I have no idea what that is supposed to have to do with anything.

It means that is fine for Kilo to mean 1024 in the context of computers and 1000 in the context of distances, because you're never going to be in a situation where that is ambiguous.

Except it's not because it's constantly ambiguous in computing.

E.g. Macs measure file sizes in powers of 10 and call them KB, MB, GB. Windows measures file sizes in powers of 2 and calls them KB, MB, GB instead of KiB, MiB, GiB. Advertised hard drives come in powers of 10. Advertised memory chips come in powers of 2.

When you've got a large amount of data or are allocating an amount of space, are you measuring its size in memory or on disk? On a Mac or on Windows?

It's the forced revisionism of what "kilobyte", "megabyte" and "gigabyte", that has caused most of the confusion.

Especially that it was only partially successful.

Which is not to say that there had been zero confusion; but it was only made worse.

And that is because some people didn't like that a kilobyte was 1024 bytes instead of 1000, so they started using 1000 instead, and then that created confusion, so then they made up new term "kibibyte" that used 1024, and now it's all a mess.

And in most cases, using 1024 is more convenient because the sizes of page sizes, disk sectors, etc. are powers of 2.