Serendipity35 - WebCetera

The Y2K38 Bug and the End of 32-bit Unix Time

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Tue, 20 Jan 2026 09:55:00 +0000

Y2K, short for “Year 2000,” was a potential computer bug caused by how dates were formatted in older software. To save memory space, early computers used two-digit years—like “97” for 1997—which in the new millennium risked misreading “00” as 1900 instead of 2000, potentially disrupting systems that depended on accurate dates (read 101).

Though a kind of panic occurred in 1999, the Y2K issue surfaced in technical literature as early as 1984. Long before it became a global concern, researchers were already flagging the two-digit date flaw. A 1984 book, "Computers in Crisis," outlined how the year 2000 rollover could break financial, governmental, and technical systems if left unaddressed.

In the late 1990s, many feared this glitch could cause widespread failures in banking systems, power grids, transportation networks, and other critical infrastructure. This idea took hold of the public imagination, spawning doomsday predictions, a booming survivalist market, and a massive global push to audit and repair vulnerable systems before the deadline—work that cost an estimated $300B-$500B.

Because of the extensive preparations, Y2K passed without significant disruptions, however, its legacy endures. The crisis helped modernize global IT systems, accelerated the outsourcing of programming jobs, and exposed society’s dependence on digital infrastructure—prompting long-term shifts in cybersecurity and software maintenance.

The Year 2038 problem is the next potential computer time rollover bug. Many older systems store time as a signed 32-bit integer counting seconds since Jan. 1, 1970. That counter maxes out on Jan. 19, 2038—overflowing into negative time and sending clocks back to 1901, potentially crashing any older software that depends on accurate dates. The Y2K38 bug is also known as the end of 32-bit Unix time and the year 2038 problem.

Can a Font Be 'Woke'?

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Tue, 23 Dec 2025 09:35:00 +0000

My posts on the blog are about education and technology and often about where those two topics cross. It is rare for politics to enter these posts, but obviously,y politics plays a role in education and technology.

In this ever-crazier federal administration, we find that the Department of State has recently declared a move away from so-called "woke" fonts.

WTF does this mean? The translation of "woke" in this context is "accessible." Apparently, Times New Roman is the preferred "unwoke" font.

The US government has long provided a whole suite of accessibility recommendations for its agencies. These include accessible design and universal design. They're all under Section508.gov. This past summer. The website said, "Accessibility is about more than compliance with standards. It’s about developing solutions to meet the needs of all users, with and without disabilities. Universal design, a concept now widely used in the private sector, provides a path for federal agencies to shift to this broader focus."

In December 2025, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a formal directive to revert the Department’s official font from Calibri back to Times New Roman.

While the "woke" terminology comes largely from media headlines and social commentary describing the move, Rubio's official memo explicitly linked the font change to the administration's broader push to dismantle DEIA (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility) programs.

In a memo titled "Return to Tradition: Times New Roman 14-Point Font Required for All Department Paper," the Department argued that the previous switch to Calibri was a "wasteful" and "radical" initiative. Rubio stated the change was necessary to "restore decorum and professionalism" to official work products, arguing that Calibri was too "informal" and clashed with official letterheads.

The memo cited statistics showing that the number of accessibility remediation cases remained nearly identical before and after the change. A spokesperson stated the return to a serif font aligns with "President Trump’s One Voice for America’s Foreign Relations directive," emphasizing a unified, traditional image for the U.S. government.

More likely, the reverals has more to do with the fact that the Biden Administration in 2023 made the change because sans-serif fonts (Arial, Helvetica, Calibri et al) are generally easier for people with dyslexia or low vision to read on screens.

The current State Dept. labels the Biden change as a "wasteful DEIA program. Supporters of the reversal argue that government communications should look formal and authoritative, and that the previous administration's focus on "inclusive typography" was performative bureaucracy.

Critics (including disability advocates and typography experts) argue that the move ignores the technical benefits of sans-serif fonts for digital accessibility and that labeling a typeface as "woke" is an unnecessary politicization of basic office tools.

