Sun Dec 15 12:39:35 CET 2013
Standardization: How did things go so wrong with clothes?
In the last weeks I've been trying to adapt to the Cold Season by aquiring new clothes.
What used to be annoying has now gone into full retardation: It's become impossible.
So, here's the confusing thing: Clothes come in different Sizes that are supposed to be at least somehow mildly Standardized. Thus I'd be on the lower end of the M classification, with an occasional S size fitting better.
Pants come in imperial units: Length and waist circumference. This makes it trivial for me to predict that a 32/32 will fit me as I am just about that size.
Soooooooo. Uhm. The last pants I bought were a 34/32, and they are *SMALLER* than my older 32/32. So they are too small by around 10%. Bonus: They are "wide", which means they are skintight - apparently pants are now made for stick people. I have no idea how a 32/32 is supposed to fit anyone, you'd need to be extremely thin and have a huge gut for that size to add up to something reasonable with the way they are cut.
Right, so what about other things? I now have a long-sleeve shirt size XL that is extremely tight. It is smaller than my old M shirts. By that logic I am now size XXL+, which means most shops don't even carry my size - I'm neither tall nor heavy, it appears that stores have shifted to servicing dwarves and fairies. (For reference: My BMI is barely over 20, and at 175cm length I'm pretty much "average" size)
Seriously? What the bleep!
There's no logic to sizes, there's no precision in precise units.
The female clothes sizes are even smaller, so as a female I'd be size XXXL or a bit more. I seriously wonder if that's part of some psychological warfare ...
A few years I used to be extremely thin - to the point where it was difficult to find pants. I was a 28/32 size (which doesn't usually exist in german clothes shops). And the pants for females have that as UPPER size limit, with a 23/32 being the lower end. I can't even figure out how extremely thin and/or malnourished humans would have to be to fit in that.
A big bonus of this random sizing is that I can't predict what size I'll be today, so I can't order things online. Instead I'm supposed to go into retail shops and spend lots of time trying on clothes in the hope of finding things that fit me.
Last time I tried that in 5 shops there were no pants cut wide enough for my legs, they all refused to be pulled above my knees. So my motivation to do that dance again is very small...
It'd be, like, really awesome, if clothes retailers could care more about their audience and produce clothes in human sizes. I'd appreciate being considered normal again. A huge bonus (which would be extra awesome) are Jeans that are made for legs, so that I could actually buy Jeans that don't have to be re-tailored completely to approximate my human body shape. Like, I have a Gluteus Maximus that is attached to me, so maybe have pants acknowledge that.
Oh, also. Please. I'd appreciate shoes in feet-shapes. I haven't bought many shoes in the last years because I haven't found any that fit my feet in ways that are anatomically correct - last purchase was a EU size 46 that is actually too long, but at least it doesn't try to rearrange my toes into a triangular shape.
(Funny thing there: ASICS has a "2E" series of extra wide shoes. The old ones, size 46.5, just barely fit me well. The new ones, ahem, are cut more narrow, which slightly makes the label absurd because now they are more like ... moderately wide. Even there the shrinkeration is going on at a nice pace, soon I'll reach size 52 because things become smaller, and then I'll just completely give up and have shoes hand-made.)
So ... standards, good thing; but without enforcement it ends up as an unpredictable mess that makes life more difficult. Fixed units: Supposed to be Fixed and not dynamic. Sanity optional.
So, here's the confusing thing: Clothes come in different Sizes that are supposed to be at least somehow mildly Standardized. Thus I'd be on the lower end of the M classification, with an occasional S size fitting better.
Pants come in imperial units: Length and waist circumference. This makes it trivial for me to predict that a 32/32 will fit me as I am just about that size.
Soooooooo. Uhm. The last pants I bought were a 34/32, and they are *SMALLER* than my older 32/32. So they are too small by around 10%. Bonus: They are "wide", which means they are skintight - apparently pants are now made for stick people. I have no idea how a 32/32 is supposed to fit anyone, you'd need to be extremely thin and have a huge gut for that size to add up to something reasonable with the way they are cut.
Right, so what about other things? I now have a long-sleeve shirt size XL that is extremely tight. It is smaller than my old M shirts. By that logic I am now size XXL+, which means most shops don't even carry my size - I'm neither tall nor heavy, it appears that stores have shifted to servicing dwarves and fairies. (For reference: My BMI is barely over 20, and at 175cm length I'm pretty much "average" size)
Seriously? What the bleep!
There's no logic to sizes, there's no precision in precise units.
The female clothes sizes are even smaller, so as a female I'd be size XXXL or a bit more. I seriously wonder if that's part of some psychological warfare ...
