date +%s Turning 1111111111 574
initsix writes "Break out your party hats. According to http://www.onlineconversion.com/unix_time.htm , Unix time is supposed reach 1111111111 on
Fri, 18 Mar 2005 01:58:31 GMT
That's only 1036372537 seconds from 2^31 (ie Tue, 19 Jan 2038 03:14:08 GMT)!!"
Here's the process... (Score:3, Insightful)
2) Bored Unix programmer sees that this is equivalent to just a little while from now.
3) Bored Unix programmer tosses around a few more numbers and submits the story to Slashdot.
4) Story becomes Slashdot front-page news.
Fake Nerds (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:also interesting - 2038 (Score:2, Insightful)
The number of bits a CPU can natively operate on data has little relevance on the problems due to representing dates with too few bits. It all depends on the programming interface and storage format. If you use an outdated (hah) API on a 256-bit CPU, you'll still have a YnK problem.
"Interesting" numbers (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Eh... (Score:5, Insightful)
k-thx-bye
Re:What happens in 2038? (Score:5, Insightful)
[PutsOnNostradamusHat]
The only reason that the y2k computer problem was such a media event is because the year 2000 was such a media event. People were expecting the world to end, the y2k computer bug fit neatly into that hysteria.
There is nothing about 2038 that will grab media attention. So no boob tube watchers will ever know anything about the date rollover problem.
Then, because there will be no public panic about it, it won't be taken seriously by the PHBs and no matter how much the coders scream about it, no money will be given to the project and it will end up being a much bigger problem than y2k turned out to be.
[\PutsOnNostradamusHat]
Re:"Interesting" numbers (Score:5, Insightful)
I like the number 219. There isn't anything special about it -- It's just happens to be one of my favorite ascii characters. (The solid block one.) I stayed in hotel room 219 just yesterday and felt good about having that room number.
Lot's of people attach meaning to the number 42. There isn't anything wrong with that.
Some people find powers of 2 appealing -- imagine driving route 256 -- how cool would that be?
Gamblers may have some attraction or aversion to the numbers 7 and 13 -- some might get a good feeling seeing hte number 21.
Finding an old girlfriends phone number can be nice -- it let's you remember.
I don't know if you have any numbers that are significant in your life -- But I know I do! I don't think I'd want it any other way.
You have to learn to enjoy those small meaningful things -- or you'll miss the whole point of living -- I don't mean the meaning of life, mind you, but the meaning in life.
Re:Eh... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"Interesting" numbers (Score:3, Insightful)
At this point I'd like to make some witty rejoinder about embrace and extend, but it's just not worth the effort.
Re:Next Party (Score:3, Insightful)
One place the unix timestamp has made it into literature is in Vernor Vinge's "Deep" books: A Fire Upon the Deep, and A Deepness in the Sky. In the latter, there are a number of uses of a "day" onboard their starship that is 100,000 seconds long, and was based on a semi-mythical OS on early computers 8,000 years earlier, back before humans left their original planet and spread out into the galaxy. They routinely use kiloseconds as the main division of the day.
The size of the second count isn't a problem, of course, because nobody builds 32-bit computers then. If fact, we probably won't be making them by the time the second count reaches 2^32. I wonder how many old 32-bit machines will still be operational by then?
(Probably a lot of them, and they'll all still be running Fortran and Cobol programs.
Re:"Interesting" numbers (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"Interesting" numbers (Score:2, Insightful)