I care far less about what the default font might be, but I do care that in the time of war in the Ukraine, Israel and Gaza battles and other hotspots getting hotter around the globe, mass shootings, ICE raids on imigrants, and the U.S. economy continuing to fall, that the administration has the time and budget to care about fonts and reversing almost everything done by the previous aministration.

Marian Croak: A Force Behind Modern Communication

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Tue, 18 Nov 2025 10:00:00 +0000

Marian Croak, a name that may not be familiar to many, has had a profound impact on the way we communicate today. As a renowned American engineer, Croak has spent her career pushing the boundaries of technology, particularly in the realm of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP). With over 200 patents to her name, Croak's work has enabled seamless communication over the internet, revolutionizing the way we connect.

Her U.S. Patent No. 7,599,359 for VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Technology was ultimately used to create applications such as Zoom, WhatsApp and many others.

Born on May 14, 1955, in New York City, Croak's interest in technology was sparked by her father, who built her a chemistry set that led to her early exploration of the sciences. She pursued her passion for problem-solving at Princeton University, where she earned her undergraduate degree in 1977. Later, she received a PhD in Social Psychology and Quantitative Analysis from the University of Southern California.

Croak's career spans three decades at Bell Labs and AT&T, where she worked on digital messaging applications and VoIP technologies. Her team convinced AT&T to adopt the TCP/IP protocol, which allowed for standardized communication over the Internet. Croak's work on VoIP enabled the conversion of voice data into digital signals, making it possible to transmit voice, text, and video over the internet.

Another of Croak's notable achievements is her patent for text-based donations to charity. Developed in response to Hurricane Katrina, this technology allowed users to donate to organizations using text messaging. The technology was widely used after the 2010 Haiti earthquake, raising over $43 million for relief organizations. Croak received the 2013 Thomas Edison Patent Award for this innovation.

Croak's contributions extend beyond her technical expertise. As a leader at AT&T, she managed over 2,000 engineers and computer scientists, overseeing programs that impacted millions of customers. In 2014, she joined Google as Vice President of Engineering, focusing on expanding internet access and developing Responsible AI.

Throughout her career, Croak has received numerous accolades for her work. She was inducted into the Women in Technology International Hall of Fame in 2016 and the National Inventors Hall of Fame in 2022, becoming one of the first two Black women to receive this honor. She has also been inducted into the National Academy of Engineering and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

As Croak herself notes, "Inventors are usually people like you. Sometimes they're good at certain things, other times they're not, and that's ok. Just focus on what you want to change, and you become that change and can make that change happen."

Her legacy serves as a testament to the power of innovation and the impact one person can have on the world. As we continue to navigate the complexities of modern communication, we owe a debt of gratitude to pioneers like Marian Croak, who have worked tirelessly to bring people closer together.

I See You .icu

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Tue, 11 Nov 2025 11:08:00 +0000

I wrote earlier about the issues we were experiencing with the blog's backend. I mentioned that Tim, the IT half of Serendipity35, had created a testing version of the blog on an .icu domain. This .icu domain was new to me, and I had to look it up.

The .icu top-level domain (TLD) quite literally stands for "I See You" and was launched in 2018 as a flexible, globally accessible domain option. “I See You” is probably appealing for brands and individuals who want to convey visibility, connection, or care. It also coincides with the medical abbreviation for Intensive Care Unit though I doubt that any brands want that association.

It officially became available for public registration in 2018, and quickly gained traction due to its affordability and the wide availability of names. The original application was submitted by One.com, a Danish web hosting provider.Since it’s relatively new, many desirable domain names are still unclaimed and it has lower costs. Registration fees are typically lower than traditional domains like .com or .net. The .icu domain is not region-specific, making it suitable for international branding.

While .icu domains are popular for their flexibility, one caveat is that they’ve also been associated with spam and phishing, again because of their low cost and ease of registration. This has led some email providers and security platforms to flag .icu domains more aggressively. That said, legitimate businesses and creators continue to use .icu effectively, especially when paired with strong branding and secure hosting.

You've Been Facebooked: Social Media in 2006

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Thu, 16 Oct 2025 11:07:00 +0000

Looking back at Facebook in 2006 for your consideration of where it is today.

