Major Memory System 1-1000 Pdf
Karmen Mcarthun
I was thinking about building three different peg systems each containing 0 - 1300 words. One peg system would be devoted to adjectives, another would contain nouns, and then finally another one would utilize verbs. As you process long string of numbers. You would first use an adjective, then a noun, and finally allocate a verb to this image. You then could place this in a loci and embellish further upon it adding addition items and associates to these items depending on the string of numbers you obtained from whatever the scenario.
This would stop you from using tons of different items in your loci cutting the number of unique objects in an image down from 3 to 1 and additionally would stop you from linking adjectives to solidify loci in your journey or story, that they themselves do not serve any purpose, but to embellish your story. Now these adjectives can be utilized and use to code abstract information and not just the items in the loci themselves. That is huge reduction in unnecessary information and with these additional pieces of information it would allow solidification to your loci or story making it more vivid.
Has anyone had any experience with this? Has anyone already made these types of peg systems because it would take me a lot of time that I would rather put to memorizing the system then building something from scratch.
How do you think this system would compare to a larger 10,000 peg system? I was thinking that the efficient would increase because of how you are condensing the journey and making it far more compact. Making sure that ever piece of information you place in this loci translates to something and it not just their as extra useless information that serves only to embellish and solidify the loci, but it self does not translate to a number or the abstract.
If anyone wants to give feedback I would be extremely grateful. I am only beginning my mnemonic journey and I know you guys have far more experience with mnemonics than I. if this has already been talked about I apologize I did search before hand.
I will be using this system for more than counting cards. I was wondering per encoding large amounts of numbers at one time if this would be a good system? I do not want to build an entire system if there are better ones out there. I feel like this would be better than a 10,000 peg system and any other major system alternative that I have come cross. I would just like feedback on other possible choices/better ones.
I was thinking about building three different peg systems each containing 0 - 1300 words. One peg system would be devoted to adjectives, another would contain nouns, and then finally another one would utilize verbs. As you process long string of numbers. You would first use an adjective, then a noun, and finally allocate a verb to this image.
Which conversion should I teach to my undergrad students? That 1 kB is 1024 bytes (binary) as everyone learned back in the nineties or the recent industry-led "friendly" conversion that says that 1 kB is in fact 1000 bytes (decimal)?
I notice that you used KB in your question to refer to both sizes; perhaps you should also point out that KB could be interpreted as either of these prefixes (though Wikipedia suggests it is most often used in place of KiB). In your position, I would suggest clarifying which one you mean if you use this notation.
You should teach them it's messed up beyond repair, and it's their generation's job to teach the next generation to use the silly-sounding standard prefixes, so that when they finally retire (and the current old-timers are more permanently removed from the argument), there can finally be a consensus.
As the matters currently stand, all the prefixes are unknowable without context. A networking megabit is $10^6$ bits, a filesystem megabyte is $2^20$ bytes, a hard drive megabyte is somewhere pretty close to $10^6$ bytes, and a megapixel is "probably a million pixels, who cares."
The difference between providing your students with a proper discussion of this topic, and simply teaching them one or the other, is the difference between being a real educator and being a reciter of factoids.
If there is no single correct definition of KB for you, then why would you instill something different in your students? The answer to your question is thus obvious in its formation. Your responsibility as a teacher is to convey an understanding of the issue, not to boil it down to one-or-another fact that you know to be less-than-true.
This has some similarity and some difference with the base 10 system that they (should) know. First we break it into blocks of 10 (instead of 3), the remainder we just convert to base 10, the rest is the same.
It is important to show where the 2 systems are used. While some answers say that they have never seen the $1000$ based SI system used in computing. It turns out that the SI system is used a lot, depending on what is being measured.
I've worked in IT professionally since the mid-1980s. My current practice is to write whichever of e.g. KB or KiB that I mean at the time, with KB meaning $10^3$ and KiB meaning $2^10$. If I'm talking about the RAM in a machine I'll write e.g. "64MiB" and if I'm talking about the as-manufactured and as-marketed size of a disk drive I'll write "1TB." I am not, however, prepared to use words like "mebibyte" in conversation. Maybe one day I'll change my verbal abbreviations from e.g. "meg" to "meb" but I'm not there yet.