A few years I used to be extremely thin - to the point where it was difficult to find pants. I was a 28/32 size (which doesn't usually exist in german clothes shops). And the pants for females have that as UPPER size limit, with a 23/32 being the lower end. I can't even figure out how extremely thin and/or malnourished humans would have to be to fit in that.
A big bonus of this random sizing is that I can't predict what size I'll be today, so I can't order things online. Instead I'm supposed to go into retail shops and spend lots of time trying on clothes in the hope of finding things that fit me.
Last time I tried that in 5 shops there were no pants cut wide enough for my legs, they all refused to be pulled above my knees. So my motivation to do that dance again is very small...
It'd be, like, really awesome, if clothes retailers could care more about their audience and produce clothes in human sizes. I'd appreciate being considered normal again. A huge bonus (which would be extra awesome) are Jeans that are made for legs, so that I could actually buy Jeans that don't have to be re-tailored completely to approximate my human body shape. Like, I have a Gluteus Maximus that is attached to me, so maybe have pants acknowledge that.
Oh, also. Please. I'd appreciate shoes in feet-shapes. I haven't bought many shoes in the last years because I haven't found any that fit my feet in ways that are anatomically correct - last purchase was a EU size 46 that is actually too long, but at least it doesn't try to rearrange my toes into a triangular shape.
(Funny thing there: ASICS has a "2E" series of extra wide shoes. The old ones, size 46.5, just barely fit me well. The new ones, ahem, are cut more narrow, which slightly makes the label absurd because now they are more like ... moderately wide. Even there the shrinkeration is going on at a nice pace, soon I'll reach size 52 because things become smaller, and then I'll just completely give up and have shoes hand-made.)
So ... standards, good thing; but without enforcement it ends up as an unpredictable mess that makes life more difficult. Fixed units: Supposed to be Fixed and not dynamic. Sanity optional.
Wed Dec 4 07:07:33 CET 2013
Histograms of commit activity
Commit histograms for all gentoo devs, rough first draft.
It doesn't handle renames/dev moves yet (fauli/opfer are two histograms) and since it contains manifest commits it's a bit more than it should be, but as a comparative graph it should still amuse.
Thanks to autoscaling every graph should have a max width of ~80 stars, so please don't try a direct comparison.
EDIT:
Commit time-o-grams showing the frequency for each hour of the day
It doesn't handle renames/dev moves yet (fauli/opfer are two histograms) and since it contains manifest commits it's a bit more than it should be, but as a comparative graph it should still amuse.
Thanks to autoscaling every graph should have a max width of ~80 stars, so please don't try a direct comparison.
EDIT:
Commit time-o-grams showing the frequency for each hour of the day
Wed Dec 4 06:26:07 CET 2013
Random graphs
What started as an experiment to re-do the Codeswarm video from a few years ago ended up as some random graphs instead.
The distribution of commits to gentoo-x86 per weekday:
So what about timezones?
The difference between 03:00 UTC and 18:00 UTC is a factor of almost 3.
There's lots of fun to be had with data mangling :)
Total 3529536 One day ~= 14.3% of the week Monday 13.8% 488905 *********************************************************************** Tuesday 13.3% 472381 ********************************************************************* Wednesday 15.4% 545485 ******************************************************************************* Thursday 15.4% 546166 ******************************************************************************** Friday 14.0% 494919 ************************************************************************ Saturday 13.5% 476995 ********************************************************************* Sunday 14.2% 504685 *************************************************************************This is roughly equally distributed with only 15% difference between min and max.
So what about timezones?
0 109812 3.11 ***************************************** 1 90863 2.57 ********************************** 2 98304 2.79 ************************************ 3 80233 2.27 ****************************** 4 85476 2.42 ******************************** 5 80632 2.28 ****************************** 6 83603 2.37 ******************************* 7 92694 2.63 ********************************** 8 98658 2.80 ************************************ 9 164297 4.65 ************************************************************* 10 163369 4.63 ************************************************************* 11 153660 4.35 ********************************************************* 12 160316 4.54 ************************************************************ 13 168591 4.78 *************************************************************** 14 173634 4.92 ***************************************************************** 15 189496 5.37 ********************************************************************** 16 189183 5.36 ********************************************************************** 17 200902 5.69 *************************************************************************** 18 213663 6.05 ******************************************************************************** 19 204722 5.80 **************************************************************************** 20 207506 5.88 ***************************************************************************** 21 197050 5.58 ************************************************************************* 22 176366 5.00 ****************************************************************** 23 146506 4.15 ******************************************************There's a distinct "heartbeat" of activity averaged over all commits. EDIT: Fixed times to be UTC, now it all makes more sense
The difference between 03:00 UTC and 18:00 UTC is a factor of almost 3.
There's lots of fun to be had with data mangling :)