Mastodon Skip to content
  • Home
  • Aktuell
  • Tags
  • Über dieses Forum
Einklappen
Grafik mit zwei überlappenden Sprechblasen, eine grün und eine lila.
Abspeckgeflüster – Forum für Menschen mit Gewicht(ung)

Kostenlos. Werbefrei. Menschlich. Dein Abnehmforum.

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. 100% tariff on the MM/DD/YY date format.

100% tariff on the MM/DD/YY date format.

Geplant Angeheftet Gesperrt Verschoben Uncategorized
216 Beiträge 119 Kommentatoren 0 Aufrufe
  • Älteste zuerst
  • Neuste zuerst
  • Meiste Stimmen
Antworten
  • In einem neuen Thema antworten
Anmelden zum Antworten
Dieses Thema wurde gelöscht. Nur Nutzer mit entsprechenden Rechten können es sehen.
  • amiserabilist@beige.partyA amiserabilist@beige.party

    @wendinoakland @renwillis @Natasha_Jay @stux

    NASA lost the Mars Climate Orbiter in 1999 due to a fatal mix-up between English (feet, pounds) and metric (meters, Newtons) units, where contractor software used English measurements for thruster force while NASA expected metric, causing the orbiter to enter Mars' atmosphere too low and burn up, a classic example of unit conversion error.

    https://science.nasa.gov/mission/mars-climate-orbiter/

    $327.6 million 🚽

    renwillis@mstdn.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
    renwillis@mstdn.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
    renwillis@mstdn.social
    schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
    #93

    @amiserabilist @wendinoakland @Natasha_Jay @stux Hey, I said be fluid, not stupid!

    1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
    0
    • sloanlance@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
      sloanlance@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
      sloanlance@mastodon.social
      schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
      #94

      @aaronmccollum @Natasha_Jay
      😐

      1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
      0
      • mitsunee@mk.absturztau.beM mitsunee@mk.absturztau.be

        @Natasha_Jay@tech.lgbt I still have my proposal for separator to indicate format as a compromise: DD.MM.YYYY, YYYY-MM-DD and MM/DD/YYYY. This disambiguates the ones with YYYY at the end, as long as we can get americans to stop using . sometimes randomly.

        agowa338@chaos.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
        agowa338@chaos.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
        agowa338@chaos.social
        schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
        #95

        @mitsunee @Natasha_Jay

        And what do you with "DD/MM/YYYY"?

        mitsunee@mk.absturztau.beM 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
        0
        • wendinoakland@beige.partyW wendinoakland@beige.party

          @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay @stux Wasn’t that a critical error with the Hubble Telescope lens? (I’m suggesting you do the research…)

          quadrivial@beige.partyQ This user is from outside of this forum
          quadrivial@beige.partyQ This user is from outside of this forum
          quadrivial@beige.party
          schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
          #96

          @wendinoakland @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay @stux I happen to know an extremely skilled optical engineer
          cc: @felix_t_fois

          1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
          0
          • wendinoakland@beige.partyW wendinoakland@beige.party

            @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay @stux Wasn’t that a critical error with the Hubble Telescope lens? (I’m suggesting you do the research…)

            stux@mstdn.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
            stux@mstdn.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
            stux@mstdn.social
            schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
            #97

            @wendinoakland The Hubble Telescope uses a large, 2.4-meter (8-foot) primary mirror, not a lens

            @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay

            wendinoakland@beige.partyW 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
            0
            • stux@mstdn.socialS stux@mstdn.social

              @wendinoakland The Hubble Telescope uses a large, 2.4-meter (8-foot) primary mirror, not a lens

              @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay

              wendinoakland@beige.partyW This user is from outside of this forum
              wendinoakland@beige.partyW This user is from outside of this forum
              wendinoakland@beige.party
              schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
              #98

              @stux @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay Maybe it was the mirror…? There was some metric/imperial measurement error on a critical Hubble element

              stux@mstdn.socialS 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
              0
              • wendinoakland@beige.partyW wendinoakland@beige.party

                @stux @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay Maybe it was the mirror…? There was some metric/imperial measurement error on a critical Hubble element

                stux@mstdn.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                stux@mstdn.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                stux@mstdn.social
                schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                #99

                @wendinoakland @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay I'm gonan do some checks 😁 Those are veeeery expensive errors woahh

                wendinoakland@beige.partyW 2 Antworten Letzte Antwort
                0
                • stux@mstdn.socialS stux@mstdn.social

                  @wendinoakland @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay I'm gonan do some checks 😁 Those are veeeery expensive errors woahh

                  wendinoakland@beige.partyW This user is from outside of this forum
                  wendinoakland@beige.partyW This user is from outside of this forum
                  wendinoakland@beige.party
                  schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                  #100

                  @stux @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay Indeed! I remember, long ago, hearing about it and being truly shocked. Yeah, engineers communicating incompletely.

