South Korea To Move To Standardized, Internationally Recognized Age System 81
South Koreans are set to become one or even two years younger - at least on official paperwork. From a report: On Thursday, the South Korean parliament passed a law to scrap Korea's two traditional methods of counting age. From June 2023, the so-called "Korean Age" system will no longer be permitted on official documents. Only the standardised, internationally recognised method will remain. The government is fulfilling a campaign promise to reduce confusion by adopting the same system used in the rest of the world.
Currently, the most widely used calculation method in Korea is the so-called "Korean age system", in which a person is one year old at birth and then gains a year on the first day of each new year. In a separate method - the "counting age" - a person's age is calculated from zero at birth and a year is added on 1 January.
Currently, the most widely used calculation method in Korea is the so-called "Korean age system", in which a person is one year old at birth and then gains a year on the first day of each new year. In a separate method - the "counting age" - a person's age is calculated from zero at birth and a year is added on 1 January.
Re: (Score:1)
Please provide one Democrat who has spoken in favor of "post natal abortions".
Re: (Score:2)
Ralph Northam.
But i'm not accusing all democrats, and specially not all democrat supporters of wanting such things, was going for basically the literal worst i saw from this subject from the two sides.
It's pretty easy to get the worst of the worst and paint em as the majority, and it's one of the radicalization playbook tricks.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
But i'm not accusing all democrats, and specially not all democrat supporters of wanting such things
Kinda sounded like you were. "The radicals on your side" is textbook bothsidesism. :p
Thanks for providing a quote, BTW.
He explained [cbsnews.com], “The infant would be delivered; the infant would be kept comfortable; the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desire, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
So, in your mind, "a discussion between the physicians and the mother" is automatically about euthanasia. Nowhere is Northam reported or suggested as intimating that. Did it occur to y'all that it might be a discussion of whether to put the baby up for adoption or how best to provide palliative care or even what resources she might need in order to care for the baby?
"The radicals on y
Re: (Score:2)
Ralph Northam.
But i'm not accusing all democrats, and specially not all democrat supporters of wanting such things, was going for basically the literal worst i saw from this subject from the two sides.
It's pretty easy to get the worst of the worst and paint em as the majority, and it's one of the radicalization playbook tricks.
I'm calling you out on this. You called this man a radical and the worst of the worst?
He's a doctor. What would YOU do, Z80a, for a baby born with anencephaly? Pray, then what? Take the time to look it up and formulate a realistic answer. These decisions need to be made between a mother and doctors, not legislators.
How can you play "both sides" and not bother to look something up?
Re: (Score:2)
Dozens of GOP politicians and a majority of the Supreme Court speak openly of wanting desperately to get rid of all abortions for decades.
Please provide one Democrat who has spoken in favor of "post natal abortions".
You mean school shootings?
Re: (Score:1)
The radicals on your side want "post natal abortions"
Who exactly is advocating for infanticide?
Re: (Score:1)
Since you asked.
Quebec College of Physicians [nationalpost.com] for cases of severe deformation
Seems to be an opinion from a single French-speaking doctor in Quebec.
When you refer to him as a "radical on your side", which "side" do you believe this is? I'm looking over the various pages (in French) about his credentials, but I can't see much about his "radical" politics.
And I note the complete absence of voices-- liberal or otherwise-- chiming in to agree.
Re: (Score:2)
And even then it's a discussion with the mother.
I know if I was in extreme pain and not likely to live long enough to get past it, I would want the option of MAID for myself. Don't we already do
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I would call that euthanasia, not "post-natal abortion".
Re: (Score:2)
What does Quebec have to do with a discussion about American politics?
Re: (Score:2)
Well... erm... "Poutine" is in the news lately?
Re: (Score:1)
The comment was about "radicals on your side" (whoever that is), so I don't see that it must be limited to the US.
Re: (Score:1)
The radicals on your side want "post natal abortions"
I'd love to meet these 3 people that legitimately hold that view. Now, how many people on your side think a clump of cells smaller than the size of a pencil eraser is a "baby"?
Re: (Score:2)
You probably can find quite a few if you dig down "your side", and even some pretty other horrifying opinions as well, just like exactly what will happen if i dig mine.
Stupidity and radicalism is not just partisan at all.
Re: (Score:2)
You probably can find quite a few if you dig down "your side"
No, no, no. You don't get to make your point and then ask your opponent to find the evidence for you. Who are these liberals who want post natal abortions? Name them or STFU.
Re: (Score:2)
Stupidity and radicalism is not just partisan at all.
Absolutely right on that point.
