this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
769 points (98.4% liked)

memes

10646 readers
2761 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 32 minutes ago

Nah, they will do what they always do. Change some system environmental variables to move the zero date on till after they would have retired.

Nobody wants to touch the original code, it was developed in the 1970s

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 hour ago

In this thread: mostly people that don't know how timekeeping works on computers.

This is already something that we're solving for. At this point, it's like 90% or better, ready to go.

See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem

Time keeping, commonly, is stored as a binary number that represents how many seconds have passed since midnight (UTC) on January 1st 1970. Since the year 10,000 isn't x seconds away from epoch (1970-01-01T00:00:00Z), where x is any factor of 2 (aka 2^x, where x is any integer), any discrepancies in the use of "year" as a 4 digit number vs a 5 digit number, are entirely a display issue (front end). The thing that does the actual processing, storing and evaluation of time, gives absolutely no fucks about what "year" it is, because the current datetime is a binary number representing the seconds since epoch.

Whether that is displayed to you correctly or not, doesn't matter in the slightest. The machine will function even if you see some weird shit, like the year being 99 100 because some lazy person decided to hard code it to show "99" as the first two digits, then take the current year, subtract 9900, and display whatever was left (so it would show the year 9999 as "99", and the year 10000 as year "100") so the date becomes 99 concatenated with the last two (now three) digits left over.

I get that it's a joke, but the joke isn't based on any technical understanding of how timekeeping works in technology.

The whole W2k thing was a bunch of fear mongering horse shit. For most systems, the year would have shown as "19-100", 1900, or simply "00" (or some variant thereof).

[–] a9cx34udP4ZZ0 6 points 2 hours ago

Actual programmers wondering why this joke doesn't mention 65535...

[–] finitebanjo 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

More of a front end issue actually, almost all time is just stored as the number of seconds since 00:00:00 Jan 1 1970.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

And it's represented as a 64 bits value, which is over 500 billions years.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago

That's the 32 bit timestamp

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

We've still got time to fix it, and the next release of Debian will likely have a time-64 complete userland. I don't know the status of other "bedrock" distributions, but I expect that for all Linux (and BSD) systems that don't have to support a proprietary time-32 program, everything will be time-64 with nearly a decade to spare.

[–] Letsdothis -1 points 3 hours ago

"Were being short-sighted"

Lol Picard maneuver. Pretty sure your opinion wasn't asked for.

[–] Jamablaya 24 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

oh just start at 0000 again, signate that as 10,000. Files didn't start until like 1979 anyways, and there can't be many left, and even if it is a problem, now you have 2000 years to not worry about it.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 11 hours ago

We’re being short-sighted

Tell that to the billionaires speed-running terraforming this planet into a barren wasteland.

[–] marito 37 points 13 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The trick is to unplug our computer a few seconds before midnight on December 31st, 9999 and then plug in the wire again

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Yo I dunno what you made me do but now I got the y10k virus, help

[–] TheGiantKorean 44 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Good news! We'll be exctinct long before this happens. One less thing to worry about!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Seems hyperbolic to assume we will be extinct by 9999.

Sure we’re heading for a climate crisis, but I don’t think all humans will be dead; Just the poorest.

[–] Donkter 28 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

That has forever been the fallacy.

The poor won't die in the apocalypse leaving only the rich behind. The poor will die, and the rich will be faced with the harsh reality that they needed an army of poor working under them to sustain themselves, leading them to all die within the generation.

[–] DogWater 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

That's true until it isn't. Automation is on its way. Marching ever onward.

The factory I work in built a new building this year that employs 1/4 of the workers as the next newest one and does 2.5x the output.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

You still need loaders, drivers, retailers to get anything to the customer. A lot of rich ski and holiday towns can't staff the stores and Cafe's, because the employees can't afford to pay rent in the same towns, so they face a similar issue...

[–] [email protected] 31 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

In 9999, this meme will be problematic because it assumes the entire galaxy conforms to an Earth-based calendar system.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Well the USA is on Earth so obviously the earth calendar is the default.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 hours ago

Still set by London 😂

[–] [email protected] 114 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

Programmers in 292,271,023,045 after uint64_t isn't enough for the unix timestamp anymore:

[–] Agent641 6 points 4 hours ago

Programmers dealing with the timezones of asymmetric period binary and trinary star systems once we go interstellar 💀

[–] idunnololz 8 points 13 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Don't worry, we'll be extinct soon, hopefully. Maybe even before int32_t runs out. Unfortunately not soon enough to stop the humans impact on earth before the worst damage is done.