Mark Zuckerberg was testifying recently in a landmark antitrust trial brought by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against Meta. The FTC alleges that Meta, through its acquisitions of Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014, has unfairly maintained a monopoly in the social networking market. The government claims these purchases were part of a strategy to "neutralize" competitors and stifle innovation

I wrote a post here in 2006 when Facebook first became available to the general public. Initially, it was launched in 2004 as "TheFacebook" and was limited to Harvard students. Over time, it expanded to other universities and eventually opened up to anyone aged 13 or older with a valid email address in 2006. I have repurposed that old post here in an updated version.

I jumped in right away. I was at a university, and I immediately thought this would be big with students, and that the faculty needed to know what it was about. The faculty was not interested in the presentations I offered. I did one on "social media" and where it was headed.

Facebook wasn't the first or the only player.

MySpace was very popular at the time, and it was the go-to platform for music lovers and personal profiles.
YouTube launched in 2005 and was gaining traction as the place for video sharing.
Flickr was the favorite for photo sharing and had amateur as well as professional photographers.
LinkedIn: Focused on professional networking, it was already carving out its niche.
Friendster's popularity was waning, but it was still a notable player in the early social media scene.
The lesser-known Orkut gained popularity in Brazil and India but not in the U.S. It was Google's failed attempt at social networking.

In 2004, the soon-to-be social networking giant was a baby called "The Facebook.” The19-year-old co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg needed to explain the concept behind the site,. Check out this explanation he did in his first-ever television interview with CNBC on April 28, 2004.

In my 2006 post, I wrote about the American fascination with turning nouns into verbs, so for a time people were saying that you could be "facebooked." That verb meant the action of 1) looking someone up on Facebook or 2) asking someone to be your friend on Facebook.
"I Facebooked that girl I met at the party last night, and she Facebooked me this morning, so now we're friends."

You could also "poke" someone which was a suggestive term for a kind of gentle message without content. You could send an email-style message to them or leave a message on their "wall."

It is interesting to read what Zuckerberg said 19 years ago about the website and consider where it is today. The definition of Facebook, according to founder Mark Zuckerberg in 2006:

"The idea for the website was motivated by a social need at Harvard to be able to identify people in other residential houses. Harvard is a fairly unfriendly place. While each residential house listed directories of their residents, I wanted one online directory where all students could be listed. And I've always enjoyed building things and puttering around with computer code, so I sat down and in about a week I had produced the basic workings of the site.
We had a launch plan to enter into other colleges based on where friends would be most likely to overlap, so the site spread organically based upon that model, and now we operate on a broad spectrum of campuses. It doesn't make sense to exclude anybody or any college from the resources that Facebook offers. This is a product that should be fun and useful for all college students.
We don't view the site as an online community. We bill it as a directory that is reinforcing a physical community. What exists on the site is a mirror image of what exists in real life.
To a certain extent, the website is unfortunate because it oversimplifies things. Everybody's concept of having a friend is different. It can definitely blur the relationships that exist between people. But in the end, I think that thefacebook can only reinforce preexisting communities. We think we have been particularly successful in strengthening those relationships that exist between people who are only â€œfringe friends.
It's not unusual for us to receive an email from somebody saying, "I spend all of my time on your website and now I have less of a social life than I had before." We would much rather have people meet people through the website and go out and party than stay at home on a Friday night reading other people's profiles. And it's surprising, but we have actually received far less complaints about stalking than we otherwise would have expected."

Here are some of my 2006 stats about Facebook:
- 12 million users (*MySpace has 54 million users)
- 300 million page views per 24-hour period - page views surpasses Google
- Facebook comes in seventh in terms of overall traffic on the entire Web
- 70% of users use the site every day
- 85% use it once a week
- 93% visit monthly
- The site makes more than a million dollars a month in ad revenue
- Since its start, a high school edition and a photo upload and tagging option were added

I joined Facebook mostly to see what it was all about. I knew that my college-aged sons both used it. (It seemed like my younger son - a freshman in 2005 - met a hundred people at his school through Facebook during orientation and the first weeks, plus all his high school friends at other schools that were added to his friends list, and then their friends who added him.

I felt pretty sad at first because I had no one to add to my list. I started with my sons, who "allowed" me to be their friend list (you do have to approve someone's request to be added), though they made me promise never to put something on their wall. Facebook was not really for mom and dad.

