this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
256 points (93.2% liked)
Showerthoughts
29643 readers
934 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The best ones are thoughts that many people can relate to and they find something funny or interesting in regular stuff.
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- Avoid politics (NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out)
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
dd/mm/yyyy
1607 is prime
I maintain that dd/mm/yyyy and mm/dd/yyyy are stupid.
Big -> small is how we read numbers:
yyyy/mm/dd
I prefer the simple dy/my/dy/my format (with the year reversed for added ease of use). For example, today would be 14/02/70/72.
NIST and ISO have stopped responding to my emails, but I'm optimistic that the Türk Standardları Enstitüsü will eventually adopt it as their preferred standard.
I prefer the MYOWN-16080 standard of
yy/dm/md/y/y. Also the year units are randomly swapped for encryptionWhat a shitty standard. Where are the check bits? Are you using PGP?
lmaoooo and the fucking year digits are backwards 🤣🤣🤣 i knew the date and it still took me a while to figure it out
ISO8601 club
Julian date club 24199
Yeah, but you have to admit mm/dd/yyyy is way more stupid. Small -> big makes more sense than middle -> small -> big
For every day purposes, absolutely. For programming? Nope, the only right answer is big->small.
Honestly, the alternative to every day use is to stop using numbers for the month
The problem with three letter month codes is language to language difference. Numbers are more universal.
https://xkcd.com/927/
Actually, I disagree that DD/MM/YYYY even qualifies as being small to big.
If you actually treat it as a counter from 01/01/2024 onward, note that the first digit that moves is actually the second digit in the 8-digit representation. In terms of significance, the most significant digit is the 5th one in the string, then counting down the significance it's 6th, then 7th, then 8th, then jumps back to the 3rd, then the 4th, then the 1st, then the 2nd.
A day is less than a month, is less than a year
12 is smaller than 31 is smaller than ∞, though.
Really, we can all come up with vastly reasonable reasons the date system we prefer makes the most sense... but in reality it's all very subjective. Not only will different methods be appropriate for different situations... but some people just prefer their own way.
It's all really moot, though. We should have been using stardates for the last 55 years anyways.
Yes, and recurring dates naturally drop the year, so MM/DD better fits that general rule.
What if we just count all the nanoseconds since 1601 and divide by 100.
I still don't get that timestamp approach. Especially after learning how unix/linux handle it...
At least modern AD tools can automatically do the date conversions now.
Because it’s a basic data structure that holds time, instead of multiple interrelated ints…. And it’s easy to do math on.
^^ This is the only acceptable way to write out the date numerically. I'll die on this hill.
Yes but small is more relevant since you're more likely to know the big. therefore i propose we put minutes ahead of hours.
Big is more important than small. If your use case has the big stuff in context, drop the big.
You mean YYYY-MM-DD right? Right?!?
That would not give a prime number