Max Battcher wrote: > As a person who has had to work across radixes it is much > easier to deal with radixes that are powers of two (binary, > base 4, octal, hexadecimal) than any other arbitrary base. > There's a reason computers use binary or unary.
They make significantly more sense than base 10, for most things. > Base 12 sounds ridiculous, Not if you routinely have to divide numbers into thirds or sixths, something that's not too uncommon in the real world. Thirds and sixths are pretty common in nature. 12 is evenly divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6, a much better list of factors than the puny 2 and 5 you get with base 10. > and all the more ridiculous for your religious ranting > and racism. To quote Bailiff Bull Shannon, "Oooooookaaaaay"... I didn't see either of those things in Robert's post. ______________________________________________________________________ Steve Sloan ......... Huntsville, Alabama =========> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brin-L list pages .............................. http://www.brin-l.org Science Fiction-themed online store ..... http://www.sloan3d.com/store Chmeee's 3D Objects .................... http://www.sloan3d.com/chmeee 3D and Drawing Galleries .................. http://www.sloansteady.com Software ................ Science Fiction, Science, and Computer Links Science fiction scans ......................... http://www.sloan3d.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
