- Mar 29, 2010
- Androgyne; they/them
- Basic Beliefs
- Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
From years of working with systems: there MUST be a tolerance that allows the occasional shortage, but to be properly bounded this must be in terms of the sum total of allowable variance.Holy overcomplication, Batman!It is for manufacturing efficiency: they are manufacturing an efficient way to bilk customers.Jarhyn's remark reminds me of a controversy in California several decades ago. Producers were required to state net contents of a package and were permitted 6% "slop" or such. So a "5 ounce" bag of potato chips might legally contain anywhere from 4.7 ounces to 5.3 ounces.
Manufacturers claimed they needed the tolerance for manufacturing efficiency. But instead it was found that they were able to consistently fill the bags with almost exactly 4.75 ounces of product!
The temp control example was in fact one from my work.
Really such regulations should be 5.0 +/-.05 ounces per standard deviation.
Gig them for excessive variance and mean drift, not per bag.
The regulation should be 'not less than the stated contents'. It's then up to the manufacturer to decide how much more than that target they aim for, in order to not be caught breaking the rule.
Of course, since even among researchers and scientists such messiness is common, I don't see rigor encroaching on packaging and label regulations and time soon.