To be clear, I’m fine with RAM being base 2 – it’s rather difficult for it not to be given the structure – but for fixed storage, this is an old-school measurement that only gets worse with each order of magnitude.
I don’t remember which is the stupid “1024 bytes in a kilobyte” one but
745,450,666,761,889 byte is 745 terabytes, that should be 745 TB and that 678 should be what TiB is for
And also that entire 677.98 is a useless value, there’s nothing that is “677” about this
It is if you just truncate! No one should do this, as I don’t recall the last time I saw such a textbook example of “rounding error” meaning “we fucked up while rounding.”
Dear god, are we still using base 2 for file sizes? At least use TiB like a reasonable person.
It doesn’t matter in this case, as long as it is documented (and it is by the unit).
To be clear, I’m fine with RAM being base 2 – it’s rather difficult for it not to be given the structure – but for fixed storage, this is an old-school measurement that only gets worse with each order of magnitude.
deleted by creator
Yes, we all do
I don’t remember which is the stupid “1024 bytes in a kilobyte” one but
745,450,666,761,889 byte is 745 terabytes, that should be 745 TB and that 678 should be what TiB is for
And also that entire 677.98 is a useless value, there’s nothing that is “677” about this
It is if you just truncate! No one should do this, as I don’t recall the last time I saw such a textbook example of “rounding error” meaning “we fucked up while rounding.”
Nobody does that nerd