Slashdot Mirror


US DoD Poll On Leap Seconds

@10u8 writes "For time scales to leap, or not to leap, has been the question here before. The ITU-R will be considering leap seconds again in a few weeks. This week the USNO posted a survey about leap seconds by the US DoD. The issue has civil implications as well as technical ones, and there is a demonstrated way to respect the history, remove leaps from navigation and POSIX time, yet keep the sun overhead at noon."

314 comments

  1. Are leap seconds really all that important? by NoobixCube · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I thought we had leap years to take care of the discrepancy between our calendar and the actual orbit around the sun. Would a leap second even be made longer by any noticeable amount? What about sporting events? Someone who misses out on a world record by a tiny bit would complain that the record h older had more leap seconds in his race! (Okay, that one was a joke, but the rest I'm serious about)

    --
    Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
    1. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Compare absolute time vs relative time vs elapsed time vs hammer time...

    2. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by maxume · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The leap seconds do the same thing as the leap years (each leap day moves the calendar closer to the orbit, but not exactly to the orbit).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're thinking of leap years, those are used to handle the year being having a fractional day. The leap seconds are inserted because the earth's rotation has a small but measurable instability. Some days really are longer than others (by a few milliseconds, anyway).

    4. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by xstonedogx · · Score: 5, Funny

      I dunno. When it's Miller Time all those other times kinda look alike.

    5. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the ugly chick at the bar starts to look good

    6. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      I dunno. When it's Miller Time all those other times kinda look alike.

      4:20 would be all over the place. Interesting concept.

    7. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I want to solve: There is no such thing as absolute time.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    8. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Funny
      "And the ugly chick at the bar starts to look good"

      Just make sure to take her home to her house...so when you wake up hungover and see her...you can leave quickly...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    9. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by VeNoM0619 · · Score: 1

      Screw leap seconds/leap years. Lets just get our calendar back on track. What's with this 2008 crap? Lets go back to either the beginning of earth or time itself. A year like 2,000,000,008 sounds just right, now lets see the creationists talk.

      --
      Disclaimer: I am not god.
      We may not be created equal
      But we can be treated equal.
    10. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by idiotnot · · Score: 1

      The leap seconds are required because of hammer time.

      Alright stop.
      -pause-
      Hammer time

    11. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by blueZ3 · · Score: 1

      You forgot the awesome power of TIME CUBE!

      --
      Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
    12. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      As far as I (a bear of little brain ;-)) can determine, it makes little difference whether or not the sun is overhead at noon.

      I am aware that historically it made a difference to navigators using clock and sextant to establish their position. I, as a yachtsman, still prefer to keep in practice with this having encountered a potentially nasty situation where the electronic gear fritzed out as a result of a good soaking with sodium chloride in solution with dihydrogen monoxide. Besides, the instruments are beautiful, and it's cool to be able to use them. ;-)

      But I recognise that most simply rely on the GPS, and it really doesn't matter how one sets the clock there so long as everybody agrees.

    13. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

      Be sure to tell her you post on Slashdot. That way you can avoid the problem of sleeping with her.

    14. Re:Are leap seconds really all that important? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      Right. Everyone knows time began 1221005929 seconds ago.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  2. Not quite by Deadstick · · Score: 4, Informative
    there is a demonstrated way to...keep the sun overhead at noon.

    No there isn't, but you can make it culminate at noon.

    rj

    1. Re:Not quite by moderatorrater · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, but anyone close enough to give the sun a nooner would get burned up.

    2. Re:Not quite by JustOK · · Score: 1

      so do it when its cloudy, d'uh!

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    3. Re:Not quite by sconeu · · Score: 1

      <PARIS-HILTON>
      That's Hot!
      </PARIS-HILTON>

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    4. Re:Not quite by Fear+the+Clam · · Score: 1

      No there isn't, but you can make it culminate at noon.

      It depends where you are in your time zone. It's rare for the sun to be directly overhead at noon.

    5. Re:Not quite by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      No there isn't, but you can make it culminate at noon.

      Yes there is: Move to the equator.

      :P

    6. Re:Not quite by Deadstick · · Score: 2, Informative
      It's rare for the sun to be directly overhead anywhere, and impossible outside the Tropics. At noon local standard time (assuming the leap-second problem has been taken care of, per the thread topic), it culminates for an observer on the base meridian of the time zone. It always culminates at noon local solar time -- which is a bit of a tautology, because local solar time is computed from the time when it culminates.

      rj

    7. Re:Not quite by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      That will get you up to twice a year.

      rj

    8. Re:Not quite by eggnoglatte · · Score: 1

      ...just like everywhere else on the planet, one might add.

      Well, everywhere except for regions north of the arctic circle or south of the antarctic circle. That covers what, about 99.999% of the human population?

    9. Re:Not quite by cnettel · · Score: 1

      Nope. Only twice a year if you are within the tropics, i.e. +/- 23Â 26' 22". For someone living at 60Â N, it's quite evident that we never have the sun in zenith, but we are also a far shot off from actually being north of the arctic circle.

    10. Re:Not quite by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 1

      No, not [ant]artic circles, but between the tropics of Capricorn and Cancer, as http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=957511&cid=24927705 said.

      Now you've got me curious about the real percentage of people living in the tropics. Hmm.

      --
      Take off every 'sig' !!
    11. Re:Not quite by kcelery · · Score: 1

      People think it is noon time at 12. Well, almost.
      This is a small chart of our local time when the sun is at the highest point:
      Jan 1, 12:27
      Feb 1, 12:37
      Mar 1, 12:36
      Apr 1, 12:27
      May 1, 12:21
      Jun 1, 12:21
      Jul 1, 12:27
      Aug 1, 12:30
      Sep 1, 12:23
      Oct 1, 12:13
      Nov 1, 12:07
      Dec 1, 12:13

      It is actually changing everyday.

    12. Re:Not quite by pmontra · · Score: 1

      I can't give you a number but if you look at a map (this one?) you can see that half of India is in the tropics, all the South-East Asia, most of Mexico, all central America, more than half of South America and Africa. I think that the number is at least 2 billions, maybe 3. I'd guess that 30-40% of the human population live in the tropics.

      The map and the data provided by this Wikipedia page could help make a more precise estimation, if I had the time.

    13. Re:Not quite by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      No. If you aren't between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn you will never, ever see the sun overhead. The highest it can possibly be is (113.6 degrees - latitude) mod 90.

      And even if you're between the Tropics, you still will never see the sun overhead unless you accept some margin of error. In order to be exactly overhead, it would have to cross your longitude and your latitude at exactly the same time, and the probability of that is zero. If roughly an eighth of a degree off is acceptable, you'll see it twice a year.

      By contrast, the sun culminates, exactly, once a day everywhere on the planet.

      rj

    14. Re:Not quite by louks · · Score: 1

      For at least half the year, you cannot have it culminate at noon, as we lie to everyone with Daylight "Saving", telling them that 11:00 am is supposed to be noon, and you didn't REALLY go to work at 7am, because it's stupid to ask someone to go to work at 7am. It's 8am, because that what the government decided to call 7am during the summer (and spring, and most of fall, now).

      But I digress. At one point, every town had a different time zone, because they WOULD set their clocks to solar noon, and since they were off by minutes, trains had a hard time creating and keeping track of schedules, so the government simplified everything by creating the standard time "zones" in which a single solar noon was sufficient for every location. Only the VERY few places now have the sun culminate at noon anymore, because we've associated an arbitrary designation of time.

      In conclusion, keep UTC, and keep leap seconds, for all it matters. Time has nothing to do with our place in the universe anymore. It's as arbitrary as the lengths of the months.

      (I do what my Standard Time back, though. I hate Daylight Saving in Indiana. We're between two time zones, so it was the BEST compromise for relating to the rest of the world. We could be two hours from PDT during the summer, putting us in much better touch with the West, but we're too far east to have the sun "set" at 4pm CST in the winter.)

  3. Kill DST instead!!!! by wealthychef · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd be more interested in killing Daylight Savings Time than dealing with Leap Year.

    --
    Currently hooked on AMP
    1. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by illegalcortex · · Score: 2, Insightful

      DST can be "fixed" by recording time in UCT. No such "fix" exists for leap seconds. With leap seconds, you're getting down to the fundamentals of how time is recorded, not how it is translated to local time.

    2. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by philspear · · Score: 1

      Because it doesn't give you enough time during the day to sufficiently explain yourself on /.?

    3. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by narcberry · · Score: 0, Troll

      DST increases the productivity of the workforce. Just compare Arizona with the rest of the nation.

      --
      Modding me -1 troll doesn't make me wrong.
    4. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Why would you want to get rid daylight savings time? I would make the argument that we should extend it even more. I can't stand leaving for work when it's still dark, and getting off when the sun is starting to go down. My skin is already turning incandescent green from spending too much time in the office.

      Think of how many lives daylight savings saves regarding traffic

    5. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by CorporateSuit · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'd rather have the sun on my face when I'm trying to wake up in the morning than hovering in my rearview while I'm trying to drive home.

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    6. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by corsec67 · · Score: 1

      Why don't you try to get everyone you interact with to use UTC, then?

      The gp obviously wasn't talking about recording timestamps, which should be in UTC.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    7. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by kpainter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why would you want to get rid daylight savings time?

      Because it is like cutting a foot off of one end of a blanket and sewing it on the other end and expecting to get a blanket that is a foot longer. Kind of dumb. If you want to get up when it is light, get up earlier. When should we all have to move the clock back and forth? Split the difference between DST and normal time and leave it. Who cares if the sun isn't overhead at exactly noon.

    8. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by RanCossack · · Score: 1

      The solution is obviously to use Unix timestamps for everything.

    9. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Killing it? I want to change them completely, and wintertime too. Now, I live a bit further north than most people (60 degrees latitude) and what happens in the winter is that I, like most people, head to work in the dark and come home in the dark. Maybe you get to see some sun on your lunch break, but unless you got an office with a view you won't see much of it otherwise. If we have like 6 hours of sun, they should be 4PM-10PM so you can do some outdoor activity after work. What happens now is I sit indoors during the day because of work, and I sit indoors in the evenings because it's dark and cold outside. I haven't got any stats to back it up but I'd think most people work indoors these days, the reason to have light == noon so you could run around outside just isn't there. I'd be happy with mornings that suck (some more) and evenings that were bright and nice all year round.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    10. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by BagOBones · · Score: 1

      Not only that the blanket keep shrinking in the wash anyway, so moving the end around doesn't matter as the blanket will be too short in any direction in a few weeks anyway.

      http://www.gaisma.com/en/dir/001-continent.html

      --
      EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
    11. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      I'd be more interested in killing Daylight Savings Time than dealing with Leap Year.

      Feh. You can have my daylight savings time when you pry it from my cold dead hand.

      Want a powerful life that you love? Try Landmark Education

      If you're going to join a cult that uses lawyer and the DCMA to silence critics, why not go all the way for Scientology?

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    12. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Why don't you ask if you can come into work earlier so that you can leave earlier, rather than messing with my clock?

    13. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by mrsquid0 · · Score: 1

      > Think of how many lives daylight savings saves regarding traffic Actually, that is a myth. To make matters worse, what little affect there is on traffic safety depends on what side of the time zone that one is on, so the tiny benefit gained in cities on one edge is balanced by the cities on the other edge. The reality is that DST has far more effect on one shopping habits than it does on safety. DST is just another example of social engineering. Now, that said, it is nice to have a few hours of daylight in the evening. However, I would prefer to have that extra light in the morning, when I am trying to wake up, rather than when I am trying to go to sleep.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    14. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      My thoughts *exactly*. That whole DST idea was broken from the very beginning and I wonder what could actually break if we just got rid of it right now?
      I guess there would be some confusion in the first few years because millions of clocks and watches would still auto-adjust (and have to be fixed or replaced anyhow) but that's not so different to what we have today, twice every year.

      Is there anything serious relying on DST that would break if DST suddenly went away?

      Either way I think it's a safe bet that the savings in energy and money due to DST sum up to a negative value.
      So why can't the people in charge get their act together and abolish it...

    15. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by zappepcs · · Score: 1

      Yes, indeed. I was hoping to find an explanation in comments... I don't have TIME to read the articles... sigh

    16. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by corsec67 · · Score: 1

      Why not see if you could get to work at (say) midnight, so that when you get home it is morning?

      How about instead of redefining time, you change what the times mean?

      That is my complaint about DST: instead of leaving it up to businesses to start work at 9 instead of 8, they have to mandate that the whole concept of local time changes.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    17. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by nsayer · · Score: 1

      Think of how many lives daylight savings saves regarding traffic

      Um, if you extend DST longer, then you're going to lose all those lives you save by having the morning commute occur in darkness.

      They tried this during WWII. It was called "War Time," and yes, the accident rate went up in the mornings during the winter.

    18. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by nsayer · · Score: 1

      Because maybe he's a bus driver and flex time wouldn't work very well.

    19. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Jorophose · · Score: 1

      But think of the children!

      No, really.

      How the hell am I going to go to sleep and wake up in time?

      3PM-9PM, with the sun completely down at 10PM would be pretty sweet. I mean, I'm in school all day, and they're leaving the lights on anyway, so why not? I finish school and it's bright out, it's so great to go outside! It would encourage us to get off our fat asses too. No more excuses. It's now sunny outside when you don't have work.

    20. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      Why does your blanket have feet on it? And why are you cutting them off?

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    21. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Why not see if you could get to work at (say) midnight, so that when you get home it is morning?

      It's not the "getting to work" part, it's the "staying employed" part. Very few jobs, even with flexible hours will accept that you're never around during normal business hours. And the whole bit about social events which would then happen at "nighttime" for you.

      That is my complaint about DST: instead of leaving it up to businesses to start work at 9 instead of 8, they have to mandate that the whole concept of local time changes.

      It's not like they're warping the time stream or anything, it's just digits on a watch and there's no law saying businesses can't "un-DST" their business hours. Can it be that what you really have a problem with is being an hour out of synch with everybody else? In that case it's rather funny because it's exactly what you suggest for me, while trying to avoid it yourself by trying to remove DST rather than just live on non-DST time if that's what you want.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    22. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I'm still busy patching my systems from the last damned DST change...

    23. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      My thoughts *exactly*. That whole DST idea was broken from the very beginning and I wonder what could actually break if we just got rid of it right now?

      Nonsense! In the beginning it served an important purpose - it allowed the pubs to stay open after people got off work and before the blackout went into effect in the evening during WW1.

      Anyone who can say that keeping the pubs open an extra hour was "broken from the very beginning" is a sick, depraved individual....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    24. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by lgw · · Score: 1

      BUt the whole point is, that work could have simple started and endd an hour earlier, keeping the pubs open just as well. The whole idea of changing the clock rather than changing the work schedule is a bit baffling.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    25. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      You're right!!!

      DST should be all year long!!

    26. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by illegalcortex · · Score: 1

      Actually, the gp wasn't "obviously" anything and was being very vague. In fact, now that I look at it they said leap year, which is almost a non-sequitur considering the context.

      I also don't get the point of you talking about getting everyone you interact with to use UTC. If your wish is that you would get everyone GLOBALLY to abolish any kind of DST, good luck with that. It's simply not going to happen so it seems to be a moot point even talking about it. As long as there is a good way to record the time, what do you really expect to happen?

    27. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Myopic · · Score: 1

      I live in Alaska, and I have always thought that!