You probably can find quite a few if you dig down "your side", and even some pretty other horrifying opinions as well, just like exactly what will happen if i dig mine.
I know I'm biased on the topic of abortion. I have enough women in my life. This is a huge direct issue for them, and therefore me. Even when I do my best to look past my biases I have a hard time seeing any significant population of people that support unfettered access to even late term abortion. Finding anyone of any consequence that actually supports euthanizing born babies? Not likely. On the other hand how many Senators and Congressmen/women ran their campaigns on a
Re:Careful (Score:4, Interesting)
The early or late term distinction isn't actually the point. The point is best illustrated via an analogy.
In this scenario, you are the only match as a bone marrow donor for a 6-year old child with leukemia. This child has acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and without this transplant, the child will die. Morally, it would be the "right" thing to do to undergo the donation procedure. However, donating requires a general anesthetic which, despite major improvements in safety standards, still caries some risk of complications or even death.
So the question is: should the state compel you to undergo the procedure? The child's life is 100% in the hands of you donating your body. Without it, the child dies. So morally I think most of us would go through with it. But should the government pass a law to compel you do do it? Of course not! And I bet most voters, both left and right, would argue that the government should get their hands off my body!
Well, this is exactly the same scenario as a woman carrying a fetus to term. Without the woman donating her body, the fetus dies. So why on earth should the government be passing a law compelling a woman to undergo a dangerous procedure?
The stage of the pregnancy doesn't come into it. Trying to define when a fetus becomes a baby doesn't come into it. It's purely about the woman's rights, and purely about whether they should be compelled to donate their body for the life of another.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fun Fact: Matthew Hale argued that the existence of witchcraft laws proved that witchcraft exists. Checkmate, logic!
Still waiting to hear the names of prominent liberals advocating for unfettered access to abortion in the second trimester, much less the third trimester, must less post birth.
Re: (Score:2)
The radicals on your side want "post natal abortions"
I'd love to meet these 3 people that legitimately hold that view. Now, how many people on your side think a clump of cells smaller than the size of a pencil eraser is a "baby"?
The OP intentionally didn't pick a side. Why are you so quick to paint him as the opposition? He was rightfully saying that the extreme of both sides are crazy and we should let the sane middle decide.
Re: (Score:2)
The OP intentionally didn't pick a side.
Ummm, did you miss this part?
The radicals on your side want "post natal abortions"
Re: (Score:2)
He was referring to the side of the poster before him not himself. He clearly stated that both sides are crazy which somewhat implies that he is in the middle as people generally don't believe their own views are crazy.
Re: (Score:2)
He was referring to the side of the poster before him not himself. He clearly stated that both sides are crazy which somewhat implies that he is in the middle as people generally don't believe their own views are crazy.
Being ignorant doesn't put someone in the "middle" because they're too uninformed to understand the ideological sides. You can be ignorant and pick any side. To be in the middle you need to actually understand both sides of an argument.
If you haven't taken the time to become familiar with the possible complications of pregnancies and developmental deformities then what the hell could someone be in the middle of.
It's like saying I'm in the middle on national space exploration policy, I'm not an anti-spacer
Re: (Score:2)
If you haven't taken the time to become familiar with the possible complications of pregnancies and developmental deformities then what the hell could someone be in the middle of.
People in the middle know about those issues which is why they are in the middle.
People in the middle generally want some form of "safe, legal, and rare"
Complications and developmental deformities are generally not considered "elective abortions" and the vast majority of both sides want to remain legal.
Re: (Score:2)
The words "your side" would seem to indicate the other party is on a differing side. If they resided on the same side of an issue you'd think they would have used the term "our side". I agree with their sentiment that the quiet majority should decide the issue, not the vocal minority. Where my issue comes from is the implication that there is any significant population on my side that supports actually killing babies, much less any people that are in any sort of position of power. As opposed to the frig
Re: (Score:2)
It's not like the elementary school shooting supporting side is against "post natal abortions".
Because once they plopped out they can go fuck themselves has been the moto for a long time for the party that denies child support by the state and medical aid by the state for children. It's always so weird for pro-lifers to seemingly think that life starts at conception and ends at birth.
It's not weird at all, it's "fuck you, I got mine" and it's extremely consistent. It's so consistent that's how you know the fetus is just a rhetorical device. If the technology existed to extract a healthy fetus and grow it outside the womb making it someone else's responsibility, you'd see the true colors.
Pregnant woman: fuck you, I got mine ...
