Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar...
by effie on Friday April 02, 2021 @03:32PM
(#26675115)
I'll bite, what's up with those zero prefixes?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar...
by cpeterso on Friday April 02, 2021 @03:51PM
(#26675253)
Preparation for the Y10K problem. Five-digit years is something the Long Now Foundation started using to encourage people to think longer term:
Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar...
by thelean12 on Friday April 02, 2021 @05:26PM
(#26676179)
Holy hell, talk about premature. That's 100 lifetimes away.
Is it still April 1st?
Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar...
by kragen on Friday April 02, 2021 @06:50PM
(#26676767)
> That's 100 lifetimes away.
Such a pessimist!
Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar...
by ethbr0 on Friday April 02, 2021 @08:50PM
(#26677452)
Fine, 0100 lifetimes away.
Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar...
by stjohnswarts on Friday April 02, 2021 @04:25PM
(#26675578)
lol that's ridiculous. We'll either have wiped ourselves out by then or be so far beyond problems like Y2K that it's a ridiculous thing to worry about
Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar...
by kragen on Friday April 02, 2021 @05:31PM
(#26676208)
More fun than worrying about global pandemics or nuclear meltdowns!
Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar...
by krrrh on Friday April 02, 2021 @03:56PM
(#26675292)
It’s promoted by the Long Now Foundation, as a way of encouraging thinking on 10,000 year time scales.
Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar...
by why_Mr_Anderson on Friday April 02, 2021 @04:17PM
(#26675492)
That's so -idiotic- short term thinking. 10k years is nothing in the timescale of the universe.
Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar...
by radicalcentrist on Friday April 02, 2021 @03:48PM
(#26675229)