You were in first for “youngest person” though!
Comment on xkcd #3110: Global Ranking
davidgro@lemmy.world 1 week ago
At one point I was ranked dead last in the entire world for number of seconds lived.
y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
Comment on xkcd #3110: Global Ranking
davidgro@lemmy.world 1 week ago
At one point I was ranked dead last in the entire world for number of seconds lived.
You were in first for “youngest person” though!
trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Chances are you shared that position with someone else.
NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 1 week ago
Not if it’s measured with a fractional part.
I wonder if the rate is high enough and the distanced large enough that relativity could make it so people on opposite ends of the world disagree on which baby was born first. Then again, birth takes a lot longer than a second and it’s not really possible to pinpoint an exact timestamp when the baby is born and wasn’t previously.
trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 1 week ago
In that case I’d expect the wording to be “time lived”, not “number of seconds lived”.
I don’t think the time someone is born is registered that precisely anywhere, so it would probably be very hard to get anyone to agree on it.
davidgro@lemmy.world 1 week ago
You know I thought of how to word that better, but wasn’t sure I could convey what I meant clearly enough. I should have just used something like ‘time lived’.