https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar
Sounds similar, and IMHO a bit better, because every month is the same and has only one leap day, instead of a whole leap week.
Symmetry454
21–30 of 35 posts
Re: Symmetry454
#22The thing is though, our current calendar, while maybe not super logical and/or always practical, is not broken in the sense that we're dealing with major unfixable problems. So changing to anything other than what we currently have is creating more issues than it's trying to solve.
And I say that as a purist and nitpicker who loves everything being perfect and organized.
Re: Symmetry454
#23The two problems as I see it: - A leap week is worse than a leap year. 7 days of birthdays that just don’t exist most years. - No variety in day of week for your birthday. I know it’s just a cultural thing, but always celebrating a birthday on say a Tuesday sounds depressing to me.
Also the excessive variability of being paid monthly but having only 4 weeks of expenses vs 5 the next would be a challenge.
I assume if the entire world is spending billions of dollars reworking culture, infrastructure, software, etc., that swapping to making weekly pay the norm is just a bit of noise in that transition.
Re: Symmetry454
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also the excessive variability of being paid monthly but having only 4 weeks of expenses vs 5 the next would be a challenge.
I assume if the entire world is spending billions of dollars reworking culture, infrastructure, software, etc., that swapping to making weekly pay the norm is just a bit of noise in that transition.
I wonder what the gamification effect would be if we paid everything by the second. I think for example transitioning from social support to employment would be more attractive.
Switching everything to any other system all at once would indeed be a huge waste of money.
Re: Symmetry454
#25I love it when ideas that have absolutely no chance of adoption get fully thought through anyway. Esperanto is a similar idea for language - too moonshotty, but complete. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto
Esperanto actually is used more than the majority of natural languages on Earth -- there's new books and magazines published in it every year. Yes, it seems like a tiny language compared to English or Chinese, but compared to most Amerind or Paupan languages it's not that tiny.
Re: Symmetry454
#26I love it when ideas that have absolutely no chance of adoption get fully thought through anyway. Esperanto is a similar idea for language - too moonshotty, but complete. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto
Esperanto has actually been criticized for being half baked. There’s this whole website on the subject from a respected expert. In particular it’s really eurocentric.
Rants about Esperanto aren't terribly different from the similar rants one finds about programming languages -- that Go, or Java, or Rust are poorly designed according to whatever criterion the author thinks a language should have. People can agree or disagree with them, but there isn't really an objective way to validate taste in languages whether human or programming.
Re: Symmetry454
#27I remember in 2004 being fascinated with the tons of alternative proposals to the current calendar. Read about them on the kind of sites one can now find using wiby ;)
Re: Symmetry454
#28I love it when ideas that have absolutely no chance of adoption get fully thought through anyway. Esperanto is a similar idea for language - too moonshotty, but complete. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto
Esperanto has actually been criticized for being half baked. There’s this whole website on the subject from a respected expert. In particular it’s really eurocentric.
All rants on Esperanto fall into these two categories:
- see, the language is not that simple as you think, it has this complexity you haven't thought of, so it fails
- the language is as simple as you think, but no one would ever speak like that, the real world is more complex, so it fails
Sometimes those two get mixed up in the same sentence.
Re: Symmetry454
#29Why having months at all if they don't correspond to moon?
In my language 'month' and 'moon' are the same word and some people still don't make the connection. I once had someone ask me, when I was talking about some period of x months in antiquity, if they had months (moons) back then.
Re: Symmetry454
#30Why having months at all if they don't correspond to moon?
In my language 'month' and 'moon' are the same word and some people still don't make the connection. I once had someone ask me, when I was talking about some period of x months in antiquity, if they had months (moons) back then.
Which language?