Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

waspdev.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 430 posts

Re: 1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

#361

Post by fuzzfactor »

tim333 wrote: post #353
highhedgehog wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wait, what is wrong with that?

Dunno but there are two similar but slightly different cross head screw designs https://www.pbswisstools.com/en/news/detail/phillips-and-poz...

Patents at work.

Before the patent on Phillips screws & tools expired, Pozidriv was launched which was different enough to be capable of a bit more torque.

Phillips was for mass-production, Posidriv for mass-production with a little more torque.

Lots of people who wanted that still waited until the Pozidriv patent expired before considering it.

The screws themselves are marked on the head with little ticks so you can tell the difference, but not necessarily the screwdrivers :\

It's good to have the right tool for the job, HP instruments used Posidriv in a number of places.

Re: 1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

#362

Post by wat10000 »

breezykoi wrote: post #329
wat10000 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because an official body gives a single definition doesn't mean it's unambiguous. Real communication isn't bound by official bodies. When I say my computer has 16GB of RAM, that does not mean exactly 16 billion bytes. I need to update my language accordingly? No thanks. I'll keep saying what I say and nothing will happen.

Real communication isn't bound by official bodies, but it also doesn't work by everyone "just saying what they say" and hoping for the best...

Right, it works by a bunch of different people all using the words in the same way to communicate. Like, say, various SI prefixes being used to mean powers of two in computing contexts by large numbers of people for longer than most of us have been alive.

Re: 1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

#363

Post by nixpulvis »

tombert wrote: post #245
nixpulvis wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a terribly nihilistic outlook on language. We agree to meaning to communicate and progress without endless debate and confusion. SI is pretty clear for a reason.

> We agree to meaning to communicate and progress without endless debate and confusion. We decidedly do not do that. There's a whole term for new terms that arbitrarily get injected or redefined by new people: "slang". I don't understand a lot of the terms teenagers say now, because there's lots of slang that I don't know because I don't use TikTok and I'm thirty-something without kids so I don't hang out with teenag…

I didn't say all language is planned and agreed on. But we absolutely do plan and agree on things.

Re: 1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

#364

Post by nixpulvis »

tuyiown wrote: post #306
nixpulvis wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a terribly nihilistic outlook on language. We agree to meaning to communicate and progress without endless debate and confusion. SI is pretty clear for a reason.

> That's a terribly nihilistic outlook on language. I'm pretty sure any linguist will agree with this definition. All language normalisation is an afterthought.

Incorrect.

Re: 1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

#365

Post by nixpulvis »

reaperducer wrote: post #331
nixpulvis wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

You sly dog.

Re: 1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

#366

Post by KellyCriterion »

simondotau wrote: post #292
philipswood wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, tomato's ARE actually a fruit. But really!? I'll keep calling it in nice round powers of two, thank you very much.

Even more weirdly, pumpkins are berries. But that’s a botanical definition. In the kitchen they (and tomatoes) are classified as vegetables.

Same with cucumbers and a lot more "plants" :-)

Re: 1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

#367

Post by cestith »

cmovq wrote: post #21

The mistake was using the "Kibi" prefix. "Kibibyte" just sounds a bit silly when said out loud.

I usually just say kilobyte when speaking, and say “binary kilobyte” or “decimal kilobyte” if it’s not clear from context. I still (usually, but I forget) use the IEC symbols when I mean binary and the SI symbols when I mean decimal. The extra ‘i’ doesn’t cost that much.

Re: 1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

#368

Post by tiagod »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #356
tiagod wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what you mean. kA is a perfectly valid SI unit.

I don't understand what you don't understand. Where did I object to kilo-amperes?

I misread. GA or GW is a perfectly valid SI unit as well, however.

Re: 1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

#369

Post by NetMageSCW »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #198
ozozozd wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not them denying it, it’s the LLM that generated this slop. All they had to say was that the KiB et. al. were introduced in 1998, and the adoption has been slow. And not “but a kilobyte can be 1000,” as if it’s an effort issue.

They are managed by different standards organizations. One doesn't like the other encroaching on its turf. "kilo" has only one official meaning as a base-10 scalar.

Who was appointed as arbiter of meaning for kilo? And by what right?

Re: 1 kilobyte is precisely 1000 bytes?

#370

Post by NetMageSCW »

burnt-resistor wrote: post #347
pif wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never heard It doesn't matter. "kilo" means 1000. People are free to use it wrong if they wish.

Such a myopic view when reality and marketing is messier than dramatic self-righteousness. This unnecessary bikeshedding nonsense has already been solved by using mebi, kibi, etc. to disambiguate sloppy abuse of SI units.

Fortunately SI doesn’t get to own terms or prefixes and trying to enforce different usage by fiat fails in the real world, exactly as it should.
Post reply on HN