It’s actually been quite interesting, looking at my old posts, something I haven’t really done. I had forgotton some of the things I’d written (and I will admit, some posts have been edited slightly and some aren’t going to be transferred). One of the post was entitled ‘Musings on the Internet how it used to be‘, in which I commented on a website that I happened to visit which had a link to a ‘large’ image with a warning about its size and that browsers may not be able to cope.

Which brings me to today.

One thing that I like about the BBC News website is that they don’t use CSS ‘properly’. By that, I don’t mean that it’s not valid code or anything, (although I am now curious to know… bear with me… I’m really surprised now – it doesn’t… oh well) no, what I mean is that when I was doing web design at college, and I see this around quite a bit too, CSS is so you can change the whole site design in one easy go, so your pages are kept to the same design as you go across your website. The BBC News website don’t seem to have grasped this, which is a good thing.

It means that when you search for archive news since their website started, such as this article about the safety of the Pacer trains, you see their old site design. Click on that link now, go on – I’ll wait. Just make sure you come back because I’ve still got stuff to say and unless you’re a train geek who is interested in a news article from 1999 then you’re not going to be interested in the actual article.

Welcome back! See how narrow that website looks on your monitor? How pixellated the banner at the top of the screen looks? The weird thing is that the text size for the article isn’t (noticeably) a different size to what it is now. The site now is just wider than it used to be.  Incidentally, in case you were wondering (because I was so there’s an outside chance you might’ve been), the old BBC News website does have valid CSS code.

So, last night I was asleep. Nothing unusual there (well actually given my sleep patterns recently, but that’s another post for another time!) except that I found myself dreaming – which actually isn’t that unusual either.

I have heard that you only know you’re dreaming when you’re not in a deep sleep, or that you can only remember that you dreamed if you weren’t in a deep sleep when you were dreaming. Anyway, I’ve digressed slightly.

Last night in my dream, I realised that I had come across an idea that I needed to remember. Of course, in that subconscious way you do sometimes, I knew that I was in a dream and that this idea needed to become reality so had to think of a way of doing this. The cartoon from XKCD as shown above came to mind, so I found a keyboard and started typing.

I could feel my real fingers moving as if I was typing, and I assumed that I was using my laptop keyboard to do so – my laptop being still switched on on the floor beside my bed (no officer, I wasn’t downloading anything…) so I assumed that I had managed to pick it up, open it, and start typing.

You can therefore imagine my surprise this morning when I woke up to find that absoutely nothing had happened.  I hadn’t typed a message to myself in my sleep, nor had I remembered this idea that I needed to remember.  Knowing my dreams though, it was probably either a very extraordinarily good idea or a pathetically bad one. I also found that my laptop had turned off as the night went on as the power went in the house at some point during the night and the battery ran out. This is also the reason why I was late for work, because I woke up and looked at my phone and realised that it was half past 8.

The moral of the story? Well, there isn’t one to be fair. There usually isn’t.

I was told this story by my Granddad this afternoon, with the question ‘how many grains of rice were there in total?’. Being the former IT student that I am, I recognised this as being binary – which to a certain extent it is. A square on the chessboard is equivalent to 1 bit, a line on a chessboard is 8 squares, therefore a line is equivalent to a byte and would have 128 grains of rice on the line.

This is where things started to go a bit awry in my mind. Not having any pieces of paper to work things out on, and realising that it wasn’t simply a case of having 8×128 (the ninth square would be 256), I figured that this was impossible for me to work out. Nevertheless, I started to think that I might be able to work it out once I returned home and had the computer in front of me.

8×8 is 64, thought I, therefore a chessboard is effectively 64 bit, and the answer would be that number, multiplied by itself, minus 1 (which in binary would be 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111)

Thinking that it would be easy to work out what the 64th number in the binary world would be, I did a quick Google search but gave up. (I have since worked this out, see below.)

That is when I started to write this blog post, thinking that I could allow you all to see me work through this mathematical problem. To give the story a proper retelling, I then searched Google for ‘rice chessboard’ or something like that. What should pop up high on the list, but an article from good old Wikipedia, which not only told me the story – the Chinese gentleman was in fact an ancient Indian mathmetitian named Sessa so -1 point for my grandfather there – but also the answer.

The answer is 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 – which when read out is eighteen million four hundred and forty six thousand seven hundred and forty four million seventy three million seven hundred and nine million five hundred and fifty one thousand six hundred and fifteen (I think anyway).

Now, having the answer to this conundrum has made me a much better person.  Admittedly, I didn’t work it out myself (which actually would have made me a much better person) because I looked it up on the Internet. I was going to, but the Internet stopped me from doing it as it made it quite a pointless thing to do.  The Internet has ruined my life. But it has made me a better person for it.

Possibly.

(To conclude, the 64th number in the ‘binary sequence’ is √(18446744073709551615 + 1) which is 4294967296. That bit was worked out by myself, so I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s wrong…)

Yesterday while I was in the shower, for some reason I started thinking about the designs that have been on this very website in the past. I remember posting a copy of an old design which I found that had been done in MS Word, and other designs had been completed in MS Publisher and Dreamweaver before I started coding the pure HTML of sites.  One design that I remembered yesterday was composed mostly of lego, where all the page headings and the like were created in Lego and then photographed. I mention designs because I’m currently contemplating switching over to WordPress so I’ve actually got a website that works…

I’ve also been looking at some old websites that are still around, and earlier on today came across this little snippet of text: “If your browser can cope with it, there is a bigger version of this photo (1402×1170 pixels, 168 KB).”

I very much doubt that you’d need to put that on images any more…

I’ve also forgotton what the main point of this post was except to say that I’m still alive… Take care all.