                  1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                  0
                  • stux@mstdn.socialS stux@mstdn.social

                    @wendinoakland @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay I'm gonan do some checks 😁 Those are veeeery expensive errors woahh

                    wendinoakland@beige.partyW This user is from outside of this forum
                    wendinoakland@beige.partyW This user is from outside of this forum
                    wendinoakland@beige.party
                    schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                    #101

                    @stux @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay Okay, looking around Wikipedia it seems it was a flaw in the mirror grinding position tolerances, where a mm is as big as a mile (!) and the contractor ground the mirror to the WRONG SHAPE! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Space_Telescope?wprov=sfti1#Origin_of_the_problem

                    1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                    0
                    • wendinoakland@beige.partyW wendinoakland@beige.party

                      @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay @stux Wasn’t that a critical error with the Hubble Telescope lens? (I’m suggesting you do the research…)

                      amiserabilist@beige.partyA This user is from outside of this forum
                      amiserabilist@beige.partyA This user is from outside of this forum
                      amiserabilist@beige.party
                      schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                      #102

                      @wendinoakland @glasspusher

                      >the primary cause of the failure with the Hubble Space Telescope's mirror was spherical aberration caused by a miscalibrated, faulty testing device during manufacturing.

                      Here are the key details regarding the failure as discussed by users:

                      The Root Cause (The "Why"): The primary mirror was ground and polished by Perkin-Elmer to the wrong shape because a device called a "null corrector"—used to measure the mirror's surface during polishing—was assembled incorrectly.

                      The Specific Error: A spacing error of 1.3 millimeters in the null corrector (caused by a missing cap on a rod) led to the mirror being polished too flat at the edges by roughly 2.2 microns (1/50th the width of a human hair).

                      Ignoring Data: Users noted that a second, independent testing device actually indicated the mirror was flawed, but this data was ignored because the, albeit faulty, "new" null corrector was trusted more.

                      The Fix: Because the mirror was ground so accurately (just wrongly), scientists knew exactly how to fix it. The 1993 servicing mission (STS-61) installed COSTAR (Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement), which acted as "glasses" to correct the aberration.

                      >One report explained it this way;

                      If you took a finely polished mirror and enlarged it to the size of the Gulf of Mexico, you'd have a surface with +/- 80 foot swells.

                      If you enlarged the Hubble mirror to the same scale, you'd have a surface with +/- 3 inch swells.

                      https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/cjw5az/til_that_after_almost_20_years_of_battling_for_a/

                      >Imagine you are trying to make a perfectly shaped, giant, curved mirror for a space telescope (like Hubble). Because it’s so large, you need to check if you are grinding the glass into the exact right shape.

                      The Problem: The mirror is a weird shape (aspheric). If you shine a light on it to check the shape, the light bounces back looking crazy and blurry. You can’t tell if the mirror is wrong, or if it just looks that way because of the weird curve.

                      The Solution (The Null Corrector): You put a special lens or mirror between your eye (or camera) and the giant mirror. This device takes the messy, distorted light and "fixes" it.

                      "Null" Means Zero Error: If the giant mirror is ground perfectly, the null corrector makes the reflected light look completely flat (or "null" of errors).

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_corrector

                      >Why an Aspheric Shape is Needed

                      Spherical mirrors (like a perfect bowl) focus light from distant objects to different points depending on where the light hits the mirror, causing blur.

                      Aspheric mirrors, with a more complex curve, can focus all light rays to a single, sharp focal point, producing clearer images. Hubble's design used this superior shape.

                      http://astro.vaporia.com/start/asphericmirror.html

                      @renwillis @Natasha_Jay @stux

                      glasspusher@beige.partyG renwillis@mstdn.socialR 2 Antworten Letzte Antwort
                      0
                      • wtl@mastodon.socialW wtl@mastodon.social

                        @Natasha_Jay @renchap YYYY/MM/DD is the only acceptable format.🤣

                        wen@mastodon.scotW This user is from outside of this forum
                        wen@mastodon.scotW This user is from outside of this forum
                        wen@mastodon.scot
                        schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                        #103

                        @WTL @Natasha_Jay @renchap I’ve never understood the U.S. obsession with getting it wrong. It’s not even simple to sort by date.

                        wtl@mastodon.socialW dpnash@c.imD 2 Antworten Letzte Antwort
                        0
                        • mkj@social.mkj.earthM mkj@social.mkj.earth

                          @UkeleleEric But dd/mm/yyyy (regardless of separator) is not meaningfully easily sortable. yyyy-mm-dd is.