Because early on, parents and adults played no real role in Facebook (though alumni can create accounts for their alma mater) I didn't expect to find any of my classmates there. Faculty could have a profile at their school, but that was rare in 2006.

What really bothered me at first was that my profile said, "You have 0 friends at NJIT." I planned to do a presentation to faculty at NJIT about this new website, so I had to Facebook a few students that I thought would say yes to my request. Then I started searching students I had taught in my former K-12 days. Found a few and sent them a message. And that led to a few of their classmates finding me. Social networking...

When I did my first presentation, I had 37 friends - which by Facebook standards was pretty pathetic. It for younger readers to imagine these early social media ( aterm no one was using) times. I only had 55 people on my AOL AIM buddy list, so 37 seems was about right.

When I showed the site to faculty and academic and non-academic friends, the most common comments were:
Yeah. So what's the point? [Remember, most of my friends are old.]
Why does everyone seem to have an alcoholic drink in their hand in all the pictures? [sad but true]
Many more females than males on Facebook. [True]
Wouldn't it scare you if you had a daughter and she was posting pictures, her dorm room #, email address and other info online? [Yes}
Doesn't it scare you that your sons are doing that? [To a degree - but maintaining a common double standard, not as much.]
What about identity theft? [As with any sitaution where you reveal personal information, facebook could open you up to id theft by giving someone enough information to attempt to create a fake account.]

One comment I heard did turn out to be true later that year. "Don't you think employers will check this kind of site when screening clients?" I had heard that but I doubted it would be widespread. It turned out that employers could get access through employees who were students, faculty and alumni from an applicant's school. I saw a posting that said "Monster.com [a very popular jobs site in 2006] is who you portray you are, but Facebook is who you really are."

In the fall of 2005, North Carolina State University disciplined several students for underage drinking after a resident assistant found party photos of them on Facebook. A few days after students rushed the football field following a Penn State win over Ohio State, campus police found pictures of the incident containing identifiable students on Facebook. Northern Kentucky and the University of Kentucky both have disciplined students they had seen drinking in pictures posted on Facebook. Campus police at George Washington University use Facebook to find underage drinkers. Employers and the career center at the University of Kansas use Facebook to evaluate students being considered for KU jobs.

People commented that "You can't seriously think that these people actually have 345 "friends?" Well, not the way we may have once defined "friend." I'm pretty confident that someone who has 345 friends on Facebook realizes that they are not friends in the same way as their 6 close friends that they see face-to-face regularly.

In 2006, I Facebooked Mark Zuckerberg. He had 323 friends already, but hey, you can always use another friend, right?

Servers Servers Servers

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Tue, 09 Sep 2025 14:51:00 +0000

Google’s servers, 1999

In 1999, Google's servers were ten CPUs across four servers.

Google doesn’t publicly disclose the exact number of servers it operates, but estimates suggest it’s in the millions. A 2011 analysis based on Google’s energy usage suggested around 900,000 servers, but that was over a decade ago. In 2016, Gartner estimated Google had around 2.5 million servers globally. Google has designed systems like Spanner to manage fleets ranging from 1 million to 10 million machines, hinting at massive infrastructure growth. Given the scale of Google’s services—Search, YouTube, Gmail, Cloud, and AI—it’s reasonable to assume the number is well above 2.5 million today, spread across dozens of data centers worldwide.

Other tech giants like Amazon and Microsoft don't publish exact server counts, so these are educated estimations.

Amazon (AWS) probably has ~4–5 million as the largest cloud provider globally with a massive scale across 100+ data centers.

Google probably has ~2.5–3 million+ for its heavy investment in AI and search, and is expanding rapidly with Gemini and Cloud.

Microsoft (Azure) is close with ~2–3 million+ but has a strong enterprise presence and is growing with Office 365, Copilot, and Azure AI.

Going Viral

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Fri, 22 Aug 2025 16:04:00 +0000

Reading Amber Mac's newsletter this week, I saw a connection with something I was writing on one of my other blogs about this idea of having content "go viral." It sounds like a great thing. But does it come at a cost?

