That story is hilarious. Thanks for sharing! As to kilo vs kibi, it's not the case that I can't think in binary (I use it all the time) or even that the use of kilo to mean 1024 troubles me in itself. It is that I have found no consistency in the context in which the word kilo reliably means 210. Transfer speeds, at the level of hardware are often referred to with metric kilobits or kilobytes. In the world of hard disk manufacturers, the issue has even been brought to court, I hear. And although a lot of programs do use the words kilo and mega to mean 210 and 220, the community is by no means consistent with these definitions. Once I even did a crossword puzzle where the clue was "1,440,000 Bytes", and the only answer that fit was "MEG" ** Gasp! ** I should have ripped it up and wrote a nasty letter to the publisher! haha. For these reasons, I think the IEC (I before E, to correct my last post...) kibi standard is a blessing. It allows us to unambiguously use metric in most cases, and also gives us symbols to unambiguously use the base two numbers most convenient with machines, when we really need them.
-John
Post, Mark K a écrit :
No, but that particular bit of idiocy was the inspiration for my comment. I
just took it one decimal point further.