                          @WTL @Natasha_Jay @renchap

                          ukeleleeric@mstdn.socialU This user is from outside of this forum
                          ukeleleeric@mstdn.socialU This user is from outside of this forum
                          ukeleleeric@mstdn.social
                          schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                          #104

                          @mkj @WTL @Natasha_Jay @renchap why not? You can sort it numerically in the same way. 30122019 is obviously after 29112019 - you can, quite easily, separate the date into three separate variables (DD), (MM), (YYYY).

                          wtl@mastodon.socialW 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                          0
                          • ukeleleeric@mstdn.socialU ukeleleeric@mstdn.social

                            @WTL @Natasha_Jay @renchap there are arguments for either that or DD/mm/yyyy. Both are equally logical - just increasing or decreasing.

                            wtl@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                            wtl@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                            wtl@mastodon.social
                            schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                            #105

                            @UkeleleEric @Natasha_Jay @renchap Agreed, but dd/mm/yyyy doesn't sort nicely. 🤣

                            1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                            0
                            • wen@mastodon.scotW wen@mastodon.scot

                              @WTL @Natasha_Jay @renchap I’ve never understood the U.S. obsession with getting it wrong. It’s not even simple to sort by date.

                              wtl@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                              wtl@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                              wtl@mastodon.social
                              schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                              #106

                              @Wen @Natasha_Jay @renchap 💯🤣

                              mlawton@mstdn.socialM 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                              0
                              • ukeleleeric@mstdn.socialU ukeleleeric@mstdn.social

                                @mkj @WTL @Natasha_Jay @renchap why not? You can sort it numerically in the same way. 30122019 is obviously after 29112019 - you can, quite easily, separate the date into three separate variables (DD), (MM), (YYYY).

                                wtl@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                                wtl@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                                wtl@mastodon.social
                                schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                #107

                                @UkeleleEric @mkj @Natasha_Jay @renchap When you have fifty files of ddmmyyyy you can't *at a glance* see which one is the oldest, newest, or second oldest. You have to do something. yyyymmdd you can tell straight away.

                                And I'm lazy. I like things easy and logical.

                                1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                0
                                • amiserabilist@beige.partyA amiserabilist@beige.party

                                  @wendinoakland @glasspusher

                                  >the primary cause of the failure with the Hubble Space Telescope's mirror was spherical aberration caused by a miscalibrated, faulty testing device during manufacturing.

                                  Here are the key details regarding the failure as discussed by users:

                                  The Root Cause (The "Why"): The primary mirror was ground and polished by Perkin-Elmer to the wrong shape because a device called a "null corrector"—used to measure the mirror's surface during polishing—was assembled incorrectly.

                                  The Specific Error: A spacing error of 1.3 millimeters in the null corrector (caused by a missing cap on a rod) led to the mirror being polished too flat at the edges by roughly 2.2 microns (1/50th the width of a human hair).

                                  Ignoring Data: Users noted that a second, independent testing device actually indicated the mirror was flawed, but this data was ignored because the, albeit faulty, "new" null corrector was trusted more.

                                  The Fix: Because the mirror was ground so accurately (just wrongly), scientists knew exactly how to fix it. The 1993 servicing mission (STS-61) installed COSTAR (Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement), which acted as "glasses" to correct the aberration.

                                  >One report explained it this way;

                                  If you took a finely polished mirror and enlarged it to the size of the Gulf of Mexico, you'd have a surface with +/- 80 foot swells.

                                  If you enlarged the Hubble mirror to the same scale, you'd have a surface with +/- 3 inch swells.

                                  https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/cjw5az/til_that_after_almost_20_years_of_battling_for_a/

                                  >Imagine you are trying to make a perfectly shaped, giant, curved mirror for a space telescope (like Hubble). Because it’s so large, you need to check if you are grinding the glass into the exact right shape.

                                  The Problem: The mirror is a weird shape (aspheric). If you shine a light on it to check the shape, the light bounces back looking crazy and blurry. You can’t tell if the mirror is wrong, or if it just looks that way because of the weird curve.

                                  The Solution (The Null Corrector): You put a special lens or mirror between your eye (or camera) and the giant mirror. This device takes the messy, distorted light and "fixes" it.

                                  "Null" Means Zero Error: If the giant mirror is ground perfectly, the null corrector makes the reflected light look completely flat (or "null" of errors).

                                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_corrector

                                  >Why an Aspheric Shape is Needed

                                  Spherical mirrors (like a perfect bowl) focus light from distant objects to different points depending on where the light hits the mirror, causing blur.

                                  Aspheric mirrors, with a more complex curve, can focus all light rays to a single, sharp focal point, producing clearer images. Hubble's design used this superior shape.

