From the last millennium
The 1900s
Submitted 22 hours ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/ee2fb3ee-1d84-4840-bb04-f2c829548f18.jpeg
Comments
rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de 3 hours ago
BanjoShepard@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
A few years ago, I started a sentence in my class with “When I was born”. A student instantly chimed in and said “What in the 19’s?” And I thought in my head, of course you idiot, everybody is born in the 19’s. It still haunts me.
Klear@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
samus12345@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
Updated hover text: “I’m teaching every 23-year-old relative to say this, and every 29-year-old to do the same thing with Toy Story. Also, Pokemon hit the US almost three decades ago and kids born after Aladdin came out will turn 33 next year.”
BilboBargains@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
It does depend what we’re talking about. The geology of Himalaya or computer technology? One of these things didn’t change much in the last forty years.
Valmond@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Thete are som good stuff from before 1990s comcerning computers.
Eiri@lemmy.ca 7 hours ago
I regularly say “from the 20th century” when I want to emphasize the age, the irrelevance, of my lack of knowledge of something.
I don’t know crap about cars, so sometimes, someone would ask me about an old one or something and I’d say “not sure, mid-20th century I think”.
It’s a funny way to talk about it and it almost masks the fact I just tried to get away with a 25-year window.
Although in a more rude manner I’ll also say I don’t care about some 20th century movie or something.
datelmd5sum@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
You should check out which movies came out in 1999.
Eiri@lemmy.ca 1 hour ago
Oh yeah, definitely very old stuff, huh.
Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 19 hours ago
My dad told me recently, when he started practicing medicine the old people with heart failures he was treating were often born in the late 1800s, but now those are all dead, and the people he’s treating are more likely to have a birth years that are around 1940-1950. Which is also starting to become uncomfortably close to his own, 1960.
chetradley@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
A given person’s definition of “old” is usually about 15 years older than they are. My boss is 65 and calls 70 year olds “young”.
Donkter@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
Cause as you get older, you realize that a lot of the hype about people being “old” is manufactured. I’m closing in on 30 and I’m squarely in a zone I thought was “old” when I was 18. But I feel like I still have my whole life ahead of me. And despite a lot of fear mongering, I still feel healthy and ready for anything.
And although I definitely feel like 45 is pretty old, I know that when my parents were that age they were scoffing and telling me “45 is not that old”. I’m sure when I’m 60 I’ll be looking at retirement and think about how it’s actually not too bad to be 60 and it’s the 80 year olds that are really old.
jol@discuss.tchncs.de 18 hours ago
When I started using dating apps I found 24 year olds too old. I still have that impression memorized but it’s wild.
RogueBanana@lemmy.zip 16 hours ago
Yeah sure, everybody has different definitions and all but calling 70 year olds as young is straight up lunatic.
Reyali@lemm.ee 15 hours ago
With one parent who turned 80 this year and the second in their late 70s, I’ve realized there’s a difference between “elderly” and “old.” A lot of people equate the two. I think “old” always started in one’s 70s to me, even as a kid. “Elderly,” however, is not based on a number but on a physical state of being.
My dad is elderly. He’s frail and struggling to move around much. It’s hard to watch and it’s been going on and worsening for a few years now. My mom, despite being only 3 years younger, is not at all elderly. She has more energy and vivacity than many people over 20 years her junior (hell I’m in my 30s and she can do loops around me, but I got the chronic illness genes that she didn’t have). Technically, she’s old. But no one who knows her would think of her as “elderly.”
MehBlah@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
I would of freaked him out. I had a heart attack when I was 36.
Chee_Koala@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
You always have folks who just wanna show off 😊
Carrolade@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
I mean, tbf that was admittedly last millennium.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
Over a quarter century ago!
God I feel old.
WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
TBF, the veracity of the information is relatively field dependent. Structural engineering? Yeah, probably still as relevant as the day it was published… Quantum computing or astrobiology theory? Far more likely to be superseded or debunked.
Dasus@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
I have a backpack that’s over a quarter of a century old. Which I got new, and have been using actively for that time. Great fucking backpack.
samus12345@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
Not yet, it’s won’t be over a quarter century ago for 2 more years.
Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 11 hours ago
apostrofail@lemmy.world 5 minutes ago
late 1900s*
JoMiran@lemmy.ml 20 hours ago
I’m Gen-X, 51, and this doesn’t sting too much…so like whatever. I do feel for Millenials and the elder Gen-Z though.
Imagine being Gen-Z out to buy some beer, you pull out your ID, the cashier barely glances at it and runs your credit card. You smugly say, “I guess you don’t really check ID since you didn’t really look at the date.” The cashier responds, “I did. I saw the nineteen.” Ooooff.
eldavi@lemmy.ml 20 hours ago
it’s an odd feeling to be gatekept from beer by someone who’s younger than the stretch marks & grey hairs on my body and; yet; it makes me feel good to be carded nonetheless somehow.
JoMiran@lemmy.ml 18 hours ago
it’s an odd feeling to be gatekept from beer by someone who’s younger than the stretch marks & grey hairs on my body…
*slow clap*
AmazingDillyDaily@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
I managed to go all of 22-28 never once being carded for anything.
When I hit 30 I started getting carded for things I’d never been carded for before, even the milk bar I’d bought smokes at for 10 years, same guy and his son running it, suddenly started carding me.
That’s how I learned the ID that I’d been carrying around for 10-11 years since getting my photo ID in highschool was functionally useless, because hardly anywhere would accept it as legal ID despite it being legal ID.
I had to keep the website for the government list of ID boolmarkef so I could show doubtful cashiers that my ID was indeed federally accepted, legal and valid ID.
I went to try and get a different type of ID last year which is how it found out that despite being born in my country to a citizen of my country, and having my birth recorded and receiving my birth certificate. Somehow I’m not actually a citizen of my own country and I can’t get a passport…so I’m trying to navigate that system but that’s extra fun and confusing because I have neurodevelopmental issues and no one to help me understand what I need to to do.
I just want to be able to buy alcohol as a person in their 30s, without having to jump through impossible hoops to prove that I’m not not 17.
I’ve got smile lines and the beginnings of crows feet, I am weathered! Why am it getting carded now
gofsckyourself@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
This is just intentionally phrased poorly to create a rise out of people. It’s like referring to water as “dihydrogen monoxide”.
Donkter@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
How so? I would certainly call something from 1894 to be from the "late 1800s’ or late 19th century. I mean, we’re a quarter of the way through this century, at some point it turns into history.
apostrofail@lemmy.world 3 minutes ago
late 1800s*
gofsckyourself@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Because people don’t use that terminology when referring to a time period within a majority of living people’s lifetime.
spookedintownsville@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
woodenskewer@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
I put this on an unlabeled squirt bottle once at work. It was wrong to do because technically it’s an OSHA violation for being improperly labeled because it was just in sharpie and not a standard label. But it was night shift I was bored and the bottle was already unlabeled so it was already out of compliance. Why not write on it?
A week or so later I heard people talking about this squirt bottle that said dihydrogen monoxide. Two safety guys were there so I didn’t take credit for my shenanigans based on the reception not being great.
I said I think it’s just water, but the chemical name. Ya know? Nope, they didn’t get it. The kind of doubled down and started talking about things in that link because they “researched the name” and it was actually harmful.
It was a strange experience.
yemmly@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
The deadliest chemical
OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 20 hours ago
One day, there will only be a handful of people from the 19 hundreds left
samus12345@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
The oldest person who ever lived so far made it to 122, so by 2123 they’ll almost certainly all be gone.
Dasus@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
That’s a verifiable old age people have lived to. Seeing how medicine and our understanding is constantly evolving, you don’t think it even possible that someone would live even as long to 123?
This is no science, if even pop-sci, but: the first person to live as long as they want may have already been born is an idea that’s been floated around. The remarkable thing is that while people have believed in living forever, well, forever, this is the first time in history that it’s actually possible. Not perhaps even probably, but definitely possible that medicine will develop so far.
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 7 hours ago
This is stupid. We’re 24% through the 2000’s. Get over it. How thin is your skin?
KrankyKong@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
It’s hyperbole, yo. It’s just funny because people born in the previous century don’t really think of it as that.
Irelephant@lemm.ee 14 hours ago
I feel old and I wasn’t even born on the 1900s
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 10 hours ago
Get off my lawn, young’n.
VerilyFemme@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 hours ago
To use a quote from the later part of the 1900s:
Time keeps on slippin’ into the future.
Mwallerby@startrek.website 19 hours ago
To use another from the very late 1900s
The years start comin’ and they don’t stop comin’
frezik@midwest.social 18 hours ago
Definitely one of the songs of the very late 1900s.
I_am_10_squirrels@beehaw.org 14 hours ago
I need to fry up an eagle 🦅
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
It seems awkward to me to refer to the previous century that way until you’re at least halfway through the next century.
DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Students are often awkward
tdawg@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
Not to mention they could be on the spectrum. I could see a buddy of mine phrasing this question in this exact manner
user224@lemmy.sdf.org 17 hours ago
Early 2000’s doesn’t sound odd at all though.
apostrofail@lemmy.world 2 minutes ago
Early 2000s*
Bubs12@lemm.ee 17 hours ago
Because that’s referring the 2000’s decade. In terms of centuries, I would say we are still in the early 2000’s and that does feel odd to say.
emeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.de 7 hours ago
I mean if your life started in 2005 and you didnt live through any of the 20th century, calling it the late 1900s seems totally reasonablr. You werent there when people were living through the “90s”, to you its just another bygone era that people speak about in waya you’ll never be able to relate to.
N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 hours ago
Reading that just broke my hip.
jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
What a strange and dumb question.
Or, you know, not real.
StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
This is a perfectly acceptable question in a science course. Just because you don’t have the experience, knowledge, or, barring those two, even just the imagination to understand how a question might apply doesn’t make it strange or dumb. It just shows that you’re…maybe not dumb, but certainly ignorant.
dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 13 hours ago
Exactly. Citing a psychology paper from 1912 is risky business. Young people don’t know precisely when each particular science caught up to the current paradigm.
firebarrage@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
Is it though? I definitely had teachers in middle/high school with oddball requirements like “only physical books more than 10 years old are valid sources”. Total nonsense but it does happen. College is a place where you are meant to have these bad assumptions challenged and corrected. Presumably after a response they’ll be better for it.
Irelephant@lemm.ee 14 hours ago
Nothing ever happens.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 15 hours ago
Nononono, that was 30 years ago. Can you believe it? Don’t you feel old?
(It actually feels like 60 years ago to me, but I’m weird.)
Maggoty@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
It feels like an entirely different life to me.
TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 8 hours ago
OOoooooOOOOOoooOOO time keeps moving FOOOooooOOOooOOORWARD!
Hupf@feddit.org 7 hours ago
Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 hours ago
I suddenly feel like the crypt keeper
thefartographer@lemm.ee 20 hours ago
We can’t possibly be that old! I feel you’ve made a grave mistake
Anderenortsfalsch@discuss.tchncs.de 18 hours ago
And I am the skeleton in that crypt that turned to dust just now. (58 y.o.)
Lojcs@lemm.ee 20 hours ago
Isn’t this an actual thing? Pretty sure I was told by some instructor not to use references older than a decade or two old. Unless the subject is very elementary older sources are more likely to be obsolete
fossilesque@mander.xyz 20 hours ago
Depends on the subject. Historians use a lot older materials more regularly for obvious reasons.
nickhammes@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
And even then it’s probably not a hard rule as much as a good heuristic: the older a source is, the more careful you should be citing it as an example of current understanding, especially in a discipline with a lot of ongoing research.
If somebody did good analysis, but had incomplete data years ago, you can extend it with better data today. Maybe the ways some people in a discipline in the past can shed light on current debates. There are definitely potential reasons to cite older materials that generalize well to many subjects.
Lojcs@lemm.ee 20 hours ago
Ofc
7bicycles@hexbear.net 20 hours ago
Yes, the point is to see something like your birthyear or maybe that good summer in your 20s being described as too old to be relevant anymore stings
IrritableOcelot@beehaw.org 18 hours ago
In chemistry a lot of the foundational synthesis and work is as old as the 60s and 70s; people build on it, but in some cases those early papers said pretty much all there is to be said on a topic, so there’s no reason to republish on it.
I’ve had to cite papers as old as the late 30s before, because no one has ever found anything to fix or correct about their work! Pretty impressive if you ask me, given how few tools they had.
0x4E4F@sh.itjust.works 21 hours ago
TTT… no matter how much we don’t like to admit it.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 20 hours ago
Time Takes all Titties?
SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
I think it’s, “timed times time”
Tippon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 hours ago
I just pulled my back and broke my hips reading this, it made me feel so old 👴🏻
Frogmanfromlake@hexbear.net 11 hours ago
Idk it’s kind of a cool feeling that people see us the way we would have seen people born in the 1890’s.
beefbot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 hours ago
We will never* stop seeing accounts milking this same joke for more attention points
- at least not until 2050 when they’ll change it to “early 2000s”
JimmyBigSausage@lemm.ee 21 hours ago
OMG
Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
i dont take much stock in calendars these days. too painful
Mango@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
Yeah sure kid, but I was reading the news when I was 3 and your work better be damn accurate!
pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 hours ago
if you’ve heard of amiga!
paddirn@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
I’m going to start saying that when asked about my birth year. “The late 1900s”