> If we wanted to bring the 1-indexing we use in language to the fullest extent here to fix that particular issue, time counting would have to start at 1111. T

> If we wanted to bring the 1-indexing we use in language to the fullest extent here to fix that particular issue, time counting would have to start at 1111. That's funny, but there's actually an elegant way to do it called Bijective numeration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bijective_numeration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bijective_numeration). We're currently living in the 1A22th year.