POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : For Warp Server Time
9 Oct 2024 06:59:29 EDT (-0400)
  For Warp (Message 5 to 14 of 44)  
<<< Previous 4 Messages Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 10 Messages >>>
From: Darren New
Subject: Re: For Warp
Date: 25 Jun 2009 16:41:51
Message: <4a43e10f$1@news.povray.org>
Warp wrote:
>   That must be... at least 5 years ago or more?

I thought it had come up repeatedly. :-)

I didn't mean to single you out personally in any way. I just thought you'd 
be amused that the two search engines couldn't agree. :-)


-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Insanity is a small city on the western
   border of the State of Mind.


Post a reply to this message

From: Warp
Subject: Re: For Warp
Date: 25 Jun 2009 16:45:15
Message: <4a43e1db@news.povray.org>
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> I didn't mean to single you out personally in any way. I just thought you'd 
> be amused that the two search engines couldn't agree. :-)

  The question remains: Which one is correct?

-- 
                                                          - Warp


Post a reply to this message

From: Darren New
Subject: Re: For Warp
Date: 25 Jun 2009 16:46:28
Message: <4a43e224$1@news.povray.org>
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> I didn't mean to single you out personally in any way. I just thought you'd 
>> be amused that the two search engines couldn't agree. :-)
> 
>   The question remains: Which one is correct?

I find it interesting that google thinks 1024 meg is a gig, and wolfram 
thinks 1000 meg is a gig. :-) Clearly science disagrees with computers.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Insanity is a small city on the western
   border of the State of Mind.


Post a reply to this message

From: Orchid XP v8
Subject: Re: For Warp
Date: 25 Jun 2009 16:48:34
Message: <4a43e2a2$1@news.povray.org>
Warp wrote:

>   The question remains: Which one is correct?

Whichever one you arbitrarily define as "correct".

Since "kilo" is an SI unit defined as 10^3, I guess that has historical 
precedent. (I mean, without SI, would we even call it "kilobytes" in the 
first place?)

IIRC, somebody somewhere wanted to start calling it KiB or something 
stupid for when you actually mean 2^10...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*


Post a reply to this message

From: Eero Ahonen
Subject: Re: For Warp
Date: 25 Jun 2009 17:13:36
Message: <4a43e880$1@news.povray.org>
Darren New wrote:
> http://www.imgur.com/jvehe
> 
> Who do you believe?


http://www27.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=100000MB+to+GiB

IMO it's a good idea to make them discreet like WA does - it makes
cross-calculating possible.

-Aero


Post a reply to this message

From: Warp
Subject: Re: For Warp
Date: 25 Jun 2009 17:14:56
Message: <4a43e8cf@news.povray.org>
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> IIRC, somebody somewhere wanted to start calling it KiB or something 
> stupid for when you actually mean 2^10...

  I think that "somebody somewhere" would be the International
Electrotechnical Commission.

  The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers also adopted
the naming convention in their IEEE 1541-2002 standard, as well as the
European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization.

-- 
                                                          - Warp


Post a reply to this message

From: somebody
Subject: Re: For Warp
Date: 25 Jun 2009 19:03:34
Message: <4a440246$1@news.povray.org>
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:4a43e8cf@news.povray.org...
> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> > IIRC, somebody somewhere wanted to start calling it KiB or something
> > stupid for when you actually mean 2^10...

>   I think that "somebody somewhere" would be the International
> Electrotechnical Commission.
>
>   The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers also adopted
> the naming convention in their IEEE 1541-2002 standard, as well as the
> European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization.

Good intentions, but "kilo binary binary digit" - what were they smoking?


Post a reply to this message

From: Chambers
Subject: Re: For Warp
Date: 25 Jun 2009 22:20:01
Message: <web.4a442f6130d220383eea59080@news.povray.org>
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >> http://www.imgur.com/jvehe
> >
> >> Who do you believe?
> >
> >   Why for me?
>
> You're the one I most vividly remember complaining that disk drive
> manufacturers say 1,000,000,000 bytes is a gigabyte?

No, that would be me.

DIE, WA, DIE!!!!11

....

OK, I'm done now for at least a week... ;)

....Chambers


Post a reply to this message

From: Mueen Nawaz
Subject: Re: For Warp
Date: 25 Jun 2009 23:53:17
Message: <4a44462d$1@news.povray.org>
On 06/25/09 15:46, Darren New wrote:
> I find it interesting that google thinks 1024 meg is a gig, and wolfram
> thinks 1000 meg is a gig. :-) Clearly science disagrees with computers.

	Do you mean the other way round? The link clearly shows Wolfram 
thinking 1024 Megs is a Gig.

-- 
Marge: "When I married you, I knew we wouldn't live in luxury."
Homer: "And I kept that vow."


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl


Post a reply to this message

From: Darren New
Subject: Re: For Warp
Date: 26 Jun 2009 01:21:22
Message: <4a445ad2$1@news.povray.org>
Mueen Nawaz wrote:
>     Do you mean the other way round? The link clearly shows Wolfram 
> thinking 1024 Megs is a Gig.

Errr, no, I don't think so. The top half is where google says 100,000 megs 
is 97 gig, implying 1024 meg to the gig. The bottom half is wolfram saying 
100,000 meg is 100 gig. Hence, wolfram thinks 1000 meg is 1 gig, yes?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Insanity is a small city on the western
   border of the State of Mind.


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 4 Messages Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 10 Messages >>>

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.