4 May
2009
4 May
'09
4:34 a.m.
Christian Corti wrote:
On Sat, 2 May 2009, Tim Shoppa wrote:
> I just noticed that the total size of the Bitsavers archive seems
> to have surpassed 100 Gigabytes in the past few days.
No it hasn't ;-) The current total size of
Bitsavers (everything including
bits and pdf) is 96 GB on a ZFS "partition".
Maybe I did not make myself clear enough. When I wrote
100 Gigabytes, I meant 10**11 bytes, because as I see the archive with
rsync there are 100461300404 bytes in it. Certainly when I made the other
calculations I used 10**11 bytes.
I did not mean 10**8 * 2**10 bytes.
I did not mean 10**5 * 2**20 bytes.
I did not mean 10**2 * 2**30 bytes.
I suspect your 96 GB is 96 * 10**3 * 2**20 bytes, i.e. what you call
a GB is actually what a SI-sensitive person would call a KiloMebibyte.
Tim.
4 May
4 May
7:46 a.m.
--- On Mon, 5/4/09, Tim Shoppa <shoppa at trailing-edge.com> wrote:
Ah, so you used hard disk manufacturer's "lying" gigabytes... <grin>
A bit is a single one or zero. A byte is eight bits. A kilobyte is 1024 bytes. A megabyte
is 1024 kilobytes, and a gigabyte is 1024 megabytes.
So, in that case, 100461300404 bytes/1024 comes out to 98106738.68 kilobyes.
divided again by 1024 to get 95807.36 megabytes...
divided again by 1024 gives us 93.56 gigabytes.
100 gigabytes = 107374182400 bytes.
<grin>
-Ian
Christian Corti wrote:
No it
hasn't ;-) The current total size of
Bitsavers (everything including
bits and pdf) is 96 GB on a ZFS
"partition".
Maybe I did not make myself clear enough. When I wrote
100 Gigabytes, I meant 10**11 bytes, because as I see the
archive with
rsync there are 100461300404 bytes in it. Certainly when I
made the other
calculations I used 10**11 bytes. 
7:50 a.m.
On Mon, 4 May 2009, Tim Shoppa wrote:
Maybe I did not make myself clear enough. When I
wrote
100 Gigabytes, I meant 10**11 bytes, because as I see the archive with
A factor like kilo or giga implies a base of 2 when used in conjunction
with with bytes, basta! And I hate those babybytes - ehm - mebibytes and
so on.
Christian
7:58 a.m.
On May 4, 2009, at 10:50 AM, Christian Corti wrote:
You and me both. The people who came up with that need to be
beaten severely. Then they need to find a hobby to take up their
obvious excess of free time so they won't try something like this again.
The other one that really gets me was the (thankfully short-lived)
effort to replace the traditional "master/slave" ATA terminology with
"master/subordinate", because some professionally offended person
couldn't handle even the mention of the word "slave".
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
Maybe I did
not make myself clear enough. When I wrote
100 Gigabytes, I meant 10**11 bytes, because as I see the archive
with
A factor like kilo or giga implies a base of 2 when used in
conjunction with with bytes, basta! And I hate those babybytes -
ehm - mebibytes and so on. 
10:07 a.m.
The other one that really gets me was the (thankfully short-lived) effort to
replace the traditional "master/slave" ATA terminology with
"master/subordinate", because some professionally offended person couldn't
handle even the mention of the word "slave".
I think someone eventually handed that guy a nice, steaming hot cup of
STFU. :)
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
OpenQM - A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://gpl.openqm.com - Get it _today_!
10:18 a.m.
On May 4, 2009, at 1:07 PM, Gene Buckle wrote:
ROFL! I suspect that was the case, yes. :)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
The other one
that really gets me was the (thankfully short-lived)
effort to replace the traditional "master/slave" ATA terminology
with "master/subordinate", because some professionally offended
person couldn't handle even the mention of the word "slave".
I think someone eventually handed that guy a nice, steaming hot cup
of STFU. :) 
10:27 a.m.
