Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support peta prefix #44

Closed
plajjan opened this issue Jan 2, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

Support peta prefix #44

plajjan opened this issue Jan 2, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@plajjan
Copy link

plajjan commented Jan 2, 2016

I'm dealing with lots of numbers in the peta range but it switches over from Tera to 10^15 when passing 1000 tera. Could we have it as peta instead? :)

@OAGr
Copy link
Member

OAGr commented Jan 4, 2016

We don't write out the names, just the letters. So that would be 1P. Personally, if I saw a number saying 30P, I would be confused. Does anyone else have an opinion here?

This part of the codebase is here btw: https://github.com/getguesstimate/guesstimate-app/blob/master/src/lib/numberShower/numberShower.js

@plajjan
Copy link
Author

plajjan commented Jan 4, 2016

Yes, I meant 'P' and not actually peta.

Perhaps it is confusing. Being a network / computer person I find it's rather natural with the metric prefixes kilo, mega, giga, tera, peta, exa prefixes.

I see that 10^9 is called 'B', presumably for billion. I was never a fan of that as it's somewhat ambiguous (short vs long scale) and means different things in different countries. SI prefix is (G)iga.

@OAGr
Copy link
Member

OAGr commented Jan 4, 2016

That makes sense.

It used to be (G), then someone complained about it. It probably would make sense to go all SI, and have a hover over to explain.

Most non-technical people don't seem to understand (G)iga, but maybe with some education they will :) One of the things I'm hoping for with Guesstimate is to be able to educate people about numbers and uncertainty. I'm not sure how doable that is (vs. focussing on the people who already understand those things), but it seems worth finding out.

@OAGr
Copy link
Member

OAGr commented Jan 11, 2016

Added as 'discussion' because the bottleneck is the choice; not the functionality.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants