> If you want metric byte storage sizes, then > first redefine a byte as 10 bits. I think this is the funniest rationale for using base-2 that I have come acro

> If you want metric byte storage sizes, then > first redefine a byte as 10 bits. I think this is the funniest rationale for using base-2 that I have come across. It makes no sense. Memory works conveniently with base-2 because of the address lines. n address lines can select 2^n addresses. The size of the bytes stored at those addresses is completely irrelevant. Your logic would suggest that US gallons, which contain exactly 256 tablespoons, should use binary units, as in "%1010 gallons of gas please" or "that tanker truck can carry 11.3 KGallons (where K equals 1,024)". Base-2 definitely works most neatly for memory capacity, because memory chips are exactly a power of two, always. There's no need to invoke the (irrelevant) size of the byte.