Beep@lemmus.orgBanned to Comic Strips@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 month agoShrinkflationi.imgur.comimagemessage-square29linkfedilinkarrow-up1225arrow-down1158file-text
arrow-up167arrow-down1imageShrinkflationi.imgur.comBeep@lemmus.orgBanned to Comic Strips@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 month agomessage-square29linkfedilinkfile-text
minus-squareanyhow2503@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down1·1 month agoCould be surrealist humor if we ignore the alternative american version
minus-squareLumidaub@feddit.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up4arrow-down3·1 month agoLess than the Freedom units one?
minus-squareLumidaub@feddit.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up4·1 month agoYes. And 32 ounces != 28 ounces. They’re absurdly using “a litre” and “a 32 ounce bottle” kind of like “a serving”.
minus-squareKairos@lemmy.todaylinkfedilinkarrow-up4·1 month agoOhh wait I get it. “A liter [bottle] shrank to…”
minus-squareanyhow2503@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 month agoYes, the issue is the wording. The american version shrinks a bottle of certain volume, the metric version shrinks the unit of measurement.
The metric version makes no sense
Could be surrealist humor if we ignore the alternative american version
Less than the Freedom units one?
Yes.
How so?
1 liter != 0.9 liter
Yes. And 32 ounces != 28 ounces.
They’re absurdly using “a litre” and “a 32 ounce bottle” kind of like “a serving”.
Ohh wait I get it. “A liter [bottle] shrank to…”
Yes, the issue is the wording. The american version shrinks a bottle of certain volume, the metric version shrinks the unit of measurement.