6 ms·

Since our civilization seems to have moved to binary for actual computations I wonder if we will someday go back to thinking in terms of halves, quarters, eight

Since our civilization seems to have moved to binary for actual computations I wonder if we will someday go back to thinking in terms of halves, quarters, eighths, etc. of some standard unit. Then people would mock the metric system for being implicitly based on the biological accident of ten fingers...

langarto 12y ago
We should abandon base 10 and use base 16.
- guscost 12y ago
  Base 12 is more useful. We should teach kids to count in binary (and convert it to base 12) then standardize all units around that. And if some country refuses to go along with the plan, we should bomb them until they capitulate.
- Houshalter 12y ago
  Why not base 8? It's closer to 10 and doesn't require 6 more numbers, but 2 fewer.
  - NolF 12y ago
    It's not as easily divisible by 3.
kps 12y ago
Indeed — you can't even represent 0.1 in IEEE floating point, so who in their right mind would try to build a measuring system on tenths?
- letney 12y ago
  > "you can't even represent 0.1 in IEEE floating point" Not true, the IEEE 754-2008 standard provides a Decimal Floating Point specification in binary. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_floating_point#IEEE_754-2008_encoding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_floating_point#IEEE_754...
  - kps 12y ago
    Ah, well, you're the best kind of correct. IBM even have instructions for it. I'll counter with the Ferranti Orion (1959) which had mixed-base operations (primarily for £sd accounting).
- letney 12y ago
  > "you can't even represent 0.1 in IEEE floating point" Not true, the IEEE 754-2008 standard provides a Decimal Floating Point specification in binary. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_floating_point#IEEE_754-2008_encoding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_floating_point#IEEE_754...
xxs 12y ago
Binary notion is too cumbersome - read long to use properly. As a matter of fact e-based system would be the most efficient [1]. There was an attempt to develop 3-based (ternary) computer by the Soviets[2], ternary in theory is slightly more efficient than binary (3 being close to e) but its engineering obstacles makes it quite impractical. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-integer_representation#Base_e http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-integer_representation#Base... [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_computer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_computer

langarto 12y ago

We should abandon base 10 and use base 16.

guscost 12y ago
Base 12 is more useful. We should teach kids to count in binary (and convert it to base 12) then standardize all units around that. And if some country refuses to go along with the plan, we should bomb them until they capitulate.
Houshalter 12y ago
Why not base 8? It's closer to 10 and doesn't require 6 more numbers, but 2 fewer.
- NolF 12y ago
  It's not as easily divisible by 3.

kps 12y ago

Indeed — you can't even represent 0.1 in IEEE floating point, so who in their right mind would try to build a measuring system on tenths?

letney 12y ago
> "you can't even represent 0.1 in IEEE floating point" Not true, the IEEE 754-2008 standard provides a Decimal Floating Point specification in binary. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_floating_point#IEEE_754-2008_encoding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_floating_point#IEEE_754...
- kps 12y ago
  Ah, well, you're the best kind of correct. IBM even have instructions for it. I'll counter with the Ferranti Orion (1959) which had mixed-base operations (primarily for £sd accounting).
letney 12y ago
> "you can't even represent 0.1 in IEEE floating point" Not true, the IEEE 754-2008 standard provides a Decimal Floating Point specification in binary. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_floating_point#IEEE_754-2008_encoding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_floating_point#IEEE_754...

xxs 12y ago

Binary notion is too cumbersome - read long to use properly. As a matter of fact e-based system would be the most efficient [1]. There was an attempt to develop 3-based (ternary) computer by the Soviets[2], ternary in theory is slightly more efficient than binary (3 being close to e) but its engineering obstacles makes it quite impractical. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-integer_representation#Base_e http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-integer_representation#Base... [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_computer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_computer