[LEAPSECS] h2g2

[Paul Sheer]

> : 

> : *I* care 

> : 

> : but I'm not important - I'm just one person 

> 

> So do you live [...]


here we have dst


> You are already [...]


agreed


> 

> : many people might care and many people are not getting to make

> : the decision because the decision is being made for them. 

> 

> That decision was made in the last half of the nineteenth century:

> Standard time already decoupled local solar time from the time that

> the clocks read.


and leap seconds helps it keep up


> 

> : further, it's not a decision we can *ever* go back on once it is

> : made because reversing back to solar to time would be politically

> : far too difficult to get collaboration on. 

> 

> Yes, but why do you care?


Why? Simple:

leap seconds are not a serious problem - just an inconveniance.

we can stop leap seconds at *any* time - what is the rush to do it in
*this* generation?

we have had proper timekeeping for less than a hundred years - a *short*
time.

we have no idea what the future will bring.

and the future is vast compared to this 100 years.

we *may* come to regret the decision for reasons we cannot foresee.

we are discovering new physics all the time - rather let a few
generations go by before we decide anything.



> 

> : therefore it is a decision that must be made very very carefully. 

> : 

> : that some NASA/ITU/whoever people find leap seconds "inconvenient"

> : for programmers is NOT sufficient reason to ever have started

> : pursuing this agenda. 

> 

> And why can't we just keep track of the accumulation for the

> relatively small number of applications that care?  Why can't we

> adjust timezones as the drift becomes larger every few hundred years

> or so?  What genuine benefit is served by keeping UTC in sync to

> England?  If corrections can be made and published, how are the

> different astronomical applications made significantly harder?



just because there appears to be no reason not to do something,
does not follow that we *must* proceed with it.



> 

> : > leap hour will ever happen, but I won't be around to see it one way or

> : > another. 

> : 

> : so really, your argument is to try convince people to only consider

> : eventualities that occur within the space of their lifetime? 

> : 

> : darwin takes care of this attitude - it's sort of guaranteed 

> 

> Listen to my argument: I'm saying that a leap hour just doesn't

> matter.  We've found a better way to keep time than the earth.  We


it may not matter now.

but not even astute students of philosophy like yourself cannot predict
in 500 years whether we may look back and regret the decision.



> bollixed up [...]


you exagerate - I've worked in *every* kind of IT environment and leap
seconds have never been a problem


> 

> But, of course, redefining the second now to make up for historical

> mistakes is out of the question. 


you don't say



> None of this has to do with my not caring about posterity. 


i can't tell if this means yes or no to you caring?



> space, and keeping time better than the Earth, it is time to question

> how absolute are our needs for this synchronization, and whether the

> complexity is generates is worth the cost it imposes.

> 


again you exagerate - it's not really a problem

i think this has more to do with certain IT people wanting to be
purists than the fact that anyone's livelyhood is materially affected.

-paul