[HN Gopher] Tomorrow the Unix timestamp will get to 1,666,666,666
___________________________________________________________________
Tomorrow the Unix timestamp will get to 1,666,666,666
Author : bubblehack3r
Score : 222 points
Date : 2022-10-24 13:36 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (time.is)
(TXT) w3m dump (time.is)
| bloopernova wrote:
| To pretty print the Unix timestamp in your ZSH prompt, you can
| use something like this: function prompt_epoch()
| { printf -v COMMA_EPOCH "%'d" ${EPOCHSECONDS}
| p10k segment -f 66 -t ${COMMA_EPOCH} }
|
| It relies on zmodload zsh/datetime to get EPOCHSECONDS. In the
| example above I'm using it with the powerlevel10k prompt.
| timwaagh wrote:
| And Lucifer shall walk the earth
| fimdomeio wrote:
| This should be a comemoration of the things that are easy for
| computers to read and look like a representation of hell for
| humans. We can't in any way find meaning in what 1,666,666,666
| seconds are, we can only atribute some magical evil meaning to a
| number.
|
| We would start the party with google deep dream, move to
| algorithms hiring and firing people, crime prediction, some guy
| ranting that his life was ruined when youtube close his account
| and the impossibility of talking to a human, and then would end
| with a bang reaching 1,666,666,666.
|
| I am a fun party planner.
| sbf501 wrote:
| Fun fact: Unix timestamp will eventually be every integer number
| from 1 to 4294967295
| fanf2 wrote:
| The 1970 epoch was set in 1973 so time_t (as currently
| specified) never had values less than 100,000,000
|
| https://dotat.at/@/2014-11-22-nerdy-trivia-about-unix-time-t...
| sbf501 wrote:
| That's funny! I never really thought about WHEN it was
| adopted. I guess I just assumed every nerd sat around on Dec
| 31, 1969 and pressed a button 1 sec after 11:59 GMT. (Clearly
| I'm joking, please don't correct me, folks!)
| eska wrote:
| Implying it hasn't already been every integer number from 1 to
| 4294967295..
| zokier wrote:
| Except if we have a negative leap second at some point
| [deleted]
| stvnbn wrote:
| why is this relevant?
| yewenjie wrote:
| Happy Halloween.
| xeromal wrote:
| Happy All Hallows Eve!
| gerikson wrote:
| In about 13 hours at time of writing, so _today_ in most US
| timezones.
| protomyth wrote:
| Well, there is about three devils worth of pain in our Unix
| servers sometimes.
|
| I remember being in a building that was 668 and we called it
| neighbor of the beast (US streets have odd on one side and even
| house numbers on the other).
| 867-5309 wrote:
| "Triablo"
| MisterTea wrote:
| > Well, there is about three devils worth of pain in our Unix
| servers sometimes.
|
| Our machines have been possessed by daemons for years so I'm
| not at all worried.
| hobo_mark wrote:
| ...as in Europe (but I am certain there are exceptions and am
| looking forward to the replies pointing out where that is not
| the case)
| stardenburden wrote:
| Berlin uses a different system in the older parts of the city
|
| https://googlemapsmania.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-berlin-
| hous...
| bloak wrote:
| Wikipedia describes two systems in the UK:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_numbering#United_Kingdom
|
| According to both those systems, if you look down the street
| from the end where number 1 is (which is always the open end
| of a cul-de-sac), then number 1 is the first house on your
| _left_. I 'd be interested to hear about any exceptional
| cases in which number one is on your _right_.
| ajay-d wrote:
| related maybe?
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belphegor%27s_prime
| kuschku wrote:
| https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:House_numbers_clockw.
| ..
| contravariant wrote:
| I don't know of any country that uses an entirely different
| system, but I'm willing to bet each country has a couple of
| exceptions somewhere.
| etamponi wrote:
| IIRC, Japan uses (or used?) to number buildings in
| chronological order.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Obligatory: https://www.mjt.me.uk/posts/falsehoods-
| programmers-believe-a...
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| That is not a strict rule. I grew up in a neighborhood where
| houses were numbered by the order the lots sold. They were
| effectively random.
| protomyth wrote:
| I know. I grew up on a road with no name that numbered the
| houses with an odd cadence. But, well mannered neighborhoods
| have stuck with the scheme such that most people recognize
| the reference.
| [deleted]
| altares wrote:
| Praise the sun!
| groffee wrote:
| It's kind of funny people are so obsessed with 666 when it's a
| mistranslation, the actual number was 616.
| ars wrote:
| Even funnier is that 666 is a positive/holy number in Judaism.
|
| It represents the creation of the physical world: The 6
| directions, (cardinal directions plus up and down), and the 6
| days of creation, and repeating a number represents
| strengthening it, i.e. it represents perfecting the physical
| world.
|
| It's also the Gematria (numerical value) of a prayer requesting
| divine mercy.
|
| https://ohr.edu/ask_db/ask_main.php/277/Q1/
|
| Edit: It's also interesting that two people got so annoyed at
| me posting this that they downvoted every one of my comments
| that they still could.
| pegasus wrote:
| That downvoting behavior is indeed fascinating (and slightly
| troubling).
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| Not a mistranslation, exactly. It depends on whether you
| rendered Nero's name from Latin or Greek. In Greek, Nero's name
| was written "Neron". The letter 'n' had a gematria value of 50,
| so when transliterated into Hebrew, the extra 'n' would have
| made the calculated value either '616' or '666' depending on
| what source language the name came from.
| dsfyu404ed wrote:
| It might not be a mistranslation but if you wanna construct a
| "haha people are dumb" narrative or drop a "well akschually"
| it can be construed as one which is sufficient for that
| purpose.
|
| The above statement applies to a hell of a lot of things, not
| just the whole 666 was/wasn't a mistranslation factoid.
| Comments like the top level one are what platforms
| incentivize when they "keep score" of discourse like
| many/most do.
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| xeromal wrote:
| The guy you're replying to isn't the top comment which I
| believe you're talking about.
| mmcgaha wrote:
| I learned something from both posts so I am glad we got the
| simple answer and the lets-knuth-this-thing answer too.
| cristoperb wrote:
| > lets-knuth-this-thing
|
| As a related aside, Don Knuth once composed a work for
| the pipe organ based on the book of Revelation:
|
| https://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/fant.html
| colejohnson66 wrote:
| Citation?
| Operyl wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_beast has a fair
| bit on it.
| pratio wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/616_(number)
| reitanqild wrote:
| seriously? If so, what is then meant with the statement about
| it being "the number of a man"?
| jollyllama wrote:
| Man is a carbon based lifeform (atomic # 6) According to
| Genesis, Man was made on the 6th day
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| The popular theory is that it referred to Emperor Nero. The
| author was basically telling you, "I'm making an allegory
| right now. Wink wink, nudge nudge."
| whatshisface wrote:
| That theory has never made a lot of sense to me because the
| persecution of Christians wasn't a big secret.
| lupire wrote:
| It's generally dangerous to talk about things everyone
| knows, when the thing everyone knows is how evil the
| local power structure is.
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| Two reasons come to mind:
|
| 1) There's a long history of it. Gematria was a Jewish
| technique, then carried over to the early Christian
| community. There may have been reasons to keep it up as a
| matter of course, but as you said, with Nero it probably
| didn't matter: the dude knew everyone hated him. Not just
| Christians.
|
| 2) The purpose of Revelations was meant to comfort the
| current Christian community at the time by prophesying a
| future calamity with many parallels to the current
| calamity. The end of the world brings great destruction,
| yes, but there is _vindication_ at the end of it all, and
| hence hope for the community.
|
| One thing to keep in mind about the nature of the "anti-
| Christ" is that it is the opposite of Christ in all ways.
| Christ was expected to come back at the end of days. So,
| too, then, was the anti-Christ. If the anti-Christ has
| never been seen before then "coming back" doesn't quite
| make sense, but it _does_ make sense if the anti-Christ
| refers to Nero: he was a complete bastard in his first
| life, and he 's so evil that he will _come back_ at the
| end of days to persecute Christendom again.
| bloak wrote:
| I have also heard the suggestion that 666 is an obvious
| number to pick if you use Roman numerals, being every
| letter (less than M) once in descending order: DCLXVI. (But
| why exclude M?)
|
| (Trivia: what is the biggest number that is an English word
| when written as a Roman numeral?)
| MichaelApproved wrote:
| Huh. TIL!
|
| From wiki:
|
| > _Papyrus 115 (which is the oldest preserved manuscript of the
| Revelation as of 2017), as well as other ancient sources like
| Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, give the number of the beast as
| khist or khic, transliterable in Arabic numerals as 616
| (khist), not 666._
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_beast
| antiterra wrote:
| I don't think it's a mistranslation, the manuscripts themselves
| differ. Regardless of which is 'correct,' it's likely an error
| in the retelling or copying.
|
| This person points out that either 616 or 666 could refer to
| Nero and some other possible evidence that was the case:
| http://kiwihellenist.blogspot.com/2018/06/the-number-of-beas...
| westurner wrote:
| Approximations of Pi:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approximations_of_p
|
| > _In the 3rd century BCE, Archimedes proved the sharp
| inequalities 223/71 < p < 22/7, by means of regular 96-gons
| (accuracies of 2*10-4 and 4*10-4, respectively)._
| 223/71 = 3.1408450704225 666/212 = 3.1415094339622 p
| = 3.14159265359 22/7 = 3.1428571428571
|
| Is p a good radix for what types of math in addition to
| Trigonometry? And then what about e for natural systems; the
| natural log.
|
| "Why do colliding blocks compute pi?"
| https://youtu.be/jsYwFizhncE
| https://www.3blue1brown.com/lessons/clacks-solution
| https://www.reddit.com/r/3Blue1Brown/comments/r29vm5/rationa...
| ... Geogebra: https://www.geogebra.org/m/BhxyBJUZ :
|
| > _The applet shows the old method used to approximate the value
| of p. Archimedes used a 96-sided polygons to find that the value
| of p is 223 /71 < p < 22/7 (3.1408 < p < 3.1429). In 1630, an
| Austrian astronomer Christoph Grienberger found a 38-digit
| approximation by using 10^40-sided polygons. This is the most
| accurate approximation achieved by this method._
| polotics wrote:
| If anybody's interested, there is a best-guess on why the heck
| 666 was declared to be the "number of the beast" in ancient
| scriptures: It's a statement that each one of us is our own worst
| enemy, as this is the number you can easily make an image of with
| your left hand.
|
| The fact that this was inadvertently recycled into the WP gesture
| is abysmally hilarious.
| boston_clone wrote:
| I don't think that our current character for 6 is the same as
| it was when those scriptures were written.
| piperswe wrote:
| From what I can tell, the earliest manuscript of Revelation
| 13:18 (the typical source of "666" being evil) originates from
| the third century CE in Egypt [1], instead saying "616" is the
| mark of the beast and using the Greek numerals. The first
| example of the earliest ancestor to the modern numeral "6"
| appears in inscriptions in India dating to the same period [2].
| I would expect there is no relationship between Revelation and
| the modern numeral for 6.
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_115
|
| [2]:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edicts_of_Ashoka#Ancestor_of_t...
| jmclnx wrote:
| Actually I listened to a NPR show that said something like 666
| was a mis-translation or due to a smudge on an old doc.
| Supposedly it should be 616. IIRC, they said in Roman Numerals
| 616 has/had somekind of meaning.
| adamrezich wrote:
| I would've thought that by 2022 everyone would have finally
| realized that the "OK hand sign emoji = white supremacist
| secret hand sign" thing was _literally_ a 4chan troll job.
| people still don 't actually think white supremacists make the
| "OK" sign with their fingers as some kind of secret signal to
| each other, do they?
| jaywalk wrote:
| > people still don't actually think white supremacists make
| the "OK" sign with their fingers as some kind of secret
| signal to each other, do they?
|
| The only people who ever thought that, though it because the
| news told them so. Since the news hasn't told them it's not
| true, they still think it is.
| bena wrote:
| This is one of those things where fiction becomes truth.
| While it may have initially started as such, unless you can
| also prove that every single white supremacist also knew it
| was a joke, it kind of became a white supremacist hand sign.
|
| It's an issue with satire in general. Eventually there will
| be someone too stupid to see it as satire.
|
| And then you get into Schrodinger's racist territory. Being
| an asshole ironically is still being an asshole.
| adamrezich wrote:
| > unless you can also prove that every single white
| supremacist also knew it was a joke, it kind of became a
| white supremacist hand sign.
|
| 4chan is an anonymous imageboard, anyone can post anything,
| anyone can "meme" anything into being a "hate symbol".
|
| it doesn't seem like a very good idea to allow 4chan trolls
| to literally dictate societal norms, especially the
| creation of "hate symbols". at some point one must realize
| that such "hate symbols" _literally_ only have as much
| power as you 're willing to grant them--so why grant them
| any?
| bena wrote:
| This is kind of a vacuous argument. Once something leaves
| the confines of 4chan, the origin doesn't matter. The
| intention behind the action matters. If white
| supremacists are using it as a signal, it is a de facto
| white supremacist symbol.
|
| And by the way you're trying to move the goalposts, I'd
| have to say you're from Tennessee. At first your argument
| was that "it's from 4chan, it was a joke, it didn't
| count". And now, your argument is "words are powerless
| unless you give them power". Which, is the sort of
| aphorism I'd expect from Ricken.
|
| Symbols are important because they serve to signal to
| others what is and is not accepted. Or who are members of
| your in-group, whatever those groups may be. If I go to a
| sporting event, I can choose to adorn myself in the
| symbols of one team or another to indicate support of
| that team. And that tells complete strangers if I'm
| inclined to cheer with them or against them.
|
| Don't be obtuse.
| adamrezich wrote:
| > And by the way you're trying to move the goalposts, I'd
| have to say you're from Tennessee.
|
| > Which, is the sort of aphorism I'd expect from Ricken.
|
| dude what are you even talking about you completely lost
| me
|
| > And now, your argument is "words are powerless unless
| you give them power".
|
| when were we talking about words? what?? I think you're
| having an argument with some kind of Tennessean strawman
| on accident.
| bena wrote:
| Tennessee beat Alabama in a recent game and responded by
| ripping the goalpost out of the ground and crowd surfing
| it around the field.
|
| Ricken is a character from Severance who writes a book of
| profound sounding nonsense.
|
| I addressed why both were relevant. Your argument now is
| different from your initial argument. And "abstract
| concepts only have the power we give them" is the kind of
| pap we feed to others to give ourselves license to keep
| using shitty abstract concepts.
| adamrezich wrote:
| uh ok, apologies for not understanding all the cultural
| references I guess?
|
| what portion of people today in 2022 do you think see
| someone use U+1F44C in electronic communications and
| immediately think "white supremacist dogwhistle"?
| obviously there was a bit of a "panic" there a few years
| back, but hasn't pretty much everyone gotten over it by
| now? I use it all the time especially as a reaction-emoji
| in messaging services, and nobody I know (of all faiths &
| colors) has any issue with it. I used it all the time
| before, during, and after the 4chan trolling, with the
| latter being what I consider to be "doing my part" in not
| letting something so ridiculous actually take hold within
| my culture, because holy shit how ridiculous can you be,
| it's the OK sign, I've been making it all my life, I'm
| not going to stop doing it because some 4chan trolls
| (correctly, but frustratingly) thought it would be
| hilarious to convince everyone overnight that it was the
| Ultra Secret White Supremacist Hand Sign, _specifically_
| because it is so widely-used by everyone.
|
| so going forward, do we keep pretending like "the ok hand
| sign" should be "white supremacist dogwhistle", just
| because there was a brief flash-in-the-pan 4chan trolling
| about it a few years ago, which a few people are
| (apparently???) still sensitive about? should what
| society determines to be "hate symbols" be exclusively
| dictated by the most sensitive and reactionary people in
| said society? if that's the rules you want to play by, go
| for it man, if you need me I'll be over here in Normal
| World where a man can pinch his index finger and thumb
| together without being assumed to be a white supremacist.
|
| "abstract concepts only have the power we give them" is
| an absolute truth, which I am actively proving by
| refusing to give this abstract concept any kind of
| undesired power, and going out of my way to refuse to
| cease using said abstract concept in my day-to-day life,
| due to some ill-defined sense of Internet Moralism trying
| to exert control over me by preventing me from doing so.
| it has no power over me or anyone around me whatsoever,
| and in fact I completely forgot it was even a thing until
| today lmao
| goto11 wrote:
| The original scriptures did not use Arabic numerals.
| greenbit wrote:
| Why didn't 1,618,033,998 get this much buzz?? Is there a rational
| explanation for this?
| Ruq wrote:
| Why did I just get "Dawn of the Final Day" vibes?
| jl6 wrote:
| Closing in on the Y2K38 problem.
| N19PEDL2 wrote:
| Are 32-bit systems still around? I mean other than some old
| embedded system that will likely be decommissioned well before
| 2038.
| GuB-42 wrote:
| Even in 64 bit systems, some numbers are stored as 32 bit
| integers. And 32 bit systems can process 64 bit numbers, they
| are just slower at it.
|
| It is a software and standardization problem, not hardware.
| onion2k wrote:
| Nooooo! The Y2K38 problem is _already here_. It is not a
| problem that will happen in 2038. It is a problem with _storing
| and processing dates past 2038_. For example, if you work in a
| bank and you have a system to store mortgage information that
| includes the epoch timestamp that someone 's 25 year mortgage
| will end that means you need to store a date that is in 2047.
| If you do that using an epoch timestamp on a system that's
| using a 32 bit timestamp it'll overflow and return a date
| before the epoch instead.
|
| Do not imagine that Y2K38 is something to put off until nearer
| the time. You need to be thinking about it _right now_.
| lupire wrote:
| What's wrong with dates before the epoch? Subtraction of
| rolled over unsigned ints works.
| lucb1e wrote:
| So long as you know it was before 1970, and after
| 1970-(2038-1970)=1902, you can recover the original date,
| yes.
| coderintherye wrote:
| I'm kind of both horrified and impressed that this very
| solution is likely in place in some codebases.
| onion2k wrote:
| The fix itself doesn't need to be complicated for it to be
| hard to actually implement. A lot of apps that are affected
| probably haven't been deployed in years. Some won't have
| any source code available. Others won't have any docs, or
| tests, or even developers who know the right language.
| Fixing simple issues in old apps is hard.
| 9front wrote:
| Apple I was priced at $666.66. Look at what Apple became, a
| beast!
| ArcMex wrote:
| Can't even transact without it * wink *
| jslaby wrote:
| We got apple watch.. soon to come apple headband.
| Reason077 wrote:
| Time flies. Seems like just yesterday the clock hit 1,000,000,000
| (Sun Sep 9 01:46:40 UTC 2001)
| shashurup wrote:
| Something like 30 years ago I came across a magazine in which
| there was a calendar with set of events for each day so that you
| can have a pretext to drink everyday. After a while the idea of a
| similar service came to mind - a program which would figure the
| nearest "round" number of seconds, minutes, days in hex, oct, bin
| etc. So it is more than 20 years already and I'm still thinking
| it would be great to implement it finally.
| nixcraft wrote:
| Here is how to get the date from the Unix timestamp (GNU/Linux
| coreutils): date -d @1666666666
|
| macOS/bsd coreutils: date -r 1666666666
| hbarka wrote:
| In PostgreSQL:
|
| SELECT to_timestamp(1666666666);
| proxysna wrote:
| Got a bit curious.
|
| date -d @6666666666
|
| Wed 04 Apr 2181 01:51:06 PM CEST
| dillon wrote:
| I also got curious
|
| - date -d '@2222222222' Fri Jun 1 08:57:02 PM PDT 2040
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| You're implying there's time past 2038-01-19T03:14:07?
| That's ridiculous.
| user8501 wrote:
| I think it is often an incorrect assumption that the people who
| flaunt numbers like this are being tongue in cheek.
|
| 77
| tragomaskhalos wrote:
| The number of the beast is pretty explicitly the exact number six
| hundred and sixty six, not 'six six six', so any other
| concatenation of the digits should really be meh even to the
| apocalyptically inclined.
| greenbit wrote:
| You know, "2 out of 3 ain't bad"
| joshspankit wrote:
| In this case, one out of three _is_ bad
| cygx wrote:
| At that time, a total of 1,666,666,693 seconds will have passed
| since 1970-01-01 00:00:00 GMT as Unix time pretends leap seconds
| don't exist...