Infant: fuck you, I got mine
Child:
Adult: repeats
Re: (Score:1)
You'd think that would've been important given how it is used to address one another in the language. Someone who is older is addressed one way, vs. someone who is younger vs. someone who is the same age.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot younger: "Hello little baby!"
Younger: "Stop acting like a baby!"
Same age: "<smoothVoice>Hello, baby.</smoothVoice>"
An old friend of mine (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
What this reminds me of is the counting of floors in a building. In German class I was taught that they call the first floor the ground floor, and the second floor the first floor.
So they could say, "What, Americans think they are 1 floor up when their feet are level with the ground!?" Well, no, us calling it the first floor doesn't mean we are up by 1 floor. It's just our convention.
Also, to a runner, say
How about the 21st century? (Score:2)
The labeling of the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries always messes up me and forces me to take the extra step of mentally accounting for the off-by-one error. The labeling sort of makes sense in theory, as there can't be a 0th century, but in practice, the off-by-one for the hundred's unit is not so practical. This nonsensical labeling still happens all the time. My company will report 2022Q4 results in February 2023.
In a similar way, there can't a 0th year of age. However, there is no requirement for age
Re: (Score:2)
If you thought there was a century that started in the year 2000, and that century wasn't the 20th century, then you are using some weird mixed-up logic.
Re: (Score:2)
China is similar. I'm some regions you are 9 months old when you are born.
The UK is like Germany, where the ground level floor is called the ground floor, and the 1st floor is one level up from the entrance.
Re: (Score:3)
China is similar.
My spouse's parents are Chinese. They know the year they were born, but the month and day were never recorded. Their passports say January 1. Birthdays were not celebrated.
Today, the system has changed, and the full dates are recorded. Part of the reason was the arrival of McDonald's in China. McD gave kids a free toy on their birthday, but they needed a document that listed it.
McDonald's also changed queueing culture in China. Traditionally, instead of queueing at an order window, they would mob it and try
Re: (Score:2)
You are??? So, which regions are you?
Re: (Score:3)
What this reminds me of is the counting of floors in a building. In German class I was taught that they call the first floor the ground floor, and the second floor the first floor.
No, in Germany and in the UK they call the ground floor the ground floor and the first floor the first floor. In the USA, they call the ground floor the first floor, and the first floor the second floor.
Re: (Score:2)
No, in Germany and in the UK they call the ground floor the ground floor and the first floor the first floor. In the USA, they call the ground floor the first floor, and the first floor the second floor.
You don't have floors at ground level? You just walk around on the ground? Do you then have a mat so you can wipe the dirt off of your feet before you ascend to a floor? In many developed nations we have floors in our first story.
Re: (Score:2)
In German class I was taught that they call the first floor the ground floor, and the second floor the first floor.
That might make some kind of sense if at some point you built buildings with dirt floors, and then added second floors onto them without adding a floor into the ground level. Otherwise, buildings have floors, so obviously the first one is the one on the ground...
Re: (Score:2)
I raise you Ninewells hospital in Scotland. Depending which building you go into the "ground" floor could easily be the 4th floor!
Basically the site is on a hill and as the hospital has expanded over the years new building floor levels match up with the older buildings. So say floor 4 is on the same level above sea level in every building across the site. Which given the buildings are all interconnected makes pushing trolleys around much easier and you don't change floor level just because you walked down a
Re: (Score:2)
given the buildings are all interconnected makes pushing trolleys around much easier and you don't change floor level just because you walked down a corridor.
As long as the entrances are marked with the floor number, it sounds like a good and reasonable plan to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Otherwise, buildings have floors, so obviously the first one is the one on the ground...
This is only a problem in English where we decided to oversimply our language by giving words multiple meanings. Going back to old English you didn't have 1st floor or 2nd floor. You had 1st storey or 2nd storey.
Other languages still do that. E.g. Dutch: Beganegrond "Ground basis" Then Erste Verdieping - "First Storey" completely different from the word boden "floor".
German is the same. Erdgeschoss > Erste Stock > Zweite Stock, no use of the word floor for either.
French: Rez-de-chaussée > prem
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard the idea of "being in your first year of life" or by extension whatever other year of life a number of times in Germany at least where it's called "Lebensjahr" (lit. year of living).
German legal text that are concerned with age usually are phrased like "Mit Vollendung des n. Lebensjahres" which directly translates into "with completion of the nth year of living". Using a direct example "with completion of the 18th year of age" in German legal text
legal age to drink alcohol so will some be stuck w (Score:2)
legal age to drink alcohol so will some be stuck with going from legal to not legal for them?
