JaKiri

They haven't changed hard drives to meet their advert's claim because it's, you know, more expensive. And the system was designed to work in base 2, I meant, not the computer.

Given it wouldn't work anyway...

Therefore god doesn't exist. Excellent, we have concordance. I don't care what my parents say about this kind of thing, because they're not scientists and don't claim to be.

It's not 'standardisation'. It's forcing a base 10 system on one which is obviously designed to work in base 2.

200,000,000,000 bytes would be 200 gig under the former system, but 186 under the latter.

Bear in mind that we're in an enormous magnetic field right now.

The latter source is incorrect. It's using the definition '1 gig = 1000 megs' which is utter tosh, because it's using 1 meg = 1024 k and 1 k = 1024 bytes. If it was consistent with that definition, it would say 1.074 gigs. The main problem here is that it's not standardised whether 1000 or 1024 is used; mainly in the hard drive industry, where drive sizes are defined by 1000 because it makes the disk look bigger.

That's not similar at all.

Not really.

Yeah, but blindly on I go, mindlessly accepting that it's possible for people to change what they think when there's an obvious contradiction.

I had exactly 1 gig of ram in my computer a while ago.

The only reason this 'argument' is useless is because you refuse to accept the fact that you're wrong.

1Gb = 1024Mb.

He's probably talking about Doom III. I like Doom, yet by today's standards it's missing a lot of gameplay innovations. As is Doom III.

Well, they're not fine per se. They just don't get the worst of the after effects because they're in space for such a short time. What you meant to say was 'We don't use it because we don't need it. Astonauts aren't in microgravity long enough for these effects to become significant, yet, were we to need them to be in space for a longer time, for example the trip to jupiter in 2001, then we would probably need such a system'.

If by 'pretty cool' you mean 'is useless for most common uses of high speed internet'.

I don't know where you got that from, but it definitely wasn't from some generally accepted source of scientific philosophy.

Incorrect. It said there were independent sources for the nature of the machine.

People who find it fun to play, obviously. There's no truly objective system for this.

That's the tesla coil, surely?

Improved lightning? What? (Radio is obviously the 'big' one of those)

How is that even supposed to work efficiently? Or at all? Sort of. The difference is down to the difference in Nuclear Binding Energy, so it's almost exactly the opposite of a nuclear reaction which gives out energy.

The Atom Bomb. Although, if we're going for the 'influential scientist' award, the winner would probably have to be Fritz Haber.