As long as we don't expect Linux to exist for another 85 years ;)

100.01 still works expect for alphabetical sorting. The worry happens at 985 years.

Numeric sorting can still work after 985 years. Only question is whether to use 1000.01 or 3000.01. I slightly prefer former, as a final rejection of the culture-specific BC/AC split. The ascendance of the net is the beginning of the real CE. Though skipping year notation altogether for seconds (or some 10s multiple of) since the epoch would also be fun for versioning.

> the culture-specific BC/AC split

Any dating scheme is going to be culture-specific. The point you pick to be "year zero" is always going to be a point in time that's culturally valuable.

> The ascendance of the net is the beginning of the real CE.

That's an assertion that a marker you find culturally important (as a techie) is more meaningful to you than a marker that other people find culturally significant.

You could just as well choose the Before Present dating scheme, which defines "present" as 1 January 1950, roughly the point in time when the number of atomic explosions made radiocarbon dating obsolete (and the beginning of an astronomical epoch). But that is also culturally-specific, relative to the concerns of a certain epistemic community.

You're right, thanks. The claims in my comment require lots of qualification, are embarrassing without.

I enjoy your a[s]t[ron]omic epoch year zero idea. One could start from much further back (eg beginning of universe, earth, modern humans, writing) but those would all be specific to the culture estimating them and to what that culture valued.

There is no year zero in Common Era/Anno Domini.

"Year Zero" was more a reference to the idea of trying to wipe out symbols of past culture (i.e. Anno Domini) for political reasons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Zero_%28political_notion%...