Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.223.171 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.223.171; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ie0-f171.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1750679.2ZqEPETxMv@crushinator>
References: <CAPg+sBh1_mYH4JNv1xTFnLsoC=qzmgi0QaLAyd7YeQ=wZQBDSQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJHLa0P9SmynBfJ94A1js30j2OsC0PeEhEy-n+6Wa2Sogo+TNw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAC1+kJPUxNn0iSz=c3OTCFS26sg2jxS-goUdE7LSKphtE9owKw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1750679.2ZqEPETxMv@crushinator>
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 13:28:41 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+s+GJBm_0AX3MTWFvbNw1_GxXFTf_7wHv0GvkATUtz0v6wpsQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01176cadbcba5804f649effc
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Finite monetary supply for Bitcoin
Precedence: list

--089e01176cadbcba5804f649effc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>wrote=
:

> On Saturday, 5 April 2014, at 12:21 pm, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n wrote:
> > I like both DD-MM-YYYY and YYYY-MM-DD. I just dislike MM-DD-YYYY and
> YYYY-DD-MM.
>
> Your preferences reflect a cultural bias. The only entirely numeric date
> format that is unambiguous across all cultures is YYYY-MM-DD. (No culture
> uses YYYY-DD-MM, or at least the ISO seems to think so.)
>

Let's not waste any time shed-painting this. I'd like to finish this
discussion at once:

https://xkcd.com/1179/

Wladimir

--089e01176cadbcba5804f649effc
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Matt Whitlock <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a hre=
f=3D"mailto:bip@mattwhitlock.name" target=3D"_blank">bip@mattwhitlock.name<=
/a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"">On Saturd=
ay, 5 April 2014, at 12:21 pm, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n wrote:<br>
&gt; I like both DD-MM-YYYY and YYYY-MM-DD. I just dislike MM-DD-YYYY and Y=
YYY-DD-MM.<br>
<br>
</div>Your preferences reflect a cultural bias. The only entirely numeric d=
ate format that is unambiguous across all cultures is YYYY-MM-DD. (No cultu=
re uses YYYY-DD-MM, or at least the ISO seems to think so.)<br></blockquote=
>
<div><br>Let&#39;s not waste any time shed-painting this. I&#39;d like to f=
inish this discussion at once:<br><br><a href=3D"https://xkcd.com/1179/">ht=
tps://xkcd.com/1179/</a><br><br></div><div>Wladimir<br></div></div><br><br>
</div></div>

--089e01176cadbcba5804f649effc--