Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

agnos.is Forums

  1. Home
  2. Microblog Memes
  3. oddly specific

oddly specific

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Microblog Memes
microblogmemes
62 Posts 41 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Q [email protected]

    As the numbers guy. Do you remember the name of the site that can tell you the what a given number is often associated with?

    jackbydev@programming.devJ This user is from outside of this forum
    jackbydev@programming.devJ This user is from outside of this forum
    [email protected]
    wrote last edited by
    #35

    My brain is going to OEIS or angel numbers which are both like total opposites. Number theory or numerology, take your pick.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
    • C [email protected]

      Unless there isn't one that's the largest because there are infinite primes.

      jackbydev@programming.devJ This user is from outside of this forum
      jackbydev@programming.devJ This user is from outside of this forum
      [email protected]
      wrote last edited by [email protected]
      #36

      You started at zero and went to infinity. If you start at infinity and go to zero then the first prime you got is the largest. QED.

      C 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • D [email protected]

        No, you can't have a group of zero, so the counter doesn't need to waste a position counting zero.

        jackbydev@programming.devJ This user is from outside of this forum
        jackbydev@programming.devJ This user is from outside of this forum
        [email protected]
        wrote last edited by
        #37

        Tell that to the Castlevania 2 devs. https://lemmy.ml/comment/19720906

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • jackbydev@programming.devJ [email protected]

          Powers of two are the roundest of numbers.

          B This user is from outside of this forum
          B This user is from outside of this forum
          [email protected]
          wrote last edited by
          #38

          Much later in my career I came to appreciate the beauty of this system and the link with hexadecimal. I had to debug a network transmitted CRC that was endian flipped and in that process learned that in the Galois Field of two, 1+1=0 which feels delightfully nonsensical to a luddite.

          1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • R [email protected]

            A previous version of this article said it was "not clear why WhatsApp settled on the oddly specific number." A number of readers have since noted that 256 is one of the most important numbers in computing, since it refers to the number of variations that can be represented by eight switches that have two positions - eight bits, or a byte.

            Lol, weird way to say that 256 is a power of two, and computers operate in base two.

            O This user is from outside of this forum
            O This user is from outside of this forum
            [email protected]
            wrote last edited by
            #39

            Their definition is a lot better.

            1 Reply Last reply
            11
            • jackbydev@programming.devJ [email protected]

              You started at zero and went to infinity. If you start at infinity and go to zero then the first prime you got is the largest. QED.

              C This user is from outside of this forum
              C This user is from outside of this forum
              [email protected]
              wrote last edited by
              #40

              I can no longer tell if these are bits. 🫠

              jackbydev@programming.devJ M 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • J [email protected]

                Shout out to Castlevania II, where you can hold anywhere from 0 to 256 laurels. Yes, you read that right -- 256, not 255. I inspected RAM to double check. It's a 16-bit word on an 8-bit system with a maximum value of 0x100. They could have used 8 bits instead of 16. But no, they really did choose this arbitrary number.

                J This user is from outside of this forum
                J This user is from outside of this forum
                [email protected]
                wrote last edited by
                #41

                how can you hold 0 laurels? that's different from not having laurels?

                J 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • S [email protected]

                  If this is about a counter for users in the chat, sure. But if this is an array of users indexed by an 8-bit number, then it will fit 256 slots with the first slot being numbered 0.

                  J This user is from outside of this forum
                  J This user is from outside of this forum
                  [email protected]
                  wrote last edited by
                  #42

                  this guy indexes

                  S 1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • J [email protected]

                    how can you hold 0 laurels? that's different from not having laurels?

                    J This user is from outside of this forum
                    J This user is from outside of this forum
                    [email protected]
                    wrote last edited by
                    #43

                    the number of laurels in your inventory is stored as an integer from 0 to 256.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    2
                    • S [email protected]

                      They just do it to look cool in front of their developer friends.

