Re: Intent to package: "birthday" [OT]
On Sun, Mar 14, 1999 at 07:56:14PM -0600, David Starner wrote:
> Jonathan P Tomer wrote:
> > however most of the world doesn't care about that,
> > nor do we consider new year's day to be 1/12 just because eleven days
> > were eliminated in 1752. we use the calendar as it is, not as some
> > people think should be.
>
> And the calendar, as is, starts at 1 AD. Therefore a millenum, by
> definition, ends at 1001 AD and 2001 AD. To say that it doesn't is as
> wrong as claming 1 kilobyte to 1000 bytes. Maybe it would be nicer that
> way, but all the clueless in the world can't change that.
Wrong wrong wrong.
The millenium starts when marketing strategees wants to have it started.
Why wait another year if you can make the big money THIS year?
No argumentation, philosophical, historical, mathematical or whatever, can
change what big business likes to make us believe.
And, I think this discussion is silly. There are good arguments for any
date. If Christ ever was born at all, it happened a few years off most
certainly. Then, the calendar has changed then and when. And then, there are
many calendars in the world. Every Billy, Biff and Scooter makes his own
date.
If you want to make a senseless discussion even more, ask WHERE on earth
does the millenium start? What is the most eastern point just before the date
zone?
Time is arbitrary.
Thanks,
Marcus
PS: I have beaten a dead horse. Everybody after me will get his hands dirty
on a rotten one :)
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Reply to: