cm0002 to Funny@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · 1 month agoKind of a bummerlemmy.mlimagemessage-square32fedilinkarrow-up1756
arrow-up1756imageKind of a bummerlemmy.mlcm0002 to Funny@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · 1 month agomessage-square32fedilink
minus-squareArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up34·1 month agoAh yes, the 20th century, well known for not having serious problems… Actually so far 2000 to 2026 is looking much better than 1900 to 1926.
minus-squaremarcos@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up23·1 month agoI’m reserving my judgment until after 2038. But yes, everything looks much better this century.
minus-squareanomnom@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·1 month ago2038, or 2028? If 2028 doesn’t go right, getting to 2038 is going to be rough.
minus-squareKubeRoot@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·1 month agoIIRC 2038 is when 32-bit integer Unix time will hit the limit and overflow, so anything that isn’t updated to use 64bit time will break in some ways, same story as Y2K.
Ah yes, the 20th century, well known for not having serious problems…
Actually so far 2000 to 2026 is looking much better than 1900 to 1926.
I’m reserving my judgment until after 2038. But yes, everything looks much better this century.
2038, or 2028? If 2028 doesn’t go right, getting to 2038 is going to be rough.
IIRC 2038 is when 32-bit integer Unix time will hit the limit and overflow, so anything that isn’t updated to use 64bit time will break in some ways, same story as Y2K.