      I don't know what the best way to get that is. Either we could move time to fit our preconceived notions of proper waking and sleeping "hours", or we as a dark society could change our preconceived notions. What if the government of Alaska (or wherever you live) pushed an agenda to get everyone on a one-am-to-five-pm schedule for business activity instead? We'd all get up in the dark, like we do anyway; go to our poorly lit offices, like we do anyway; get off work after eight hours, like we do anyway; then walk outside, but instead of darkness, we would open onto the sunrise, with a few hours to do something outside, or with natural lighting.

    28. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      > I'd be more interested in killing Daylight Savings Time than dealing with Leap Year.

      OK, but ONLY if our time zones get permanently moved +1 hour. In Florida, at least, that would be awesome... even in the northernmost part of the state, the sun would still rise by 8am on the darkest day of winter, and we'd get to have an hour or two of daylight after work in the winter instead of driving home in darkness (and hellish gridlock).

      Don't underestimate the impact of daylight on traffic. Morning traffic tends to be spread out over several hours. So does evening traffic... except during the winter, when people who normally might have straggled home at 6 or 7 (figuring traffic is gridlocked anyway) all start to rush out the door at 5pm in a desperate effort to get home before dark, and a 3-5 hour process of congested traffic collapses into 2-4 hours of complete gridlock for everyone. When traffic is normally bumper-to-bumper and a half step shy of complete gridlock, it doesn't really take THAT many people to decide to try and get home early to tip the balance and bring everything to a grinding halt. If you don't believe me, come to Miami and observe morning and evening rush hour on the last Friday of Daylight Savings Time, then compare it to morning and evening rush hour the first Monday after it ends. Then Do the same thing a few months later... on the last Friday before DST begins, observe that traffic really hasn't gotten any better all winter despite the sun now setting around 6:30pm, and morning traffic is as bad as ever... then compare it to the traffic on Monday. Morning traffic? Unchanged. Evening traffic? Literally, a night-and-day difference. A 5pm drive that took 45 minutes during the winter suddenly takes 30 minutes.

    29. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by igb · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Don't be silly. If you need monotonically increasing time, that's what TAI is: constant seconds, no leap seconds, ticked by atomic clocks.. If you need time that works for solar or celestial navigation because you want to sail boats using only a sextant, you use UT0 or UT1, so that the sun is in the right place relative to your watch, but you accept that seconds aren't constant: variations in the movement of the earth appear as variations in the length of seconds. UTC is a convenient compromise, with the constant seconds of TAI plus leap seconds to keep it within 0.9s of UT1. It's not good for long duration timing (leap seconds) and it's not good for accurate navigation (could be up to 0.9s), but it's the best compromise for civil time. The ITU-R are complaining that a timescale with properties X and Y doesn't have property Z, even though they could easily use timescale Z.

      By the way, for extra fun, although all UK systems operate as if legal time is UTC, in fact it's GMT, which is either UT0 or UT1 depending on who you ask. There was legislation being worked on in 1997 to standardise on UTC, but it wasn't restarted after the change of government. So telecoms companies complaining that they don't like leap seconds but `have to' because of legal requirements are simply wrong: they should be ticking UT0 or UT1 for their billing systems, which don't have leap seconds anyway.

      ian

    30. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by amorsen · · Score: 1

      UTC is a convenient compromise, with the constant seconds of TAI plus leap seconds to keep it within 0.9s of UT1. It's not good for long duration timing (leap seconds) and it's not good for accurate navigation (could be up to 0.9s), but it's the best compromise for civil time.

      TAI would have been the best compromise. UTC is not convenient for anything.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    31. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by igb · · Score: 1

      TAI might be a good compromise now, less so in a thousand years' time when it'll be several hours out. ian

    32. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by jecblackpepper · · Score: 1

      While I personally hate DST, there are lots of reasons why one would use it instead of providing more flexible work schedules. Things like public transport timetables, school hours, work contracts specifying hours at work, TV schedules etc. which means one can't easily just adjust your own timetable to give you the best use of sunlight hours. Until these are also solved to allow more flexibility then DST remains a compromise that most of society seems to be happy with.

    33. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      UTC contains leap seconds BY DEFINITION! if you want to get rid of those, use TAI.

      --
      bickerdyke
    34. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by amorsen · · Score: 1

      It takes significantly longer than a thousand years before it will be several hours out. Once it is several hours out, leap seconds won't cut it anyway, you would have to add them way too often.

      One good solution would be inventing new time zones an hour shifted and simply migrate users to the new time zones. It isn't a particularly large problem, and it has been done several times before anyway when areas were moved to different time zones.

      Once the day moves beyond 86450 seconds or so, no solution works. Either adjust the length of the second or the number of seconds (minutes, hours) in a day.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    35. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      isnt it more like just moving a blanket one foor up or down, to the place where you actually feel cold?

      --
      bickerdyke
    36. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      People get into habits. Getting up a 5AM is one of those habits, and they'd feel put-upon by their employers if their employers told them they had to get up at 4AM. Change the clock, and they can still get up at 5AM, and get the benefits of getting up at 4AM without the put-upon feeling.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    37. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by evilbessie · · Score: 1

      Well your analogy is not quite accurate, becuase you fail to point out that the blanket does get longer and shorter throughout the year (I can't use this analogy any further) But if you assume that you work 9-5, but if you only get 8 hours or sunlight during the winter, then it makes sense to have them 8-16 (equally spaced about noon). But in the summer you have 16 hours of sunlight, so you might as well make them 5-21 so we're not all getting up at 4am when the sun would rise. You effectively feel like you get an extra hour of sunlight in the evening, yes you don't really but the numbers make it seem so. It also reduces accidents in the winter, which having it dark in the morning does overall cause more accidents.