Re: (Score:2)
I find it funny that the legal drinking age limit never stopped me from underage drinking, I always found it easy to get alcohol (or lots of other restricted things). But it is very hard (at least it used to be) to rent a car before the age of 25, some companies would do it and charge more, others just would not rent to under 25. For me, age 25 was a much bigger deal than 21, I used to travel a lot. Being able to just rent a car anywhere was really freeing for me.
Not quite the way Korean age explained to me (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
That was my understanding as well although I am not Korean so I don't know how much that helps.
Re:Not quite the way Korean age explained to me (Score:5, Interesting)
. But there's another implication there, that the Korean culture considers conception as the formation of "life" which at least in the US is a key point of debate when discussing issues around women's health and abortions. Do Koreans consider an abortion equivalent to murdering a child if they're counting age from conception?
Life began 3.7 billion years ago (Score:2)
Precisely much of that continuity you want to consider sacred is I suppose just a matter of values.
correction (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's an interesting perspective. First, let's ignore the fact that we're counting from the day someone's parents had sex and the ick factor.
Good, they don't do that, they start at one instead of zero. They also increment age on New Year's Day, so don't read too far into it.
And abortion is a constitutional right in S Korea so there's that.
Re: (Score:2)
Python does not have arrays, only lists as I discovered helping my niece with her first year physics degree homework. Quite why you would use a language which does not have arrays for scientific computation is somewhat beyond me. Let me just compute the Hamiltonian, errrr...
Re: (Score:1)
Traditionally China also used the Korean system where you are 1 at birth (it's still a concept people have, but not common). It wasn't a conception thing. And surely Korea just inherited the system from China, and then has kept it longer than China.
It also doesn't make sense that the age would change at the new year's, if it's marking the "birthday" by moment of conception.
Re: (Score:3)
I've made a few trips to Korea over the years, and I've had many Korean friends and colleagues. They've all described their age counting method as starting from the date of conception (or at least the best guess of date of conception). Korean Slashdotters feel free to correct me.
I googled it for you, "conception" is the hand wavy rationale, but you are one year old at birth, not .75, not one in a few months. Also it increases on January 1st instead of your birthdate.
More of a counting from 1 vs 0 thing it sounds like. So if you were born today, you are one. Next month you will be two. Conception doesn't factor in at all.
Re: (Score:2)
"Conception doesn't factor in at all."
Well, it has to factor in somehow! Otherwise he wouldn't be here!
Re: (Score:2)
It's a traditional method in Japan as well, although it's long since passed out of official use there. It always seemed to me that it was meant to work this way: "You're born; this is your first year here. January 1st rolls around, marking the beginning of your second year here. And so on." You're never 0 years old, just like there's no 0 A.D.
I wonder (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
From 1953 through 2020, abortion was illegal in most circumstances [wikipedia.org], but illegal abortions were widespread and commonly performed at hospitals and clinics. On April 11, 2019, the Constitutional Court ruled the abortion ban unconstitutional and ordered the law's revision by the end of 2020.
Nothing here about age.
The government of South Korea criminalized abortion in the 1953 Criminal Code in all circumstances. The law was amended by the Maternal and Child Health Law of 1973 to permit a physician to perform an abortion if the pregnant woman or her spouse has a certain hereditary or communicable diseases, if the pregnancy results from rape or incest, or if continuing the pregnancy would jeopardize the woman's health.
Even their illegal abortions were more humane than what's being proposed in several US states.
Wait... (Score:5, Funny)
Does that mean the warranty on a new KIA is shorter than you think?
Does if affect tech warranty or something? (Score:1)
I'm wondering why this is even a thing, /. has always had non tech stuff creeping in but now it's going full tilt?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm wondering why this is even a thing, /. has always had non tech stuff creeping in but now it's going full tilt?
Slashdot has always been about stuff that Nerds and Geeks find interesting. It has never been exclusively tech. Yes, Nerds and Geeks find tech stuff interesting so tech stuff tends to dominate but they also find other stuff interesting. Dates fall into this as it's notorious how complex dates and times get. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Romans (Score:2)
The Latin expression for age was "annum agens xx" where the indicated age counted the current year as a full year. By current western standards that person would be xix years old.
Younger? (Score:4, Funny)
I'd better check to see if any of those pics of my Korean waifu will become child porn.
Re: (Score:1)
alwayshasbeenmeme.jpg
Fencepost error? (Score:2)
Time zones (Score:2)
The US should adopt Korean Age (Score:2)
Fear of the number zero. (Score:2)
Yes its annoying, but I'm still a little sad (Score:1)
More important than you think. (Score:1)