There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

If civilization continues to the year 9999, is the idea to go to year 10.000, or...?

It seems like it’d get increasingly impractical as the years go on to hundreds of thousands and millions of years to write them out that way, but then…I guess technically one may already do this with the preceding years, so future’s fair game for it?

FuglyDuck ,
@FuglyDuck@lemmy.world avatar

What’s going to happen, is that I’m going to start a Humanist cult, and they’re going to name the new age after me.

They’ll call it “the year of our salvation.” They just misremember everything, and think I was some hero. The reality is I’m an asshole and should never be trusted leading a quasi-religious crusade.

PlutoniumAcid ,
@PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world avatar

Yup, ducks are general assholes. And they rape a lot, which also tracks with the cult leaders. And they quack, too!

Genericusername ,

By then, I don’t think that the use of earth’s orbital period around the sun would make sense as a unit of measurement. It is important to track the seasons if you’re living in an agricultural society. But the orbital period of the earth is not consistent across time, nor the time it takes for the earth to rotate. It doesn’t make a good unit of measurement. And don’t get me started on leap years, leap seconds, negative leap seconds, timezones and daylight saving times…

I’d prefer to base the new unit of time based on “Plank time”. About 10^44 of these are about one second. Now if we switch to the duodecimal system we can define 12^41 × Plank time to be our standard unit. It’s about a third of an earth second. 144 of these (12^43) equal roughly 3/4 of a minute. 144 of these (12^45) is about 1.8 hours. 12 of these (12^46) could be the equivalent of a day, 12 of that could be an equivalent of a week, and you can find an equivalent for a year. The duodecimal is unnecessary, but it makes division a bit neater. Now peak a date well before the beginning of human history to avoid the need for negative years (BC / AD) and that’s it.

That way you get a single number that you can manipulate arithmetically. Not like yyyy/mm/dd format where each part is a different length.

CoolMatt ,

…what?

Eufalconimorph , (edited )

Astronomers already use Julian Dates for various reasons. Right now it’s 2460261.2834606, it’ll be later by the time you read this. Julian dates/times are fractional days starting from January 1st, 4713 B.C. = 0. Just keep counting up from there.

hansl ,

So I got confused and had to read Wikipedia for this. Day 0 is Jan 1, 4713 BC. I feel this causes more confusion if it isn’t mentioned.

Eufalconimorph ,

DOH, skipped those two critical letters! Thanks for the correction.

Corkyskog ,

How are you still not confused??

So I just read through the same wiki and there is absolutely no explanation of why they start at 4713 BC. It’s just bizarrely stated as fact with no explanation.

It would be like if invented a card game called Percluey where you had to count to 44 and Yell “Percluey” to win the game. And 8s are also called perclueys and worth -3. Then when you ask why it’s 44 you just say “because that’s Percluey” and then when they ask you what the heck is a “Percluey” you just shrug and sip on your spritzer.

hansl ,

I don’t know if you read the right wiki, but in the history section the first paragraph is:

The Julian day number is based on the Julian Period proposed by Joseph Scaliger, a classical scholar, in 1583 (one year after the Gregorian calendar reform) as it is the product of three calendar cycles used with the Julian calendar:

28 (solar cycle) × 19 (lunar cycle) × 15 (indiction cycle) = 7980 years

Its epoch occurs when all three cycles (if they are continued backward far enough) were in their first year together. Years of the Julian Period are counted from this year, 4713 BC, as year 1, which was chosen to be before any historical record.[28]

It was either that, or earlier, or in the future. That’s the only year that kinda makes sense (solar = lunar = induction = 0). It looks odd but once you know you know, you know?

kzhe ,

We’ll probably have a Calendar system switch to a new major event

Kolanaki ,
@Kolanaki@yiffit.net avatar

BC - Before Christ

AD - After Christ (but in Latin)

ADR - After Christ Returns (but in Martian)

olsonexi ,
@olsonexi@lemmy.wtf avatar

AD - After Christ (but in Latin)

eh… not quite

it actually stands for “Anno Domini”, which is latin, but means “in the year of the lord”

rappo ,

we should really update this to “After when some people thought Jesus was born but they fucked up by 4-6 years. Also why is there no year zero?”

