1340: "Unique Date"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

CharlieBing
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 3:50 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby CharlieBing » Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:01 pm UTC

PsiSquared wrote:
Copper Bezel wrote:I do love the Long Now Clock, though. Now that's what I call a successful rhetorical gesture, and it might even have some practical value in the long run.


And if this latest comic gets a few people thinking about the Long Now and the clock and the future - instead of rambling on about non-secular dates and religious chronologies - then so much the better. :roll: Should I get my coat?

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby CharlieP » Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:06 pm UTC

NeatNit wrote:
PinkShinyRose wrote:Sometimes ISO just does ridiculous things.

Tell me about it. A while ago I read that they defined Monday as the first day of the week instead of Sunday. The only reason for this, I believe, is that Sunday is the Christian day of rest. Sure, let's ignore the fact that in countless languages including my own, Sunday is literally called "first day", Monday is "second day", etc. Let's just throw ALL THAT away, and contrary to ALL LOGIC define Day No. 2 as the first day of the week. Just because we feel like it.


I never knew that - I'm only used to the ones where days of the week are named after Norse/Germanic gods or planets.

Certainly I grew up with the naive view that the week started on a Monday, since Saturday and Sunday were the weekend. The majority of calendars I've seen have Saturday and Sunday together at the end of each row - it's just awkward when they're split and you have to write weekend activities in twice. At school they tried telling me that the week began half-way through the weekend, which seemed a bit weird, and I just put it down as one of those "you say tomato" things with no real bearing on anything.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby CharlieP » Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:09 pm UTC

Mikeski wrote:I mean, I'm not offended by the idea that AD 2014 is also Heisei 26. Why should I be? He's not "my" Emperor, he's just "an" Emperor. Similarly, I'm not offended by the secular or religious Romanness of January or July, nor by days of the week named after Norse deities...


Me neither. Though some people seem to think I'm a hypocrite for "celebrating Christmas" (which in this country is more a commercialised form of Yule/Saturnalia)...
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

User avatar
Wee Red Bird
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:50 am UTC
Location: In a tree

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Wee Red Bird » Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:29 pm UTC

The year count should go back to the beginning at 2015 when the Age of Aquarius starts.

User avatar
cjmcjmcjmcjm
Posts: 1158
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:15 am UTC
Location: Anywhere the internet is strong

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby cjmcjmcjmcjm » Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:36 pm UTC

Klear wrote:I'm sure you must be very angry about September, October, November, and December.

Actually, I am. (We should have 10 36 day months with 5 (occasionally 6) special days around the solstices)
frezik wrote:Anti-photons move at the speed of dark

DemonDeluxe wrote:Paying to have laws written that allow you to do what you want, is a lot cheaper than paying off the judge every time you want to get away with something shady.

User avatar
Jackpot777
Posts: 328
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Jackpot777 » Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:55 pm UTC

CharlieP wrote:
Mikeski wrote:I mean, I'm not offended by the idea that AD 2014 is also Heisei 26. Why should I be? He's not "my" Emperor, he's just "an" Emperor. Similarly, I'm not offended by the secular or religious Romanness of January or July, nor by days of the week named after Norse deities...


Me neither. Though some people seem to think I'm a hypocrite for "celebrating Christmas" (which in this country is more a commercialised form of Yule/Saturnalia)...


Axial tiltist here.

Image

rmsgrey
Posts: 3485
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby rmsgrey » Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:02 pm UTC

I don't see what all the Y2K fuss was about. I'm perfectly happy with the year being 19114...

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3007
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby orthogon » Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:49 pm UTC

Klear wrote:
orthogon wrote:Well, for international use, it's helpful to be able to communicate a date without necessarily acknowledging in the process that you consider Jesus of Nazareth to be your Lord. Chronology and religious adherence are not exactly the same thing. :P


I'm not acknowledging Jesus of Nazareth to be your Lord, I'm acknowledging him to be pretty much the most influential person in the history of the western civilization. Besides, if you still cound the "common era" from his birth so it would seem you agree he was quite an important fellow.

Edit: I see Mikeski already made that point. It also helps that in Czech we write "př. Kr." meaning simply "before Christ". There is the "př. n. l." alternative (before our era), but that's A) longer, B) been established by the communists.

