Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2020 March 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Computing desk
< March 3 << Feb | March | Apr >> March 5 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


March 4

[edit]

Doubled pasting into Skype

[edit]

Whenever I paste a text string into Skype with ctrl-V it appears twice. Why, and how can I prevent it? It's particularly annoying because the Skype editor for posts is so crude. Hayttom (talk) 08:41, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it doesn't always happen... Hayttom (talk) 09:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Binary IEC prefixes vs SI decimal prefixes

[edit]

Readers of this page may care to note that there is a discussion of the use of binary vs decimal prefixes for binary quantities on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates_and_numbers#Binary_prefixes. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's been going on for years. I don't have to look at it to guess that it's the same obnoxious bozos trying to wp:own the topic and I bet I know what the dispute is too. It's late now but I'll try to look at it in the next few days. 2602:24A:DE47:B270:A096:24F4:F986:C62A (talk) 10:41, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's recently restarted and may yet explode into a full blown RfC. BTW, interesting to know if your "obnoxious bozos" are those that support the use of IEC prefixes or those that want to ban them, a nice piece of fence sitting! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:57, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't gotten around to looking at the dreary MOS page again, but the bozos I was thinking of were the ones insisting that throughout history, KB, MB, and GB of disk space always and I mean always referred to decimal quantities. They put examples into articles that were discredited by sources, so they removed those examples and put in other examples instead (no true Scotsman fallacy). When the new examples were also discredited by sources, they removed the examples altogether. It was nuts. I wonder if anything has changed, but I doubt it. 2602:24A:DE47:B270:A096:24F4:F986:C62A (talk) 02:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]