• PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I just use millis since epoch

    (Recently learned that this isn’t accurate because it disguises leap seconds. The standard was fucked from the start)

  • nesc@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    This pyramid visualisation doesn’t work for me, unless you read time starting with seconds.

  • czardestructo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m almost 40 and now just realizing my insistence on how to structure all my folders and notes is actually an ISO standard. Way to go me.

    • valkyre09@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I stumbled upon it years ago because sorting by name sorts by date. There was no other thought put into it.

      • clockworkrat(he/him)@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s incredibly annoying that in clinical research we are prohibited from using it because every date must comply with the GCP format (DD mmm yyyy). Every file has the GCP date appended to the end.

  • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    “Europe”, as if there weren’t several languages in Europe with different date formats per language…

      • htrayl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Meh. It’s getting a lot of hate here, but I think it works well in casual short term planning. Context (July) - > precision (15).

        If I want to communicate the day in the current month, I just say the day, no month.

          • tomenzgg@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            No because the year is a super large time; there’s a reason people always say they take a bit to adjust to writing the new year in dates because it’s s long enough period of time that it almost becomes automatic.

            For archiving, sure; most other things, no (logically, ISO-8601 is probably the best for most cases, in general, but I’ll die on the hill that MM-DD-YYYY is better than DD-MM-YYYY).

            • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              the year is a super large time

              Not when you’re old… I’ll be 50 this year, they’re flying by.

            • Mac@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              Exactly. It would be like reading the minute of the clock before the hour.

              • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
                cake
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                Everyone starts sentences with a capital letter, you shouldn’t be flinging shit mate 😂

              • tomenzgg@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                Again, – within most use cases – it really isn’t.

                In your day to day, will you need to know the year of a thing? Probably not; it’s probably with the year you’re currently in.

                Do you need to know the day of the month first? Probably not unless it’s within the current month so you need to know the month first.

                Telling me “22nd” on a paper means nothing if I don’t know what month we’re referring to; and, if I do need to know the year, – well – it’s always at the the of the date so it’s easy to locate rather than parsing the middle of the date, any.

  • azi@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Hot take: 2025-Jan-27 is better than 2025-01-27 in monolingual contexts.

  • Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I often have to refrain myself from using ISO-8601 in regular emails. In a business context the MM/DD/YYYY is so much more prevalent that I don’t want to stand out.

    Filenames on a share drive though? ISO-8601 all the way idgaf

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Mmm US military date and time is fun too.

    DDMMMYYYYHHMM and time zone identifier. So 26JAN20251841Z.

    So much fun.

      • boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Honestly look very readable to me, though I’m not sure on the timezone bit. Maybe they left it out? Ohterwise it’s 26th of January 2025, 18:41

        It’s gonna be problematic when there’s 5 digit years, but other than that it’s… not good, but definitely less ambiguous than any “normally formatted” date where DD <= 12. Is it MM/DD or DD/MM? We’ll never fucking know!

        Of course, YYYY-MM-DD is still the king because it’s both human readable and sortable as a regular string without converting it into a datetime object or anything.

        • jagungal@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          All you’d have to do to make it much more readable is separate the time and the year with some kind of separator like a hyphen, slash or dot. Also “Z” is the time zone, denoting UTC (see also military time zones)

          • boonhet@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Oh, duh. It’s why all my timestamps have Z’s in the database lmao

            Thing is, you’re right that the separation would help, but this is still way less ambiguous that MM/DD vs DD/MM if you ask me.

      • namingthingsiseasy@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Nah, ISO is a shit organization. The biggest issue is that all of their “standards” are blocked behind paywalls and can’t be shared. This creates problems for open source projects that want to implement it because it inherently limits how many people are actually able to look at the standard. Compare to RFC, which always has been free. And not only that, it also has most of the standards that the internet is built upon (like HTTP and TCP, just to name a few).

        Besides that, they happily looked away when members were openly taking bribes from Microsoft during the standardization of OOXML.

        In any case, ISO-8601 is a garbage standard. P1Y is a valid ISO-8601 string. Good luck figuring out what that means. Here’s a more comprehensive page demonstrating just how stupid ISO-8601 is: https://github.com/IJMacD/rfc3339-iso8601

          • derpgon@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Sure, it means something, and the meaning is not stupid. But since it is the same standard, it should be possible to be used to at least somehow represent the same data. Which it doesn’t.

            • groet@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              I think it is reasonable to say: “for all representation of times (points in time, intervals and sets of points or intervals etc) we follow the same standard”.

              The alternative would be using one standard for points in time, another for intervals, another for time differences, another for changes to a timezone, another for …

              • lad@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                The alternative would be

                More reasonable, if you ask me. At least I came to value modularity in programming, maybe with standards it doesn’t work as good, but I don’t see why

                • groet@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Standards are used to increase interoperability between systems. The more different standards a single system needs the harder it is to interface with other systems. If you have to define a list of 50 standard you use, chances are the other system uses a different standard for at least one of them. Much easier if you rely on only a handful instead

  • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    In one work report, I recorded the date as “1/13/25”, “13/1/25” and “13JAN2025”

    I have my preference, but please for the love of all that is fluffy in the universe, just stick to one format…