weird@sub.wetshaving.social to memes@lemmy.world · 9 days agoAt least we're not mixing in lettersimagemessage-square218linkfedilinkarrow-up11.25Karrow-down150
arrow-up11.2Karrow-down1imageAt least we're not mixing in lettersweird@sub.wetshaving.social to memes@lemmy.world · 9 days agomessage-square218linkfedilink
minus-squarenaticus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·9 days agoWeird, I’ve seen many analog clocks with Roman numerals but always IV for 4.
minus-squaretopherclay@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up20·8 days agoIt’s actually called the “clockmakers four” or “watchmakers four.” it’s a thing.
minus-squarenaticus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·8 days agoYeah I looked it up and saw it is a thing, and it’s interesting. I wonder if the clock I’m thinking of was just a really cheap one that was labeled as you’d expect based on Roman numerals or whether some just didn’t follow it.
minus-squarerumba@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·8 days agoTo be fair, Google searching Roman numerals clocks give you about a 50/50 distribution. I wasn’t aware of this either and I suspect we’re not alone. It’s not highly noticeable and if there’s a 50-50 chance won’t even see it…
minus-squareChadus_Maximus@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down9·8 days agoFalse. I had a clock that used IIII instead.
minus-squarenaticus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10·8 days agoYour clock having it doesn’t change that mine didn’t.
Weird, I’ve seen many analog clocks with Roman numerals but always IV for 4.
It’s actually called the “clockmakers four” or “watchmakers four.” it’s a thing.
Yeah I looked it up and saw it is a thing, and it’s interesting. I wonder if the clock I’m thinking of was just a really cheap one that was labeled as you’d expect based on Roman numerals or whether some just didn’t follow it.
To be fair, Google searching Roman numerals clocks give you about a 50/50 distribution.
I wasn’t aware of this either and I suspect we’re not alone. It’s not highly noticeable and if there’s a 50-50 chance won’t even see it…
False. I had a clock that used IIII instead.
Your clock having it doesn’t change that mine didn’t.