    38. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by dargaud · · Score: 1

      I've worked in a place where they did exactly as you suggest: 5 hours difference between the official noon and the time the sun was at its top. And I can tell you it was hell if you had to actually _work_ outdoors. Too cold (you worked all through the coldest hours of the day), too dark, etc... Yeah, your ass is nice and cozy in the office and you want some sunlight so you can play with your dog when you get home. Right.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    39. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everyone works in a office doofus.

    40. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by illegalcortex · · Score: 1

      My comment about UTC was that it was the "fix" for DST (at least as far as software development). I wasn't applying UTC to the leap seconds question. I was pointing out that DST was simply a mapping question. Leap seconds is more of a definition question.

    41. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Full agree.

      perhaps maybe the reduction of accidents. You may reduce them in the morning, but increase them in the evening. The blanket is still a bit too short...

      --
      bickerdyke
    42. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then start waking up when the sun is on your face, not when a little electric gizmo makes annoying noises at you.

    43. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about we just get rid of time zones completely and use the same time everywhere? What does the 'name' you give to a given moment in time matter? What would be so wrong with you working from, say 9:00 to 17:00, some other guy in another part of the world working from 23:00 to 7:00, and yet another one from 14:00 to 22:00?

    44. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by imboboage0 · · Score: 1

      It sounds to me like you need to get a job that has you driving home in the other direction, so as to avoid the rear view mirror issue. This is much easier than changing time, I promise. :)

      --
      Honesty may be the best policy, but by process of elimination, dishonesty is the second best policy.
    45. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by lgw · · Score: 1

      I feel exactly the opposite - I feel put-upon when the goventment makes me do something, but my employer is paying me. I guess that's why some people prefer socialism, and other capitalism. :)

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    46. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      Your privilege, of course. Just be aware that the overwhelming number of other people prefer it the other way, and suck it up.

      To me, it's cutting off one end of a string to tie to the other end, no matter how you manage it.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    47. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by CorporateSuit · · Score: 1

      the way I go, I drive against traffic and cut 30-50% of my commute time.

      and I like where I live

      and my work pays me so well to do what I do!

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    48. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by kvezach · · Score: 1

      What you want is a time system that's synchronized to sunrise rather than to noon.

      The bad news is that with such a system, you don't get just time zones, you get time "quadrants", and there's also a degenerate case by the poles (either it's light all day or it's dark all day).

    49. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by imboboage0 · · Score: 1

      Whoosh.

      Quite obviously, driving the other way would put the sun in your face instead. :)

      --
      Honesty may be the best policy, but by process of elimination, dishonesty is the second best policy.
    50. Re:Kill DST instead!!!! by toddestan · · Score: 1

      He says he works in an office, so that would be one strange bus driving job.

  4. Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 5, Informative
    Leap days correct our orbit around the sun to keep December/January in the middle of winter for the Northern Hemisphere.

    Leap seconds correct for the rotation of the earth to keep the sun above at noon.

    If we dispense with leap seconds then this relationship will slowly change and noon will eventually be dark.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by NoobixCube · · Score: 2

      I suppose I'd know that if I'd R'd TFA... :P

      --
      Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
    2. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about we have a leap hour? It would only need to occur every 1/3600 times that we do a leap second and the reasoning for it would make a whole lot more sense to the general public.

      It bothers me the amount of money that is being spent researching this problem.

    3. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by catmistake · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Leap days correct our orbit around the sun to keep December/January in the middle of winter for the Northern Hemisphere.

      While true, that is the intent, has any one noticed that this has failed over the last 20 years or so? When I was a child, Winter was Winter, and the first snow fall in the Northeast was usually by Thanksgiving. Over the past couple decades, the first snowfall seems to be pushing itself into late January, mid-February. Used to be, the harshest part of Winter was Dec-Jan, now it seems firmly seated in February. And why is it every year we see an Indian Summer smack in the middle of Winter? By my reckoning, we're now at least a month off (April frost brings May snot).

    4. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It syncs to astronomic time, i.e. how the earth rotates around the sun. You can see that by how long the days are and how high the sun is in the sky at noon.

      The weather is a very different and very complex question that could not be predicted ahead of time like that. So by your reckoning, climate lags astronomic movement by a month now compared to 20 years ago? Depending on where you live, that's quite possible. But it's not something leap anythings could fix :)

    5. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by blantonl · · Score: 1

      My God your signature:

      Engineering is the art of compromise.

      And then this quote:

      If we dispense with leap seconds then this relationship will slowly change and noon will eventually be dark.

      Does slowly equal 20 years, or 20,000 years before we're dark? I mean really?!?

      --
      Lindsay Blanton
      RadioReference.com
    6. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      has any one noticed that this has failed over the last 20 years or so?

      No. Labor Day was as cold in the valley as it usually is in the mountains this year, and trick or treating has consistently required coats for my family for the past 20 years.

