In defense of 'flicks' (or how I learned to stop worrying and love 705600000)
1–10 of 66 posts
Re: In defense of 'flicks' (or how I learned to stop worrying and love 705600000)
#2Re: In defense of 'flicks' (or how I learned to stop worrying and love 705600000)
#3Re: In defense of 'flicks' (or how I learned to stop worrying and love 705600000)
#4Re: In defense of 'flicks' (or how I learned to stop worrying and love 705600000)
#5The article's leap year rules seem wrong. Pretty sure year 2000 did have a leap day, but 1900 didn't.
The article has it backwards. Years divisible by 400 get leap days, others divisible by 100 do not.
Re: In defense of 'flicks' (or how I learned to stop worrying and love 705600000)
#6Did you leave that unbalanced paren in the [Hacker News] title just to drive Lisp users mad? Edit: Thanks for the fix!
Re: In defense of 'flicks' (or how I learned to stop worrying and love 705600000)
#7The article's leap year rules seem wrong. Pretty sure year 2000 did have a leap day, but 1900 didn't.
Re: In defense of 'flicks' (or how I learned to stop worrying and love 705600000)
#8"Audio recorded at 44100khz" should be 44.100 kHz or 44100 Hz.
"there was no leap day in the year 2000" - false. 2000 is divisible by both 400 and 100, so it was a leap year.
Re: In defense of 'flicks' (or how I learned to stop worrying and love 705600000)
#9The article's leap year rules seem wrong. Pretty sure year 2000 did have a leap day, but 1900 didn't.
Re: In defense of 'flicks' (or how I learned to stop worrying and love 705600000)
#10Good article, with a couple of minor errors: "Audio recorded at 44100khz" should be 44.100 kHz or 44100 Hz. "there was no leap day in the year 2000" - false. 2000 is divisible by both 400 and 100, so it was a leap year.