zlacker

[return to "1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?"]
1. waffle+pC[view] [source] 2026-02-03 19:24:06
>>surpri+(OP)
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.
◧◩
2. crazyg+nL[view] [source] 2026-02-03 20:04:00
>>waffle+pC
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.
◧◩◪
3. nixpul+8P1[view] [source] 2026-02-04 02:13:42
>>crazyg+nL
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.

◧◩◪◨
4. reaper+iG2[view] [source] 2026-02-04 10:03:50
>>nixpul+8P1
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.

[go to top]