I count the common era from the start of the common era, because it's as good as any other arbitrary datum and most importantly it's what everyone else does. And it would be fine to be explicit that we're using the birth of Jesus as our arbitrary reference, except that he probably wasn't born in 1AD at all. But as I understand it, "Christ" means that he was the messiah, and "Anno Domini" has the meaning discussed earlier, so using either BC or AD technically implies that you believe Jesus actually was the real deal. For what it's worth, I agree Jesus was indeed extraordinarily influential and I also think he was pretty cool guy with some great ideas. But I don't buy the son of God business and shouldn't have to imply that I do every time in order to communicate a date.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Someguy945
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 5:09 am UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Someguy945 » Mon Mar 10, 2014 6:02 pm UTC

If our current civilization lasts another 8,000 years, it's probably fair to assume the Long Now Foundation got things right, and at some point we started listening to them and switched to five-digit years.


I don't think it's a fair assumption that we'll switch to 5 digits by 10000. Companies will tell their programmers to begin working on it as a "low priority item" in 9998, and then there will be a meeting in November 9999 where it gets upgraded to "high priority, but take care of this one other thing first".

That being said, 2014-03-10 will still be a unique date because it's not 8000 years away, it's 10000 years away. More than 2000 years after the Y10K problem, it IS fair to assume that we'll finally be representing years with 5 digits.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Klear » Mon Mar 10, 2014 6:06 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:But as I understand it, "Christ" means that he was the messiah, and "Anno Domini" has the meaning discussed earlier, so using either BC or AD technically implies that you believe Jesus actually was the real deal. For what it's worth, I agree Jesus was indeed extraordinarily influential and I also think he was pretty cool guy with some great ideas. But I don't buy the son of God business and shouldn't have to imply that I do every time in order to communicate a date.


"Christ" means he's been baptised AFAIK, and I'd argue AD has long since lost the original meaning.

I would have a problem using money declaring that I believe in God though.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3007
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby orthogon » Mon Mar 10, 2014 6:38 pm UTC

You might be right, but nobody else is ever referred to as Christ, which suggests the title is a little more exclusive. A smarter move would have been simply to redefine what BC and AD stood for, like they did with GSM. It's a bit odd that BC is in English and AD in Latin.

After writing my last post I was thinking about the circularity of my definition, and came to a terrifying realisation: the reference datum really is defined by the fact that today is 2014-03-10. Our entire calendar system relies completely on our not losing count. Some kind of EMP combined with a Saramago-esque collective memory loss would be enough to break it.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Whizbang » Mon Mar 10, 2014 6:47 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:You might be right, but nobody else is ever referred to as Christ, which suggests the title is a little more exclusive. A smarter move would have been simply to redefine what BC and AD stood for, like they did with GSM. It's a bit odd that BC is in English and AD in Latin.

After writing my last post I was thinking about the circularity of my definition, and came to a terrifying realisation: the reference datum really is defined by the fact that today is 2014-03-10. Our entire calendar system relies completely on our not losing count. Some kind of EMP combined with a Saramago-esque collective memory loss would be enough to break it.


It would have to be quite a memory loss. We can calculate the date pretty well using the stars and such. So, not only would we need a worldwide EMP (that also takes out the systems protected against such things), a collective memory loss of the current date and how to calculate it, but also all paper records of how to calculate the current date.

Also, aren't the mechanical time keeping devices that wouldn't be affected by an EMP? Like wouldn't most write watched (non-digital) keep working?

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Klear » Mon Mar 10, 2014 7:08 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:You might be right, but nobody else is ever referred to as Christ, which suggests the title is a little more exclusive.


Uh, Christians? Because they are christened? In Czech we call it "křesťanství" because they undergo "křest" (baptism) and Christ is Kristus, so maybe it's just more obvious to me.

