Late 1900s
Late 1900s
Late 1900s
I love to say “before the turn of the century” when referring to stuff like 1997.
In the late millennium
Before computing got poisoned.
From now on, when someone asks how old I am, I'm going to say I was born in the late 1900s
"Oh, no, not that late, actually."
Or at the late 20th Century...
Doesn't work, "20th century" as a term is synonymous with "modern". "The xx00s" is automatically "a long time ago".
Look at this youngling, I was born in the previous millennium
what's wrong with this? 1994 is indeed the late 1900s, and it's 31 years ago so depending on the topic they're writing on, it could be immensely outdated
There is nothing wrong with it other than it makes me feel ancient and I don’t like it.
ok boomer
<3
To answer the question: The professor assumes the email referred to 1900-1910 with "late 1900s". As this was normal 20 years ago (and still gets used). He then gets upset realising the age difference between him and his student was likely the main contributor to this incorrect assumption.
To ask a question back: From https://www.bucknell.edu/fac-staff/john-penniman, I read:
John Penniman is Associate Professor and chair of Religious Studies
I would say for religious studies it should be fine. But also for other areas, why can't you use 1994 papers?
It depends on what field you're studying. Some fields of study, like social studies, move very quickly. So it's not uncommon for someone studying one of those subjects to exclude research that's even 10 to 15 years old because things move so quickly.
A different subject, say hydrologic engineering has been studied for hundreds of years and doesn't change very quickly. So a publication from 1994 could be just as valid today as it was then. Every topic is different and without more context the meme as is, is just meant to incite a reaction. Not to tell us about something that actually happened.
I assumed they might be working in certain fields of science where the most progress is very recent so old papers will be very incomplete and sometimes even wrong.
My field is particle physics and while a paper from 1994 wouldn't be completely useless, I would need to check if recent papers still confirm the same results.
It sounds weird, given that 1994 was like 30 years ago, not 130 years. I'd personally say "late 90s" rather than late 1900s. If i was referring to the 19th century, then yea I may say late 1800s for 1894. There isn't anything wrong with it, it just sounds weird and makes a lot of people feel old as shit. Most people would say late 90s I think. I feel that you'd get a weird look if you referred to 1994 as the late 1900s in casual conversation.
Very much depending on the topic. For specialised niche subjects, which are usually the ones students choose for final papers, literature can be very scarce, and 1994 would be fairly recent. For my specialised field the main study (which is still being cited frequently) is from 1870.
I was at school so it cannot... darn it
If this was a CS major, 1994 might as well be Antiquity
I read CS papers from the late '80s/early '90s and it feels like unearthing cuneiform tablets. Lots of good ideas, just everything felt so raw and new.
You guys remember when Sony made tiny handheld AM radios?
Because Signal surely isn't based on works from 80s, yes.
And how kind of you to share that with us here. On Lemmy. That skews older.
(sad) lmao
Hey now, 1995 will always be 10 years ago. Always.
Funny how time works.
I can still hear the dialup tone in my brainnnnnnn
I finally was able to readjust my brain into believing 1995 was longer than 10 years ago. I'm now convinced it was 20 years ago.
I first played Doom in 1995. And SimCity 2000. It indeed feels like 10 years ago.
I was born in 96. I'll be turning 30 next year
Damn, I've got the heaviest drinking pattern of any 10 year old you ever seen then.
Since this was true when I was in primary school, it'll always be seared into my brain. I mean, I realized this when I was learning to count and spell, of course it's saved as one of the most basic facts of life. Like, 4+4=8, 90s are 10 years ago 70s are 30 years ago etc was stuff learned at the same time, so it's like it's saved in a similar way.
Today in Warframe a new character dropped he is a rockstar. One guy from my clan asked me "Do you know who David Bowie is? He is kind of an old rock legend..." Bruh I'm 40 WTF?
Kids these days will be easy prey for the Goblin King.
They are just one brick in the wall....
Nickelback is classic rock.
Bowie died in 2016. Is your clan mate like 14?
Four years ago, got it.
He got to 15 this year...
Oof size: big.
I had to translate German papers to English. Not necessarily because I'm that old, but they were the only ones that had the information I needed. Although most of my research was based on stuff in the 90's....
Everything before 9/11 is fake news.
Computers, never invented.
AIDs and the cure for it, never happened.
Bill Clinton, I mean cmon, doesn't fucking exist.
I'm old enough to remember when they were making all this stuff up. Like 2 whole world wars, yeah, right.
I'll just be over here checking into an assisted living home. Don't mind me.
[Matt Damon aging.GIF]
I always wondered what would happen if you cite an original source of something we consider common sense now. What would nature say if you use conservation of momentum and cite Isaac Newton and the Principia Mathematica.
What if you quote something in latin. For most of science history this was completely normal.
This is incredible
Wow
I mean the 1700s is 1700-1799 so it's just consequential
Is the final paper on the events of the early 1900's? I feel like we need a bit more context...
"Actually, 1994 is the only year that is excluded in this history course."
Literally 10 years too late.
💀