• TechieDamien@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 month ago

    I like the detail that there alien has 4(10) fingers as opposed to the 10(22) that the human has.

          • BlueKey@kbin.run
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            In any Base-x system, one digit goes up to x - 1 (with base > 10 we use alphabet letters), then the next digit (to the left) is incremented.
            So in our normal Base-10 system, you count up from 0 to 9 and then add a digit in the front and reset the other digits to get 10.

            This means, that in every Base-x system ‘10’ equals x.
            So you can make the “There 10 types of people …” with every base as ‘10’ in Base-2 means 2, 3 in Base-3 and so on.

    • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Jesus Christ.

      I just realized that we call binary base2 and there’s no 2 in that numbering system. We call hexadecimal base16 but there’s no 16 (at least not like we know it). But then why is base10 base10? We have a 10…but it’s not a single digit number.

      Why is this reminding me of Project Hail Mary?

      • psud@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 month ago

        Every base has ten, but it’s made of two digits

        Binary 0, 1, 10 Ternary 0, 1, 2, 10 … Decimal 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Hex 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, A, B, C, D, E, F, 10

        Each has the right count of digits for its base before you go two-digit - binary has two (0, 1), etc

        • Randelung@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          more precisely, every base has 10, but it’s usually not equal to ten. ten is a fixed value, while 10 depends on the base. you still count normally (one two three four five), even in a base two system. you just write it differently.

          • psud@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            25 days ago

            I don’t see the need to bring values into this, this is about the naming of number systems. We really have no more claim to ten being this many (…) than hexadecimal people have to claim ten has this many (…)

            • Randelung@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              25 days ago

              10 as the first overflow of digits is not a clear vlaue, it depends on the notation because its base is unclear.

              Ten as the English word is 100% defined. The issue is we translate seamlessly between the word and number, but there really is no confusion when writing ten. 10 in hex has a different english word: sixteen.

              English number names are mostly decimal-based, but their values are still fixed. Ten isn’t the word for “the first time our number system overflows”, it’s an amount.

              So I disagree. Ten will always be (…) this many, because it’s an English word.

        • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          The same is true for all bases. What we call base-4 in base-10 is 0123. In base-16 it’s 0123456789abcdef, where f is what we would call 15

      • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        because then every base would be ‘base 10’

        That or the decriarchy has been normalizing the decimal counting system as the default one for far too long!

      • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        If there’s no agreed symbol for digit 37, you can call it Base 37A (or express it in another base of your choosing).

        In case the formatting doesn’t work, that A is supposed to be subscript

  • Wanderer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Can we all use base 12?

    It will be a shower of shit for like 50 years but then it will be marginally better for pretty much everyone.

    • ted@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 month ago

      42* years. Centuries are now 84 years. We are living in the 19th century! I rate this idea 12/12.

    • Khrux@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Some people argue that it would be harder to count on your fingers but we could just surgically give everyone more?

      • Wanderer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        There are 12 sections on your fingers (excluding your thumb) you then use your thumb to count to 12 on one hand.

        Two hands can allow you to count to 24. Which is way higher than 10. Base 12 is better!

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Billions of years ago, our collective great-great-great-[several million more]-grandparent evolved a fin with a five bone structure. That idiot didn’t know anything about common denominators, and now we’re stuck with this numeric system that can’t divide things into thirds without causing issues.

      • rockerface@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        When was the last time you’ve actually needed to count something on your fingers?

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Binary is very good for counting with your fingers. With both hands you can count to 1023. One hand is 31, which is still usually more than you typically need to count. It’s also trivial to do once you know how binary works. It takes very little thought, though potentially the decoding could take a bit depending on your proficiency.

        • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I made it to 27 on my first attempt, so def messed up somewhere. Also, my fingers don’t want to work that way.

          Doable.

      • Wanderer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Every civilised country on earth uses metric.

        Only the really shitty ones use imperial. Imperial is just stupid (unless you count in base 12 ironically)

    • Nafeon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      This would be great. I was researching why we don’t have 10 based clocks and then I saw a video about why a 12 and 60 based system is actually much more convenient and now I would love a ‘dozen based metric system’

    • lowleveldata@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      50 years? I bet we couldn’t even agree on how to write “11” & “12” on such short notice. (See: date format, encoding, etc)

    • مهما طال الليل@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      That’s not 64 rocks

      Edit: In C any number that starts with 0 is implicitly interpreted as an octal.

      int i = 0100; // this is octal 100 i.e. 64
      

      I can tell from the upovotes vs. downvotes that I’m too old

  • Ech@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Huh, that’s a good point. A better universal naming system would be something like “Base x+1”, with x being one integer lower than 10. So humans would use Base 9+1, and the alien would use Base 3+1.

    *This has been on my mind all day and the more I think about it, the more obvious it becomes how fundamentally terrible the name “Base-10” is. How did this never occur to the people who coined the term? Even the system I suggested is flawed as it’s still trying to incorporate the same bad logic.

    A better system would be something like Base 9, stopping shy of the respective 10 in each system, or if it needs to be clarified, Base 9+0, as 0 is the extra digit in the first place, not 10.

    • niartenyaw@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      we’d only be able to represent bases for numbers with one digit though because what does base 15+1 mean? the 15 could be in any base higher than 5. the clearest way would probably be to just represent it with lines or something “base ||||||||||”

      • harmsy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Base 16 is typically represented with letters being used as the extra numerals, so it would end up being F+1. Problem solved.

      • Ech@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        It’s only 15 to us because we use base 10 (or 9+1). Like how we have 4 through 9, but that aliens in the picture only count up to 3.

        In the case of a mismatch, the culture using the higher base would just translate down (Base 21+1 in the given scenario).

        Single units would probably be the simplest method, but also wildly impractical as the base gets higher. You really want to count each digit just to figure out someone uses Base 100?

        • niartenyaw@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          i know about hexadecimal, but what if you need to refer to a base larger than 16? i’m not saying it isn’t possible to create symbols for every number, i’m saying if you have to describe your base with more than one digit, you encounter a problem of not knowing what base that multi-digit number is in.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            well no, i know, i’m just saying that’s it’s not really that big of a problem, unless you’re using octal, and you skill issue.

            You should design base systems to be independent of each other, and hex does a really good job at this, because often times it’s prepended with 0x to imply hex.

      • Ech@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I think that would confuse things more than it would help. It’s base 5, unless it’s base 10, unless it’s base 50, etc. And then there’s the rules designating numbers 1 below certain other numbers, or 2 below, depending on the system being used. That’s a whole web of complications when communication is already murky.

        One glyph to one integer communicates the number system being used more clearly.

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    There are only 10 ways of doing things: the right way and the wrong way. (Programming joke)