{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2p","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2p","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-04-05\n📝 Original message:On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Matt Whitlock \u003cbip at mattwhitlock.name\u003ewrote:\n\n\u003e On Saturday, 5 April 2014, at 12:21 pm, Jorge Timón wrote:\n\u003e \u003e I like both DD-MM-YYYY and YYYY-MM-DD. I just dislike MM-DD-YYYY and\n\u003e YYYY-DD-MM.\n\u003e\n\u003e Your preferences reflect a cultural bias. The only entirely numeric date\n\u003e format that is unambiguous across all cultures is YYYY-MM-DD. (No culture\n\u003e uses YYYY-DD-MM, or at least the ISO seems to think so.)\n\u003e\n\nLet's not waste any time shed-painting this. I'd like to finish this\ndiscussion at once:\n\nhttps://xkcd.com/1179/\n\nWladimir\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140405/f40e3dcb/attachment.html\u003e"}