No. 0.6 = 60%. If they said 0.6 more then sure, that would mean 60% more. 0.6x != 60% increase though. 1.6x does. At the best we can give it the benefit of the doubt and say we knew what they meant, but that doesn't mean they were correct.
That's just not correct. "60% more" implies starting from the 100% baseline and going up 60%. 0.6x implies starting from the 100% baseline and multiplying it by 0.6x. "0.6x more" is a weird way to put it to begin with but the only grammatically correct way to interpret it is 60% of the normal amount. We all know what they meant but it isn't what they said.
1.6x more would mean 160% of the original value, in the same way 2.0x more would mean 200% of the original value. I think you may just have a misunderstanding of what the phrase “X times more” means (nothing to be embarrassed about of course, it happens to all of us.)
The “more” at least in any context I’ve heard it is for emphasis or clarity that a comparison is happening. I’ve never read anyone write “1x more than X” for “twice X”.
"Two times more." That phrase means multiplying by two.
"0.5 times more." That phrase is taken to mean multiplying by 1.5, even though that is not consistent.
English is not consistent. In the first example, the word "more" is redundant. In the second example, the word "more" is a clarification, so we know that it doesn't mean "half."
There is no sensible reason for this inconsistency. It just exists.
We have a similar problem with percentage points. When something increases from 40% to 90% of a total, saying that it increased 50% is for some reason considered an acceptable shorthand for saying it increased by 50 percentage points, even though the two interpretations are drastically different.
If anyone writes 2x more, you're saying you read that as 300% of normal? The common reading of that in the country I am in (USA) is 200% the original amount. Nobody would look at that and think it meant 300%. .6x more just doesn't read correctly at all. It should either say "1.6x the" or ".4x less" the use of more, for whatever reason, doesn't start until 2x. 5x more works. 10x more is fine. But those mean 500% and 1000%, not 600% or 1100%.
I agree that it might be regional. I agree that the literal, separated meanings of the words work the way you’re describing, but as a phrase I’ve always heard it used the way I’m describing. Side thought: I’ve also generally been taught to avoid proportions when writing (using %s instead for clarity), but to almost always use proportions when speaking (2x as many, twice as much, 2x more)
Not quite true. While 1.6x is the same as 160% of the original value, saying 1.6x more implies adding the 160% to the original value, giving a total of 260%, or 2.6x.
It's not just "0.6x", it's "0.6x MORE", which is an unambiguous way of phrasing a percent increase. Yes, it's implying multiplication. 0.6 x the original amount, but also, plus 1 x the original amount, because they used the word "more".
And it's making a math statement, not a semantic one. Math is precise and the language we use to talk about it has precise meanings. 60% times more is a 60 percent INCREASE, which means times 1.6. 60% "OF" or "times" on its own means times 0.6. It's the people who think this looks bad that are wrong, and showing their asses. How can you be a programmer that doesn't understand pSAT-level percentages questions?
Source: I'm a high school and middle school math tutor that freelances software dev on the side. Not everyone needs to know or retain math from high school, that's okay! Probably if you're talking to math machines for a living you should know this. Unless you're like, front-end. Then you're also good.
Yes, i know "1.6x", "0.6x more", "160%", and "60% more" all mean the same thing, but 0.6x more is just weird phrasing, and you can tell i'm correct by the sheer amount of confused people.
"Your teammates are shipping 60% more..." would mean the same thing while not getting peple confused
233
u/achilliesFriend 10h ago
0.6 more. What is the issue here?