User avatar
Wnderer
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 9:10 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Wnderer » Mon Mar 10, 2014 7:09 pm UTC

It's BCE that's dumb. When they changed over from AD/BC to CE, they should have included the year zero and used negative numbers.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26547
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Mar 10, 2014 7:13 pm UTC

Klear wrote:"Christ" means he's been baptised AFAIK, and I'd argue AD has long since lost the original meaning.
"Christ" means "anointed", and comes from the Greek translation of Hebrew mashiah (i.e. "messiah"). So it's obviously more than simply his being baptized that earned that name. (And the fact that the word for "baptism" is still etymologically related to "Christ" in other languages doesn't mean much for the meanings of English words.)

And neither BC nor AD has lost its meaning. If someone asks what AD means, how would you explain it other than by telling them the meaning of the Latin those letters come from? "Christ" and "domini" both still explicitly refer to Christian religious beliefs most of the world doesn't hold.

Whizbang wrote:It would have to be quite a memory loss. We can calculate the date pretty well using the stars and such. So, not only would we need a worldwide EMP (that also takes out the systems protected against such things), a collective memory loss of the current date and how to calculate it, but also all paper records of how to calculate the current date.
Even if we could recalculate the date of the year from the stars (which would requireknowing a few astronomical terms and a few recent years' dates for equinoxes and solstices), forgetting the current year and losing records from the past handful of years would at least add a great deal of uncertainty to whether we were still counting that "correctly".

I suspect that if all of civilization collapsed to the point where people no longer remembered what year things happened, though, subsequent civilizations would start their count from something else, and would be fine with that. As things stand now, we don't know exactly when dates in obsolete systems happened, even if we can make some pretty decent guesses.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Mikeski
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Mikeski » Mon Mar 10, 2014 7:38 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:"Christ" and "domini" both still explicitly refer to Christian religious beliefs most of the world doesn't hold.

Which doesn't really matter. "Queen Elizabeth II" is still "Queen" even if she has only a twentieth of the subjects that Jesus has.

And if we're picking one religion to base a calendar on, Christians have a plurality, though not a majority. And I don't think any single non-religious group outnumbers them (~2.18 billion), either.

gmalivuk wrote:I suspect that if all of civilization collapsed to the point where people no longer remembered what year things happened, though, subsequent civilizations would start their count from something else, and would be fine with that.

Exactly so; probably for the same reasons as above (pick the most-important event to the greatest number of people. And stick with it so we don't have to rewrite all our books every time someone overthrows the king).

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1822
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Mar 10, 2014 7:53 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:You might be right, but nobody else is ever referred to as Christ, which suggests the title is a little more exclusive. A smarter move would have been simply to redefine what BC and AD stood for, like they did with GSM. It's a bit odd that BC is in English and AD in Latin.


Its probably due to the fact that in Latin, Anno Domine and Antequam Domine have the same initials ;)
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Klear » Mon Mar 10, 2014 7:57 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Klear wrote:"Christ" means he's been baptised AFAIK, and I'd argue AD has long since lost the original meaning.
"Christ" means "anointed", and comes from the Greek translation of Hebrew mashiah (i.e. "messiah"). So it's obviously more than simply his being baptized that earned that name.


It also means "being covered in oil". I guess many refinery workers are our Lords now as well.

From ritual and symbolic standpoint being baptised and being anointed is the same thing. Of course, Jesus gets to use it as a name since he did it before it was cool.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26547
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:07 pm UTC

Mikeski wrote:Exactly so; probably for the same reasons as above (pick the most-important event to the greatest number of people. And stick with it so we don't have to rewrite all our books every time someone overthrows the king).
No one ever had to rewrite everything just because the numbering system changed, though. In systems named after emperors, the emperor's own name is typically included in the year number. Doesn't work great for electronic records you want to use in calculations, but it's fine for books and still gives unambiguous points in time just like every other widely used system.

Mikeski wrote:Which doesn't really matter. "Queen Elizabeth II" is still "Queen" even if she has only a twentieth of the subjects that Jesus has.
Everyone agrees the Queen Elizabeth II is indeed a queen, but we don't all agree that Jesus was LORD. And even if I agree that Jesus is some people's LORD, I don't have to like a year numbering system based on his birth any more than I'd like one based on the reign of QEII.

Mikeski wrote:And if we're picking one religion to base a calendar on, Christians have a plurality
Sure. And if we're picking one monarch to base a calendar on, Queen Elizabeth II has the largest and most populous realm. And if we're picking one D&D Edition to base a calendar on, 3.5 is the best one.

