2038: here we come

With this week’s news about RISC OS Developments Ltd, can we look forward to bright green future in which 5-byte centisecond counts from 1-Jan-1900 carry us well beyond the dreaded Unix problem expected at 2038.01.19 03:14:07 UTC? See Wikipedia

Some of us won’t even have reached 100 by then and may still be using RISC OS.

Some of us won’t even have reached 100 by then and may still be using RISC OS.

I expect to be dead. At 92 I would otherwise expect to have other priorities! Like breathing?

Sorry to be a bit downbeat!

Some of us won’t even have reached 100 by then

Oh, I’ll be 65ish. Retirement age.

Oh wait, I retire…Uh… When is it now? Help me out here, am I supposed to die before or after I retire?

I shall be 88 – older than any known male ancestor reached, but younger than most of my female ancestors. Not sure what chance I’ve got…but all still all there and reading and writing until very close to the end, so if I’m still around…

but younger than most of my female ancestors

I understand gender changes are quite popular. Maybe something to think about? :→

Not sure it helps with longevity – at any age, especially when one’s already in one’s late sixties…

older than any known male ancestor reached

On my father’s side, I passed that milestone a while back. For the female part, just one crazy (I mean that very literally) granny. But we’re not a close family so I can only name the grandparents on my mother’s side, and a long distant relative in Ireland (too distant to say “hey, I’m Irish”).

I understand gender changes are quite popular.

Just dress in girl clothes and adopt a falsetto. The, um, procedure… It doesn’t bear thinking about. [years ago: was bored, watched a documentary on C4, then wished I hadn’t]

Not sure it helps with longevity

UK average: woman 82.9 years, men it is 79.2 years. But can you cheat the system? ;-)

I would be 50. But I’m worried the world is going to change drastically in the time between then and now due to global warming. Who knows what could happen.

UK average

Oh, sure, females live longer, definitely in my family tree – but do trans females live longer? My suspicion is that they probably don’t. Not sure the numbers have been high enough for long enough to have any stats yet.

UK average: woman 82.9 years, men it is 79.2 years. But can you cheat the system? ;-)

Nope, it’s largely about the genes in your jeans¹

I’m worried the world is going to change drastically in the time between then and now due to global warming. Who knows what could happen.

Well quite likely “more of the same” for Florida, but the ‘merkins’ tend not to subscribe to “global warming” so that could be interesting.

But we’re not a close family so I can only name the grandparents on my mother’s side, and a long distant relative in Ireland (too distant to say “hey, I’m Irish”).

The info is out there if you look in the right places.

¹ I quite like that one.

Well quite likely “more of the same” for Florida, but the ‘merkins’ tend not to subscribe to “global warming” so that could be interesting.

You refer to the “sunny weather” in Florida? I could surely do with more of that over here.

I am deeply impressed that the Britains fear a slightly warmer climate. I guess you don’t want to lose your unique selling point “bad weather”?

I am deeply impressed that the Britains fear a slightly warmer climate. I guess you don’t want to lose your unique selling point “bad weather”?

I’ve only been to England once, but it was warmer than the “cold and dark” stories had implied. However, whenever I mentioned this I always got the same excuse: “We’re having a heat wave”. It’s the only place I’ve been to where the people apologise for good weather!

You refer to the “sunny weather” in Florida? I could surely do with more of that over here.

A reference to the slightly strong breeze they had remodelling the state, which I suspect you wouldn’t be wanting.

I’ve only been to England once, but it was warmer than the “cold and dark” stories had implied.

I must be part cat¹ or something because the only thing that really bothers me is being out in the rain but I normally carry an umbrella anyway. “Variable” sums things up.

¹ Although one of our cats pretty much ignores the wet stuff unless it’s absolutely hosing down.

A reference to the slightly strong breeze they had remodelling the state, which I suspect you wouldn’t be wanting.

Ah, now I understand. But where is the connection to Climate Change? Science says that there is no correlation to be found since recording of hurricanes started. At least the scientific articles I read and checked for statistical validity. Do you have different evidence?

Ah, now I understand. But where is the connection to Climate Change? Science says that there is no correlation to be found since recording of hurricanes started.

Interesting because the prevailing theory¹ suggests that the likely change effects (apart from the melting of icecaps that gets much publicity) will largely be more variable/extreme conditions. For places like the UK (and near continent) that’s all the stuff we’re used to but more so. For areas that get large storm systems (hurricane/typhoon) they are likely to see more and stronger – and that’s what the US of A has been seeing for a number of years, more and stronger.
Of course people are free to deny that the storm system labelled Michael was the strongest system to hit Florida.

¹ Interestingly very recent reports suggest the time period to see the effects is actually going to be shorter than previously predicted. So unless people reading this move to “pushing up daisies” real soon they are likely to see the effects themselves.

Interesting because the prevailing theory suggests that the likely change effects (apart from the melting of icecaps that gets much publicity) will largely be more variable/extreme conditions.

Where can I read about that prevailing theory? AFAIK, there is no solid statistical evidence that weather gets either more variable or more extreme or both.

For areas that get large storm systems (hurricane/typhoon) they are likely to see more and stronger – and that’s what the US of A has been seeing for a number of years, more and stronger.

I am sure you will show me some evidence for that hypothesis. I am following Climate Change science since reading the first IPCC report in 1990. I have since learned that most of the media reports about Climate Change are greatlyexagerated, mostly because model output is falsely taken as evidence for anything. For software developers, a good start is to look at the ModelE source code to quickly lose faith in anything those models predict.

So back to that prediction about “more and stronger”. As a start, how much more likely and how much stronger? Error bars of that prediction? I have followed some of the model’s predictions over the years, and usually after less than 10 years they are outside their suggested error bars. Don’t believe in anything that the models “predict”.

