Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 38 of 38

Thread: Lucid reads file size wrong/what package to debug?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Beans
    473

    Re: Lucid reads file size wrong/what package to debug?

    What's hilarious is that the new ubuntu unit policy https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UnitsPolicy is the pretty much what people voted not to do in the brainstorm http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/17839/

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Beans
    20

    Re: Lucid reads file size wrong/what package to debug?

    Quote Originally Posted by Longinus00 View Post
    What's hilarious is that the new ubuntu unit policy https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UnitsPolicy is the pretty much what people voted not to do in the brainstorm http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/17839/
    What the majority vote for is not always the best.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: Lucid reads file size wrong/what package to debug?

    I understand why the new unit policy is needed. And I can use it when writing programs or write essays. But I will never ever use it orally in a technical situation. kilo is 2^10 This is because 10^3 is not viable. The SI prefix is only used in marketing purposes and for those mortals.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Beans
    5

    Re: Lucid reads file size wrong/what package to debug?

    Since we are righting wrongs ... (although it is slightly OT)

    Quote Originally Posted by recluce View Post

    Modem definitions were based on baud (pulses per second) and that definition originates with telex and earlier services, not the computer world. Thus transfer rates were always expressed as base10. The usage of "kbit/s" is indead wrong here, It should be kBd (kilo-Baud). Again, blame human laziness for no longer using the Baud unit where appropriate.
    It is a common misunderstanding, mixing baudrate with bitrate. These two measures are related - but only slightly. The baudrate specifies the number of "symbols" transferred per second. However, one symbol might represent one or several bits of information; how many depends on the type of modulation.

    Consider the common (well, it used to be) V29 16 point QAM modulation. The baud rate is 2400 baud (symbols per second). But since each symbol represents 1-of-16 different data points, it carries four bits of information across. Hence, the bit-rate is 2400 * 4 = 9600 bits / second.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Beans
    927
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    This System Will Avoid Confusion

    Glad they've done this, but they should display all sizes in iB, rather than B, or at least give you the option to choose for yourself how sizes are displayed. For your information, although CD's are measured in MiBs, DVDs are measured in GBs - so although at first this may cause some CD confusion, it will avoid more confusion in the long run.
    Code:
    CD = 700MiB
    DVD = 4.7GB
    Yep, they're measured differently.
    More info here.
    Last edited by Penguin Guy; March 14th, 2010 at 10:22 PM.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Beans
    15
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: Lucid reads file size wrong/what package to debug?

    Quote Originally Posted by recluce View Post
    Just check out the size calculation of all floppy disks and floppy drives (go to wikipedia for a source, if you like). a 1.44 MB floppy was 1.44*1024² bytes. Same for optical media. Any media BUT hard drives was base2 calculated for the longest time.
    Floppy disks are the best example of abusing standards. A floppy labeled with "1.44 MB" neither has 1.44 MiB, nor 1.44 MB. It has 1,440 KiB = 1,440 * 1024 bytes = 1474560 bytes = 1.47 MB = 1.41 MiB.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Beans
    11
    Distro
    Ubuntu Breezy 5.10

    Re: Lucid reads file size wrong/what package to debug?

    Quote Originally Posted by recluce View Post
    I go back in computing a bit longer, so from the late 70s on, a Kilobyte (kB) was 1024 Bytes, a Megabyte (MB) was 1024 kb or 1024*1024 bytes (earlier too, but that I don't remember).
    The convention which defines that a kilo = 1000 goes way back, it was created by Lavoisier more than 200 years ago. Some computer scientists of the 70s made a mistake when they tried to redefine kilo to a more practical value creating the mess we have today.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Freiburg, Germany
    Beans
    3

    Re: Lucid reads file size wrong/what package to debug?

    Until the day comes that we abolish the bit as the fundamental unit of all computation-and that includes the size of the registers in your cpu, to the pins coming out the bottom of that cpu, to the number of transistors used to represent a unit of memory in silicon memory chips, abandoning base-2 operations and all of the logic(electrical and algorithmic) based on that base, any mucking around the numbers being displayed at either the OS level or application level is just flat out, unconditionally wrong.

    If one feels one must adhere to standards, which often amount to little more than mere conventions, even while one is transgressing against some 100 years of established binary usage in all things computational, the one can change the 2 letter prefix(MB) to a 3 letter prefix (MiB) if that really floats your boat.

    The issue at hand here is that the binary basis of computers is not *merely* a convention, it is not simply a matter that we talk about computers this way or that. It is not simply a standard. Our agreement, yours and mine-means NOTHING in terms of computation, in terms of algorithmic and electrical logic, which is the basis of the computer.

    Computers ARE binary, that is how they function, how they are built, how they are designed and how they work. In a world where almost everything is arbitrary, and we just need to agree to get along, computers are like stalwart reminders that not everything *is* arbitrary. (this impotence, this being thrown-back on ourselves in a futile attempt to make computers more human, even though there is NOTHING human about computers in terms of how they function, is the ultimate source of this little charade)

    If you break the underlying link between the numbers that we get displayed in the outputs from the OS, from applications, etc. and the binary basis of these calculations you will get nothing more than a world of hurt:confusion, mistakes, wrong assumptions, and outright frustration.

    The SI is a wonderful system. It's advantages are too many as to be denied. Personally I wish that the whole world would make the switch. But as with any standard, standards are only useful within a specific scope of application. In the scientific world where SI has had nearly universal success, it's success has been based on the fact that at the basis of all scientific activity there lies act of measuring. How we measure things is by definition arbitrary. And if we construct countless devices and instruments which record measurements in units that facilitate our practical utilities, science as a whole, and all things dependent on science make spectacular progress. Yet how much memory is being used is not in the first instance a measurement. There is a difference between that which is being measured and the measurement. One is a representation the other is not. How much memory is being used on a given media is a reality, not simply a way of looking at it. If you attempt to write more data to a medium than it can hold Bad Things Happen(TM). Regardless of how you or I or anyone else looks at it.

    Go ahead and change to GiB,MiB and KiB. I can ignore the little 'i' and get on with things. Change the actual numbers and you turn my computer into something which continually misrepresents, something that I cannot count on, something where it's only consistency is in the consistency of it's inaccuracy. And although we are used to such from politicians I really don't want my computer to become that way.

    Have a nice day

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •