4 ms·
This is only true when there is some context establishing recency. If I mail you a letter, that is recent and may be assumed to be in the current year. If I f
by MereInterest 3y ago
This is only true when there is some context establishing recency. If I mail you a letter, that is recent and may be assumed to be in the current year. If I find a letter in my grandparents’ attic, I should not assume that it is from the current year. It may have just been moved to the attic yesterday, or it may have been decades before.
For a post about processors from the 70s, there is no default assumption of recency. This post is on Google Groups, which has existed since 2001, and which is a gateway server to Usenet groups that predate it. Absolutely nothing about it gives a shared context in which the absence of a year can be reasonably assumed to be the current year.
- bee_rider 3y agoI think they specifically meant in the context of this site. When the title doesn’t have a date here, the assumption is more-or-less “fairly recent.” It is an odd post though, it really is like just a couple comments, and then the real content is in a link in one of the comments https://trixter.oldskool.org/2011/06/04/at-a-disadvantage/ https://trixter.oldskool.org/2011/06/04/at-a-disadvantage/ So the actual content is a 2011 article talking about historical processors.