[Guvante]

You want numbers to be understandable and K produces illogical numbers.

(There is a reason it is common to drop the century when talking about years, humans are less skilled at numbers over 100)

And I know temperatures in Fahrenheit go higher but it is common to refer to Phoenix as "over 100" even when it's high can peak over 120.

[zinckiwi]

That’s 02025 thinking.

[lstodd]

You mean 0o2025 that is 1045AD?

[GolfPopper]

X̅ ?

(I'm a little sad the five-digit date hasn't become popular.)

[chrismorgan]

Why would five-digit years have become popular? They seem roundly a bad idea.

Years aren’t even four digits by custom: they’re just numbers, with the present idiosyncrasy of eschewing a grouping (thousands) separator. We say the sack of Rome was in 410, not 0410. Only for specific serialisation purposes have we ever recorded fixed-width dates, acknowledging that there are limits to this. The recording of two-digit or offset-by-1900 years in computer systems was a case of bad judgement. The recording of four-digit years as is presently customary is pragmatic and entirely adequate for the next few thousand years, and there’s no point in designing things beyond that horizon.

[8note]

what makes a number illogical? i havent heard of that concept wrt to numbers

[Guvante]

Paraphrasing for "hard to understand" but with an emphasis on internalizing.

Most people generally fundamentally know what 30 means in their unit but might have a harder time with 303 (or 272)

[thaumasiotes]

> (There is a reason it is common to drop the century when talking about years,

Yep.

> humans are less skilled at numbers over 100)

No, the reason is that the century is constant and therefore carries no information. Where the century isn't constant, it never gets dropped.

[Guvante]

You can say the same thing about decades

No one says 6 even though it has a very reasonable information density for conversations. It is either a relative year or a two digit one.

[cwillu]

The 90s called, they'd like a word.