As someone who has studied programming in both high-school and at uni I can't help but find your comment slightly funny. You see, I can't think of a single time I've used binary for anything. Pure binary that is, as in say 1010, not true/false or 1, 2, 4, 8 etc. I can still relate to this comment though as learning binary felt like an important part of becoming a programmer. Do you use any binary when you program?

@@johanrosenberg6342 Lol, that's fair. Binary doesn't have a use case in most modern environments. But for me, my primary focus when coding has always been around low-level game development. So things like bit flags and byte packing were extremely important for keeping the game running fast without using up too much memory. Although, here, it's more so learning this that gave me a new way to think about problems. It gave me an idea of how problems can be approached outside of the box.

@@TheDudeFromCI Cool! I've always wanted to try stuff like that, but these days I'm worried I'd just be wasting my time figuring out low-level stuff (I focus my work on the gameplay mechanics). Don't get me wrong though, I think it would be a quite fun waste of time. And seeing as I already have quite good understanding of BASIC I could always take the Ultima route and reserve assembly for certain routines. That actually reminds me, I think the joystick on the Commodore 64 operates in binary, and I've programmed that in BASIC. But aside from that and some CPU-building in Minecraft I can't think of any other times I've used binary. Not that strange though considering how simple and practical hexadecimal is in most cases.

@@johanrosenberg6342 Yeah, binary only really has uses in very special circumstances. Not a whole lot of use cases in modern development at all. In your case of low-level game development, I say it's worth it. While it's never going to get you as far as using a high level engine or anything, it teaches you how the engines work under the hood and gives you a huge boost when it comes to designing the high level stuff. You get much better grasp for why things are done the way they are and how you can optimize the high level stuff around that.

@@johanrosenberg6342 I explicitly use binary at times when I'm developing BLE communication protocols

+Adriana Michel : I agree 100 % (I am a teacher myself).

Yea Adriana you are Quite right. i will love to get in touch with you if you don,t mind Madam?

Yeah right, in universities too...

@@markpainters5869 GTFI|O U STUIPD

Or schools should have computers and a suitable youtube playlist

And at the bottom put a binary to decimal converter

David Panić indeed =)

+Mikael Murstam decimal to binary, and binary to decimal converters would need a reservoir of available marbles though. F.e. 32 would be 5 marbles in decimal (3 on the 10 column, and 2 on the 1 column), while it's only one in binary (one on the 32 column). While f.e. 11 is 2 marbles in decimal (one on the 10 column and 1 on the 1 column), while it's 3 marbles in binary (one on the 8 column, one on the 2 column, and one on the 1 column). I wonder how you can make a reservoir without electronics to just release the number of marbles you need to convert a number. Making counters in any base is possible though (so addition machines should be too, given the right input configuration). F.e. see this clock kzfaq.info/get/bejne/i65ye6ak19e9fas.html The counting mechanism uses base 12 for the hours, and base 12 + base 5 (which multiplies to 60) for the minutes (base 60 directly would make it too big suppose).

David Panić That would be a pretty complicated machine. Very possible to make though. There are multiple ways to go about it but probably the best way for a larger number would be to find a way implement the double dabble algorithm for binary to bcd then a bcd to decimal decoder. Not something i would ever want to make but it would be amazing to see

i just found *TopFineWoodworking .Com* and the plans on there are so amazingly laid out and well thought i don’t know what I would do without them now.....

Well the interger overflow on normal calculators is one googl but on this one it is 63 and on top of that, you still have to add to get a result, It is interesting, yes, but it is incompetent and only shortens the amount to add

Thank you.

maybe with about a billion more

that would be pretty cool to see, maybe not crysis but something simpler but still definitely a video game.

holy hell this joke is old as the hills, let it die already...

It's can run your mind to write about Crysis. But, more complicated function is to run marbles, you can play marbles, it's also funny

It will take a hundred trillion years just to load the game (a trillion marbles clashing).

+Guy_With_A_Stick Never seen an abacus?

Tera Volt An abacus is mostly human-powered. With this, it automatically adds.

I recommend visiting the Technisches Museum in Berlin where the Zuse Z1 is exhibited, a programmable mechanic computer. Looks like Matthias' adder, only bigger.

Guy_With_A_Stick yeah fair point

That's right, me too...

+TheDrB0B And if you were just a wee bit smarter, you would have clicked on the link in the description and realized it operates in BINARY.

Matthias Wandel Just a question, can something that adds those numbers and gives out a single answer be done with only wood as well?

+TheDrB0B That is a single answer. 32 + 16 + 8 + 4 + 2 + 1 is 111111 in binary. The 32 ,16, 8, 4, 2 and 1 are simply labels for the individual bits.

Oh, yeah. I guess I did miss that haha. Sorry Matthias Wandel. I misunderstood your reply. I didn't know what binary was precisely, but I looked it up and IslandCave helped me understand it.

+TheDrB0B also thats like the limit of the machine (63) most of the smaller numbers give a far simpler to interpret result as shown in the video

Creed Bratton I'm actually going to agree with Creed here, even though his comments come off like he's a troll. He has a good point, just in the sense of forcing us the realize we would very seldom use binary as an output format in the real world, simply because we have 10 fingers and learned to count in that base. Nevertheless, any device that helps us visualize binary systems is a great way for beginners to understand computer logic.

There is a view that binary operations using stones or marbles could have been in existence long before people actually had words for the numbers. One can easily compress or reduce a pile of marbles down to its binary number by using repeated halving (even numbers given a zero & odd numbers given a 1). Whilst an equivalent pile of marbles can easily be built from their binary number by starting with a 1 and then doubling it (and adding a one if the next number is a 1) before doubling again until the end is reached. Addition subtraction multiplication and division operations are easily done in binary. If one looks at later Egyptian multiplication it appears to be based on a similar approach to binary multiplication. Halve one number and double the other and add up those totals that have an odd number reduction. It is much easier to do than to explain but once one is used to doing binary multiplication it seems obvious to use this approach with decimal numbers. If children were introduced to binary first then numbers & operations would become much simple and easier to understand whilst handling big numbers with ease. It also allows one to move easily into other bases whether it is; 5, 10, 12, 20 or 60 as a precocious 16 year old young Napier found out.

Downhill not really. When he is adding, what he is really doing is just converting between our decimal system and binary system. If you were okay working with and representing numbers in binary, you would have no need of adding them up as he does.

@@erikengheim1106 You did not understand Downhill's comment, I believe: when performing calculation, there is an expectation that the calculation result will be accurate, isn't there? To gauge accuracy of the result, we must already have at least an idea of it, hence Downhill's comment.

Hahaha

storminmormin14 That would be very slow... and NOISY... but fun if you're in no hurry. I'd like to see it try to download an image... it would probably take a month and sound like a hailstorm.

Now Apple will watch this, replicate it exactly, and then paint it black. They will say they invented it first. Then patent arbitrary things like the 90° corners of the product.

+ProGamer1515 lol

+ProGamer1515 It'll sound good when a British guy talks about it.

Pablo Suarez ANYTHING sounds good when a British guy talks about stuff. XD

Yes. This is already known to greeks and egyptians. Look at the pyramid. Lol huge.