I just found out one horse has about 15 horsepower and I’m so mad I can’t think straight.

Viva la Evolution

Horsepower is not a unit, it's a marketing term.

@electrineer I was just starting to like you...

(Jk you're actually pretty funny)

And also https://sciencefocus.com/science/...

Doesn't this depend upon the horse? Like a Shetland won't have the same power of a Clydesdale.

This term never made sense to me. It needs to be retired.

One horse has about one 1hp in sustained power. Peak power over a few seconds can be 15hp.

@stackodev thats why in germany at least the power must be published in kW

@jfgilmore That's a factor of 1000 off the mark. 1hp = 746W.

@Demolishun what about a mustang?

They've evolved a lot!

They started as horses, and now they're transformers, robots in disguise.

when the unit was originally "invented", 1 horse actually had 1 horsepower, but since the ever larger machines and wagons needed ever-more-powerful horses, via the century or two of selective breeding, we made the standard horse 15times stronger.

#TrueFacts4Real

@Fast-Nop but imagine if hourses had 750kW, the things you could do. A horsekick would be even more horrifying

Wait someone actually uses hp? In 21st century? What?

@jfgilmore haven’t seen anything but kW in ages.

@Midnight-shcode that sounds like a fact from those annoying tiktok videos

And our PM also thinks 1 developer does 2-3 manpower jobs…

can you guys tell me again why you still refuse to use metric?

@darksideofyay tradition
we always did it this way and only death brings use to change the way we do it.

@electrineer then i was successful

So... If you reverse it...
A car with 150 horse power is actually only worth 10 horses..

Reminds me of why ISP traffic limit is shown in mbits and not mbytes... Looks bigger...

@GyroGearloose That's because Mbit/s refers to the phy layer, and its speed is in Mbit/s because that directly translates into frequencies.

MByte/s has no meaning because it depends on the phy encoding scheme and on the higher level protocol. Even worse, you can just reduce the redundancy in the encoding and advertise higher nominal Mbyte/s which are completely useless because you also have higher packet loss which in turn totally tanks TCP.

@Fast-Nop Isn't there like 10 bits per byte "frame" or something? So dividing mbit by 10 gives a rough mbyte? So 20mbits is roughly 2mBytes. I seem to remember this being close.

@Demolishun That depends on phy, frame size, and even upper layer protocol. The UDP/IP header alone is 20 bytes, so if you transfer something like command data, the overhead can be 20:1. Then again, the throughput in such a case isn't limited by bandwidth, but by latency.

@Fast-Nop understood shit lol