View Full Version : The time is wrong


Ben Winter
December 16th, 2007, 04:53 PM
Well, I guess I'm bored and have nothing else to point out, but it seems the time on these boards is about 18 minutes fast (for me). I double-checked the official US time website just to make sure. The DVinfo page displays the time as 5:49 PM when the official time was 5:31. What got my attention was someone posting a reply from 9 minutes in the future! :)

Again, I'm ashamed to be pointing out something so lame, but...there it is.

Boyd Ostroff
December 16th, 2007, 05:51 PM
Actually this was discussed internally, and Chris explained that he's purchased a special hosting plan which assures DVinfo members will be the first to learn of any industry news by time-shifting the site 18 minutes into the future. Now the clock on my screen is 21 minutes fast, not 18. But that's one of the privileges of being a moderator...

Pete Bauer
December 16th, 2007, 06:02 PM
Yeah, behind the scenes we moderators have complained bitterly to Chris about this because it makes us think we are missing Mythbusters reruns when we really aren't.

However, he refuses to fix it because he believes that information at DVinfo travels faster than the speed of light, making time flow backwards and therefore the time discrepancy is relativistically accurate. That's how he stays one step ahead of everyone else.

FWIW, it has been that way since the last server upgrade several months ago. I do have to admit that I enjoy seeing my posts online before I have written them, though.

EDIT: Oops, I hope I didn't violate any government NDA's (nondisclosure agreements) by revealing the details of the hosting plan.
EDIT AGAIN: Now I'm REALLY MAD. Just cuz Boyd has way more posts than me, he gets 21 minutes and I only get the standard 18! (Boyd, let us know if you need help setting your computer's clock!
;-)

Boyd Ostroff
December 16th, 2007, 06:44 PM
Pete's a real rocket scientist, so you'd better listen to him! But he must have complained to Chris, because now the DVinfo page is only 16 minutes ahead of real time for me (and my system clock is supposed to be in sync with Apple's timeserver).

Chris Hurd
December 16th, 2007, 07:13 PM
Do you guys have any idea how much money I had to shell out to our hosting company for those extra 16 minutes? We'll move to 21 minutes as soon as I can afford it!

Alan Craig
March 14th, 2008, 06:05 AM
Chris you could'nt do me a favour and move the time up to 1600hrs on 05/04/2008 and tell me what horse won this years Grand National could you, I will give you a cut of the winnings.

Alan

Niall Chadwick
March 14th, 2008, 06:25 AM
Where's a DeLorean when you need one? :)

Tim Hodgson
March 15th, 2008, 08:35 AM
Now think about this.

Chris actually does keep correcting the time. But when he does, he is doing it 16 minutes in the future, which means that when the current "present" timeline reaches that point we have again slipped 16 minutes into the past.

To properly solve the problem Chris would have to travel 16 minutes into the past to "set" the correct time. The problem is ... would that set the time to the present? How could it ? He would be from the future. And yet he traveled back in time which puts him in the past !!! And as we all know, no one can travel into the past. Only the future apparently because that's where Chris is now. And if that is the case, then Chris is not really here ... well not for 16 minutes anyway. In which case we are discussing someone who does not exist.

Now if we all waited 16 minutes ... ahh ... no that wouldn't work either ...

Actually I don't know why I'm typing this because Chris has already posted the reply, he knew what I was trying to say 16 minutes ago ...

OK, this is now starting to hurt.

Greg Boston
March 15th, 2008, 09:53 AM
Hmmm, I think Chris could travel back to the past, but he would need a few more dollars to fund that trip to space where he warps around the sun for the slingshot effect.

Since Pete is with NASA, I would fully expect my fellow wrangler to help Chris out with all the pull he can muster (which, at his age, might not be much). Hehe.

-gb-

Chris Hurd
March 15th, 2008, 10:19 AM
if that is the case, then Chris is not really here ... In which case we are discussing someone who does not exist..A show of hands would probably yield a 50/50 split on that question.

I thought traveling backward in time involved putting on a cape, flying around the globe counterclockwise several times and saving Margot Kidder.

Julian Frost
March 15th, 2008, 12:04 PM
There is no saving Margot Kidder!

Chris Hurd
March 15th, 2008, 12:22 PM
Maybe that's why I can't get this time-travel thing to work no matter how much I flap my arms!

Niall Chadwick
March 15th, 2008, 04:47 PM
Chris,

Is seeing you in tights an "optional extra"

Oh dear god, someone get the image out of my head! :)

Chris Hurd
March 15th, 2008, 04:59 PM
"Chancho! When you are a man... sometimes you were stretchy pants... in your room. It's for fun."

Luis de la Cerda
March 25th, 2008, 02:02 AM
We're 16 minutes behind because that's the deductible and they've already deducted it :)

(For those who have no idea what I'm talking about, it's a Seinfeld thing ;) )

Now, about that extra money that it costs to keep this site 16 minutes ahead of time, don't worry, it's a writeoff.