Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WWOly-0004iG-Ik for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 05 Apr 2014 11:28:30 +0000 Received: from mail-la0-f47.google.com ([209.85.215.47]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WWOlw-0002qn-Od for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 05 Apr 2014 11:28:30 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f47.google.com with SMTP id pn19so3227726lab.6 for ; Sat, 05 Apr 2014 04:28:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OCoTefCWQFHdrgHfjdvmDH5od0ZmXpeX8kGEk3DNbVo=; b=PbeZBwL0Ryl5vTNqgql6s6uSg15PXQn3eEvestJOTbI7k1iiYtlBPlaQ8eFCBXpDX8 s1FGt99YQoZZlw5sP3iqIepa1nl3VW94dpYqdytnVlupeeqTgCqUZ5LUPMF9trEC5E/F PDB/ZGwoIMkRL3aCGFIyDhHk/8vakwrC9trvkfJn9FYYbQq08gx0zAPw2L5jVwuMqo2t Ntlq/RHKlczgpVcyp+Vpww0wKdUHhOmJ4IiE8h2ePX8HyBF4x0JVAapbD+qjpLmDWQoZ cBK0TAbTi4IL13T5xhRjvdkB1n1TV7Q3uwk6lQbZA8x+G5N6MRgILQ6VNQgnXlvoZbsH r/AA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlln/poKSFKTVB2hLjctYu2rXwAfvMAT9gKjK89MrkJLuAFLa2dln8TJ8dVsKcaohXkyINa MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.29.170 with SMTP id l10mr717938lah.40.1396697301587; Sat, 05 Apr 2014 04:28:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.60.196 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Apr 2014 04:28:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [85.53.145.179] In-Reply-To: <1750679.2ZqEPETxMv@crushinator> References: <1750679.2ZqEPETxMv@crushinator> Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 13:28:21 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Tim=F3n?= To: Matt Whitlock Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 1.2 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net [Blocked - see ] X-Headers-End: 1WWOlw-0002qn-Od Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Finite monetary supply for Bitcoin X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 11:28:30 -0000 On 4/5/14, Matt Whitlock wrote: > On Saturday, 5 April 2014, at 12:21 pm, Jorge Tim=F3n 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.) Probably my acceptance of DD-MM-YYYY is caused by cultural bias. The ISO YYYY-MM-DD seems what you normally do with indo-arabic numerals: put the more weighted numbers on the left, so I guess it's the most universal (in addition to being standard). --=20 Jorge Tim=F3n http://freico.in/