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

  • mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Let me introduce you to tolerance in measuring instruments and measuring errors.

    Edit: Apparently I’m pro evil companies because I just pointed out that scales (and more importantly non-professional scales) have relatively high error tolerances (+ the measurament method error). Thus the measuring of this pasta and the possible interpretations of it have to take into account that.

      • PennyAndAHalf@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Last year this claim went around for the Loblaws No Name brand in Canada so I went shopping with my kitchen scale, preparing to be outraged. Everything was a solid 10% over the advertised weight.

      • 0xD@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        “Always” is a really strong word that you should not be using in this context since it’s just not true.

        • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          For example, there once was more than indicated on a package of lentils in 1958. So it’s clearly not always.

    • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      That does not apply in today’s world where shrinkflation and consumer fraud run rampant.

      It us solely the company’s responsibility to ensure each package is labeled with the correct weight, not the consumer to tolerate excuses like “measuing errors” whether they’re valid or not. Companies have too much power to just not know or be able to accurately weigh or label their product, ergo if there’s a problem, they chose to have it in there. And if you dispute that, I will simply block you and move on.

      Stop defending evil corporations. Stop doing this.

  • skeeter_dave@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Sup, I’m your local friendly USDA contractor who very much uses scales everyday. Consumer grade kitchen scales are terrible and will lie to you. The fact that it does not go out to the tenths or hundredths is a big flag for accuracy.

    We check test our scales twice a year to make sure they are accurate. I once tried check testing my kitchen scale I use for canning for giggles and it failed miserably. It would only register weight on 2 out of 4 quadrants until I got to 10g or so. I’m sure my ohaus is going to show a different and more accurate result if I where to try it.

  • Aux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Plenty of people have already explained that consumer scales show bullshit. But there’s another reason why your weight is not the same as producer’s weight.

    You see, kilograms are a unit of measure of mass, not weight. Weight is measured in Newtons. And 1kg = 1 * g Newtons. But here’s the catch - g is not constant in real life. It changes from 9.7639 to 9.8337 depending on your location. That’s almost 1% of variance.

    What that means is that if you take your scales and your pasta and go on a worldwide trip, then you will see different weight in different locations.