                                  http://astro.vaporia.com/start/asphericmirror.html

                                  @renwillis @Natasha_Jay @stux

                                  glasspusher@beige.partyG This user is from outside of this forum
                                  glasspusher@beige.partyG This user is from outside of this forum
                                  glasspusher@beige.party
                                  schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                  #108

                                  @amiserabilist @wendinoakland @renwillis @Natasha_Jay @stux

                                  +5 for Gulf of Mexico

                                  I dunno what "finely polished mirror" they're talking about. Maybe they're talking a bathroom mirror? That mirror would be unsuitable for astronomical purposes

                                  I've got a 47 cm diameter mirror with an error of about 20 nanometers.
                                  My error translated to 1500 km diameter would be about 6 cm, so yeah. If you can't piss with the tall dogs, stay out of the high grass.

                                  the Hubble mirror had 2 null testers, one all lenses, one lenses and mirrors. The latter one showed an error, the former one did not. They got lazy and said "the second null tester is screwed up". They were wrong.

                                  wendinoakland@beige.partyW 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                  0
                                  • glasspusher@beige.partyG glasspusher@beige.party

                                    @amiserabilist @wendinoakland @renwillis @Natasha_Jay @stux

                                    +5 for Gulf of Mexico

                                    I dunno what "finely polished mirror" they're talking about. Maybe they're talking a bathroom mirror? That mirror would be unsuitable for astronomical purposes

                                    I've got a 47 cm diameter mirror with an error of about 20 nanometers.
                                    My error translated to 1500 km diameter would be about 6 cm, so yeah. If you can't piss with the tall dogs, stay out of the high grass.

                                    the Hubble mirror had 2 null testers, one all lenses, one lenses and mirrors. The latter one showed an error, the former one did not. They got lazy and said "the second null tester is screwed up". They were wrong.

                                    wendinoakland@beige.partyW This user is from outside of this forum
                                    wendinoakland@beige.partyW This user is from outside of this forum
                                    wendinoakland@beige.party
                                    schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                    #109

                                    @glasspusher @amiserabilist @renwillis @Natasha_Jay @stux I posted a Wikipedia link — it’s in there, someplace. Oh, Paul quoted the deets above.

                                    glasspusher@beige.partyG 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                    0
                                    • agowa338@chaos.socialA agowa338@chaos.social

                                      @mitsunee @Natasha_Jay

                                      And what do you with "DD/MM/YYYY"?

                                      mitsunee@mk.absturztau.beM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      mitsunee@mk.absturztau.beM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      mitsunee@mk.absturztau.be
                                      schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                      #110

                                      @agowa338@chaos.social @Natasha_Jay@tech.lgbt that would no longer be valid

                                      1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                      0
                                      • natasha_jay@tech.lgbtN natasha_jay@tech.lgbt

                                        100% tariff on the MM/DD/YY date format.

                                        soviut@hachyderm.ioS This user is from outside of this forum
                                        soviut@hachyderm.ioS This user is from outside of this forum
                                        soviut@hachyderm.io
                                        schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                        #111

                                        @Natasha_Jay You mean you don't like wondering what 12/11/12 represents?

                                        1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                        0
                                        • vonxylofon@witter.czV vonxylofon@witter.cz

                                          @zed @bsdphk @Natasha_Jay Wristwatches solve a different use case. When you look at them, chances are you know if it's a quarter to midnight or to noon.

                                          When you represent date/time in a globalised world, it's an entirely different matter. An event at 11:45 is totally ambiguous, so you need 4 digits + the AM/PM bit to be unambiguous. With 24h time, you only need the four digits.

                                          zed@mstdn.partyZ This user is from outside of this forum
                                          zed@mstdn.partyZ This user is from outside of this forum
                                          zed@mstdn.party
                                          schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                          #112

                                          @vonxylofon but when I wear a watch (which is every day), and my train leaves at 18h, I don’t want to have to do math while looking at my watch to see if I’m going to be on time or not.

                                          bencotterill@mastodon.socialB vonxylofon@witter.czV soldusty@beige.partyS 3 Antworten Letzte Antwort
                                          0
                                          Antworten
                                          • In einem neuen Thema antworten
                                          Anmelden zum Antworten
                                          • Älteste zuerst
                                          • Neuste zuerst
                                          • Meiste Stimmen



                                          Copyright (c) 2025 abSpecktrum (@abspecklog@fedimonster.de)

                                          Erstellt mit Schlaflosigkeit, Kaffee, Brokkoli & ♥

                                          Impressum | Datenschutzerklärung | Nutzungsbedingungen

                                          • Anmelden

                                          • Du hast noch kein Konto? Registrieren

                                          • Anmelden oder registrieren, um zu suchen
                                          • Erster Beitrag
                                            Letzter Beitrag
                                          0
                                          • Home
                                          • Aktuell
                                          • Tags
                                          • Über dieses Forum