    7. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      source? Pretty sure the latest recorded freeze in the DFW area has been april 14th for something like that for more than 30 years. when 80% of the US has only had scientifically accurate weather data for the last 100 year or so. pull up weather records for your area and post them, i'd be interested to see factual evidence support your theory.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    8. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by nsayer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The trouble with that is twofold:

      1. Ordinary people who don't take note of such things can have their clocks be off by a second (or even a few) and still get along in their ordinary lives. That would not be the case if the government announced that there was going to be a leap hour inserted this year and they missed it.

      2. Any semi-periodic event that must be noted and accommodated by the general public that cannot be calendared years in advance is virtually guaranteed to be a snarling mess.

    9. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by nategoose · · Score: 2, Funny

      You had me scared there for a little bit. I thought you were going to explain how dispensing with leap times was going to degrade our orbit and make us either fall into the Sun or fling out into deep space.

    10. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Global warming... 'nuff said."

      --Al "A.C." Gore

    11. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the whole issue is made more complicated than it is. The timescales where leap seconds are a hindrance obviously don't care at all about synchronicity to "natural" time as dictated by the rotations of the Earth. They are used in applications which care more about exact durations rather than points in time. That quite obviously means that these timescales should simply count (micro-, nano-, femto-)seconds from a defined point in time and leave the days and years to the timescales where these words make sense. "Human" time on the other hand, with it's days and years, should equally obviously be kept in sync with our movement through the solar system.

    12. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by wtfispcloadletter · · Score: 1

      2. Any semi-periodic event that must be noted and accommodated by the general public that cannot be calendared years in advance is virtually guaranteed to be a snarling mess

      We seem to get along just fine with the idiotic Daylight Savings Time and changing clocks twice a year. True those who are paying attention actually know which days those are. But the same could be done with a leap hour as those could be scheduled and known years in advance. Not that I agree with the concept of a leap hour, I think the very idea is moronic as I agree more with your first statement. People don't care or notice if their clocks are off by a few seconds or even a few minutes. If they happen to notice, they they make the minor adjustment and go on with their lives.

    13. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Dannkape · · Score: 5, Informative

      According to wikipedia, there seems to have been 24 leap seconds in the last 36 years. For solar noon to move a single hour away would take over 5 millenia.

      Of course, they do give the news something harmless to report on every once in a while...

    14. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by catmistake · · Score: 1

      Well, Labor Day is late Summer, and at elevation weather is always more extreme. Over recent history, haven't you noticed that the snows come later and linger longer? There was a snow storm late March 2 years ago... that just doesn't sit right with me that the biggest storms are arriving post-January rather than early December.

    15. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by CorporateSuit · · Score: 4, Funny

      If we dispense with leap seconds then this relationship will slowly change and noon will eventually be dark.

      In that case, we rename "noon" to "midnight", and "midnight" to "noon"
      then "AM" can mean "After-Meridian" and "PM" can mean "Pre-Meridian"
      I thought of everything. Problem solved forever.

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    16. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by nsayer · · Score: 1

      Did you miss the part where I talked about events that can be calendared years in advance? Leap hours can't be so easily predicted. Remember the gnashing of teeth the last time they changed the DST rules, for example?

    17. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Well , my grandma told me, that once, they had snow in mid-June. I guess we need more and more exact data...

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    18. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by hclewk · · Score: 1

      So, if leap seconds are needed to correct the position of the sun at noon, then that means that aren't exactly 24 hours/1440 minutes/86400 seconds in a day. Isn't the definition of 1 hour supposed to be 1/24th of a day? The length of a second is completely arbitrary. It is 1/60th of 1/60th of 1/24th of a day. So why not just make an hour slightly shorter (or longer, whichever the case) to be exactly 1/24th of a day.

      Leap years, on the other hand, are completely justified. 1 year is defined as one trip around the sun. 1 day is defined as one rotation of the earth around its own axis. It just so happens that there are 365.24ish days in 1 year.

      The implications of changing the definition of the hour would be completely technical, as is the case with the leap second. No one would notice their clock being a few seconds off.

    19. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The length of the second has been redefined to a precise value. Something related to the crossing of a proton by a photon or something...

    20. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "While true, that is the intent, has any one noticed that this has failed over the last 20 years or so? When I was a child, Winter was Winter, and the first snow fall in the Northeast was usually by Thanksgiving. Over the past couple decades, the first snowfall seems to be pushing itself into late January, mid-February. Used to be, the harshest part of Winter was Dec-Jan, now it seems firmly seated in February. And why is it every year we see an Indian Summer smack in the middle of Winter? By my reckoning, we're now at least a month off (April frost brings May snot)."

      I dunno, I still turn my A/C off in November pretty much like clockwork...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    21. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the last 20 years, there was 10 leap seconds. That means that a leap hour would occur once every 7200 years. We basically could decide without any problem of the next leap hour a millennium in advance. Is that enough for you or you already have something booked for September 15, 3198 on your agenda.

      Idiot.
       

    22. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by shaitand · · Score: 1

      In the past 10yrs or so things have been fairly consistently late. My birthday is in late september and normally there would chilled or even frosty days in Sept. by November things were rather frigid and by late November you'd normally see a snow that stuck. Dec-Jan were damn cold. Feb might be warmer but was usually still cold, and march was noticably warmer than feb. Actually I haven't noticed much change at the end of winter, mostly its the earlier months.

      We moved a lot, so this was in Delaware, Central Illinois, and Northern Nevada.