At the basic level, memory addressing is binary. Usually, at the programmatic level, the addressing is keyed in hexadecimal format (it was originally binary); however, hexadecimal is also base 2 derived (it is base 16 or, 24) and so is directly compatible.
Beginning at the KB level for communicating understanding here is useful since the concepts of base 2 derived units have existed since before MB was in common usage (no differentiation in prefix from SI unit).
On a memory controller IC, if you imagine that address selectors are a row of switches (binary logic gates) and depending on how they are switched you get the memory read from a specific address on the data lines. The data is stored and returned as bytes.
There has always been a limited number of address lines available to address memory, and it so happens that using binary complete address sets for a given number of bits of addressing are base 2 numbers. So, on a 4KB machine, there are 12 address lines representing addresses 0 through 4095 (4096 bytes). These 12 address lines are corresponding to the 111111111111 addresses possible in binary, 0FFF in hexadecimal or, 4096 bytes in decimal. It would not be logical to limit address mapping to 4000 bytes for the sake of decimal convention when there are 12 addressing bits available.
This logic followed initially to hard disks also, where blocks are groups of bytes accessed by address, however (and I have not checked), I do hear that perhaps hard disk vendors find it less critical to use 'round addressing' formats, particularly considering the following.
All standard values in computer terminology are base 2 derived, although, for marketing purposes, some vendors 20MB hard disk may not be as large as some keeping the convention. It is convenient to slap 20MB on something even if it does not contain as many blocks and is easier to manufacture because there is less data density required.
Early IDE hard disks (there were other earlier systems before IDE), before the Logical Block Addressing (LBA) system was introduced, used to be configured by cylinders, heads and, sectors (CHS). The entire addressing system was binary, and even standard Unix utilities used 1024 byte blocks for display.[1] Standard tools like Conky still use base 2 for display of RAM and HDD information, although, it uses the GiB style format to avoid confusion. Later, the LBA addressing system allowed for logical mapping of the CHS format as hard disk size grew, however, LBA simply applies the CHS format addressing internally in the hard disk's onboard controller and allows the OS (and the programmer) to just consider the logical blocks.
Network addressing also uses binary masks on every one of millions of data packets every second to ensure correct routing but, it is a long time since the data portion of a network packet has resembled a base 2 number. Probably the outermost layer of the packet still does conjecture.
You will no doubt need to mention that there is confusion especially when it comes to marketing of products as being a particular size, and that there are some programitc implementations for display of values using SI units (it is no longer more inconvenient or slower actually, it is probably still slower, but on modern computers it is no longer noticable for computer programmers to implement decimal, particularly for display) but, there can be no doubt about computer usage that the correct answer is the base 2 convention.
The second idea was formulated by Computer industry 1KB = 1024 bytes 1MB = 1024 KB 1GB = 1024 MB Notice I am using capital B and not small b, and capital B implies bytes The small b should not be used This is the case always and is true for things related to computers
The first idea was formulated by Tele-communication industry and is applicable not for data size (bits and bytes) but for data speed (bits per seconds or bytes per second) 1Kbps = 1000 bps (bits per second) 1Mbps = 1024 Kbps 1Gbps = 1024 Mbps Notice I am using small b and not capital B, and small b implies bits The capital B should not be used This is the case always and is true for things related to data transmission
Teach them that without context, you don't know because there most certainly are people out there who will use k to mean 1000 and others who will use k to mean 1024. Which is right is not relevant because both usages are out there. This leaves any use of "k" with bytes ambiguous unless whoever gave the number also specified what they meant.
Converting using 1000 is easy but 1024 is tricky so focus on that, the knowledge will help them in computer architecture, assembly and networking courses. They'll have to work with it someday so get them ready
64591212e2