this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
332 points (99.4% liked)

xkcd

8839 readers
52 users here now

A community for a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

https://xkcd.com/2835

Alt text:

So what do we do when we get to base 10? Do we use A, B, C, etc? No: Numbers larger than about 3.6 million are simply illegal.

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 54 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Finally, a system that uses more information to express less information.

[–] 22rw@feddit.de 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

According to this article, the factoradical system gets efficient for numbers larger than 20!, but i guess this here is a shining example of ~~less is~~ more is less

[–] Sanyanov@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

It begins to improve related to regular base-10 after, well, 10!, but it takes a while to recover for lower base numbers before that.

[–] notabot@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago

Good grief, it's far too early in the morning for this sort of thing. My brain hurts now.

[–] OurTragicUniverse@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago

This is cursed, haha

[–] fantoski@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

What's the point of such a system ?

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Hum... Have you checked what site it's on?

[–] dylanTheDeveloper@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Idk trolling

[–] Trail@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This is actually a pretty cool idea.

[–] jasory@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not really. The reality is that the only real metric for the utility of a notation is the speed of computation. A constant positional notation system is the most efficient, then you just optimise for a base whose multiplication table can be memorised (27 is a good one). Many people are under the impression that highly composite bases are better, but the reality is that it only optimises for euclidean division which is far out weighed by multiplication and addition (and can be easily computed using them).

[–] Trail@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Well I didn't say practical or efficient, it's just a cool idea :)

[–] Classy@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

0 = 0

1 = 1

2 = 10

3 = 11

4 = 20

5 = 21

6 = 100

101, 110, 111, 120, 121,

200, 201, 210, 211, 220, 221, 300, 301...

Amidoinitrite