I bought 175 g pack of salami which had 162 g of salami as well.

    • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Also just as plausible that there’s still some broken noodle crumbs and fragments stuck in the bottom flaps of the box.

    • abracaDavid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Huh? Well how do we know that any scale at all is right?

      Pretty sure that every modern scale has a “tare” button that resets the weight and zeroes everything out.

      • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Taring isn’t the same as calibration. Every scale should have instructions on its tolerance (± x grams) and a calibration weight. You’ll have to buy the calibration weight separately.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        That is only single point calibration. You want more than that in case the transfer function is non-linear. Ideally at least two for the extremes of range.

        Basically imagine if y does not equal x, say y = x -0.01*x + b. Your tare is going to adjust b such that at x = 0 you get y equals 0. That doesn’t fix x is equal to 900. At 900 you would get 891.

        Generally speaking for weight you have differential or integral non-linearity. You fix both by multiple calibration points. Which leads to the range transition problem but whatever. No excuse anymore with FPGAs.