An arbitrary decision is still arbitrary, even if a lot of people don't mind it.

Klear wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
Klear wrote:"Christ" means he's been baptised AFAIK, and I'd argue AD has long since lost the original meaning.
"Christ" means "anointed", and comes from the Greek translation of Hebrew mashiah (i.e. "messiah"). So it's obviously more than simply his being baptized that earned that name.
It also means "being covered in oil". I guess many refinery workers are our Lords now as well.
And "buddha" means "awakened", so I guess everyone awake enough to read this is now Englightened as well.

Or maybe using either Christ or Buddha as proper names without any other context clues means you're referring specifically to Jesus of Nazareth or Siddhartha Gautama in their religious roles.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Durandal_1707
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 5:30 am UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Durandal_1707 » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:12 pm UTC

I find it amusing that Randall did this comic on Mario Day (Mar10).

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Klear » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:14 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Or maybe using either Christ or Buddha as proper names without any other context clues means you're referring specifically to Jesus of Nazareth or Siddhartha Gautama in their religious roles.


No it doesn't. When I write BC, even if you insist that the C standing for Christ is relevant, I'm still referring to him just as guy influential enough that we base our calendar on his approximate birth. It has nothing to do with whether he was the son of God or not...

User avatar
Jackpot777
Posts: 328
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Jackpot777 » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:17 pm UTC

I remember an Asimov story where Year 1 was taken from the old calendar's 1945, as it was the first year of the Atomic Age (and he wrote with that great international Sword of Damocles in the world). If we become a species that spreads beyond the Earth on a regular basis, maybe October 4, 1957 would be a good day to start a calendar (Sputnik's launch).

User avatar
Jackpot777
Posts: 328
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Jackpot777 » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:19 pm UTC

Durandal_1707 wrote:I find it amusing that Randall did this comic on Mario Day (Mar10).


In parts of the world, today is 10MAR Day.

Image

Long live Iomar!

User avatar
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Flumble » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:40 pm UTC

Jackpot777 wrote:I remember an Asimov story where Year 1 was taken from the old calendar's 1945, as it was the first year of the Atomic Age (and he wrote with that great international Sword of Damocles in the world). If we become a species that spreads beyond the Earth on a regular basis, maybe October 4, 1957 would be a good day to start a calendar (Sputnik's launch).

I'd argue 1970 is year 0.

It's also a sociologically good choice, because it isn't based on a specific event (and different cultures have a very different view on the importance of an event) and it draws a vague line between the primitive era before computers and the digital age we live in now.

One day there will be a Holy Book depicting Alan Turing as the martyr (which he in fact is), born in the year 0 (just as achronologically), who led his disciples into the ways of the web and performing miracles like cracking the enigma codes using only a terminal. (though we also need an opposing force; is there any substantial culture against technological advancements?)

User avatar
Coyoty
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:56 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Coyoty » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:41 pm UTC

Today's date is 53-01-10 AC (Anno Coyoty). I look forward to having a Y2K crisis.

Mikeski
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Mikeski » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:43 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Mikeski wrote:[(]And stick with it so we don't have to rewrite all our books every time someone overthrows the king).
No one ever had to rewrite everything just because the numbering system changed, though. In systems named after emperors, the emperor's own name is typically included in the year number. Doesn't work great for electronic records you want to use in calculations, but it's fine for books and still gives unambiguous points in time just like every other widely used system.

I was referring more to the "We of the people of Bourbon will not accept the calendar of the heathens of Vodka! Henceforth, this is the First Year of Bourbon, and all previous shall be known as the years Before Bourbon! Strike all references to the heathen calendar!" The Japanese calendar counting from Taisho to Showa to Heisei is something else.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6595
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby ucim » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:45 pm UTC

NeatNit wrote:A while ago I read that they defined Monday as the first day of the week instead of Sunday. The only reason for this, I believe, is that Sunday is the Christian day of rest...
It also splits the weekend to define Sunday as the first day. Monday is (generally) the first day of the workweek, and it's nice to have the weekend grouped together.

