Monty J. Harder wrote:
On 3/19/07, Jared [email protected] wrote:
I reject SI byte units *because* they are SI/metric, not just because I'm used to the original units.
Count me in the minority among geeks, but I do also. The British system is superior to the French "innovation"
<snip> Rather, an informed one who has no interest in blindly following SI/metric because I know the 200-year-old political agenda behind it, which I still have no interest in supporting, for
Imagine me, of all people, not wanting to get into your political discussion...
Well, it's off-topic, and wide-ranging, discussing two- and three-hundred year old origins of ideas, rather than being confined to the events of the past decade as if they were sufficient to understand larger patterns. Plus I had a public education in Independence, MO, so I tend to get theories and facts wrong and argue endlessly about trivial things. Easy to imagine why you wouldn't want to get involved. :-)
If you oppose SI, then why would you want to use its terminology? The
To oppose it only strengthens it. Rather than oppose, it is wiser to not advocate it. And when someone else starts advocating it as 'superior' then it's time to weigh in and least propose an honest study of its origins.
And I use the terms kilo mega and giga because they are common. There is no need to be fanatical about these issues. But it is reasonable to be informed and thus speak with precision -- and precision is the point that Luke was originally making.
Oren, the "Stones Per Inch" proposal is one to remember for a long time. Clever.
-Jared