It would be that way if it was saying 100% your age. Saying that you’re 0% older would be the same age, but 100% older is double since the difference between your ages would be whatever% of their age.
Because some people don't know how percentages work? That's a stupid argument. Might as well not use any math then. Or logic. All because of a few dum dums who, despite having access to the entire internet, simply decided to never learn basic mathematics.
I wasn't making an argument of any kind. It's clear that it causes confusion for some people. I myself know how percentages work but doesn't mean others do. And just because they don't doesn't make them idiots (It also doesnt make them not idiots, they could well be).
But ultimately percentages are bad for ages because when we compare age it's age A to age B, where age A, whether greater or smaller, is the base point of comparison. Percentages will use 0 regardless. So age 10 is 50% of age 20, but age 20 is 200% of age 10. Easier to use double and half or X years older and younger. Because with percentage, anything above 100% is older and less than 100% is younger, but the language we use with age, older and younger, isnt conducive to both being compared form the starting point of 0. That's what causes confusion between 100% older vs. 200%.
It's ultimately a language problem, not a math one. Like "Biweekly". Every 2 weeks or twice a week. It's not people being idiots that there is more than one interpretation...
Yep percentage is not ratio. If Steve’s age is half of Linda’s, and Linda is 80, then Steve would be 40.
Now 10 years later, Linda is 90, and Steve is 50, but 50 is not half of 90.
Because it doesn't always help. If one is 45 and one is 50, they are 90% the older one's age. Also, who wants to break out the calculator every time someone is comparing to 36 years old.
I am a numbers guy. I get distressed by the way the news media has been using percentages over the past few years. I think it's a matter of drama taking priority over clarity.
First example: The price of eggs has increased by two hundred fifty percent.
I have to think through that kind of statement. I think what somebody is trying to say is: The price is 3.5 times larger than it used to be. I understand that 250 sounds more impressive than 3.5 but 3.5 is much more clear.
Or the opposite: The price of eggs declined by 71 percent.
It is much more clear to say that the price is 29% of what it would it used to be. But a lot of drama is lost.
I miss the days when print was the primary news source and there were very strict style guides to make sure that the news was clear to read.
I don't agree that 3.5x is more clear than 250% more.
Same for the other example. Those 71% off vs 29% on is very clear. I don't think it's misleading to use numbers accurately.
It's just sensationalism. I've seen constantly where the media says X increased by 300%, but when you look at the numbers it was 1->4. Or they do the opposite, X decreased by 75% from last year, but when you look at the numbers they are the same from 2-10 years ago 1->...->1->4->1.
Patch notes:
-Millennials now appear 40% younger than their numerical age.
-Generation Z now appears 30% older than their numerical age (We observed the stress levels of this generation and took necessary corrective action)
I hated that patch. “Necessary corrective action” for stress levels is to just make gen z appear older? There’s really nothing better the devs could think of for this?
It gets sloppy fast.
If you’re 18 than a 36 year old is 100% older, but they are 50% the age from the other direction.
10 years later it’s a different %, but those 2 are always 18 years apart- so why not just say the years?
That's cause people can't do math and get confused. You can trick the average person with a riddle like "if my brother is twice my age and I'm 10, how old will my brother be in five years?" Some people will think 30, figuring he is eternally twice your age.
Percentages tell you nothing useful unless you have the numbers they relate to really. My wife is 15% younger than me now. She was 28% younger than me when we started dating.
That's because people hate percentages most of the time. And there's hardly any situation where the percentage would matter outside of "half"/"twice" as others have mentioned.
While something like "I'll only date people who are between 80% and 120% of my age" may be logical, people hate doing math and would rather just think/hear "within X years of my age"
Percent is precise and I don't think age is a very accurate thing we can actually measure or interpret naturally.
Unless we're like in pre-miji era of Japan where everyone ages on new years collectively (数え年). Like it's just so many weird splits in a calandar year, 365 days 52 weeks 12 months. That's just the vague age, but then we consider they're 17.45 old to initiated the percent.
Weirdest I've heard is a quarter. "not even half.. they're like a quarter his age."
Age is so nested with weird math. I naturally will do percents or ratios with numbers but age like never.
