1/3 and 1/100 are perfectly representable using floating point. Sure, I've never seen fp in base 3 in the wild, but base 10 isn't unusual for the exact reason y

1/3 and 1/100 are perfectly representable using floating point. Sure, I've never seen fp in base 3 in the wild, but base 10 isn't unusual for the exact reason you're pointing out. So what I see is a conclusion that floating point is "emulated reals" as opposed to rationals, despite all floating point numbers being rational numbers and that decimal floating point is wrong and "the worst of both worlds", but I don't see a valid argument for it.