[–] blanketswithsmallpox 3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

I'll let you in on a secret.

Humanity and the animals that we like will get through just fine.

Humans in general and the vast majority of biodiversity will be fucked if it ever happens.

I firmly believe it won't. Too many good people in the world doing far more than the shitty ones.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago

Except the shitty ones have more money and political power.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 hours ago

well there have been mass extinctions before, the most notable maybe oxygenation catastrophe , mainly caused by photosynthetic life.

And it represented a major breakthrough for life on Earth, so i doubt that this one is an irreparable crisis.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I wonder how Voyagers' code represents time

[–] dovah 5 points 8 hours ago

It just counts up, according to this answer.

[–] [email protected] 85 points 17 hours ago (9 children)

I don't think 10000 year is a problem. There is a real "year 2038 problem" that affects system storing unix time in signed int32, but it's mostly solved already. The next problem will be in year 33000 or something like that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I've been curious about that myself. On one hand, it still seems far away. On the other hand, it's a bit over 13 years away now and I have gear actively in use that's older than that today.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

There are so many problems there is an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to them.

[–] marcos 11 points 16 hours ago

Yes, there are random systems using every kind of smart or brain-dead option out there.

But the 2038 problem impacts the previous standard, and the current one will take ages to fail. (No, it's not 33000, unless you are using some variant of the standard that counts nanoseconds instead of seconds. Those usually have more bits nowadays, but some odd older systems do it on the same 64 bits from the standard.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 15 hours ago (6 children)

Well, I looked at a Year 10000 problem less than 2 hours ago. We're parsing logs to extract the timestamp and for that, we're using a regex which starts with:

\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}

So, we assume there to be 4 digits for the year, always. Can't use it, if you live in the year 10000 and beyond, nor in the year 999 and before.

[–] Frozengyro 11 points 15 hours ago

Just start over at year 0000 AT (after ten thousand)

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] pennomi 12 points 16 hours ago

It’s a UX problem rather than a date format problem at that point. Many form fields require exactly 4 digits.

[–] HKPiax 3 points 12 hours ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

A common method of storing dates is the number of seconds since midnight on Jan 1, 1970 (which was somewhat arbitrarily chosen).

A 32-bit signed integer means it can store numbers between 2^31^ through 2^31^ - 1 (subtracting one comes from zero being effectively a positive number for these purposes). 2^31^ - 1 seconds added to Jan 1, 1970 gets you to Jan 19, 2038.

The solution is to jump to 64-bit integers, but as with Y2K, there's a lot of old systems that need to be updated to 64-bit integers (and no, they don't necessarily have to have 64-bit CPUs to make that work). For the most part, this has been done already. That would put the date out to 292,277,026,596 CE. Which is orders of magnitude past the time for the sun to turn into a red giant.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago

Maybe it's not LI5, but I certainly enjoy your explanation for including several important facts and context. I respect your skill and knowledge, dear internet stranger.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 12 hours ago

Unix computers store time in seconds that have passed since january first 1970. one there have been too many seconds since 1970, it starts breaking. 'signed' is a way to store negative numbers in binary. the basics of it are: when the leftmost bit is a 1, it's a negative number (and then you do some other things to the rest of the number so that it acts like a negative number) so when there have been 09999999 seconds since 1970, if there's one more second it'll be 10000000, which a computer sees as -9999999.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] someguy3 6 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

The Butlerian jihad will have happened by then.

[–] [email protected] 50 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

There might be a new calendar year system by then. Probably some galactic dictator who says that the beginning of their rule is now Year Zero.

Year Zero of the Glorious Zorg Empire!

[–] [email protected] 12 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Lol China used to use "Year 1" right after Xinhai Revolution.

Its "民国" (ROC) followed by the year number

Example: 民国一年 ROC Year One (aka 1912)

(ROC stand for Republic of China, btw)

Then the communists kicked the KMT out, and I think the ROC government in exhile in Taiwan stopped using it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago

and I think the ROC government in exhile in Taiwan stopped using it.

Actually it is still used. It's everywhere in legal documents, government documents and stuff. Though people more commonly say 2024 instead of 民國113年.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Awww shit, time to rewatch my favourite Jike Mudge movie starring Lon Rivingston; Space Office (9999).

Haha, I can't believe this guy has the job of manually changing all the dates on the company's database, this place sucks. I bet the past was way better.

load more comments
view more: next ›