wischi
@wischi@programming.dev
- Comment on OpenAI Execs Mass Quit as Company Removes Control From Non-Profit Board and Hands It to Sam Altman 1 month ago:
Selling your data would be stupid, because they make money with the fact that they have data about you nobody else has. Selling it would completely break their business model.
- Comment on Peeble streamer on Doop 3 months ago:
I’m seemingly also close to the grave, because I have no idea if those words are actual products or just made up.
- Comment on Air Friar 4 months ago:
Franz Reichelt vibes
- Comment on Chicken vs Egg 5 months ago:
And now everybody together… C O E V O L U T I O N
- Comment on Jesus, help me! - No! 7 months ago:
Jesus, take the
wheellegs - Comment on It's surprisingly difficult for AI to create just a plain white image 7 months ago:
But that’s not the full picture. There is a token to end the response, so the LLM decides when the answer is over. So it’s technically possible for ChatGPT to answer with “nothing” by just emitting a single token, namely the “end-answer” token.
- Comment on Most Astronauts Get ‘Space Headaches.’ Scientists Want to Know Why 8 months ago:
Too much blood in their head because of zero g?
- Comment on Real! 9 months ago:
red deitsch oida
- Comment on When "Everything" Becomes Too Much: The npm Package Chaos of 2024 - Socket 9 months ago:
yes
- Comment on SilverBullet: the self-hosted notes app for people with a hacker mindset 9 months ago:
That’s exactly what I did and never looked back. Just installed code-server + a few vs code plugins,l. Automatically synced via some some scripts that push and pull+merge git commits, done. No need for one of those million note taking apps. I also installed polyglot notebooks for vs code to embed code into notes.
- Comment on Tesla is banned from driving schools because of new turn signals 10 months ago:
But K.I.T.T actually delivered on the full self driving part.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
There is a benefit in using 1000 because it’s consistent with all the other 1000 conventions from kg to gramm, km ti meter, etc. And you can do it in your head because we use a base 10 number system.
36826639 bytes are 36.826639 MB. But how many MiB? I don’t know, I couldn’t tell you without a calculator.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
I’m not sure if that’s your disk size or partition size but it’s not a power of two: www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=prime+factors+of+500…
The underlying chips certainly are exact powers of two but the drive size you get as a consumer is practically never an exact power of two, that’s why it doesn’t really make sense to divide by 1024.
The size you provided would be 500107862016 / 1024 / 1024 / 1024 = 465.76174163818359375 GiB
Dividend by 1000³ it would be 500.107862016 GB, so both numbers are not “pretty” and would’ve to be rounded. That’s why there is no benefit in using 1024 for storage devices, even SSDs.
The situation is a bit different with RAM. 16 “gig” modules are exactly 17179869184 bytes. www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=prime+factors+of+171…
So you could say 17.179869184 GB or 16 GiB. Note that those 16 GiB are not rounded and the exact number of bytes for that RAM module. So for memory like caches, RAM, etc. it definitely makes sense to use binary prefixes with 1024 conversation but for storage devices it wouldn’t make a difference because you’d have to round anyway.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
Not even SSDs are. Do you have an SSD? You should lookup the exact drive size in bytes, it’s very likely not an exact power of two.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
Thank you for taking the time to read it and your feedback.
Your replies here come off as pretty condescending.
That was definitely never my intention but a lot of people here said something similar. I should probably work on my English (I’m not a native speaker) to phrase things more carefully.
You shouldn’t just say “did you read the article” and then “it’s in this section of the article”
It never crossed my mind this could be interpreted in a negative way. I tried to gauge if someone read it and still disagreed or if someone didn’t read it and disagrees, because those situations are two different things, at least for me. The hint with the sections was also meant as a pointer because I know that most people won’t read the entire thing but maybe have 5min on their hand to read the relevant section.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
I still don’t get how “did you read it?” is attacking anyone? It’s true I asked for feedback but I’m a bit overwhelmed that I had to clarify that I’m interested in feedback about the post from people who actually read it.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
SI prefixes are literally just base ten and not really about human psychology.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
If a hard drive has exactly 8’269’642’989’568 bytes what’s the benefit of using binary prefixes instead of decimal prefixes?
There is a reason for memory like caches, buffer sizes and RAM. But we don’t count printer paper with binary prefixes because the printer communication uses binary.
There is no(!) reason to label hard drive sizes with binary prefixes.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
Look up the exact number of bytes and then explain to me what the benefits are of using 1024 conversations instead of 1000 for a hard drive?
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
I don’t get feedback just because you read it. I’m thankful for feedback but my sentence was accurate. I don’t benefit if you read it.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
Calling 1024 a kilo is intellectually dishonest. Your conversation is perfectly fine.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
That’s true but the entire disk size is not an exact power of two that’s why binary prefixes (1024 conversation) don’t have any benefit whatsoever when it comes to hard drives. With memory it’s a bit different because other than with storage devices RAM size is always exactly a power of two.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
Binary prefixes (the ones with 1024 conversations) are used to simplify numbers that are exact powers of two - for example RAM and similar types of memory. Hard drive sizes are never exact powers of two. Disk storing bits don’t have anything to do with the size of the disk.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
True and that’s what the article is about. You should check out the interactive diagram in the “(Un)lucky coincidence” section.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
So why don’t they just label drives in Terabit instead of terabyte. The number would be even bigger. Why don’t Europeans also use Fahrenheit, with the bigger numbers the temperature for sure would instantly feel warmer 🤣
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
You should read the blog post. It’s not a matter of option.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
I tried to make the title the exact opposite of clickbait. There are no unanswered questions on purpose. No “Find out if a kilobyte is 1024 bytes or 1000 bytes”. I think people are smart enough that I not just reiterate for 20min why a kilobyte is 1000 bytes but instead go into more details.
The main problem is probably that people won’t sacrifice 20min of there time on something they are not sure if it’s a good read but the only thing I can do is trying to encourage them to read it anyway.
There are not ads, no tracking, no cookies, no login, no newsletter, no paywall. I don’t benefit if you read it. I’d like to clear up misconceptions but I can’t force people to read it.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
Pretty obvious that you didn’t read the article. If you find the time I’d like to encourage you to read it. I hope it clears up some misconceptions and make things clearer why even in those 60+ years it was always intellectually dishonest to call 1024 byte a kilobyte.
You should at least read “(Un)lucky coincidence”
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
Did you read the post? The problem I have is redefining the kilo because of a mathematical fluke.
You certainly can write a mass in base 60 and kg, there is nothing wrong about that, but calling 3600 gramm a “kilogram” because you think it’s convenient that 3600 (60^2) is “close to” 1000 so you just call it a kilogram, because that’s exactly what’s happening with binary and 1024.
If you find the time you should read the post and if not at least the section “(Un)lucky coincidence”.
- Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes 10 months ago:
I’m not sure if I’m too stupid, but how so?