| lucb1e wrote:
| Hmmm, am I wrong in understanding that, by pretending leap
| seconds don't exist, the unix time actually represents how many
| seconds passed rather than what time time is now? (Where a
| second is as long as every other second, not smearing out the
| leap second across the whole year. I.e. by the cesium standard
| definition.) user@debian:~$ qalc "$(date -d
| 2022-01-01T00:00:00+0000 +%s)"/3600/24/365.25
| ((1640995200 / 3600) / 24) / 365.25 = 52
|
| Precisely 52 years' worth of seconds, which I guess also tells
| me that there have been an integer number of leap years since
| then. Either way, at 1666666666, 1666666666 seconds will have
| passed rather than ...693 no? The extra 27 seconds are either
| for keeping the sun at its zenith when the clock strikes noon
| (not that that is even close to true where I live, it's off by
| more than an hour) or for keeping winter in December. I can
| never remember which, although we already have leap days for
| keeping December in winter (in this hemisphere) so I think it
| must be the 24-hour variable rotation speed thing.
|
| If you want to define 1666666666 as having +27 seconds passed
| since 1970 started, you would have to redefine the length of
| the second every time a leap second is announced, I think.
|
| I find this all tough to wrap my head around, though, so it can
| very well be that I'm wrong here.
| cygx wrote:
| _Hmmm, am I wrong in understanding that, by pretending leap
| seconds don 't exist, the unix time actually represents how
| many seconds passed rather than what time time is now?_
|
| It's the other way around: Unix time pretends every day has
| exactly 86,400 seconds, and consequently, you can calculate
| the current time of day by taking the respective modulus.
|
| However, this comes at the cost that the difference between
| two unix timestamps does not yield a duration in seconds in
| general.
| joshspankit wrote:
| The choice to go along with leap seconds was one of the
| bigger crimes against precision...
| w00d3nsp4c3m4n wrote:
| What is the exact unix time for "a cold day in hell"?
| sieste wrote:
| I won't upvote because it currently has 166 points.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Guess what else will happen, Unix timestamp will get to
| 1,666,666,667, then 1,666,666,668, etc.
|
| That actually looks like the rent on the old office facility at a
| company I worked for, only a few decimal places to the left:
| $16,666.66/month <shudder>
| abruzzi wrote:
| we humans tend to enjoy numerology for some reason. I remember
| turning 55,555.5 miles on my motorcycle and stopping to take a
| photo. It turns out I was on a small back road with a 55mph
| speed limit, and I was close to a "Speed Limit 55",
| unfortunately I could get that into the photo as well.
| DavidSharff wrote:
| It would have been a beautiful "footprints in the sand"
| moment if you had turned off the ignition and carried the
| motorcycle those last hundred feet for the photo.
| r2_pilot wrote:
| That's definitely some Law of 5's probability field
| distortion there.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Seems like walking the bike to a better position to get that
| photo might have been worth it
| whalesalad wrote:
| at ~10:57EST i'll be toasting this event with some kind of
| intoxicant
| macintux wrote:
| EDT. It would be a shame if you missed it by an hour.
| tingletech wrote:
| I went to a party (I think EFF sponsored it) at golden gate park
| when we hit 1,000,000,000
| [deleted]
| ariedro wrote:
| Two days before 9/11 happens, talk about creepy numerology.
| tiagod wrote:
| I went and checked 2000000000. It will happen on
| 2033-05-18T03:33:20.000Z (edited)
| mzzter wrote:
| Assuming 2000000000 is unix seconds, epochconverter.com
| converts it to Wednesday, May 18, 2033 3:33:20 AM GMT.
| tiagod wrote:
| My bad, thank you for the correction. I had converted it
| properly to 2033 but decided I wanted to switch to the
| format with ms. Ended up adding a zero in the process
| without checking the output (other than the .000 being
| there). Edited
| [deleted]
| jtylr wrote:
| I think you've added an extra 0 in there.
|
| $ date -r 2000000000
|
| Wed 18 May 2033 04:33:20 BST
|
| $ date -r 20000000000
|
| Tue 11 Oct 2603 12:33:20 BST
| [deleted]
| dis-sys wrote:
| realizing that I would be long gone by 2603, your reply made
| me really sad. then I realized that your calculation is
| obviously wrong.
|
| can I sue you for such such emotional distress?
| hummusandsushi wrote:
| i think you have an extraneous 0. It would not make sense for
| it to take a longer time to get from 1,000,000,000 to
| 2,000,000,000 than from the unix epoch to 1,000,000,000.
|
| The time I think you meant to post is Wed May 18 2033
| 03:33:20 UTC+0000 (Greenwich Mean Time).
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-24 23:02 UTC)