Yes, it's tempting to jump on TikTok trends and participate in the bite-size-ification of social, but it's also possible to produce a steady and consistent flow of valuable, high-quality content that never goes viral. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see our video views rise, but it's not essential that we trend. I think we all know how that game works. Say something controversial or do something outrageous, and the algorithms will thank you for it.

In my opinion, that spike in attention might be a win, but it's a short-term win. In other words, not everyone should go viral. If that's what you're chasing, it could be a soul-crushing experience where you lose yourself and your authentic community along the way. - Amber Mac

Bloggers often want their posts to go "viral." The word “viral” made a leap from medical terminology to broader cultural usage in the late 20th century, particularly in the context of marketing and media. I assumed that it was social media that moved the term from medical usage, but it is actually a bit earlier than the explosion of social media. In 1989, The Oxford English Dictionary cites the earliest use of “viral” to describe the rapid spread of information, marking its first known non-medical usage.

The term gained traction in marketing in 1999, especially “viral marketing,” which described campaigns that spread quickly and organically—much like a virus. In the early 2000s, phrases like “going viral” and “viral video” emerged. and by 2004, “going viral” was used to describe content that rapidly gained popularity online. From 2009 onward, viral became mainstream, fueled by the rise of social media platforms and shareable content.

It is a good and powerful metaphor. Like a biological virus, digital content can replicate and spread uncontrollably. That semantic link made “viral” the perfect word to describe the phenomenon of explosive online popularity.

I don't think I have had a "viral post," though I have had some posts that seem to get more views over the years than most of mine. But "viral" is when the surge of views hits all at once.

Can you push a post into the land of viral? I don't think so, but you can find articles about "how to," like 21 key elements for viral blog posts or explore 32 proven tactics to boost your chances - but there are certainly no guarantees.

Those kinds of articles will suggest things to do like these: Know your audience and tailor your tone, topic, and style to what resonates with them. Tap into trending issues, emotional stories, or highly useful how-tos. Use eye-catching images. Share across platforms with tailored captions and hashtags. Use analytics to see what’s getting attention and tweak accordingly. All of those make sense, and I tend to employ them most of the time.

Some suggestions probably do increase your chances of viality, but go against my own blogging philosophy: Make it skimmable. Short paragraphs, bullet points, and bolded key phrases. Engage influencers. Reach out to people with large followings who might share your post. I don't do email marketing, other than if someone decides to follow my blog via email notifications.

"Viral" is hardly the only medical term that is now in broader usage. If you're curious about that, check out this other blog.

Frank Lloyd Wright’s Taliesin West

ronkowitz@gmail.com (Kenneth Ronkowitz) — Mon, 23 Jun 2025 19:07:00 +0000

I was able to visit Frank Lloyd Wright’s Taliesin West home-studio complex a few years ago. It was started back in the early 1940s, but evolved over many decades.

The version you see in the Architectural Digest video below probably won't change very much now. It is quite different from the original design Wright and his apprentices initially built over their first six years of life and work in the Arizona desert. It went through a good number of changes after Wright himself stopped visiting in his final year, 1959.

Tour guides point out that Wright may not have "approved" of all the expansions, modifications, and renovations made by Wright's "disciples," though they say they were made in keeping with his vision.

Taliesin West may be "purer Wright" than some other more famous Wright buildings because it was not created for a client. No one was telling Wright what they wanted or creating deadlines. It was built with apprentice labor.

It's not the first Taliesin. The original was in Spring Green, Wisconsin. Taliesin West was a home, a studio, and most importantly, an educational institution. Wright and his students spent the winters there every year from 1935 on, though it was a completely undeveloped site at first.

The Wrights stayed at an inn, but the apprentices camped out on-site. They were building straight from plans that their teacher could have drawn up the day before. Eventually, it had plumbing and electricity, but it was still a communal architecture school.

There is also a 360 Virtual Visit online that lets you walk through and hear what you might hear on an official tour. Schools sometimes use this as a virtual field trip. There is even a bit more in this virtual visit than the tour I took in person. For example, visitors aren't allowed in the Blue Loggia because foot traffic would damage the irreplaceable Chinese rug, so they never see the balcony above or the rug up close.