An all-new version of the ILX code is being developed. You can test and comment at sandbox.ilxor.com.

Suggest zero years / epochs to get past this BC/BCE carp

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

1977
1970 = UNIX EPOCH
"(B/A)NH" = before / after first use of "no homo"
nov 1858 = start of modified julian dates

― Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 20:19 (nineteen years ago)

Vernor Vinge's novel A Deepness in the Sky describes a space-faring trading civilization tens of thousands of years (hundreds of gigaseconds) in the future that apparently still uses the Unix epoch. It is noted that this epoch is approximately when man first walked on the moon which is what the Qeng Ho mistakenly believe is the basis for their calendar. However, the timekeeping code is layered upon ancient programs including one that is implied to be based on the Unix epoch.

― Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 20:19 (nineteen years ago)

unix epoch time would make stuff a lot easier for total dweebs

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 20:40 (nineteen years ago)

also it could ease the transition into a global 24h timecode instead of having to append a bunch of AM/PM EST(GMT-5) horse shit to everything, and me having to type ALL TIMES ARE UTC all the time, and people needing to have ZULU explained to them

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 20:42 (nineteen years ago)

so like I said, total dweebs would love it

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 20:42 (nineteen years ago)

wait someone explain this

― river wolf, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 20:43 (nineteen years ago)

on the other hand reading your watch or glancing at the corner of your screen would take longer because epoch timestamps break human cardinality

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 20:43 (nineteen years ago)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_epoch

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 20:44 (nineteen years ago)

Tom, I'm not suggesting we drop our system of date time and move to time_t, only our years. A time system not aligned with sun position only makes sense in space.

Also should there should be a year zero.

I was born in UE11.

― Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 20:55 (nineteen years ago)

I say we move to 64 bit signed time_t also :(

― Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 20:55 (nineteen years ago)

In most modern programming environments, dates are stored as real numbers. The integer part of the number is the number of days since some agreed-upon date in the past, called the epoch. In Excel, today's date, June 16, 2006, is stored as 38884, counting days where January 1st, 1900 is 1.

I started working through the various date and time functions in Basic and the date and time functions in Excel, trying things out, when I noticed something strange in the Visual Basic documentation: Basic uses December 31, 1899 as the epoch instead of January 1, 1900, but for some reason, today's date was the same in Excel as it was in Basic.

Huh?

I went to find an Excel developer who was old enough to remember why. Ed Fries seemed to know the answer.

"Oh," he told me. "Check out February 28th, 1900."

"It's 59," I said.

"Now try March 1st."

"It's 61!"

"What happened to 60?" Ed asked.

"February 29th. 1900 was a leap year! It's divisible by 4!"

"Good guess, but no cigar," Ed said, and left me wondering for a while.

Oops. I did some research. Years that are divisible by 100 are not leap years, unless they're also divisible by 400.

1900 wasn't a leap year.

"It's a bug in Excel!" I exclaimed.

"Well, not really," said Ed. "We had to do it that way because we need to be able to import Lotus 123 worksheets."

"So, it's a bug in Lotus 123?"

"Yeah, but probably an intentional one. Lotus had to fit in 640K. That's not a lot of memory. If you ignore 1900, you can figure out if a given year is a leap year just by looking to see if the rightmost two bits are zero. That's really fast and easy. The Lotus guys probably figured it didn't matter to be wrong for those two months way in the past. It looks like the Basic guys wanted to be anal about those two months, so they moved the epoch one day back."

"Aargh!" I said, and went off to study why there was a checkbox in the options dialog called 1904 Date System.

The next day was the big BillG review.

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 21:09 (nineteen years ago)

A time system not aligned with sun position only makes sense in space.

but we are in space, jon. CYBER SPACE.

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 21:09 (nineteen years ago)

Tombot, do u wanna be bros in CYWORLD?

― Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 21:16 (nineteen years ago)

TOMBOT:
http://cyberpunk.net.pl/film/produkcje/gfx/kosiarz01.jpg

JW:
http://cyberpunk.net.pl/film/produkcje/gfx/kosiarz01.jpg

EXCEPT HUGGING.

― John Justen, Wednesday, 27 June 2007 21:23 (nineteen years ago)

a few years ago I though the best solution to this problem = to multiply the quantity of calendars out there so everybody set up their personal zero year. Pervasive computing would automatically cross-reference calendars to
maintain coherence between systems.

― Sébastien, Thursday, 28 June 2007 14:19 (nineteen years ago)

Does NNCK use the gregorian calendar? ^_^

― Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Thursday, 28 June 2007 16:39 (nineteen years ago)

CALCULATE FROM START OF MERGE INTO LOCAL FLUFF:

http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/4162/614pxmilkywayarmssvgkb2.png

― sanskrit, Thursday, 28 June 2007 17:37 (nineteen years ago)

two years pass...

In 1987 cats overtook dogs as the #1 pet in America.

― un(!)registered (unregistered), Thursday, 31 December 2009 03:18 (sixteen years ago)

what a shit year

― ★彡☆ ★彡 (ENBB), Thursday, 31 December 2009 03:21 (sixteen years ago)

it was the year I was born ;_;

― un(!)registered (unregistered), Thursday, 31 December 2009 03:22 (sixteen years ago)

in the beginning, there was unregistered

― welcome to gudbergur (harbl), Thursday, 31 December 2009 03:23 (sixteen years ago)

OK ok maybe not everything about 1986 was bad but ppl made poor decisions about pets.

― ★彡☆ ★彡 (ENBB), Thursday, 31 December 2009 03:27 (sixteen years ago)

wait if we're gonna play this game then yes, I agree that 1986 was an abomination.

― un(!)registered (unregistered), Thursday, 31 December 2009 03:32 (sixteen years ago)

ur parents did it

― welcome to gudbergur (harbl), Thursday, 31 December 2009 03:38 (sixteen years ago)

did what, blew up the Challenger?

― un(!)registered (unregistered), Thursday, 31 December 2009 03:41 (sixteen years ago)

you could call it that

― welcome to gudbergur (harbl), Thursday, 31 December 2009 03:42 (sixteen years ago)

lol!

― un(!)registered (unregistered), Thursday, 31 December 2009 03:43 (sixteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.