Of course people are free to deny that the storm system labelled Michael wasn’t the strongest system to hit Florida.

I guess the double negative was not intended…

You mean it was stronger than those Category 4 hurricanes hitting Florida in 1945, 1947, 1948, 1949 and 1950? How do you know? Al I know is that Michael was Category 4. You remember Hurricane Andrew? Now when was that, and what Category?

Climate Change is an extremely complicated subject. We know very little about many of the mechanisms (you can even read that in the IPCC reports). We still don’t know if cloud feedback is likely negative or positive. We have no idea how constantly changing ocean currents like PDO or AMO are affecting the whole climate system. I am always impressed by the certainty many people show when they demand spending of billions of bucks (of other people’s money of course) in the face of the complete uncertainty of the effect of that spending. But that is probably because believing is much easier than knowing. Those who know nothing must believe everything.

You mean it was stronger than those Category 4 hurricanes hitting Florida in 1945, 1947, 1948, 1949 and 1950?

Yes.

How do you know?

By reading.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/11/hurricane-michael-explained-biggest-florida-storm-all-you-need-to-know-extreme-weather

Climate Change is an extremely complicated subject.

Here’s my Savage Garden Affirmation bit…

• I believe that climate change is a real thing.
• I believe that nobody knows what the effects will be (it was going to be grape vines in England and orange trees here until somebody realised what every smart schoolchild had already figured out – if everything warms up then what happens to the huge amount of cold water from the melted ice?).
• I believe that humans are partly responsible for this change.
• I believe that taxing stuff and carbon trading is a sick joke, because…
• I believe that humanity may think they have power but nature is far more powerful than us and if it is going to happen then it will happen, and…
• I believe that our planet oscillates in cycles of warm and cool and this is going to happen regardless, all we have managed is to alter the timing slightly
• I believe this planet does not owe us a future or a hospitable place, for much of its existence it was quite the opposite (not forgetting the five big extinction events), it is us that needs to adapt
• I believe that tax money must be spent on dredging rivers, building flood defences, and working out how to relocate major cities a little further inland
• I believe talking about it isn’t good enough, if it’s really half a degree to disaster, actions need to be seen to be taken, but…
• I believe politicians are full of shit.

Correct (corrected), distracted: I’m not on call but keeping an eye on things at work as a badly placed aircon unit leaked onto the UPS of the main telephone switch and half the phones in the hospital are out of action – my main concern is the presence of a core switch in the same room which wasn’t affected but is at risk if things get worse.

You mean it was stronger than those Category 4 hurricanes hitting Florida in 1945, 1947, 1948, 1949 and 1950? How do you know?

Based on the statement from the state governor reading a prepared text. Of course as a politician he’s entitled to exaggerate.

I am always impressed by the certainty many people show when they demand spending of billions of bucks (of other people’s money of course) in the face of the complete uncertainty of the effect of that spending.

I think it would be better if the climate change sceptics paused before spending on schemes that certainly contribute to the known greenhouse gas problems. Sometimes it isn’t high spend to try and tackle a problem, its not spending on the cause that is required.

Everything based upon 32 bit time_t might fail, but RISC OS will be fine:

>DIM time% 8, str% 32
>time%!0 = -1 : REM Set all bits
>time%!4 = -1
>SYS "Territory_ConvertStandardDateAndTime", -1, time%, str%, (32 + (1 << 30) + (1 << 31)), 0, 0 TO ,t%
>t%?0 = 13
>PRINT $str%
06:57:57 03-Jun-2248
>

I believe that nobody knows what the effects will be (it was going to be grape vines in England and orange trees here

Yeah, I think they rather missed the global in Global Warming i.e. it’s a global effect but the local aspects are, with more energy in the system, more extreme versions of what you always had¹ which has always been rather variable, hence the British fascination with weather.

until somebody realised what every smart schoolchild had already figured out – if everything warms up then what happens to the huge amount of cold water from the melted ice?).

I think that’s the bit where my home city of Sheffield may be a seaside town on a fairly long inlet. Rather depends on the rise as Sheffield at it’s lowest is 95ft above sea level but 1700ft+ at the highest. One thing is certain the label “British Isles” will be majoring on the Isles bit but even at worst the majority of Sheffields wonderful hills will be high and dry.

¹ Of course if one of the effects is weakening the conveyor belt of warm water known as the Gulf Stream then the UK is likely to be a bit cooler.

Michael is reported to be slightly stronger than Andrew at landfall on the Florida Panhandle, but both Cat 4. Neither is stronger than the huge Labor Day Hurricane that hit the Florida Keys in 1935. This is the use of selective criteria to make a point. I hate that.

When faced with someone talking about Climate Change, I ask “What is the most important greenhouse gas?”. If I get the correct answer, I expect that a sensible discussion will follow. Otherwise I walk away, because there is no point in wasting my time.

Sensible discussion is necessary, but it is in short supply.

Here’s my Savage Garden Affirmation bit…

I can go along with most of that. ;-)

What is the most important greenhouse gas?

Is or will be? Surely it will be methane, even if it’s not yet been released in quantity from earth and subsea.

(I suppose climate change is on topic, since I gave the thread a title with a future date! Silly me.)

06:57:57 03-Jun-2248

Thanks, Rick. Obviously Wikipedia should be apprised of this limit, while we are discussing the discomforts of future generations.

Surely it will be methane,

No. I walk away. ;-)

Well – technically, water vapour is. It’s also by far the most complicated to analyse, since it has this awkward propensity for converting back and forth between vapour and water droplets, with very different greenhouse properties.

Of the others, carbon dioxide is for the foreseeable future – not because it’s potent (others are far more potent) but because it’s present in relatively enormous quantities. Methane is unlikely to match it (globally) in the foreseeable future, releases notwithstanding.