CharlieP wrote:The majority of calendars I've seen have Saturday and Sunday together at the end of each row.
I've only seen that with DayRunner and the like. Alas, most of the ones I see for sale have Sunday on the left.

But the One True Calendar starts at the Beginning of Time, as it should. It has a year zero (we are in it now) although it doesn't have month zero or day zero, and you can set the "first" (leftmost) day of the (seven day) week to be any day you like.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

Mikeski
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Mikeski » Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:07 pm UTC

Flumble wrote:I'd argue 1970 is year 0.

It's also a sociologically good choice, because it isn't based on a specific event (and different cultures have a very different view on the importance of an event) and it draws a vague line between the primitive era before computers and the digital age we live in now.

One day there will be a Holy Book depicting Alan Turing as the martyr (which he in fact is), born in the year 0 (just as achronologically), who led his disciples into the ways of the web and performing miracles like cracking the enigma codes using only a terminal.

As someone who designs those little bits of thinking sand you're so enamored of, I like that. But when we crack the next Big Thing (FTL travel, functional immortality, strong AI*), integrated circuits will seem as quaint as the assembly line process or the scientific method or crop-rotation agriculture, and picking a date that divides "then" from "now" will seem rather silly. Deciding that something that happened within your own lifetime represents The Most Important Thing In History (In Both Directions) is dangerous thinking. :mrgreen:

Flumble wrote:(though we also need an opposing force; is there any substantial culture against technological advancements?)

The "green" branch of the first-world's political left wing? No (more) nuclear power, no GMO foods, no (more) pipelines or refineries, no military advancements... and certainly none of it where they can see it. Maybe it's only the left-wing-driven reporting that makes them seem "substantial", though. :wink:

* - especially strong AI... the machines that rule after the Singularity will find a calendar system created by another species to be a strange idea, indeed.

User avatar
BytEfLUSh
Posts: 308
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:15 am UTC
Location: Sombor, Serbia, Pizza
Contact:

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby BytEfLUSh » Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:19 pm UTC

Hmm, I always wondered why is there an option on most computer systems to select Sunday as the first day of the week. Some countries actually use that system?!

As for AD/CE debate, in Serbian it's called BCE = p.n.e. (pre nove/naše ere - before new/current era) and CE = n.e. (nove/naše ere = new/current era). I don't know if there's a religious alternative - if it does exist, it's not being widely used.
Image

Image

-- Professor Dan, The Man from Earth (paraphrased)

xtifr
Posts: 337
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:38 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby xtifr » Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:27 pm UTC

NeatNit wrote:
PinkShinyRose wrote:Sometimes ISO just does ridiculous things.

Tell me about it. A while ago I read that they defined Monday as the first day of the week instead of Sunday.


Yes, that's the standard in most countries.

The only reason for this, I believe, is that Sunday is the Christian day of rest.


You believe wrong.

Sure, let's ignore the fact that in countless languages including my own, Sunday is literally called "first day", Monday is "second day", etc. Let's just throw ALL THAT away, and contrary to ALL LOGIC define Day No. 2 as the first day of the week. Just because we feel like it..


Really? What language is that? Definitely not English, since the UK starts the week on Monday, and they bloody invented the language!

http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... &country=9 (UK) vs
http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... &country=1 (US)

Not to mention these countries that also start their week on Monday:
http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... country=41 (China)
http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... &country=5 (France)
http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... &country=8 (Germany)
http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... country=75 (Iran)
http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... country=13 (Italy)
http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... country=40 (Mexico)
http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... country=20 (Russia)
http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... country=16 (Spain)

Although, curiously, India seems to start on Sunday like the US, so I guess the Monday-starters will have a hard time claiming a significant majority of the Earth's population. Just a regular old majority. :)
http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?ye ... country=35

Anyway, yeah, damn those ISO folks for trying to be an international standard instead of just blindly following whatever America does! Next thing you know, they'll be using metric units instead of imperial! :)
"[T]he author has followed the usual practice of contemporary books on graph theory, namely to use words that are similar but not identical to the terms used in other books on graph theory."
-- Donald Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Vol I, 3rd ed.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26547
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:49 pm UTC

xtifr wrote:
Sure, let's ignore the fact that in countless languages including my own, Sunday is literally called "first day", Monday is "second day", etc. Let's just throw ALL THAT away, and contrary to ALL LOGIC define Day No. 2 as the first day of the week. Just because we feel like it..
Really? What language is that? Definitely not English, since the UK starts the week on Monday, and they bloody invented the language!
For all your condescension, you sure are terrible at comprehending simple written English...

