Freedom degrees. Roughly -13° or 38° if you live in the sane parts of the world.

I’d pick triple digits, mostly because I’ve lived in places that routinely hit 100° in the summer, and I hate shoveling snow.

  • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 hours ago

    If you actually live in those temp ranges, you’re fucked either way. Modern technology is what makes those ranges bearable.

    That being said, I can bundle up pretty easy compared to mitigating heat.

  • Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Single digits for sure. I’ll be okay from -9 to +9, but I don’t really see a solution to a 999°F heatwave

  • Tinks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Assuming modern technology didn’t suddenly disappear, I would pick the cold without a doubt. Give me a good sized greenhouse attached to my home for growing my garden and I would be happy as a lamb. I hate summer, and the heat that comes with it. While 9F is colder than I typically prefer for outdoor activities (I generally like it right around 40F) I can make clothing and gear adjustments to continue outdoor hobbies like hiking and backpacking. If it was perpetually colder here I would probably take up a snow sport too. (Currently it’s not snowy enough where I live for snow sports). Also if it’s that cold I would never have to deal with bugs again and I am 100% here for that.

    As it currently is I’m basically stuck inside for 3 months of the year due to heat unless I want to drive 8 or more hours for a brief holiday respite. Summer is the worst. Give me arctic cold please.

    • Dashi@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 minutes ago

      I was voting cold before but I didn’t even think about the bugs. 1000% team cold now lol.

  • Majestic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Not even a choice.

    If you choose over 100F you will see electronics failing more often, working harder, less efficient, working badly, etc because the heat is causing them to throttle in various ways. In the modern world it is far, far easier to heat up a space with a house full of electronics and humans than it is to keep it cool. The energy required to raise the temperature from say 5 degrees F to a more comfortable 40 degrees (35 degree change) pales in comparison to the energy required to keep yourself and your devices cool a mere 10-15 degrees less to around 90 degrees which is still uncomfortably hot and sweaty.

    I’ll note that a constant 100 degrees is more than hot enough to cause various foods, medications, substances to break down and go bad. Check your medicine cabinet, most of your pills including over the counter are only rated for storage at up to 86 degrees. Your medicine will lose efficiency or go bad in some, perhaps many cases. Your food outside your fridge will spoil more quickly, mold and bacteria will grow more quickly and readily. Your fridge itself will work harder and die sooner.

    The tap water will run hot or warm most of the time meaning a shower won’t necessarily cool you off much.

    The colder temperatures are cheaper all costs considered, feel better, can be negated at a moment’s notice with socks, a jacket, and a blanket.

    It’s easy to insulate a home against extreme cold and just retain heat you generate inside including by your body and devices. It requires a lot more effort to keep the inside cold when both the outside and things inside are generating heat and trying to warm it up.

    This is a reason why climate change is a nightmare not just for human comfort but on so many levels. Our electronics are going to operate less efficiently in a warmer world and draw more power to do so.

  • ada@friend.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    12 hours ago

    @ephrin Well, assuming I still had access to mitigation strategies, like well designed housing etc, I’d choose permanent 38C (100F) over permanent -13C.

    • ephrin@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Sure, modern tech is available. Both of these theoretical would be pretty intolerable without them.

  • Luke@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Single digit temperatures. One can always wear more clothing to keep warm, but can only get so naked in triple digit heat before dying from exhaustion or dehydration.

    • hansolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Friendo, for those of us that have lived in deserts, no one gets naked. During the day at least ;)

      Light clothes are amazing. I lived for 3 years on the edge of the Sahara with no power and pulling water from a well. When it was 110+F, sitting under a tree and soaking your shirt in water was perfectly fine, and more than enough to be comfortable. Turbans are amazing technology.

      And I’ve spent time above the Arctic circle. I can compare the two.

      While you like to think “you can put in more clothes,” that’s nice and all… Both if you have the right clothes, and have imported heat and calories. OP is talking about perpetual Arctic circle winter. Nothing grows, you will run out if wood to burn to stay warm. You will import everything, from boots to gloves to pants to coats. Look at an Inuit diet. Now look at a Mediterranean diet. Civilization flourished in areas that get hot. Humans spent 50,000 years in the equatorial zone. We are built for it.

      You do you, but, uh…enjoy your narwhal blubber and seal jerkey I guess?

    • ephrin@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Which is why I made the jab at “freedom degrees” in the text. Also “single or triple digits” is easier and less random than “-13 or 38?” 😅

  • TerranFenrir@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    19 hours ago

    I literally moved from a 38 degrees+ country to a negative temps country. So yeah. Negative temps. 100%.

    U can wear warm clothes. There exist no “cold” clothes.

  • Flickerby@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    I’d take single digit temperatures over 80+ even, let alone 100+, that’s insane, I’m northern born so I start melting around 80, I would die at 100. Hell I’d take double digit negative temperatures only over triple digits

    • brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I’ve lived in both. The generally colder environments with high humidity are worse than adding 10-15° and having low humidity.

      • Flickerby@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 hours ago

        When I was a kid we once had a snow storm so bad it took out the entire (small) town’s power. People huddled up in the mayor’s house because he had a working genny. When the adults had to go out they had to wear goggles or your eyes would start freezing in your skull. Yaaaa Minnesota

  • Photuris@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Arid, or humid?

    It makes all the difference at higher temperatures. 100°F in Nevada or New Mexico is NOT the same thing as 100°F in Florida or Tennessee.