    23. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by shaitand · · Score: 1

      'That quite obviously means that these timescales should simply count (micro-, nano-, femto-)seconds from a defined point in time and leave the days and years to the timescales where these words make sense.'

      mmm hmm

      '"Human" time on the other hand,'

      Explain to me the difference between the first description and 'human' time.

    24. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not every day (i.e., from one solar crossing of the meridian to the next) is exactly the same length. (Ptolemy knew about this.) Furthermore, because of drag/perturbation/molten core/etc., not every terrestrial trip around the sun is exactly the same length. I think these latter factors contribute to the need for ad hoc leap seconds.

      --
      Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
    25. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by eggnoglatte · · Score: 1

      The start of winter is the shortest day of the year, the start of summer the longest. Weather is only a secondary effect.

    26. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by YttriumOxide · · Score: 2, Informative

      The start of winter is the shortest day of the year, the start of summer the longest. Weather is only a secondary effect.

      Actually, that's only in the US. In most of the rest of the world, the MIDDLE of Winter is the shortest day and the MIDDLE of summer is the longest day.
      Not that it matters - the seasons are just names for some various times of year anyway, so it doesn't make any difference when you start/finish them, or even whether you have them at all or not.

      You're of course right that weather has nothing to do with it though.

      --
      My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
      Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
    27. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Myopic · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's a great idea! Actually, let's do one better, and we'll change the names of the times whenever it drifts by six hours: we'll call noon "six o'clock", and whatnot. Actually, gosh, let's go all the way and do it for every hour. So, if we drift by an hour, then we'll rename "one o'clock" "two o'clock", and whatnot. That'll keep it all about right. No, wait, actually, we should do it for every minute -- no, let's do it for seconds! So, every time it gets off by a second, we'll add a second to the middle of the night!

      Nobody will even notice an extra second in the middle of the night, except nerdy scientist types.

    28. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by kakofb · · Score: 1

      In Australia the shortest day is about a third of the way into winter.

    29. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by bickerdyke · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah. an hour is meant to be 1/24 of a day. but unfortunatly, every day has a different length. You can have a look at the length of the days for each day the past 2 years here: http://hpiers.obspm.fr/eop-pc/

      Yep, that means that meanwhile, our clocks are far more precise than the earth rotation itself.

      --
      bickerdyke
    30. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by theocrite · · Score: 1

      If we dispense with leap seconds then this relationship will slowly change and noon will eventually be dark.

      In 200 centuries (if we add 2 seconds per year, and this only happened once afaik). :)

      Or if we keep the same rate as now (20s in 30 years), somewhere around 650 centuries from now.

      During a life time (less than 100 years) even if we add 2s per years, the time will only be 3 or 4 minutes "earlier".

      Anyway i'm not saying UTC is bad. It's great. I don't think everyone here understood how it work. I'll try a short summary (i hope i won't say anything wrong here).

      We have a "stable" time. We don't have something with a better precision. This time is given by atomic clocks (mainly caesium) all around the world. Then their time is compared against each other by the BIPM (Bureau International des Poids Mesures) to have more precision/security (clocks are not ticking at the same rate). Ok now we have a "stable" time. This is TAI. What's the use for UTC then ?

      Well as you may know, earth doesn't rotate evenly (mainly because of moon, oceans etc.). It can speed up or slow down. If the absolute value of the difference between TAI and UT1 (solar day, related to earth rotation) is greater than 1/2s, then we are closer to the next second than the current one. So we need to remove (this never happened afaik) or add one second to UTC.
      The wikipedia entry about leap second has a Nice graph showing how UTC differs from TAI. We can see that time can also "slow" down (especially between 2000 and 2004).

      If you're interested in this, I think you should read the page about leap second by David L. Mills (Who added the RFC NTP entry, and created (x)ntpd). Actually you can read the whole documentation, you won't lose your time, trust me.

      Now about people complaining about UTC. I don't get what's wrong with UTC ? TAI isn't an answer to UTC or an improvement, it's the foundation so we can build UTC on it.
      We can't rely on UT1, we need a really precise time (for GPS, logs, army, research, money transactions, and so on).
      We could use TAI of course. But by doing this, we won't help our grand grandchildren. If they wake up at 8:00 am, 5 hours after the day started, well, it will be weird. And they will have something to care about.

      The leap second, we don't even feel it. Only atomic clocks do the leap second (afaik, i could be wrong though). ntp clients, only need to correct the drift (leap second can be considered as a instant drift) ie add fractions of seconds slowly so that the computer doesn't even notice (and that you don't have trouble say... In apache log for instance with a page viewed at one time and another page viewed one second earlier or kernel warnings or anything else).

    31. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      you're assuming that for the next 7200 years we still would need leap seconds at around the same rate. But as leap seconds are needed to make up for the unpredictabale variations of earths rotation. We might need more, less, or even skip leap seconds instead of inserting them.

      --
      bickerdyke
    32. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Aeehmm... no?

      Even though the those days may be called mid-summer, they still mark the beginning of summer here ie Europe too.

      --
      bickerdyke
    33. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Good news.. Guess how timekeeping is already done. your "human time" is called UTC, and your other proposal already goes by the name TAI

      --
      bickerdyke
    34. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Shinobi · · Score: 1

      Depends on where.