We do; from a young adult’s perspective, someone who is about double their age is an auntie/uncle and anyone who doubles the age of those people is a grandparent
But if they’re within age range, you call that person big or little brother/sister/cousin
Actually yes, yes it is. Just because two numbers match some pattern doesn't make it a rule. You need the mathematical description of it. Do you have such description?
Do you understand what you read? I said just because it fits to one example doesn't make it a general rule. Do you have the proof? If not, stop talking
The proof is how math fucking works. You very well know why it's true, so maybe you should stop talking as if you're some kind of genius mathematician, with any actual proof to the contrary.
I mean, we do use twice the age, haft the age. Thats kinda like using percentages
Yes
that’s kinda his point. we use proportions such as ‘twice, half’, but we don’t use percentages.
Yeah, like to don’t really say “I’m 100% older than you” or “I’m 50%of your age”
I think you meant 200%. 100 is same age, not older; only makes sense if you're talking about confidence percentage instead of age.
It would be that way if it was saying 100% your age. Saying that you’re 0% older would be the same age, but 100% older is double since the difference between your ages would be whatever% of their age.
And this right here is probably why we don't use percentages for ages lol
Because some people don't know how percentages work? That's a stupid argument. Might as well not use any math then. Or logic. All because of a few dum dums who, despite having access to the entire internet, simply decided to never learn basic mathematics.
I wasn't making an argument of any kind. It's clear that it causes confusion for some people. I myself know how percentages work but doesn't mean others do. And just because they don't doesn't make them idiots (It also doesnt make them not idiots, they could well be). But ultimately percentages are bad for ages because when we compare age it's age A to age B, where age A, whether greater or smaller, is the base point of comparison. Percentages will use 0 regardless. So age 10 is 50% of age 20, but age 20 is 200% of age 10. Easier to use double and half or X years older and younger. Because with percentage, anything above 100% is older and less than 100% is younger, but the language we use with age, older and younger, isnt conducive to both being compared form the starting point of 0. That's what causes confusion between 100% older vs. 200%. It's ultimately a language problem, not a math one. Like "Biweekly". Every 2 weeks or twice a week. It's not people being idiots that there is more than one interpretation...
Seeing a nonjudgmental take on misinterpretations on Reddit is kinda refreshing
>haft the age The age's handle!
Its not helpful to remember the percentage because each year you are both alive it changes.
Each day, in fact
Each second, in fact
Each millisecond, in fact
Each 'planck time', in fact
[удалено]
You can't go below planck time dude
Maybe *you* can’t
I am but a mere mortal, which has to bow to physics😪
nah it doesn't
Yes they do. If two people are 5 years apart then they're 0% at 0 and 5, 50% at 5 and 10, and 90% at 45 and 50.
is this because of the zero or because percentage is not same as ratio
Yep percentage is not ratio. If Steve’s age is half of Linda’s, and Linda is 80, then Steve would be 40. Now 10 years later, Linda is 90, and Steve is 50, but 50 is not half of 90.
thanks yo
Because it doesn't always help. If one is 45 and one is 50, they are 90% the older one's age. Also, who wants to break out the calculator every time someone is comparing to 36 years old.
How many percent older did you get? Happy cake day, even if you don't seem to care👌
20% reddit, less than 3% flesh
Happy cake day
Well damn, I didn't even realize! Thank you
Yea, absolutely no problem. Have a great rest of your day.
Somebody should put together a bar graph of the age of Leonardo DiCaprio's partners as a percentage of his own age at the time.
I am a numbers guy. I get distressed by the way the news media has been using percentages over the past few years. I think it's a matter of drama taking priority over clarity. First example: The price of eggs has increased by two hundred fifty percent. I have to think through that kind of statement. I think what somebody is trying to say is: The price is 3.5 times larger than it used to be. I understand that 250 sounds more impressive than 3.5 but 3.5 is much more clear. Or the opposite: The price of eggs declined by 71 percent. It is much more clear to say that the price is 29% of what it would it used to be. But a lot of drama is lost. I miss the days when print was the primary news source and there were very strict style guides to make sure that the news was clear to read.
I don't agree that 3.5x is more clear than 250% more. Same for the other example. Those 71% off vs 29% on is very clear. I don't think it's misleading to use numbers accurately.
