An impossibly short period of time after the heat death of the universe on a system that shouldn’t even exist: ERROR TIME_TEST FAILURE
"End of Unix time" is under 12 years now, so, a bit longer than the time frame of this test, but we're coming up on it.
Dissimilar to the global climate catastrophe, unfortunately.
---
The 2024 state of the climate report: Perilous times on planet Earth
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/74/12/812/780859...
"Tragically, we are failing to avoid serious impacts"
"We have now brought the planet into climatic conditions never witnessed by us or our prehistoric relatives within our genus, Homo"
"Despite six IPCC reports, 28 COP meetings, hundreds of other reports, and tens of thousands of scientific papers, the world has made only very minor headway on climate change"
"projections paint a bleak picture of the future, with many scientists envisioning widespread famines, conflicts, mass migration, and increasing extreme weather that will surpass anything witnessed thus far, posing catastrophic consequences for both humanity and the biosphere"
if you didnt intend to lessen the impact of that statement, why say something that is specifically meant to lessen the impact of the statement? just say what you want to say without the hedging.
We aren't facing the ice age that has been the last 120,000 years.
I'm sure the rocky planet will survive just fine, maybe even some extreemophiles, even if we completely screw up the atmosphere. Not 6 billion humans though.
And to your point, Y2K is right there on the wiki page for it.
> At the Great Midnight at the century's end, signifying culture will flip over into a number-based counterculture, retroprocessing the last 100 years. Whether global disaster ensues or not, Y2K is a singularity for cybernetic culture. It's time to get Y2K positive.
Mark Fisher (2004). Y2K Positive in Mute.
I guess that's a matter of personal sensibilities, but it's pretty funny to me.
(Note: this is the only fact I know about it, happy to learn more.)
I have no idea about the development however.
Always include some randomness in test values.
- Test 1 -> set data_1 with value 1
- Test 1 -> `do some magic`
- Test 1 -> assert value 1 + magic = expected value
- Test 2 -> set data_1 with value 2
But this can fail if `do some magic` is slow and Test 2 starts before Test 1 asserts.
So I can either stop parallelism, but in real life parallelism exists, or ensure that each test as random id, just like it would happen in real life.
If this isn't a joke, I'd be very interested in the reasoning behind that statement, and whether or not there are some qualifications on when it applies.
Overall it's still net positive for me in certain cases of enforcing things to be temporary, or at least revisited.
db48x•18h ago
But before you judge the fix too hashly, I bet it’s just a quick and easy fix that will suffice while a proper fix (to avoid depending on external state) is written.
pavel_lishin•48m ago
Some day, Pham Nuwen is going to be bitching about this test suite between a pair of star systems.
em-bee•33m ago
but, the solution now hides the problem. if i wanted to get someone to solve the problem i'd set the new date in the near future until someone gets annoyed enough to fix it for real.
and i have to ask, why is this a hardcoded date at all? why not "now plus one week"?