one very simple example in two very limited job categories where changing from SI to Metric would introduce horrible , and potentially disastrous , difficulties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please advise us on how you're going to train every machinist, and QC agent, just to name two job categories on how to measure 30.22mm with calipers that are intended to measure in Imperial?
If they can't do this, do it reliably, and do it accurately then you're going to have some funny fitting parts on those Ares.That is just one very simple example in two very limited job categories where changing from SI to Metric would introduce horrible, and potentially disastrous, difficulties.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454471</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1245865860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But for everyday life, imperial or American units turn out to have a lot of utility that most people aren't aware of, because most of us of the younger generation have just relied on calculators doing decimal calculations for us most of the time.</p></div><p>In summary, then, the advantages are purely theoretical because your generation would just use a calculator anyway.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If you're dividing yards into feet and inches, or pounds into ounces, etc. you have thirds, 16ths, 12ths, and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.</p></div><p>If you're dividing meters into centimeters and millimeters, you have halves, fourths, eights, fifths, tenths, and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Same with volume and weight; if you do a lot of cooking and modifying quantities in recipes you can get good at those conversions.</p></div><p>Metric cooking is so difficult that French people no longer eat.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But for everyday life , imperial or American units turn out to have a lot of utility that most people are n't aware of , because most of us of the younger generation have just relied on calculators doing decimal calculations for us most of the time.In summary , then , the advantages are purely theoretical because your generation would just use a calculator anyway.If you 're dividing yards into feet and inches , or pounds into ounces , etc .
you have thirds , 16ths , 12ths , and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.If you 're dividing meters into centimeters and millimeters , you have halves , fourths , eights , fifths , tenths , and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.Same with volume and weight ; if you do a lot of cooking and modifying quantities in recipes you can get good at those conversions.Metric cooking is so difficult that French people no longer eat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But for everyday life, imperial or American units turn out to have a lot of utility that most people aren't aware of, because most of us of the younger generation have just relied on calculators doing decimal calculations for us most of the time.In summary, then, the advantages are purely theoretical because your generation would just use a calculator anyway.If you're dividing yards into feet and inches, or pounds into ounces, etc.
you have thirds, 16ths, 12ths, and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.If you're dividing meters into centimeters and millimeters, you have halves, fourths, eights, fifths, tenths, and all kinds of other useful fractions to use to think about the divisions.Same with volume and weight; if you do a lot of cooking and modifying quantities in recipes you can get good at those conversions.Metric cooking is so difficult that French people no longer eat.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453213</id>
	<title>Price</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245861600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And how much will cost a shuttle exploding because of an US unit (not imperial, mind you which is a different system) suckage? Way more i bet. The US economy has loses an incredible number of jobs because of the extra cost of their unit system nobody else uses in the world (yeah, think that for any product to be exported, 2 production lines are needed. One in US units for the US market, one in metric for the rest of the world)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how much will cost a shuttle exploding because of an US unit ( not imperial , mind you which is a different system ) suckage ?
Way more i bet .
The US economy has loses an incredible number of jobs because of the extra cost of their unit system nobody else uses in the world ( yeah , think that for any product to be exported , 2 production lines are needed .
One in US units for the US market , one in metric for the rest of the world )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how much will cost a shuttle exploding because of an US unit (not imperial, mind you which is a different system) suckage?
Way more i bet.
The US economy has loses an incredible number of jobs because of the extra cost of their unit system nobody else uses in the world (yeah, think that for any product to be exported, 2 production lines are needed.
One in US units for the US market, one in metric for the rest of the world)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455125</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>moosesocks</author>
	<datestamp>1245868140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FYI, American sporting events also tend to be based around metric units.  Running tracks tend to be 400m in circumference, making the conversion to miles very easy (1600m ~ 0.994 miles)</p><p>Swimming tends to be a mixed bag, with yards and meters used interchangeably.  The conversion's not quite as accurate, however.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FYI , American sporting events also tend to be based around metric units .
Running tracks tend to be 400m in circumference , making the conversion to miles very easy ( 1600m ~ 0.994 miles ) Swimming tends to be a mixed bag , with yards and meters used interchangeably .
The conversion 's not quite as accurate , however .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FYI, American sporting events also tend to be based around metric units.
Running tracks tend to be 400m in circumference, making the conversion to miles very easy (1600m ~ 0.994 miles)Swimming tends to be a mixed bag, with yards and meters used interchangeably.
The conversion's not quite as accurate, however.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453995</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Me! Me! 42</author>
	<datestamp>1245864300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree that imperial US Customary Units have certain useful aspects which SI lacks.<br>
What we really need to do is switch our numbering system to base 12.<br>
Then we'll have the best of both worlds!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree that imperial US Customary Units have certain useful aspects which SI lacks .
What we really need to do is switch our numbering system to base 12 .
Then we 'll have the best of both worlds !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree that imperial US Customary Units have certain useful aspects which SI lacks.
What we really need to do is switch our numbering system to base 12.
Then we'll have the best of both worlds!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453065</id>
	<title>Re:If you give up the inch, they'll take the mile</title>
	<author>lisaparratt</author>
	<datestamp>1245861000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm from the UK, and I've been metric my whole life. There're only 3 exceptions, off the top of my head:</p><p>1) Pints - beer comes in pints.<br>2) Miles - distances<br>3) Stones - for weighing people. This one tends to really confuse people who think they use Imperial units.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm from the UK , and I 've been metric my whole life .
There 're only 3 exceptions , off the top of my head : 1 ) Pints - beer comes in pints.2 ) Miles - distances3 ) Stones - for weighing people .
This one tends to really confuse people who think they use Imperial units .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm from the UK, and I've been metric my whole life.
There're only 3 exceptions, off the top of my head:1) Pints - beer comes in pints.2) Miles - distances3) Stones - for weighing people.
This one tends to really confuse people who think they use Imperial units.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453501</id>
	<title>Long term investment</title>
	<author>yogibaer</author>
	<datestamp>1245862560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The replacement for the shuttle will be around for decades (relying partly on technology that is already decades old). Now is the only time that you have  a chance for going metric, or keep on trying to avoid the inevitable.  In ten to twenty years from now there will be no alternative. By then all the subcontractors will be  busy converting metric to imperial to meet NASA's requirements (and that is as error prone as NASA going metric I'd guess) or - recognizing the unavoidable facts -NSA will start a conversion project which will a) be a major headache once the system is in operation and will b) cost a lot more. So: Jump. Just do it. And live happily ever after...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The replacement for the shuttle will be around for decades ( relying partly on technology that is already decades old ) .
Now is the only time that you have a chance for going metric , or keep on trying to avoid the inevitable .
In ten to twenty years from now there will be no alternative .
By then all the subcontractors will be busy converting metric to imperial to meet NASA 's requirements ( and that is as error prone as NASA going metric I 'd guess ) or - recognizing the unavoidable facts -NSA will start a conversion project which will a ) be a major headache once the system is in operation and will b ) cost a lot more .
So : Jump .
Just do it .
And live happily ever after.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The replacement for the shuttle will be around for decades (relying partly on technology that is already decades old).
Now is the only time that you have  a chance for going metric, or keep on trying to avoid the inevitable.
In ten to twenty years from now there will be no alternative.
By then all the subcontractors will be  busy converting metric to imperial to meet NASA's requirements (and that is as error prone as NASA going metric I'd guess) or - recognizing the unavoidable facts -NSA will start a conversion project which will a) be a major headache once the system is in operation and will b) cost a lot more.
So: Jump.
Just do it.
And live happily ever after...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455041</id>
	<title>Re:There is hidden utility in imperial we overlook</title>
	<author>Ullteppe</author>
	<datestamp>1245867900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I call bull. The only reason you find fractions convenient, is that you are used to them. In the metric world (that's the rest of the world, man) fractions are not used that much. Who says a 1/12 of something is so damn useful? I would rather have 0.08 of something instead (or 8\%).</p><p>In the rest of the world, we have our 3mm bolts rather than 1/16th inch or something else ridiculous like that. Metric works just fine for everyday measurements.</p><p>The really crazy side of imperial-style measurement is that every country had their (slightly different) measurement system. Imagine the chaos which would have reigned in today's global world if metric hadn't come along...</p><p>I would rather say that the only valid argument for using US standard system is that you are used to it. At least metric has two advantages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I call bull .
The only reason you find fractions convenient , is that you are used to them .
In the metric world ( that 's the rest of the world , man ) fractions are not used that much .
Who says a 1/12 of something is so damn useful ?
I would rather have 0.08 of something instead ( or 8 \ % ) .In the rest of the world , we have our 3mm bolts rather than 1/16th inch or something else ridiculous like that .
Metric works just fine for everyday measurements.The really crazy side of imperial-style measurement is that every country had their ( slightly different ) measurement system .
Imagine the chaos which would have reigned in today 's global world if metric had n't come along...I would rather say that the only valid argument for using US standard system is that you are used to it .
At least metric has two advantages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I call bull.
The only reason you find fractions convenient, is that you are used to them.
In the metric world (that's the rest of the world, man) fractions are not used that much.
Who says a 1/12 of something is so damn useful?
I would rather have 0.08 of something instead (or 8\%).In the rest of the world, we have our 3mm bolts rather than 1/16th inch or something else ridiculous like that.
Metric works just fine for everyday measurements.The really crazy side of imperial-style measurement is that every country had their (slightly different) measurement system.
Imagine the chaos which would have reigned in today's global world if metric hadn't come along...I would rather say that the only valid argument for using US standard system is that you are used to it.
At least metric has two advantages.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28475489
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457893
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455649
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453295
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462007
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454561
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455143
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454109
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454371
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28459587
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462765
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454897
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28469799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454471
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28463305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453135
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457105
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456245
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457337
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455653
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455575
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467183
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28465549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455125
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456323
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456085
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460153
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28464657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28465799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28465009
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453927
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28464983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454561
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457207
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455517
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456193
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456899
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28461037
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28464755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28495731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28458191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453975
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454265
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457019
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452945
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453669
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1430236_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456399
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453215
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453959
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452913
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454371
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453581
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453165
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453669
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456245
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453135
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454743
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455937
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452763
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454127
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455547
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457331
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455083
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453263
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28459995
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455065
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452867
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454305
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452601
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453699
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462765
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28458741
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452639
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456267
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453379
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454109
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453995
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454471
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28458191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455319
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453997
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28469799
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457131
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456323
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456789
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455653
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28495731
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467197
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456193
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457337
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456899
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453591
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452835
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454561
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457207
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455143
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452733
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453013
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28464755
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28465799
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460453
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457019
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455603
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455559
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455615
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460297
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453065
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28475489
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455517
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456399
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453953
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28461037
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460153
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453319
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457105
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28460357
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28464983
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454265
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453201
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454501
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462073
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28464657
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454897
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455125
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455529
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453295
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454273
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453057
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28457189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455809
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28463305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462539
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452945
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455183
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462007
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28465549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452911
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456085
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455649
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467183
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28455575
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453171
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28465009
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28459587
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28462483
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453975
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28454221
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28467341
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28456073
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28452801
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1430236.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1430236.28453223
</commentlist>
</conversation>