                      J This user is from outside of this forum
                      J This user is from outside of this forum
                      [email protected]
                      wrote last edited by
                      #44

                      Pretty much this...

                      Once upon a time, sure, you might have used an 8 bit char to store an array index and incur a 256 limit for actual reasons....

                      But nowadays, you do it because 256 is a "cool techy limit". Developers are almost all dealing with at least 32 bit values, and the actual constraints driving smaller values generally have nothing to do with some power of two limitation.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • N [email protected]

                        Maybe they keep some other data in the same space using bitmask?

                        J This user is from outside of this forum
                        J This user is from outside of this forum
                        [email protected]
                        wrote last edited by
                        #45

                        Even if true, 256 would be a waste of the range. 255 would make sense if trying to stay in one byte, using a whole different data type to get one extra bit just to hold 256 instead of saying "screw it, let's go to 511" even while using other bits.

                        It's just a very weird thing to do to pick 256 as a value limit back in those days (also oddly specific now, but for different reasons)

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        • jackbydev@programming.devJ [email protected]

                          Powers of two are the roundest of numbers.

                          C This user is from outside of this forum
                          C This user is from outside of this forum
                          [email protected]
                          wrote last edited by
                          #46

                          They're not round, they're square!

                          M 007ace@lemmy.ca0 2 Replies Last reply
                          7
                          • V [email protected]

                            ITT: People who have never done low level networking.

                            Edit: Without some absolutely crazy hacks, the smallest amount of data you can really transfer or compute on is one byte. 256 requires one byte, 257 requires you to DOUBLE the data used to 2 bytes. Multiply this by whatever data they send and the problem remains the same.

                            This is the kind of thing that comes up a lot designing custom protocols.

                            J This user is from outside of this forum
                            J This user is from outside of this forum
                            [email protected]
                            wrote last edited by
                            #47

                            My experience is that a limit of 256 means they probably are willing to allocate up to 24 bits to send the value over the network:

                            0x323536

                            People seem to love to pass around their numbers as JSON or similar.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • C [email protected]

                              They're not round, they're square!

                              M This user is from outside of this forum
                              M This user is from outside of this forum
                              [email protected]
                              wrote last edited by
                              #48

                              Only every other one...

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • P [email protected]

                                Numbers guy here, I can confirm 256 is an evenly specific number, and not an oddly specific number.

                                banazir@lemmy.mlB This user is from outside of this forum
                                banazir@lemmy.mlB This user is from outside of this forum
                                [email protected]
                                wrote last edited by
                                #49

                                But is it Numberwang, Mr. Numbers Guy?

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                3
                                • C [email protected]

                                  They're not round, they're square!

                                  007ace@lemmy.ca0 This user is from outside of this forum
                                  007ace@lemmy.ca0 This user is from outside of this forum
                                  [email protected]
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #50

                                  Slow Clap
                                  Well done!

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • N [email protected]
                                    This post did not contain any content.
                                    zachariah@lemmy.worldZ This user is from outside of this forum
                                    zachariah@lemmy.worldZ This user is from outside of this forum
                                    [email protected]
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #51

                                    evenly specific

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    5
                                    • C [email protected]

                                      I can no longer tell if these are bits. 🫠

                                      jackbydev@programming.devJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                      jackbydev@programming.devJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                      [email protected]
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #52

                                      (Yes, this is a bit. 💜)

                                      C 1 Reply Last reply
                                      1
                                      • jackbydev@programming.devJ [email protected]

                                        (Yes, this is a bit. 💜)

                                        C This user is from outside of this forum
                                        C This user is from outside of this forum
                                        [email protected]
                                        wrote last edited by [email protected]
                                        #53

                                        (Thank you for the kindness of clarity ❤️
                                        I may now be at peace.)

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • C [email protected]

                                          I can no longer tell if these are bits. 🫠

                                          M This user is from outside of this forum
                                          M This user is from outside of this forum
                                          [email protected]
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #54

                                          That's what she said...

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups