On 11/2/06, Ralph Shumaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Carl Lowenstein wrote:
> On 10/25/06, Ralph Shumaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > Incidentally, there is no truth to the ugly notion (advanced by
>> > kernel-hackers, no doubt) that most humans use names such as "thirteen"
>> > instead of "1101" simply because they are slow-witted. I know that I
>> > have no trouble equating "index-finger + ring-finger + pinky" with
>> > "thirteen" (or hex D), and the shorter representation certainly greatly
>> > aids human communication and conceptualization.
>>
>> Slow-witted?! 2 you! (0010) ;>
>>
>
> Do you send least-significant bit first, like a Teletype?
>
> carl
Actually, I was just matching the previous example of "1101" being 13.
I was about to give the serious answer that "thirteen" is way more
redundant (and thus reliable) than "1101",
and that,
incidentally, in human communication, lack of precision and potential
for ambiguity is a major design feature (it's called "diplomacy").
Carl:
.noitaton n-esab su thguorb ohw yug eht ekil daehgar gnikneets on si hplaR
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
