| ▲ | crazygringo 2 days ago |
| 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. |
|
| ▲ | waffletower 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| 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'). |
| |
| ▲ | senfiaj 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | 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"... | |
| ▲ | crazygringo 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | 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? | | |
| ▲ | waffletower a day ago | parent [-] | | Denying the importance of... | | |
| ▲ | crazygringo a day ago | parent [-] | | Which they're not... | | |
| ▲ | waffletower a day ago | parent [-] | | by coming to the conclusion they did, they are | | |
| ▲ | crazygringo 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | So not denying. You just disagree is all. So please don't mischaracterize articles in the future simply because you disagree with their conclusions. That's misrepresentation, and essentially straight-up lying. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | nixpulvis 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| 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. |
| |
| ▲ | reaperducer a day ago | parent | next [-] | | 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. | | | |
| ▲ | ZoomZoomZoom 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | ...old lazy and wrong! Capital K is for Kelvin. | | |
| ▲ | schiffern 2 days ago | parent [-] | | >Capital K is for Kelvin. It should be "kelvin" here. ;) Unit names are always lower-case[1] (watt, joule, newton, pascal, hertz), except at the start of a sentence. When referring to the scientists the names are capitalized of course, and the unit symbols are also capitalized (W, J, N, Pa, Hz). [1] SI Brochure, Section 5.3 "Unit Names" https://www.bipm.org/documents/20126/41483022/SI-Brochure-9-... | | |
| ▲ | fc417fc802 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Thus there's no ambiguity. kB is power of 10 and KB is clearly not kelvin bytes therefore it's power of two. Doesn't quite fit the SI worldview but I don't see that as a problem. | | |
| ▲ | schiffern a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I often see it with "kB" too, so the proposed (ugly) hack doesn't really solve the problem. I think the author had it just right. There's a lot of inertia, but the traditional way can cause confusion. | |
| ▲ | xigoi 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This only works with kilobytes, not megabytes and gigabytes. |
| |
| ▲ | ZoomZoomZoom a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | I was pretty sure I'd be corrected in some manner, being two of the aforementioned three. Thanks. |
|
|
|