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
On May 4, 2009, at 1:07 PM, Gene Buckle wrote:
?ROFL! ?I suspect that was the case, yes. :)
Here's a contemporary word on the topic...
<http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/11/26/master.term.reut/index.html>
I'm not sure where the concept originated, but I do recall hearing a
complaint from a friend who worked for a University that they were
considering going down the same path as Los Angeles County, but I
don't remember if it was just at the (state) University level or
across the whole state.
There was at one point a large quantity of parody surrounding this.
My favorite was to replace "master/slave" with "mistress/worm".
-ethan
The other one that really gets me was the (thankfully short-lived) effort
to replace the traditional "master/slave" ATA terminology with
"master/subordinate", because some professionally offended person couldn't
handle even the mention of the word "slave".
I think someone eventually handed that guy a nice, steaming hot cup of
STFU. :) 
10:34 a.m.
>> The other one that really gets me was the
(thankfully short-lived)
>> effort
>> to replace the traditional "master/slave" ATA terminology with
>> "master/subordinate", because some professionally offended person
>> couldn't
>> handle even the mention of the word "slave".
> I think someone eventually handed that guy a nice, steaming hot cup of
> STFU. :)
I am very cautious of people who thinks this way. This seems to be a
kind of mind problem, I have no words to express a shame I feel when I see
people who think that a word or an expression should be banned or changed
just because of it says something in another very different context.
World is full of crazy people. People that cannot accept the fact there
are other beliefs, and people who will fight (to the death!) for it.
May I land in another planet, please?
11:56 a.m.
Gene Buckle wrote:
Served with a side of clue-by-four, perhaps?
Peace... Sridhar
The other one that really gets me was the (thankfully short-lived)
effort to replace the traditional "master/slave" ATA terminology with
"master/subordinate", because some professionally offended person
couldn't handle even the mention of the word "slave".
I think someone eventually handed that guy a nice, steaming hot cup of
STFU. :) 
11:26 a.m.
You and me both. The people who came up with that
need to be
And me....
beaten severely. Then they need to find a hobby to
take up their
obvious excess of free time so they won't try something like this again.
The stocks and/or pillory would seem to come in rather handy here :-)
The other one that really gets me was the (thankfully short-lived)
effort to replace the traditional "master/slave" ATA terminology with
"master/subordinate", because some professionally offended person
couldn't handle even the mention of the word "slave".
ARGH!!!. I assume they're not well-educated enough to want to rename
'servomechansisms' too...
Let's hope they never get their hands on physics. They'd have a field day
with the term for 'the spectrum of radiation emitted by a perfect
absorber at temperature T' :-)
-tony
1:31 p.m.
On May 4, 2009, at 2:50 PM, Fred Cisin wrote:
...and cube-farms...
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
The stocks
and/or pillory would seem to come in rather handy here :-)
We might have to ship them over there.
Such devices are very hard to find on this side of the pond, having
been
replaced by water-boards
5 May
5 May
10:54 a.m.
On Mon, 4 May 2009, Tony Duell wrote:
Sorry, we don't have anough of them over here for all the people who
ought to be put in them :-)
Anyway, there must be at least one person across the Pond who could make
them...
-tony
The stocks and/or pillory would seem to come in
rather handy here :-)
We might have to ship them over there.
11:21 a.m.
On May 5, 2009, at 1:54 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
Sorry, we don't have anough of them over here for all the people who
ought to be put in them :-)
Anyway, there must be at least one person across the Pond who
could make
them...
Are you kidding? Someone over here actually MAKE something? HA!
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
The stocks and/or pillory would seem to come in rather
handy
here :-)
We might have to ship them over there.
5715
days inactive
5716
days old
13 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
alexandre-listas＠e-secure.com.br -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
cc＠informatik.uni-stuttgart.de -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
geneb＠deltasoft.com -
ian_primus＠yahoo.com -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
ploopster＠gmail.com -
shoppa＠trailing-edge.com