tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27290920.post6977547447487368874..comments2024-01-06T03:54:46.267-05:00Comments on the sceptical futuryst: Parables and horseshitStuart Candyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11847397597090443677noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27290920.post-36537918816868037122007-10-12T19:55:00.000-04:002007-10-12T19:55:00.000-04:00In terms of computer programming, yes, 0XXXX has i...In terms of computer programming, yes, 0XXXX has its practical application (for at least a few more years). But in academic discourse, and in consideration of a truly long-term perspective, might we borrow the mathematical bar notation (of 1÷3 fame) to show the infinite number of zeros that may, theoretically, precede our valued calendar year?tokyocrunchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15390146928532654401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27290920.post-69335347071168153592007-10-10T17:06:00.000-04:002007-10-10T17:06:00.000-04:00This hasn't become standard. It's a tic I picked u...This hasn't become standard. It's a tic I picked up from The Long Now Foundation, which is propagating the habit <A HREF="http://www.longnow.org/about/" REL="nofollow">ostensibly </A> to solve the <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_10,000_problem" REL="nofollow">Year 10,000 problem</A> (like the Y2K bug, but further away). A more persuasive reason is the symbolic shift to a long-term orientation. But the practical and the symbolic reasons eventually merge. Long Now cofounder Stewart Brand wrote in an <A HREF="www.longnow.org/views/essays/articles/writtenonwind.php" REL="nofollow">essay</A> in 01998:<BR/><BR/>"How can we invest in a future we know is structurally incapable of keeping faith with its past? The digital industries must shift from being the main source of society’s ever-shortening attention span to becoming a reliable guarantor of long-term perspective. We’ll know that shift has happened when programmers begin to anticipate the Year 10,000 Problem, and assign five digits instead of four to year dates. '01998' they’ll write, at first frivolously, then seriously."<BR/><BR/>Maybe Ōxxxx would work better. What's Ō?<BR/><BR/>By the way, it may not be widespread yet, but it's creeping into the culture... <A HREF="http://bp2.blogger.com/_mEUle6uwKAs/Rw09Cm69P9I/AAAAAAAAAJU/nHupYAK2DeI/s1600-h/02006.jpg" REL="nofollow">here,</A> for instance.Stuart Candyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11847397597090443677noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27290920.post-56096679824178758172007-10-10T14:16:00.000-04:002007-10-10T14:16:00.000-04:00You'll please forgive my off-point comment. I've o...You'll please forgive my off-point comment. I've observed (and been perpetually amused by) your use of the naught date precursor ("02007", in this post), reminding us that there are at least tenfold future cycles to consider. Has there been standardization of such a denominator among futurists, particularly in consideration of the conceivably infinite march of years? Disregarding HTML character limitations, would "Ō2007" confer the lesson more accurately?tokyocrunchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15390146928532654401noreply@blogger.com