← Back to context

Comment by bombcar

18 hours ago

Any time constant will be exceeded someday.

An impossibly short period of time after the heat death of the universe on a system that shouldn’t even exist: ERROR TIME_TEST FAILURE

Posted on HN in 2126: 100 years ago, someone wrote a test for servo that included an expiry in 2126

  • I've got some tests in active code bases that are using the end of 32-bit Unix time as "we'll never get there". That's not because the devs were lazy, these tests date from when that was the best they could possibly do. They're on track to be cycled out well before then (hopefully this year), so, hopefully, they'll be right that their code "won't get there"... but then there's the testing and code that assumes this that I don't know about that may still be a problem.

    "End of Unix time" is under 12 years now, so, a bit longer than the time frame of this test, but we're coming up on it.

    • I seem to recall much smugness on Slashdot around the "idiot winblows users limited by DOS y2k" and how the time_t was "so much better". Even then a few were prophesying that it would come bite us eventually ...

  • Now I feel bad for using (system foundation timestamp)+100 years as end of "forever" ownership relations in one of my systems. Looking now, it's only 89 years left. I think I should use nulls instead.

This is why I always use the year 2525. Not my problem, assuming man is still alive.

Most updates to avoid the 2038 problem really just delay it until 10889. Maybe in eight in a half millennia, they will have figured out something that lasts longer.

  • How is 10889 a problem? I thought the move to 64 bit added billions of years.

    • Depends on the unit and how you interpret the bits. Nanoseconds as a signed integer "only" make it about 300 years while seconds as a 64 bit IEEE float enjoy integral precision somewhere out past 250 million years (but if you need microsecond precision then it's the same number but as years instead of mega years).

Yep - that's why I always choose my time constants to be during years when I will be retired, or possibly dead.

If you're going to kick the can down the road, why not kick it pretty far?

Who here remembers the fud of Y2K?

  • As others have stated, the lack of visible effect is not the same thing as there never having been a land mine in the first place.

    I can tell you anecdotally that on 12/31/2000 I was hanging with some friends. At 12PM UTC we turned on the footage from London. At first it appeared to be a fiery hellscape armageddon. while it turned out to just be fireworks with a wierd camera angle, there was a moment where we were concerned something was actually happening. Most of us in the room were technologists, and while we figured it'd all be no big deal, we weren't *sure* and it very much alarmed us to see it on the screen.

  • Made me think of Mark Fisher's Y2K Positive text:

    > At the Great Midnight at the century's end, signifying culture will flip over into a number-based counterculture, retroprocessing the last 100 years. Whether global disaster ensues or not, Y2K is a singularity for cybernetic culture. It's time to get Y2K positive.

    Mark Fisher (2004). Y2K Positive in Mute.

  • While there was a lot of FUD in the media, there were also a lot of scenarios that were actually possible but were averted due to a LOT of work and attention ahead of time. It should be looked at, IMO, as a success of communication, warnings, and a lot of effort that nothing of major significance happened.

    • Yes, Y2K is a success story, similar to the alert and response related to ozone layer and CFCs.

      Dissimilar to the global climate catastrophe, unfortunately.

      ---

      The 2024 state of the climate report: Perilous times on planet Earth

      https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/74/12/812/780859...

      "Tragically, we are failing to avoid serious impacts"

      "We have now brought the planet into climatic conditions never witnessed by us or our prehistoric relatives within our genus, Homo"

      "Despite six IPCC reports, 28 COP meetings, hundreds of other reports, and tens of thousands of scientific papers, the world has made only very minor headway on climate change"

      "projections paint a bleak picture of the future, with many scientists envisioning widespread famines, conflicts, mass migration, and increasing extreme weather that will surpass anything witnessed thus far, posing catastrophic consequences for both humanity and the biosphere"

      7 replies →

  • Tell us you weren't involved in Y2K iwithout telling us you weren't involved in Y2K.

  • Exciting times with an anticlimactic end; I was in middle school, relishing the chaos of the adult world.