Okay, I’ve spent the entire day flipping through various news stations (working off a hangover) and I’m disgusted/shocked/provoked to see all these idiot newscasters talking about the Biggest News/Economic/Entertainment/Etc Stories of the Decade!
2010 is the last year of the decade, not a new one. The decade is from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2010.
The first year wasn’t Year Zero. It was Year One (you know, like the movie?).
Also, the millenium didn’t end 1999-2000. It ended 2000-2001!
Yes, this is a stupid bitch.
—Semanticher
This article appears in Dec 31, 2009 – Jan 6, 2010.
You’re right.
But, as with a lot of things, going with the flow is sometimes better than trying to change public perception. Most people consider the start of a new decade as the calendar year with the decade’s number, 2010, therefore, 2009 is the last year in the decade, so they look back on the previous decade being from 2000 to 2009. It still covers ten years, technically, that’s not wrong. Just wrong from the perspective that you state.
As we all know, educating the masses is challenging at best. But good on you for the effort OB.
You’re right, OP, this *is* a stupid bitch.
Ohh Jesus, not this argument again. Well, I guess it has been ten years now. Were people debating this when 1990 rolled around too, and before then? In 1990 I was still wetting my bed and too much into “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” to pay attention. My favourite character was Raphael – I felt I could relate to him and all that pent up rage and rebellious anger as a boy. Michelangelo was cool but a bit too much of a show-off. Leonardo was way too serious and probably just had the ninjaken shoved too far up his green ass. Donatello was a nerd. Master Splinter was creepy and gave me nightmares, even more than Shredder and his Foot Clan.
Ok, yes, we KNOW how the math works. We don’t start counting with “zero”. . . WE GET IT.
It is just a matter of CONVENTION in our language that we group the events between 1980 and 1989 as “the 80s”, the events between 1990 and 1999 as “the 90s” etc.
The odometer rolling over from 1999 to 2000 was interesting enough to merit the “official” (if not technically “correct”) acknowledgement of the “new millenium,” . . . if we all had to wait until 2001 wouldn’t the whole thing have seemed rather old by that point?
Since all the “millenium” hoopla is now (thankfully) in the past, can we PLEASE just move on and enoy the “new” decade—which I KNOW doesn’t “really” start until 2011—by my reckoning the “00’s” or whatever they were called are OVER.
Now, where are those Jetson’s-style jetpacks we were promised?
methinks you should do a history check.the first year was not called one at all.hence why we live in the 21 century.the 1900’s was called the 20th. century.check it out and you will see that i’m right.
Lifesucks: the first century was 1-99 (or 100, whatever) and the second century was 100 (or 101, whatever) that’s why we’re in the 2000s and it’s called the 21st century.
r.j., my flying car is more comfortable than a jet pack.no strings between the cheeks.just nice soft rhino hide.
Holy fuck, didn’t we go over this 10 years ago (or was it 11? 9?) when the millennium came about and there were shitheads going on about how it isn’t the millennium until such and such a year. Jesus, go get laid or jerk off or something.
Yeah, you’re right—the flying car is definitely better.
Especially if it is “atomic-powered!”
In order to get to 1 you have to start at 0, thusly making the END of the first year year 1. The beginning of a decade starts at 0. 2010, 2020 and so on. AD started 1 year after Christ’s death. Not when he actually died.