----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl Sorenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, 2003-12-25 23:57 Subject: [USMA:27984] RE: Binary prefixes--not strictly an SI topic
> Bill, I've got to take issue with a lot of what you said the past few emails > (although not the one to Michael). > > You said, "A bit is a bit is a bit. The fact that there can only be an > integral number is a simple mathematical fact and is implicit, not > specifiable, in the definition." > > Nope. There are nuances of the term "bit" that can allow for fractions. > Try reading up on information theory. > > You said, "If a specification is actually gibibytes (but incorrectly labeled > as gigabytes)..." > > Just because you think that we should use these different prefixes doesn't > make it incorrect to use different prefixes. In computer science (in which > I just got a degree), no one uses "kibi" gibi" or anything like that, that I > have ever seen. Maybe some Linux people do that, but that is hardly a > representative sample of the industry as a whole. We have a pretty standard > way of communicating. When referring to bytes, "giga" is generally > understood to mean 2^30. Perhaps a lot of hard drive manufacturers are not > following that, but the hard drive I bought two years ago was indeed labeled > that way. Try looking at the properties of a folder in Windows Explorer and > you will see an example of the traditional terminology. I disagree with what you are saying. Just because you have a degree or "no one uses" these prefixes does not make your ways correct. You are wrong to say giga means 2^30 or is understood as such. That all depends on the product, the engineers intention, the companies practice, etc. as to whether giga means 2^30 or 10^9 or even something inbetween like 2^10 x 10^6. The whole point of the discussion was to see if there was movement by industry to make the prefixes mean what they are suppose to mean and not left up to being a guessing game. You may not like kibi or gibi but at least if you see them in print you know exactly what they mean. You don't have to guess. Like metrication itself, the inertia to adopt the prefixes is great. People don't like to change. Change makes people feel like they were wrong and people don't like to be told they were wrong. It is surprising that institutions of education would not be the first to promote the correct way as being the best way, instead choosing to continue to promote error. But again, many times it was the "institutions" that have been the most resistance to change. It took new thinkers from the outside to breathe fresh air into the instituions. > > We have millions of people using a particular terminology, and a handful > that think it should be changed. The terminology of the millions doesn't > become wrong simply because the handful has a "better" idea. It sure does. Millions of people once thought the earth was flat and only a handful knew the truth. Millions followed Hitler, only a few resisted. Millions of Americans today follow George Bush blindly, only a few are willing to resist his destructive arrogance. If anything, it is the masses that are wrong and the few that are right. The masses are ignorant, the few know the better way. > > Likewise, I see nothing wrong with using "b" as the symbol for "bar". I > seriously doubt anyone will get it confused with a "barn". Pragmatically, > "mb" is a convenient symbol for "millibar". (Personally, I tend to use the > symbol hPa, but I don't get religious about it). I don't care about bars and barns, they are not a part of SI even if they may be allowed for the time being to be used along with SI. SI must be as error free as possible. It must be consistant and coherant. If you allow it to become corrupt, then you will end up with just another version of FFU. If you personally decide to go against the rules of sI, that is your choice. But you do so without official support. Meaning if your choice produces major complications, then you alone are responsible and must pay the price. You can't blame SI or the BIPM. Euric > > Carl Sorenson > > > > >
