 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> And you were never curious as to why you never saw any amounts between
> $999m and $999999m written anywhere? Anyway, you know now :-)
Well, actually a never read the kind of material where you might ever
see such numbers at all, so... ;-)
I think "million" and "billion" already sound way too similar for
numbers of vastly different sizes. Most people really don't notice the
difference between them.
I figure that's why nobody talks about "seventeen billion bytes". If you
said "seventeen million bytes", nobody would notice the difference very
much. That's why most people call it 17 GB and 17 MB. [Ah, but is that
2^10 or 20^3??]
I wonder what the hell people will call it when 4 terabyte drives become
common. MB => meg, GB => gig, TB => ???
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> And you were never curious as to why you never saw any amounts between
>> $999m and $999999m written anywhere? Anyway, you know now :-)
>
> Well, actually a never read the kind of material where you might ever see
> such numbers at all, so... ;-)
You must of at least seen or heard the headline of MS bidding to buy Yahoo?
That involved some number of billion dollars.
BTW, what you thought a billion was, 1e12, is such a big number that you
would never really see it applied to money. The largest companies in the
world don't even sell close to $1e12 worth of stuff. Only the largest 12
countries in the world have a GDP of above $1e12.
> I think "million" and "billion" already sound way too similar for numbers
> of vastly different sizes. Most people really don't notice the difference
> between them.
What makes you think that? Not noticing the difference could lead to some
pretty embarrassing situations - I've never witnessed anything like that.
> I wonder what the hell people will call it when 4 terabyte drives become
> common. MB => meg, GB => gig, TB => ???
terra?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> Well, even if you try to be metric, the Americans have a different idea
> about what constitutes a "billion"...
That's actually quite exasperating because it makes the word completely
useless. You can't use it for almost anything without the danger of
confusion.
For example if you say "this program processes 2.5 billion data units
per hour", it could well have either meaning. It's completely ambiguous.
This means that if delivering the correct meaning is important, you just
can't use the word "billion". Thus the word, which would otherwise be
quite handy, is completely useless.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Well, even if you try to be metric, the Americans have a different idea
>> about what constitutes a "billion"...
>
> That's actually quite exasperating because it makes the word completely
> useless. You can't use it for almost anything without the danger of
> confusion.
Indeed.
But then, where I work, you're not allowed to write "03/05/08". (Or even
"03/05/2008".) There's no way of knowing which date that actually means...
One more thing to thank America for.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Wed, 21 May 2008 10:30:14 +0100, scott <sco### [at] scottcom> did
spake, saying:
>>>> Well, even if you try to be metric, the Americans have a different
>>>> idea about what constitutes a "billion"...
>>>
>>> Dude, you're so out of date, were you even born when the UK officially
>>> abandoned the idea that a million million is a billion?
>>
>> It's new to me that it was *ever* abandoned. (Why would you do such a
>> thing?)
>
> To avoid confusion?
With whom? Oh wait silly question.
> IIRC back in the 80s (or maybe even earlier)
'74 according to Wikipedia.
> the UK officially stopped using "billion" to mean 1e12, and since then
> it has always meant 1e9. Did you really think all those figures in the
> financial part of the paper that say $6bn mean $6000000000000 and not
> $6000000000?
Still amusing that a bi(mi)llion is officially a thousand million,
linguists of the future are going to have so much fun with this.
Perhaps we should just drop the names and use £6e9 or £3e12 for anything
over a million?
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> Then we have -340 K = 3,400 = 4.905 K^2, which I still don't know how
>>> to solve.
>>
>> That's not what you had. You had this:
>>
>> -340 K + 3,400 = 4.905 K^2
>
> Yeah, a simple typo.
>
>> which is equivalent to
>>
>> 4.905 K^2 + 340 K + 3400 = 0
>
> Mmm, I hadn't realised that.
>
> [But... are the signs correct?]
>
Nope. At least if your previous ones were correct.
-340 K + 3,400 = 4.905 K^2 |-4.905K^2
-4.905K^2 - 340K + 3,400 = 0
-- Arttu Voutilainen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook wrote:
>
> Still amusing that a bi(mi)llion is officially a thousand million,
> linguists of the future are going to have so much fun with this.
In Finnish they are miljardi (1000 million) and biljoona (million
million) to add some confusement :).
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> THANK GOD FOR METRIC!!! >_<
I find that metric works well for things bigger than people, but poorly
for things on a human scale. A pint or cup are both more convenient then
0.3 liters or whatever. A centimeter is too small, a meter is too big.
And of course 10 is hard to divide. I'm told that the standard size for
things like construction materials (planks, drywall, etc) is multiples
of 1.2 meters, because you can actually cut it in thirds and quarters
and such. I would have to look at a construction tape-measure in
Europe somewhere to figure that out.
Interestingly, many measurements in China are combinations of the two.
The "chinese foot" is a third of a meter. The "chinese inch" is two
centimeters. The "chinese ton" (tonne?) is 1000 Kg I think. Technically
metric, but in a convenient scale.
Oh, and for what it's worth, the measures you use in the US are the
inch, the foot, the yard, and the mile. Area is the square yard or the
acre. Volume is gallons, quarts, and ounces. (Pints and cups and all
that if you're measuring cooking ingredients.)
The only time you see hands or furlongs are in horse races; the height
of a horse is measured in hands, and the distance a horse runs is
measured in furlongs. Nobody converts miles to yards or inches, either.
Mils are only used in measuring things like the thickness of paper or
cloth; It's not an everyday sort of thing. Listing all these things and
saying imperial measurement is thus confusing is like complaining there
are fortnights *and* weeks.
More confusing than metric, I'll grant, but not more confusing than
complaining about weeks being seven days or days being 24 hours.
Personally, having grown up with it, I find it quite useful to be able
to say "my desk is 2 feet deep" rather than "my desk is 0.666666 meters
deep." :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Yeah, I love it that "ounce" means different things depending on whether
> you are talking about solids or fluids,
Well, there one is weight and one is volume. :-) Of course, "ounce"
means different things depending on whether you're talking about
precious metals or dry goods, too, so I can't really say you're wrong.
> "mile" means different things on land than on sea,
This is because the "nautical mile" accounts for waves, basically.
> and "gallon" means different things depending on whether
> you are in the US or the UK, not to talk that it also means different things
> depending on whether we are measuring solids or liquids...
I never heard of a solid gallon meaning something different, actually.
And yes, "pint" means something different in London or the rest of
England, too, technically. And it means something different if it's beer
or some other liquid. In reality, nobody pays attention to those
distinctions. :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> You mean "because America says so"? [Why don't *they* just change to the
> correct way?]
So what would a trillion be?
In the US, every third power of 10 has its own word. Makes sense to me.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