AWSPTJWBBTFUB4YAWITNYZ doesn’t really roll off the tongue, though. Maybe it’s better if someone can translate that into Latin.

Edit: Google Translate says “Post cum quidam putant natus est Jesus, sed eruditionis 4-6 annis. Cur etiam annus nullus est nullus?” so I propose “Post cum”

Antimoon51 ,

That doesn’t work, PC is alfeady taken

HipsterTenZero ,
@HipsterTenZero@dormi.zone avatar

Beyond maybe needing some sort of space calendar if we ever actually get off this rock in a way that matters, why not? An extra digit isnt all that big of a hassle.

thefactremains ,

If we’re no longer on earth, days and years will be based on whatever orbit we’re following. So I guess the counter would start from zero.

cobwoms ,

we’re going to have a y2k bug situation all over again. the y10k bug

folkrav ,

Ackchyually, the Y2K bug was pretty different. A lot of software, for various reasons, took to representing dates as a two digit number. This meant going from 1999 to 2000 would make that software try to understand dates going from 99 to potentially various of other values, like 00 or 100.

We’re gonna have a different form of that on machines with 32 bit processors relatively soon. Past some time on Jan 19th, 2038, the epoch time, a count of seconds since Jan 1st, 1970, is stored as a 32 bit signed integer. At this time, it’ll run out of positive values, will overflow, and cause the internal clocks of such machines to go back to 1901. It probably won’t happen again after that, as the maximum date represented by the largest signed integer a 64 bit machine can store is 292+ billion years

hydrashok ,

Good luck to all the engineers billions of years from now having fun moving to 128-bit time. What fools we were.

folkrav ,

Silver lining is, they should be done with the IPv6 migration by then.

Cosmicomical ,

Shouldn't it go back to 1970? Why 1901?

Skua ,

It's a signed integer, meaning it has the same amount of space for negative numbers as it does for positive ones. Late 1901 is the same amount of time away from Jan 1st 1970 as early 2038 is

blargerer ,

The integer is signed, when it overflows it doesn't go to 0, it goes from Max Positive Value to Max Minimum Value, which will be a very 'large' negative number (-2147483648 to be exact).

AA5B ,

I’m pretty sure all operating systems have long ago switched to 64 bit date times. Of course, just like y2k, it’s the apps and their shortcuts that will be a problem.

folkrav ,

There has to be millions of IoT/embedded crap that runs some long obsolete OS version or whatever. Consumer stuff indeed shifted a looong time ago.

marcos ,

Well, no reason not to add a digit after 9999.

But yeah, at some point we ought to stop using years. It’s the second that is standardized, and the year is all off. I can’t imagine we reaching 9999, but the change has no relation to the extra digit and no reason to happen anywhere near it.

SirToxicAvenger ,

obviously start counting backwards to zero

lemmie689 ,
@lemmie689@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

According to Zager and Evans, the year 9595 will pretty much be it.

piped.video/watch?v=zKQfxi8V5FA

CulturedLout ,

Never thought I’d see that song as being optimistic

TheInsane42 ,
@TheInsane42@lemmy.world avatar

Nah, we’ll never get there. (When we do, major Y10K crisis. 💣💥)

Thalion ,

Eventually we reach 999.M41

SkybreakerEngineer ,

And stay there for decades until we need an excuse to sell bigger models

postmateDumbass ,

We shkuld switch to a base12 number and metric system.

geogle ,
@geogle@lemmy.world avatar

You’re thinking too small. Base 60 (Sexagesimal)…the Sumerians had the right idea.

Meho_Nohome ,
@Meho_Nohome@sh.itjust.works avatar

I’m sure we’ll switch to star dates by then.

BlameThePeacock ,

I don’t think anyone cares at this point, that’s a problem for 300ish generations from now.

Jay ,

I don’t think that’s a question any human will have to answer. Humanity will be long gone by then.

Red_October ,

At that point we switch to a Year (three digit) and Millennium (M followed by two digits) system, so the year 10,001 would be noted as 001.M10. After 999 M10 we reach 000.M11, and so on. Most applications would only really need the year number. /s

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •