Open Menu
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
lotide
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
Login

Late 1900s

⁨1176⁩ ⁨likes⁩

Submitted ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨ickplant@lemmy.world⁩ to ⁨[deleted]⁩

https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/3fb40127-072e-4a06-9e0a-39e8cc52e778.jpeg

source

Comments

Sort:hotnewtop
  • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Which sounds worse:

    • From the late 1900s
    • From last century
    source
    • Venator@lemmy.nz ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      “1900s” makes me think they’re referring to the decade of 1900-1909 😅

      source
    • can@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Not what you asked, but I find turn of the century most jarring.

      source
      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Turn of the millennium?

        source
        • -> View More Comments
  • SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I love to say “before the turn of the century” when referring to stuff like 1997.

    source
    • HK65@sopuli.xyz ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      In the late millennium

      source
    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Before computing got poisoned.

      source
  • Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    From now on, when someone asks how old I am, I’m going to say I was born in the late 1900s

    source
    • Jerkface@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      “Oh, no, not that late, actually.”

      source
    • mmddmm@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Or at the late 20th Century…

      source
      • Lumidaub@feddit.org ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Doesn’t work, “20th century” as a term is synonymous with “modern”. “The xx00s” is automatically “a long time ago”.

        source
      • kameecoding@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Look at this youngling, I was born in the previous millennia

        source
  • stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    what’s wrong with this? 1994 is indeed the late 1900s, and it’s 31 years ago so depending on the topic they’re writing on, it could be immensely outdated

    source
    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
      [deleted]
      source
      • stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        sorry my bad

        source
      • alekwithak@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        TIL I’m only 13. Hellz yeah, skibidi doo dah skibidi day or whatever the kids say now. I’ll ask my kid now that she’s older than me.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • quack@lemmy.zip ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      There is nothing wrong with it other than it makes me feel ancient and I don’t like it.

      source
      • stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        ok boomer

        <3

        source
    • LarsIsCool@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      To answer the question: The professor assumes the email referred to 1900-1910 with “late 1900s”. As this was normal 20 years ago (and still gets used).

      To ask a question back: From www.bucknell.edu/fac-staff/john-penniman, I read:

      John Penniman is Associate Professor and chair of Religious Studies

      I would say for religious studies it should be fine. But also for other areas, why can’t you use 1994 papers?

      source
      • InputZero@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        It depends on what field you’re studying. Some fields of study, like social studies, move very quickly. So it’s not uncommon for someone studying one of those subjects to exclude research that’s even 10 to 15 years old because things move so quickly.

        A different subject, say hydrologic engineering has been studied for hundreds of years and doesn’t change very quickly. So a publication from 1994 could be just as valid today as it was then. Every topic is different and without more context the meme as is, is just meant to incite a reaction. Not to tell us about something that actually happened.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I assumed they might be working in certain fields of science where the most progress is very recent so old papers will be very incomplete and sometimes even wrong.

        My field is particle physics and while a paper from 1994 wouldn’t be completely useless, I would need to check if recent papers still confirm the same results.

        source
    • FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It aounds weird, given that 1994 was like 30 years ago, not like 130 years. I’d personally say “late 90s” rather than late 1900s. If i was referring ti like the 19th century, then yea I may say late 1800s for 1894. There isn’t anything wrong with it, it just sounds weird and makes a lot of people feel old as shit.

      source
    • yata@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Very much depending on the topic. For specialised niche subjects, which are usually the ones students choose for final papers, literature can be very scarce, and 1994 would be fairly recent. For my specialised field the main study (which is still being cited frequently) is from 1870.

      source
    • supercriticalcheese@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I was at school so it cannot… darn it

      source
  • SpiceDealer@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    If this was a CS major, 1994 might as well be Antiquity

    source
    • uuldika@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I read CS papers from the late '80s/early '90s and it feels like unearthing cuneiform tablets. Lots of good ideas, just everything felt so raw and new.

      source
      • xavier666@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I was just reading the first paper on TCP Vegas (TCP congestion avoidance protocol) and the tests were done with bandwidths of “over 100 Kbps” over the internet. Feels almost unreal.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Because Signal surely isn’t based on works from 80s, yes.

      source
    • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      You guys remember when Sony made tiny handheld AM radios?

      source
  • cm0002@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    And how kind of you to share that with us here. On Lemmy. That skews older.

    (sad) lmao

    source
    • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Hey now, 1995 will always be 10 years ago. Always.

      source
      • rtxn@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Funny how time works.

        • 1995 was ten years ago.
        • 1997 was three years ago.
        • Every year of the 80s was 20 years ago.
        • 2010 was 10 years ago.
        • 2016 was two years ago.
        • 2018 was two years ago.
        • 2019 was one year ago.
        • 2020 lasted for six years, but ended three months into the year.
        • 2021-2022 didn’t happen.
        • 2023 ended just a few weeks ago.
        • 2024 still hasn’t ended. We also invented time travel. Consequently:
        • 2025 takes place in the 1960s, rapidly progressing towards the 1940s.
        source
      • cm0002@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I can still hear the dialup tone in my brainnnnnnn

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I finally was able to readjust my brain into believing 1995 was longer than 10 years ago. I’m now convinced it was 20 years ago.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • Bruncvik@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I first played Doom in 1995. And SimCity 2000. It indeed feels like 10 years ago.

        source
      • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I was born in 96. I’ll be turning 30 next year

        source
      • Droggelbecher@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Since this was true when I was in primary school, it’ll always be seared into my brain. I mean, I realized this when I was learning to count and spell, of course it’s saved as one of the most basic facts of life. Like, 4+4=8, 90s are 10 years ago 70s are 30 years ago etc was stuff learned at the same time, so it’s like it’s saved in a similar way.

        source
  • S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Today in Warframe a new character dropped he is a rockstar. One guy from my clan asked me “Do you know who David Bowie is? He is kind of an old rock legend…” Bruh I’m 40 WTF?

    source
    • Lumidaub@feddit.org ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Kids these days will be easy prey for the Goblin King.

      source
      • S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        They are just one brick in the wall…

        source
    • slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Nickelback is classic rock.

      source
      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        My local classic rock station classifies “classic rock” as released >25 years ago. They play Green Day fairly regularly now

        source
      • Jayjader@jlai.lu ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        This one gets me, as when I learned of the concept of “classic rock” Nickelback’s “How You Remind Me” had just came out.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • Broadfern@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Bowie died in 2016. Is your clan mate like 14?

      source
      • Klear@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Four years ago, got it.

        source
      • S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        He got to 15 this year…

        source
  • BreadOven@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Oof size: big.

    I had to translate German papers to English. Not necessarily because I’m that old, but they were the only ones that had the information I needed. Although most of my research was based on stuff in the 90’s…

    source
  • GluWu@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Everything before 9/11 is fake news.

    Computers, never invented.

    AIDs and the cure for it, never happened.

    Bill Clinton, I mean cmon, doesn’t fucking exist.

    I’m old enough to remember when they were making all this stuff up. Like 2 whole world wars, yeah, right.

    source
    • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      9/11/2001 is the date the simulation was turned on. Everything prior to that is just programmed memories and fabricated history.

      source
      • ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        The Bernstein bears is proof.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • FrChazzz@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Yo this is making too much sense and I’m not even high

        source
  • Maggoty@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I’ll just be over here checking into an assisted living home. Don’t mind me.

    source
  • ChillPill@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    [Matt Damon aging.GIF]

    source
  • FreeBeard@slrpnk.net ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I always wondered what would happen if you cite an original source of something we consider common sense now. What would nature say if you use conservation of momentum and cite Isaac Newton and the Principia Mathematica.

    What if you quote something in latin. For most of science history this was completely normal.

    source
  • Proprietary_Blend@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Wow

    source
  • lugal@sopuli.xyz ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I mean the 1700s is 1700-1799 so it’s just consequential

    source
  • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It’s the final paper on the events of the early 1900’s? I feel like we need a bit more context…

    source
  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    “Actually, 1994 is the only year that is excluded in this history course.”

    source
    • Klear@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Literally 10 years too late.

      source
  • NikkiDimes@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    💀

    source