Comment by waffletower
22 days ago
The author decidedly has expert syndrome -- they deny both the history and rational behind memory units nomenclature. Memory measurements evolved utilizing binary organizational patterns used in computing architectures. While a proud French pedant might agree with the decimal normalization of memory units discussed, it aligns more closely to the metric system, and it may have benefits for laypeople, it fails to account for how memory is partitioned in historic and modern computing.
I do agree up to a point as I still need to double take when I see MiB, but that said, I also do agree keeping SI unit prefixes standardized has great advantages.
So the "sane" options would be either not using SI for digital, or, what was chosen, change the colloquial prefixes in the digital world. The former would have been easier in the short term.
Yes, tomato's ARE actually a fruit.
But really!?
I'll keep calling it in nice round powers of two, thank you very much.
Even more weirdly, pumpkins are berries. But that’s a botanical definition. In the kitchen they (and tomatoes) are classified as vegetables.
Same with cucumbers and a lot more "plants" :-)
Yes. Tomatoes are a fruit because the science says so. That non-scientific people call it something else does not change facts.
Depends if you're using the botanical definition or the (more common) culinary definition[0].
I would argue fruit and fruit are two words, one created semasiologically and the other created onomasiologically. Had we chosen a different pronunciation for one of those words, there would be no confusion about what fruits are.
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit#Botanical_vs._culinary
1 reply →
Definitions that don't reflect peoples usage are not very useful definition.
1 reply →
Context matters…
Knowledge is understanding that tomatoes are a fruit. Wisdom is understanding that they don't belong in a fruit salad.
Or...
Knowledge is understanding that ketchup is tomato jelly. Wisdom is refraining from putting it on your peanut butter and jelly sandwich.
2 replies →
None of your criticisms--which start with an absurd and meaningless ad hominem--apply to the actual content of the article.
Elsewhere you write
> They are definitely denying the importance of 2-fold partitioning in computing architectures.
No, they definitely aren't. There are no words in the article that deny anything at all.
It’s not them denying it, it’s the LLM that generated this slop.
All they had to say was that the KiB et. al. were introduced in 1998, and the adoption has been slow.
And not “but a kilobyte can be 1000,” as if it’s an effort issue.
They are managed by different standards organizations. One doesn't like the other encroaching on its turf. "kilo" has only one official meaning as a base-10 scalar.
I don't think of base 10 being meaningful in binary computers. Indexing 1k needs 10 bits regardless if you wanted 1000 or 1024, and the base 10 leaves some awkward holes.
In my mind base 10 only became relevant when disk drive manufacturers came up with disks with "weird" disk sizes (maybe they needed to reserve some space for internals, or it's just that the disk platters didn't like powers of two) and realised that a base 10 system gave them better looking marketing numbers. Who wants a 2.9TB drive when you can get a 3TB* drive for the same price?
13 replies →
Who was appointed as arbiter of meaning for kilo? And by what right?
1 reply →
There's no evidence of an LLM being involved.
He probably uses Phillips head screws.
wait, what is wrong with that?
Dunno but there are two similar but slightly different cross head screw designs https://www.pbswisstools.com/en/news/detail/phillips-and-poz...
2 replies →
*rationale
Thanks, noticed after edit disappeared
What are you talking about? The article literally fully explains the rationale, as well as the history. It's not "denying" anything. Seems entirely reasonable and balanced to me.
They are definitely denying the importance of 2-fold partitioning in computing architectures. VM_PAGE_SIZE is not defined with the value of '10000' for good reason (in many operating systems it is set to '16384').
That's why I said "usually acceptable depending on the context". In spoken language I also don't like the awkward and unusual pronunciation of "kibi". But I'll still prefer to write in KiB, especially if I document something.
Also If you open major Linux distro task managers, you'll be surprised to see that they often show in decimal units when "i" is missing from the prefix. Many utilities often avoid the confusing prefixes "KB", "MB"... and use "KiB", "MiB"...
No they're not? They very specifically address it.
Why do you keep insisting the author is denying something when the author clearly acknowledges every single thing you're complaining about?
5 replies →
Yea I don't understand the issue here. SI is pretty clear, and this post explains the other standard a little bit.
It's really not all that crazy of a situation. What bothers me is when some applications call KiB KB, because they are old or lazy.
because they are old
I keep using "K" for kilobyte because it makes the children angry since they lack the ability to judge meaning from context.
1 reply →
...old lazy and wrong! Capital K is for Kelvin.
5 replies →