C
Cal Vanize
Rod said:
Maybe the Wikipedia credibility is linked to your credibility.
So THAT'S why it isn't allowed as a research source for collegiate
papers or even grade school or high school science projects.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Maybe the Wikipedia credibility is linked to your credibility.
So THAT'S why it isn't allowed as a research source for collegiate
papers or even grade school or high school science projects.
R
Rod Speed
Cal Vanize said:Rod Speed wrote
Maybe the Wikipedia credibility is linked to your credibility.
Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
So THAT'S why it isn't allowed as a research source for collegiate
papers or even grade school or high school science projects.
Wrong again, it isnt allowed for other reasons, ****wit child.
Britannica is in fact hopeless inadequate in a whole raft of areas
compared with wikipedia, most obviously with most computer
stuff, but also with a surprising variety of other stuff too.
Try looking up IUDs on both some time.
Best have a VERY large towel ready for your face.
J
jameshanley39
nice article. will take some time to absorb!
But in the table of that article there's a difference between "word
size" and instruction size. Sizes differ.
e.g. in the first row. And lots of other rows
Most obviously with the command prompt Dir
Those are both still using a multiplier.
Decimal.
If there is no binary organisation in data comms, howcome the numbers
512 and 256 occur as standard speeds?
Regarding the term decimal prefix and binary prefix.
I just found this article that discusses the 2^x and 10^x prefixes
Now I realise that binary prefix and decimal prefix are official
names.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix
It seems to me that it's not that the prefix is in binary. But it's
just officially named "binary prefix" because the prefix is "based on"
multiples of 2.
It talks about those that "abuse SI prefixes ..using them..in ***a
binary sense*** ".
What they have named/titled "decimal prefix" and "binary prefix",
(just) means "prefix for decimal multiples", and "prefix for binary
multiples" respectively.
http://www.iec.ch/zone/si/si_bytes.htm
So, It doesn't mean it's in the binary or decimal number system.
The 2^x prefix or as it is named "the binary prefix", is not 1s and
0s. The reason for it being called binary prefix is given. In all
their explanations, they don't say it's named that way because it's in
the binary number system. Not suprising, since it isn't in the binary
number system!
C
Cal Vanize
Rod Speed puked on his keyboard:
Its obvious that you practice what you preach.
Go back to your third grade teacher and tell her you need to learn some
new big words.
Right. It isn't allowed because its inaccurate and an unreliable
source. Thank yo sooooo much for proving my point.
You're the one criticizing Britannica. I only said that Wikipedia was
crap and only idiots (obviously you included) use that as a source.
Something your mother should have used.
Is that the best you can do? Go back to bed, junior.
Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
Its obvious that you practice what you preach.
Go back to your third grade teacher and tell her you need to learn some
new big words.
Wrong again, it isnt allowed for other reasons <snip typical vocabulary challenged insult).
Right. It isn't allowed because its inaccurate and an unreliable
source. Thank yo sooooo much for proving my point.
Britannica is in fact hopeless inadequate in a whole raft of areas
compared with wikipedia, most obviously with most computer
stuff, but also with a surprising variety of other stuff too.
You're the one criticizing Britannica. I only said that Wikipedia was
crap and only idiots (obviously you included) use that as a source.
Try looking up IUDs on both some time.
Something your mother should have used.
Best have a VERY large towel ready for your face.
Is that the best you can do? Go back to bed, junior.
R
Rod Speed
(e-mail address removed) wrote
Yeah, its a surprisingly complex question.
And some like the PDP11 and Vax dont really have a fixed word size too.
The earlier stuff like the PDP8 and PDP9 did.
Yeah, its surprisingly complicated. Unfortunately the links at the
bottom refer to physical books not available online as far as I know.
For the same reason that bytes are 8 bits.
Yes they are, and I said that previously, tho not so explicitly.
Thats what saying a prefix is binary means.
Yes, thats why I kept referring to PREFIXES.
Binary in its most general use involves more than just 1s and 0s.
Hex and octal are different formats for binary.
Yes, it was only you that even brought up the term 'number system'
What matters is prefixes.
nice article. will take some time to absorb!
Yeah, its a surprisingly complex question.
And some like the PDP11 and Vax dont really have a fixed word size too.
The earlier stuff like the PDP8 and PDP9 did.
But in the table of that article there's a difference
between "word size" and instruction size. Sizes differ.
e.g. in the first row. And lots of other rows
Yeah, its surprisingly complicated. Unfortunately the links at the
bottom refer to physical books not available online as far as I know.
If there is no binary organisation in data comms, howcome
the numbers 512 and 256 occur as standard speeds?
For the same reason that bytes are 8 bits.
Regarding the term decimal prefix and binary prefix.
I just found this article that discusses the 2^x and 10^x prefixes
Now I realise that binary prefix and decimal prefix are official names.
Yes they are, and I said that previously, tho not so explicitly.
It seems to me that it's not that the prefix is in binary. But it's just officially
named "binary prefix" because the prefix is "based on" multiples of 2.
Thats what saying a prefix is binary means.
It talks about those that "abuse SI prefixes ..using them..in ***a binary sense*** ".
What they have named/titled "decimal prefix" and "binary prefix",
(just) means "prefix for decimal multiples", and "prefix for binary
multiples" respectively.
http://www.iec.ch/zone/si/si_bytes.htm
So, It doesn't mean it's in the binary or decimal number system.
Yes, thats why I kept referring to PREFIXES.
The 2^x prefix or as it is named "the binary prefix", is not 1s and 0s.
Binary in its most general use involves more than just 1s and 0s.
Hex and octal are different formats for binary.
The reason for it being called binary prefix is given. In all their explanations,
they don't say it's named that way because it's in the binary number system.
Not suprising, since it isn't in the binary number system!
Yes, it was only you that even brought up the term 'number system'
What matters is prefixes.
R
Rod Speed
Cal Vanize said:Rod Speed wrote
Nope.
It isn't allowed because its inaccurate and an unreliable source.
Wrong again, it isnt allowed for other reasons, ****wit child.
You're the one criticizing Britannica.
Nope, just rubbing your nose in the terminal stupidity of your claims about Wikipedia.
I only said that Wikipedia was crap and only idiots (obviously you included) use that as a source.
You can keep repeating that pathetic little mantra till the
cows come home if you like, changes absolutely nothing.
Try comparing the wikipedia article on the IBM 360 with anything else
you can find that has any claim to be an authoritative reference on anything
like as wide a subject coverage and you will find the proof that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.
<reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>