zlacker

>>tromp+(OP)
It all depends on what values you're willing to leave unrepresentable.

(Bearing in mind that the set of operations that you can accurately support in your number system also depends on the set of representable values.)

If you don't really care you can go arbitrarily high.

>>yarg+Uq1
Very true, but in all fairness the proposed solution of using Turing machines is pretty reasonable. I think the title is a play on Scott Aaronson's "largest number" game.

>>ravi-d+Us1
Sure, but where do you stop?

I think a more interesting question is "what's the largest number usefully representable in 64 bits?".

>>yarg+Vt1
My thinking is that the article isn't really investigating the largest number you can share in 64 bits- as you say, it's sort of meaningless. Instead, like the biggest number game, it's a lead in to talk about some neat topics in theoretical computer science