• Or may be don't.

• 28 2/32   -  used all whole numbers and gave fractions of a year

• That is funny because they ask for contardicting things

17 & ~5/36

• 11507

I hope days is exact enough for them, I don't remember what time of day I was born

• Sure, if you are a honest person then you will be happy to wait until your next birthday to click continue.

•  Maybe they need a unix timestamp. In which case I hope you're not older than 38.

• Hey, no problem, as long as you were born after the epoch...

`Date d = new Date(y, (m - 1), d);`
`System.out.println(d.getTime());`
`152212345678`

Actually, the dialog says nothing about using negative decimals, so even the old FARTs are alright!

• @Steeldragon said:

That is funny because they ask for contardicting things

• @SuperousOxide said:

11507

I hope days is exact enough for them, I don't remember what time of day I was born

Kids these days ... well you read the instructions (Whole Numbers Only)!

14658

• Well since they are so demanding of precision, this must be something they put a lot of effort into. For something that you put a lot of effort into, you don't miss out a critical part of the equation unless it is deliberately missing. They are missing the units.

Therefore I'd fill this in with "1". I am 1 RAU (Ray age unit) old. The benefit of this system is that I can always guarantee that I am exactly 1 RAU old, making use of this form extra simple and predictable.

Bravo to them for allowing me this flexibility.

•  What about somebody born on (for example) 915148800? It's not an exact point in time...

• @RayS said:

Therefore I'd fill this in with "1". I am 1 RAU (Ray age unit) old. The benefit of this system is that I can always guarantee that I am exactly 1 RAU old, making use of this form extra simple and predictable.

That's great as long as you don't age. Otherwise the RAU makes for a crappy unit Then again, using a variable unit makes it easier for them to keep the exact age up to date.

I'm really curious what answer that system finally accepted.

• @Nandurius said:

I'm really curious what answer that system finally accepted.
35

Which isn't what they asked for, but which is the closest answer to what they asked for that they would accept .

• @Nandurius said:

@RayS said:

Therefore I'd fill this in with "1". I am 1 RAU (Ray age unit) old. The benefit of this system is that I can always guarantee that I am exactly 1 RAU old, making use of this form extra simple and predictable.

That's great as long as you don't age. Otherwise the RAU makes for a crappy unit Then again, using a variable unit makes it easier for them to keep the exact age up to date.

I'm really curious what answer that system finally accepted.

Nah, it's just one of those flimsy flamsy units like the Astronomical Unit (i.e. how far away from the Sun we are).

Dynamic languages seem all the rage at the moment, so why not dynamic units? You're already pointed out some of the benefits!

• I don't see anything wrong with that. Wikipedia says a Second is defined as the following:

Under the International System of Units, the second is currently defined as the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom.

That could change as well, so as long as it's precisely defined as the time he takes to achieve his current state in time and space, it's perfectly ok.

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.