5 ms·

We will figure it out, as we always do.

by asadlionpk 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
coffeebeqn 4y ago
Aren’t most systems 64-bit by now already? Maybe I’m too optimistic/startup focused
- lossolo 4y ago
  It doesn't always help, it's about how is epoch defined in code, even on 64 bit system it can be defined as int32 and will overflow.
- tspike 4y ago
  Sure, unless you count systems in sectors like banking, airlines, or government.
- pantalaimon 4y ago
  Most embedded systems are 32 bit. Yea both newlib and picolibc use 64 bit time_t now, but that doesn’t stop people from using 32 bit timestamps anyway …
p-e-w 4y ago
Yes, a lot of smart and dedicated people will work tirelessly to figure it out and prevent this from turning into a disaster, and then most people will wonder what all the fuss was about since "nothing happened". I wonder if 100-200 years into the future there will be some kind of widespread "historical climate change denialism", where the efforts made to combat climate change in the 21st century are called into question because the positive outcome (which was the result of those efforts) appears to retroactively show that there was no problem in the first place.
- dismalpedigree 4y ago
  You are assuming climate change actually gets solved. Not the bet i would take.
  - p-e-w 4y ago
    Personally, I doubt we'll ever see the worst of climate change whether it gets "solved" or not. AGI is much more dangerous than climate change and will likely arrive much sooner than its worst effects, and unlike climate change, nobody takes it seriously outside of a very, very small circle. What I think will happen is the world fighting worsening climate change, and lots of political efforts in that direction, and suddenly an entity most people think belongs in science fiction will emerge out of seemingly nowhere, and it will all be over in a matter of hours, before the vast majority of people have even had time to understand what happened. Ironically, that AGI entity might then choose to solve climate change, simply out of self-interest.
    - jdub 4y ago
      That's astonishingly optimistic given the current state of both.
      - p-e-w 4y ago
        Really? Given the progress in the past decade, I'd place AGI about 15-20 years from now, with immediate civilization-threatening consequences. By then climate change will certainly be bad, but nowhere near an existential threat to humanity yet.
        duped 4y ago
        Climate change is already an existential threat to humanity. We're the frog in the proverbial boiling pot. It's quite likely we've already doomed our species and we don't know it yet. It's a lot harder to see AGI as being possible in the next few decades (the current state of the art is still a sensationalized party trick, one cannot anthropomorphize chat bots any more than they can describe a submarine as an aquatic being). And even if a self aware program exists in 20 years, it's a lot harder to imagine it being an existential threat a la Skynet.
onion2k 4y ago
I'm less confident than you, because the perceived value of software has dropped considerably over the past 20 years. In the 1970s through to the 1990s when a business bought some custom code it was treated like an asset. It had value. That's one reason why Y2K wasn't a disaster - companies wanted to protect their asset and keep it working. Today software is cheap and disposable. Things are built with web tech so engineers can be found to work on apps easily. That's OK because new software isn't generally impacted by Y2038, but in businesses where there are old, legacy systems run by people who have a modern attitude to software ownership, things will fail because those businesses won't see importance of the threat.
- aaron_m04 4y ago
  > [...] but in businesses where there are old, legacy systems run by people who have a modern attitude to software ownership, things will fail because those businesses won't see importance of the threat. How common will that be, though? I would expect that "cheap and disposable" software would mean most software in the year 2038 would be recently written, which would mean the programmers would be aware of the impending 32-bit rollover issue.
  - cookingrobot 4y ago
    On the one hand, most programmers are writing at a higher level, and probably have no ability to fix or even work around a date rollover issue. On the other hand, a few fixes at lower levels will correct it for everyone above them.
- dastbe 4y ago
  individual software is more disposable, but the systems themselves still have immense value. the software in the system will be updated or replaced (because it is easier to do so!) if it’s valuable for the system.
roflyear 4y ago
Until we don't

We will figure it out, as we always do.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

coffeebeqn 4y ago

Aren’t most systems 64-bit by now already? Maybe I’m too optimistic/startup focused

lossolo 4y ago
It doesn't always help, it's about how is epoch defined in code, even on 64 bit system it can be defined as int32 and will overflow.
tspike 4y ago
Sure, unless you count systems in sectors like banking, airlines, or government.
pantalaimon 4y ago
Most embedded systems are 32 bit. Yea both newlib and picolibc use 64 bit time_t now, but that doesn’t stop people from using 32 bit timestamps anyway …

p-e-w 4y ago

Yes, a lot of smart and dedicated people will work tirelessly to figure it out and prevent this from turning into a disaster, and then most people will wonder what all the fuss was about since "nothing happened". I wonder if 100-200 years into the future there will be some kind of widespread "historical climate change denialism", where the efforts made to combat climate change in the 21st century are called into question because the positive outcome (which was the result of those efforts) appears to retroactively show that there was no problem in the first place.

dismalpedigree 4y ago
You are assuming climate change actually gets solved. Not the bet i would take.
- p-e-w 4y ago
  Personally, I doubt we'll ever see the worst of climate change whether it gets "solved" or not. AGI is much more dangerous than climate change and will likely arrive much sooner than its worst effects, and unlike climate change, nobody takes it seriously outside of a very, very small circle. What I think will happen is the world fighting worsening climate change, and lots of political efforts in that direction, and suddenly an entity most people think belongs in science fiction will emerge out of seemingly nowhere, and it will all be over in a matter of hours, before the vast majority of people have even had time to understand what happened. Ironically, that AGI entity might then choose to solve climate change, simply out of self-interest.
  - jdub 4y ago
    That's astonishingly optimistic given the current state of both.
    - p-e-w 4y ago
      Really? Given the progress in the past decade, I'd place AGI about 15-20 years from now, with immediate civilization-threatening consequences. By then climate change will certainly be bad, but nowhere near an existential threat to humanity yet.
      - duped 4y ago
        Climate change is already an existential threat to humanity. We're the frog in the proverbial boiling pot. It's quite likely we've already doomed our species and we don't know it yet. It's a lot harder to see AGI as being possible in the next few decades (the current state of the art is still a sensationalized party trick, one cannot anthropomorphize chat bots any more than they can describe a submarine as an aquatic being). And even if a self aware program exists in 20 years, it's a lot harder to imagine it being an existential threat a la Skynet.

onion2k 4y ago

I'm less confident than you, because the perceived value of software has dropped considerably over the past 20 years. In the 1970s through to the 1990s when a business bought some custom code it was treated like an asset. It had value. That's one reason why Y2K wasn't a disaster - companies wanted to protect their asset and keep it working. Today software is cheap and disposable. Things are built with web tech so engineers can be found to work on apps easily. That's OK because new software isn't generally impacted by Y2038, but in businesses where there are old, legacy systems run by people who have a modern attitude to software ownership, things will fail because those businesses won't see importance of the threat.

aaron_m04 4y ago
> [...] but in businesses where there are old, legacy systems run by people who have a modern attitude to software ownership, things will fail because those businesses won't see importance of the threat. How common will that be, though? I would expect that "cheap and disposable" software would mean most software in the year 2038 would be recently written, which would mean the programmers would be aware of the impending 32-bit rollover issue.
- cookingrobot 4y ago
  On the one hand, most programmers are writing at a higher level, and probably have no ability to fix or even work around a date rollover issue. On the other hand, a few fixes at lower levels will correct it for everyone above them.
dastbe 4y ago
individual software is more disposable, but the systems themselves still have immense value. the software in the system will be updated or replaced (because it is easier to do so!) if it’s valuable for the system.

roflyear 4y ago

Until we don't