Sunday is literally called "first day" in some languages, but obviously not English because in English it's literally called "Sunday". So, like, it's pretty obviously not a reference to English.

Also, that website you linked to repeatedly?
On their main page, they wrote:The First Day of the Week

The first day of the week varies all over the world. In most cultures, Sunday is regarded as the first day of the week although many observe Monday as the first day of the week. According to the Bible, the Sabbath or Saturday is the last day of the week which marks Sunday as the first day of the week for many Jewish and Christian faiths, while many countries regard Monday as the first day of the week.
It goes on to explain that Sunday is indeed the Christian day of rest because Jesus rose on a Sunday, in contrast to the Jewish day of rest on Saturday.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

brenok
Needs Directions
Posts: 507
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:35 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby brenok » Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:52 pm UTC

xtifr wrote:
Sure, let's ignore the fact that in countless languages including my own, Sunday is literally called "first day", Monday is "second day", etc. Let's just throw ALL THAT away, and contrary to ALL LOGIC define Day No. 2 as the first day of the week. Just because we feel like it..


Really? What language is that? Definitely not English, since the UK starts the week on Monday, and they bloody invented the language!

Portuguese does it. And I don't know how do you even consider that he might be talking about English, unless you believe he has some kind of reading disability.

xtifr
Posts: 337
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:38 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby xtifr » Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:12 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Sunday is literally called "first day" in some languages, but obviously not English because in English it's literally called "Sunday". So, like, it's pretty obviously not a reference to English.

Yes? That's what I said. So, to repeat myself, what language is that?

Note that I was polite enough to ignore the imbecilic comment about "countless" languages. I'd be satisfied to learn of just one.

Also, that website you linked to repeatedly?
On their main page, they wrote:The First Day of the Week

The first day of the week varies all over the world. In most cultures, Sunday is regarded as the first day of the week although many observe Monday as the first day of the week.


And yet that claim is contradicted by their own data. I'll trust the data, thanks, and suspect their FAQ was written by an American. Italy (since they don't have a separate page for Vatican City), England (home of the Anglican Church), and Germany (home of Luther) all start the week on Monday, which makes the whole "Christians prefer to start the week on Sunday" idea pretty dubious. The simple fact that most of Europe and Asia start the week on Monday makes the claim that "in most cultures, Sunday is regarded as the first day of the week" pretty darn dubious.

Yes, I freely agree that a lot of countries (more than the ones I listed) also start the week on Sunday. But my point was that so many start the week on Monday that it's ridiculous to claim that ISO did something wrong by choosing that as a standard. I'm not saying Monday is superior; I'm saying it was a perfectly reasonable choice, given that all available options would be wrong to some large subset of the world's population.
"[T]he author has followed the usual practice of contemporary books on graph theory, namely to use words that are similar but not identical to the terms used in other books on graph theory."
-- Donald Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Vol I, 3rd ed.

xtifr
Posts: 337
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:38 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby xtifr » Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:22 pm UTC

brenok wrote:
xtifr wrote:
Sure, let's ignore the fact that in countless languages including my own, Sunday is literally called "first day", Monday is "second day", etc. Let's just throw ALL THAT away, and contrary to ALL LOGIC define Day No. 2 as the first day of the week. Just because we feel like it..


Really? What language is that? Definitely not English, since the UK starts the week on Monday, and they bloody invented the language!

Portuguese does it. And I don't know how do you even consider that he might be talking about English, unless you believe he has some kind of reading disability.

Thank you for answering my question. As for the second part--this is the internet, so I'm not willing to rule anything out! :)

Anyway, Portugul also starts their week on Monday, so clearly the quirks of the language do not determine when the week officially starts, so Portuguese is not an answer to the question "what's wrong with ISO choosing Monday as the start of the week?"
"[T]he author has followed the usual practice of contemporary books on graph theory, namely to use words that are similar but not identical to the terms used in other books on graph theory."
-- Donald Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Vol I, 3rd ed.

