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)

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)

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)