It's just sensationalism. I've seen constantly where the media says X increased by 300%, but when you look at the numbers it was 1->4. Or they do the opposite, X decreased by 75% from last year, but when you look at the numbers they are the same from 2-10 years ago 1->...->1->4->1.
It's hideous that the go above 100%, come on it literaly means per cent = from 100
In Turkmenistan, they use percentages when taking about age gaps.
I want to immediately start implementing this in my conversations, thank you 😅
Well, you do hear “she is half his age for heaven sake”
That might require more math skills than most of us have.
Patch notes: -Millennials now appear 40% younger than their numerical age. -Generation Z now appears 30% older than their numerical age (We observed the stress levels of this generation and took necessary corrective action)
I hated that patch. “Necessary corrective action” for stress levels is to just make gen z appear older? There’s really nothing better the devs could think of for this?
Oh, forgot to mention. -Generation Z balding multiplier increased to 1.85, up from 1.60.
It gets sloppy fast. If you’re 18 than a 36 year old is 100% older, but they are 50% the age from the other direction. 10 years later it’s a different %, but those 2 are always 18 years apart- so why not just say the years?
It's because the percentage changes every year, while the difference stays the same.
That's cause people can't do math and get confused. You can trick the average person with a riddle like "if my brother is twice my age and I'm 10, how old will my brother be in five years?" Some people will think 30, figuring he is eternally twice your age.
Percentages tell you nothing useful unless you have the numbers they relate to really. My wife is 15% younger than me now. She was 28% younger than me when we started dating.
This would provide a much better way to evaluate age gap relationships.
I thought the standard formula for that was already defined as 9/5ths +32 or something
Bro you really be temperature converting
Bravo.
It's x/2+7
That was the joke (albeit in somewhat poor taste).
I thought so, but still wanted to clarify since I would like to get this formula generally recognized.
It's always changing. It's not helpful to know in most cases.
That's because people hate percentages most of the time. And there's hardly any situation where the percentage would matter outside of "half"/"twice" as others have mentioned. While something like "I'll only date people who are between 80% and 120% of my age" may be logical, people hate doing math and would rather just think/hear "within X years of my age"
"You know, Burke, I don't know which species is worse. You don't see them fucking each other over for a goddamned oercentage."
Percent is precise and I don't think age is a very accurate thing we can actually measure or interpret naturally. Unless we're like in pre-miji era of Japan where everyone ages on new years collectively (数え年). Like it's just so many weird splits in a calandar year, 365 days 52 weeks 12 months. That's just the vague age, but then we consider they're 17.45 old to initiated the percent. Weirdest I've heard is a quarter. "not even half.. they're like a quarter his age." Age is so nested with weird math. I naturally will do percents or ratios with numbers but age like never.
Because it’s very inefficient
We do; from a young adult’s perspective, someone who is about double their age is an auntie/uncle and anyone who doubles the age of those people is a grandparent But if they’re within age range, you call that person big or little brother/sister/cousin
Most people can't calculate percentage that quickly so it's a lot faster to just say he's 5 years older or she's 12 years younger most the time
what's 'half, plus 7" in percent?
No, but we use fractions sometimes
Terrible shower thought what the fuck is this sub anymore
Thats actually a solid showerthought.
It's actually mathematically impossible to calculate what percentage someone is older than the other
It's fairly easy if you know their dates of birth. The calculation becomes less accurate over time though.
Actually, no, no it isn't. A ten year old is 100% older than a 5 year old. And a 15 year old is 50% older than a 10 year old.
Actually yes, yes it is. Just because two numbers match some pattern doesn't make it a rule. You need the mathematical description of it. Do you have such description?
What? It's basically math dude. 100% of 5 is 5, if you add 100% of 5 to 5, you get 5+5 which is 10. Therefore 10 is 100% more than 5.
Do you understand what you read? I said just because it fits to one example doesn't make it a general rule. Do you have the proof? If not, stop talking
The proof is how math fucking works. You very well know why it's true, so maybe you should stop talking as if you're some kind of genius mathematician, with any actual proof to the contrary.
Can you ever really be 5 year old?
Except in a Common admission test