Why does metric sucks?
It's based upon how people write, not how they think. Base 2 is a better in real life, and much of American Standard has evolved over the decades to reflect that. If a printed Bitcoin note is ever printed, it should follow a pattern of notes as follows...
1 unit note
2 unit note
4 unit note
8
16
32
and so on. Nothing is simplier and easier for the human mind to wrap itself around than doubling and halving of sums, so long as one doesn't have to convert from base 2 to base 10 on the fly, which is what we have to do since most every fiat currency in use is base 10 for mathmatical advantages.
What you are referring to seems to be more of a coinage system, where as what teppy was asking about was a decimalisation system. These are slightly different concepts.
True. So consider it a recommendation over a named decimalisation system. There is no reason that we must name by decimals, but we must have some kind of naming system or one will develop anyway.
For instance if we wanted to represent
2500 bytes
we would say
2.5kB*
not present it in its binary form of
1x2048 1x256 1x128 1x64 1x4
This isn't what I was suggesting, and I think you know that.
Which is easier for your brain to process?
(Yes, computer units are metric. You see them every day. This is not some scary new system)
The american standard has not evolved. It begun with imperial measurements & while most of the rest of the world converted over to the metric standard america did not.
Saying something should be some way because that's how it is in america is not a persuasive argument. It comes across as more a case of patriotism.
Also I'm pretty sure you guys still count in base 10, not base 2, so that doesn't really make sense anyway.
The AS is two centuries of evolution from the English Imperial Standard, and I wasn't claiming that it was ideal. There are aspects of the AS system that are more intuitive than Metric, however. A kilometer is as fine a travel distance measurement as a mile, and it is easier to convert to personal distances (i.e. feet & meters), but smaller measurements are more difficult to rationally manipulate on-the-fly. Fractions of an inch are base 2 divisions, (half an inch, quarter of an inch, eighth, so on) that allow the mind to focus on relative sizes (more natural) as opposed to addition in multiple base ten units. (2.475 kilometers plus 45.5 meters plus 45287 millimeters, quick how far is that? No cheating, do it in your head) Yes, I know that most people would be able to do it, but halving and quartering (and doubling) is just more natural to the human mind.
Random fact: The only three countries that have not officially adopted the metric system are america, burma, liberia (with america being the only industrialised)
(Where "officially" means declared adoption by the government as the standard, not sole use within the country)
Not so random fact, Metric is taught to schoolchildren in this country, and has been since I was a child. But the children must also learn what everyone else uses within their society. The highway signs have both miles and kilometers where I live, and the only place that I have used the km was in the US military.
*I'm going by the standard that there are 1000 bytes to a kilobyte & not 1024 for the sake of clarity (There are actually 2 separate measuring systems for file sizes)
Yes, one is base ten and the other is base two. Considering the context is 'bits' & 'bytes'; base two is the correct one both technically and historicly (search "two bits" or "pieces of eight"), but I was not trying to make my point for either, as I was just talking about modern simplicity. Thanks for making my point so well, btw.