Talk:3089: Modern

Hate to be that guy, but wow, it’s empty Broseph (talk) 19:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

This strip reminded me of the comments in 3063. Historians / historiographers typically define (early) "modernity" to begin around 1500. early modernity 172.71.182.126 19:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

A similar problem exists, where a recent version of the Bible is known as the New Revised Standard Version. It will be a bit awkward when it is not new, revised, or standard. BobcatInABox (talk) 19:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

It's already happened. 162.158.41.167 06:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm assuming it (and the NRSVue) is still at least a version, though. And one, or even both, also an edition. ;) 172.68.229.139 08:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

The US Military has a similar problem: naming a system "Next-Gen [X]" but then the "Next Gen" item eventually becomes the current generation, and is eventually moving towards being obsolete and you need a successor (next-next gen?).172.69.6.111 20:05, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

I guess the phone companies got it right with the 3G, 4G, 5G naming. Barmar (talk) 20:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Except for that 10G glitch. And Dilbert predicted people copyrighting "8G" years before that. 104.23.172.75 20:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

There is a (not always consistent) "n^th generation" classification system that is quite developed. The F-22 Raptor is a 5^th Generation fighter, for example, with the (next-)next-gen ones being designed for the next decade being 6^th. Though, yes, "Next Gen" still pops up (currently the programs I know of are mostly aimed at the solutions for #6, of course). 141.101.99.129 22:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Wasn't there an earlier strip describing a similar problem on Wikipedia edits, maybe tied to the recency bias? There's the idea that every more recent slice needs a new, relevant name. It also seems to work going backwards, where humanity's genus, tribe, subfamily, and family are "homo", "hominini", "homininae", and "hominidae" respectively. We seem to crave a name for every arbitrary slice that is relevant for a particular researcher. And now I'm thinking of Futurama's "New New York". I'm surprised there's not already a New New York somewhere. 162.158.233.117 20:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Eventually, there'll be a New New New New New New New New New New New New New New New York...

Anyway, I actually live not far from a(nother) New York, and am also a regular visitor to (old) York. So I may not have been to New York, New York, on my travels, but I've got it covered on both sides. (I have been to both new Boston and the old one, but only been to the old Washington, both the original Richmond and its first copycat (but none of the US copycopyⁿcats), etc.) 162.158.216.175 22:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Hmmm. I've a suspicion I know who you are.

I'm gonna say...you ain't heavy? Yorkshire Pudding (talk) 22:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Ah, no. Sorry, I'm not aware of any fraternal relationship. Not just not with you, but not with anyone. ;) Nice to know there are potentially more of you out there, though.

I also forget where I think you're exactly from, from past information, but I do know that it's a different corner from me. Though I think you wisely left it vague, and I'm happy to be even vaguer (hence why I supplied multiple possibilities)... I think it's only rather specific (sort-of-)local knowledge that even let guess what more exacting info I think I know about you. West Riding, for starters, but I'm not going to narrow you down further. :p 172.70.86.134 22:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

I know where you live now /j Commercialegg (talk) 00:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

...to within 3 million acres or so, sure... ...maybe! /jj 172.69.43.221 05:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Where do I post site suggestions?¿?¿?¿?¿ Aprilfoolsupdate! (talk) 04:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

What kind of suggestion? (And, for that matter, what kind of site?!?) Though I would probably start by clicking on the Community Portal link in the side navbar over <- there (and up a bit?). Might also be worth seeing if your potential suggestion already has something like it, rather than add a new section the repeats one (or more) past subheader(s). Also might help you find which sub-page suits your particular input. 172.69.43.221 05:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

I remember as a kid asking my parents: "Why does the New Testament look so old?". 162.158.245.161 06:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

In German it makes sense, sort of - "modern" can also be a verb, meaning "to rot" :-) 162.158.245.137 06:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Some Gideon-types (maybe not actual Gideons, but of the same mind) came to my school one day (possibly they did it every year for each new age of students, never checked) and did a bit of basic god-bothering stuff with us. Either separate from the actual Religious Education class (which might have had more abrahamic=>judeo-christian=>christian=>protestant stuff, at times, but actually did properly cover other religions and wider belief systems) or as a once-only replacement for it (adjourning from the usual classroom, at its usual time, and instead meeting these 'missonaries' in one of the non-classroom rooms).

...anyway... we were given handy-sized NTs. (Probably I still have mine, somewhere, because I rarely get rid of any book, of any kind, but I know other classmates probably were happily scattering them to the four winds as soon as the fancy took them.) My most immediate impression was the disappointment that it was just the NT. Whatever I thought about the ultimate veracity of either (not much, even at that age), I already knew that all the actual exciting stuff was in the OT. All the 'New' stuff basically boils down to "Be excellent to each other, dudes!" (as paraphrased by Bill and Ted) and a mixed bag of minor peril and miscarriage of justice. Whereas the 'Old' bits has various cities being destroyed, various multigenerational soap-opera plots and two completely different explanations for how everything began! They don't write 'em like that any more. Well, they do, but between The Book Of Mormon (the Joseph Smith one, not the Broadway one) and the various works of L. Ron Hubbard ("Mission: Earth" was even more escapist than "Battlefield Earth", and would have been even easier to badly make into a movie!) there's a lot of variation. ;)

Though given how much might have been lost in translation, maybe I also ought to try reading everythihg in the original Klingon... 172.68.229.139 08:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Ever notice how the words modern and modem can resemble each other when presented in the correctly chosen typeface, point size and kerning? We could have had a 56k modern if we squinted sideways. 172.71.30.251 11:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)