Actual poster from 1917 that made me laugh. A lot.

Also, those motherfuckers are measuring the weight of those balls in kilograms, aren’t they?

  • JackbyDev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -24 months ago

    Year, month, day is the most logical. I’ll stand by month, day, year as being more logical than day, month, year because it’s somewhat more sorted lol.

    • @thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      64 months ago

      How in the world is (month/day/year) more sorted than (day/month/year)? I see two use-cases: Sorting things chronologically, in which case you want YYYY/MM/DD, or referring to nearby dates, where the year or even month can be assumed known implicitly, in which case you use DD/MM/YYYY. In no sane world does MM/DD/YYYY make sense.

      • JackbyDev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        04 months ago

        Because you put big numbers first! Three hundred twenty one is written 321 not 1, 20, and 300. 21 and 300 is more sorted. MM/DD/YYYY only has one element out of place instead of being totally backwards.

        • @oo1
          link
          English
          14 months ago

          Big numbers first is not the only way to sort - look at say how they sort the speeds of runners in a race.

          If it is “backwards”, it is sorted, in reverse order. If it has an element out of place it is not sorted.

          It’s only when they extend to hh:mm:ss dd/mm/yyyy that it becomes assorted. They need to fully commit and either use tzmm:tzhh+ fff.ss:mm:hh dd/mm/yyyy or just use fucking iso 8601. Fuck everyone who doesn’t; fuck M$, fuck oracle, fuck humans.

    • Resol van Lemmy
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 months ago

      I mean, I’m fine with the long form (August 8, 2024), but definitely not the short form, which today looks indistinguishable from DD/MM/YYYY anyway. I often think it’s the other way around and ask “since when was there a 26th month??”.