[LEAPSECS] Do lawyers care (know) about leap seconds?
Steffen Nurpmeso
sdaoden at yandex.com
Wed Oct 1 09:33:04 EDT 2014
"Gerard Ashton" <ashtongj at comcast.net> wrote:
|Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
|
|> This approach would satisfy all parties: humans can continue to enjoy the
|cultural achievement of a clock that exactly describes their home planet,
|and engineers can use TAI for satisfying airplane schedule calculations for
|businessmen.
|
|"Businessmen" can keep whatever time they like for internal use, but
|whenever a businessman communicates with a customer or another business, the
|courts will interpret any times stated as being the legal time of the
|applicable jurisdiction, although in many cases the businessman and the
|other parties have the option of agreeing to a different time scale. So the
|businessman who uses TAI internally must either take great care to convert
|this to the appropriate legal time scale when communicating to outsiders, or
|must form a contract with each and every external contact to use TAI instead
|of the legal time scale that would normally apply.
That doesn't sound overall interesting to me, as i personally
neither like businessmen nor lawyers having plenty of negative
examples at hand. Of course this is a superficial view, i am able
to give you examples of actual characters in each profession (even
a strong and noble one regarding a judge), but exceptions confirm
the rule.
I cannot imagine you wouldn't agree that having CLOCK_TAI (and
CLOCK_LEAPDRIFT) make things easier. Not an easier way than not
throwing away already available information before it hits the
wire. So what do you want? No, i cannot build a satellite. And
i will not speak against leap seconds only because they are
managed by someone located in France.
--steffen
More information about the LEAPSECS
mailing list