"Wikipedia-sized"
Is it really? They say in the article that the text of Wikipedia is a 10GB download, but that has to be compressed (and compression on plaintext, which comprises most of Wikipedia, is extremely efficient). I'm guessing (but have no proof) that their 13GB file was raw data.
A minor thing, but comparisons like this always drive me nuts. Just say "13GB proof too big for humans to check." Then there's no confusion.</sillyrant>
Different strokes. I find that spoilers make me more interested in how the story unfolds, personally. But yes, I understand that a lot of folks don't like them.
A minor thing, but comparisons like this always drive me nuts. Just say "13GB proof too big for humans to check." Then there's no confusion.</sillyrant>