What I found while looking for people who agree with me
-
I often search the web for my own grievances looking for reinforcement of my own conclusions to make myself feel better and thereby feed my own delusions about my self-worth.
In this instance I was, once again looking for people who hate the weirdly retroactively enforced metric byte measurements based on 1000 rather than the traditional 1024. I found something kind of funny:
Finally, something @scottalanmiller and I can agree on after spending so many years at each others throats on every single issue.
A new, weird and unnecessary unit of data capacity, created by some idiots of IEC and aggressively advertised on Wikipedia. [link]
Anyway I did find some rather hilariously bizarre favourable reasons:
@JeffBush01 @dnaltews not a fan either, but then it lets the confusion continue and computers be isolated from science. [link]
lol, what?
No wait, I mean, yeah, all those scientists doing weather models, genetic engineering, etc by hand because of that damn 1024 divisibility.
kilo is a SI prefix assigned to 10^3. even if we don't like it, a kilobyte is 1000 bytes. get over it please [link]
They didn't invent the word nor do they have some sort of magical control over it.
Standards exist for a reason - KiB is not ambiguous, but KB is - therefore KiB is preferred to be used when talking about 1024 bytes [link]
I'm pretty sure the only reason it's ambiguous now is because of this garbage. It always meant 1024 before, now it can mean either because of this arbitrary garbage.
Anyway, I don't mind if we want to create one divisible by 1000 and create new prefixes for those, but to go back and rewrite history completely seems completely asinine. I blame hard drive manufacturers wanting their drives to seem bigger and Apple Computer, Inc for being the first company I know of (I'm sure there were earlier ones) which began using this officially.
How is it helpful to create this reverse standard so that now any historical measurement or older way of measuring is automatically wrong? That's moronic even if you think the system should be divisible by 1000, changing one which exists serves to do nothing but to cause problems.
-
What a great find! And I refuse to use revisionist naming systems still.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What I found while looking for people who agree with me:
What a great find! And I refuse to use revisionist naming systems still.
I also refuse to use it anywhere and always have, and in fact it's not even an issue of refusing to use it, I'm just doing it the proper way and that automatically excludes it. I do feel sort of bad about all of the science that goes incomplete because of this issue, though.
-
@tonyshowoff said in What I found while looking for people who agree with me:
How is it helpful to create this reverse standard so that now any historical measurement or older way of measuring is automatically wrong? That's moronic even if you think the system should be divisible by 1000, changing one which exists serves to do nothing but to cause problems.
Yes... we had only one standard before and everyone knew what it meant. We were all taught and trained and it was obvious. Suddenly there is all this confusion for no reason. We've just made ourselves dumber.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What I found while looking for people who agree with me:
@tonyshowoff said in What I found while looking for people who agree with me:
How is it helpful to create this reverse standard so that now any historical measurement or older way of measuring is automatically wrong? That's moronic even if you think the system should be divisible by 1000, changing one which exists serves to do nothing but to cause problems.
Yes... we had only one standard before and everyone knew what it meant. We were all taught and trained and it was obvious. Suddenly there is all this confusion for no reason. We've just made ourselves dumber.
It's like changing foot is, say it's now 10 inches and an inch is now 10cm, and saying that traditional 12 inches is now "pedifoot" and 1 traditional inch (as in 2.54cm) is "unciainch", those being the Latin words for "foot" and "divisible by 12" respectively.
Damn, I may be on to something. Watch out you Americans and English.
Edit: and a mile is 1000 feet, which actually make since because it comes from milia meaning 1000, not 5,280 feet. So, maybe rename the old one to quinquemilamile? Perhaps mebimile?
-
Had a test once with a 99% result. Only failed question was a calculation for some backup storage sizing. The calculation itself was correct, but I did a mistake with KiB and KB. I'm somehow proud of that "failure"
For me, it's 128 * 8 = 1024. End of story.
-
Gnaarrr.. this is causing headache. Just thought about a student lesson: "Ladys and gentlemen, please create an array of ushort with a total size of 4 KiB".