User avatar
BytEfLUSh
Posts: 308
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:15 am UTC
Location: Sombor, Serbia, Pizza
Contact:

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby BytEfLUSh » Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:31 pm UTC

Image

Image

-- Professor Dan, The Man from Earth (paraphrased)

User avatar
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Flumble » Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:38 pm UTC

Mikeski wrote:[first part]

Nonetheless, the unix epoch is accepted and used globally, and the 64b counter will go on far beyond the 'singularity' (assuming we reach that within a couple of billions of years). Even our AI overlords might want to use the ever ticking Earth-based clock; unless they switch to a space-time-curveless planck-time based clock, then they may argue over a new epoch. :P

Mikeski wrote:
Flumble wrote:(though we also need an opposing force; is there any substantial culture against technological advancements?)

The "green" branch of the first-world's political left wing? No (more) nuclear power, no GMO foods, no (more) pipelines or refineries, no military advancements... and certainly none of it where they can see it. Maybe it's only the left-wing-driven reporting that makes them seem "substantial", though. :wink:

I'm sorry, I meant a group opposing computer technology specifically.


BytEfLUSh wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:First_Day_of_Week_World_Map.svg

Ah, thanks, I couldn't find such a map myself. :D

Mikeski
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Mikeski » Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:57 pm UTC

Flumble wrote:Nonetheless, the unix epoch is accepted and used globally, and the 64b counter will go on far beyond the 'singularity' (assuming we reach that within a couple of billions of years). Even our AI overlords might want to use the ever ticking Earth-based clock; unless they switch to a space-time-curveless planck-time based clock, then they may argue over a new epoch. :P

Those computers will be smart enough to accurately place the Big Bang as T=0, and wonder why we picked the approximate birth of disco as the epoch. :wink:

BytEfLUSh wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:First_Day_of_Week_World_Map.svg

I understand some of the grey "no data" spots... but nobody knows what a calendar looks like in Greenland?
Last edited by Mikeski on Mon Mar 10, 2014 11:05 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26547
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Mar 10, 2014 11:04 pm UTC

xtifr wrote:Anyway, Portugul also starts their week on Monday, so clearly the quirks of the language do not determine when the week officially starts, so Portuguese is not an answer to the question "what's wrong with ISO choosing Monday as the start of the week?"
Does Portugal start on a Monday because that's what they independently decided to do, or did they change it to go with the rest of Europe?

In addition to Portuguese, incidentally, Hebrew, Arabic, Persian, Greek, Vietnamese, Maltese, and Armenian all have names for Sunday that mean "first" and/or names for Monday that mean "second", according to Wikipedia.

xtifr wrote:
Also, that website you linked to repeatedly?
On their main page, they wrote:The First Day of the Week

The first day of the week varies all over the world. In most cultures, Sunday is regarded as the first day of the week although many observe Monday as the first day of the week.
And yet that claim is contradicted by their own data.
Their own data, which you've looked at for less than a dozen countries? And that proves something about the majority of cultures in the world? (Also, Wikipedia has China listed as a Sunday-start country on that map.)

Furthermore, you can't just assume the Vatican must be the same as Italy, any more than you can assume the US is the same as the UK. The Catholic Liturgical Week starts on Sunday, in keeping with the previous Jewish system.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

rmsgrey
Posts: 3485
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby rmsgrey » Mon Mar 10, 2014 11:10 pm UTC

We should obviously switch to AUC and have done with it...

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1340: "Unique Date"

Postby Klear » Mon Mar 10, 2014 11:12 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
xtifr wrote:Anyway, Portugul also starts their week on Monday, so clearly the quirks of the language do not determine when the week officially starts, so Portuguese is not an answer to the question "what's wrong with ISO choosing Monday as the start of the week?"
Does Portugal start on a Monday because that's what they independently decided to do, or did they change it to go with the rest of Europe?

Is the answer to that question in any way relevant to the discussion at hand?


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, Steeler [Crawler] and 132 guests