      Here in Sweden, summer starts in may/june, according to the old "calendar". Nowadays, summer is said to be started when the temperature even at its coldest is above 10 degrees Celsius, and at no point goes below it

    35. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by mrsbrisby · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Around 43,200 years, actually.

    36. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by phillous · · Score: 1

      Surely that means that over the course of the next 7199 years, the sun would be further away from being directly overhead, and in fact in 7199 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, 59 seconds, the sun would actually be at its highest point at 12:59:59.

      Fake guesswork math, obviously, but my point is that with seconds, the great unwashed wont notice and it never gets more than a second out of sync...

    37. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you miss the part where I talked about events that can be calendared years in advance? Leap hours can't be so easily predicted.

      Yes they can, as long as you're not hung up on inserting a leap hour exactly at the point where the drift is 30 minutes. When the drift gets to (say) 29 minutes 56 seconds you estimate the date when it will reach 30 minutes based on the current drift rate and set the official leap hour date based on that, and stick to it. That should give you about 6 years notice (according to my calculations; if they're wrong, the priciple still holds). So UTC goes from being +30 mins off to -30 mins if you're right; if you're wrong it goes from (say) +29:59 to -30:01. Doesn't matter either way.

    38. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by PetiePooo · · Score: 2, Informative

      According to wikipedia, there seems to have been 24 leap seconds in the last 36 years. For solar noon to move a single hour away would take over 5 millenia.

      RTFA. There are pretty charts showing that we're pretty much at the top of a parabolic curve. Its still relatively flat, hence there have only been 24 leap seconds needed in the last 36 years. However, as we travel further down the parabolic curve, they will be needed with increasing frequency.

    39. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Naturalis+Philosopho · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Averages are wonderful things. Over time they account for variations in, well, just about everything. So, yeah, I'll assume that the average rate over millennia is predictable once we've measured it for the few millennia between the needs for a leap hour. A large enough data set and all that.

      Doesn't a leap second smack of someone looking overhead at "high noon" each day and re-setting their watch? I mean, really. Next people will want time zones sliced into second increments so that everyone has the sun directly overhead at noon. I wonder if I could patent a watch that uses radio transceiver to re-set itself as you drive from one "time slice" to another as you cross town.

    40. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by teknognome · · Score: 1

      That's meteorology/climate. That could be changing for any of various reasons. Leap years keep the Solstices (which are an astronomical phenomenon) in the same few days in December/July.

    41. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by fyrewulff · · Score: 1

      Nope. While there have been a couple of warm winters in Nebraska in my recent memory, there's also been some pretty hardcore-cold ones.

      It all depends on how lucky/unlucky we get with the timing of weather. For instance, if it's cold enough to produce snow while storms can pick up a lot of energy from the south, we'll get dumped on with snow. That snow will cool down the air enough so that all future storms will just continue to add onto the top of it. Cold winter.

      Warm winters, either it doesn't quite get cold enough and we just get a bunch of rain at the start. When it does snow, it's too warm for it to stick around, so it either melts or washes away.

      Either winter, the nights are still cold as all get out. They're getting pretty cold right now. My A/C is barely turning itself on now.

      --
      "We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997
    42. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait a second...if a leap year only adds one day then wouldn't a leap second only add 1/365th of a second? Would anybody even CARE that it will be dark at noon sometime in the coming Ice Age?

    43. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by YttriumOxide · · Score: 1

      Where in Europe are you? As far as I was aware, every country in Europe consider the longest day (the Summer solstice) to be the middle of summer, not the start. Shinobi from Sweden (who also replied to you) seems to agree (although the other definition is a little "interesting" also!

      --
      My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
      Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
    44. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Kevin72594 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In 2006 there was a pretty bad storm in Buffalo NY in October...

      October Storm

      Aren't anecdotes wonderful?

    45. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Germany. Even took the liberty to do a quick lookup at wikipedia http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonnenwende#Jahreszeiten

      (Relevant paragraph post-babelfish) ..

      (ok.. some manual cleanup.)

      In many countries in Central Europe and the USA,, summer solstice marks the beginning of summer. In Great Britain and Ireland however the season begins on 1 May and ends on 31 July, the summer solstice lies thus in the center of the season. In many countries, in which the calendarical/astronomical summer begins 20. /21. June, the day of the summer solstice is designated as midsummer nevertheless, what possibly stems from an old common stone-age calendar.

      --
      bickerdyke
    46. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by n3tcat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      so our clocks are more precise at measuring how fast the earth does a twirl than the earth is at twirling?

      wait, what?

    47. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by YttriumOxide · · Score: 1

      Reading through that wikipedia link (babelfish not required - I can read German), I stand corrected. I just asked one of my German colleagues (I live and work in Germany, although I'm not from here) and he says that he's never really even thought about the seasons as actually having a defined start and end but it being more of a continuum (which actually surprised me as an answer, but makes a lot of sense since that's how things are in "reality"). So from a sample of one, it seems it may not be as strongly considered here as elsewhere. He did say that it seems more sensible for it to be mid-summer though, regardless of what official designation there is.

      --
      My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
      Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
    48. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Exactly.

      gives you a bit of a strange feeling, huh? :-)

      In related news: The Globe isnt a sphere...

      http://www.dirkhartwich.com/sat2/koordinaten.html

      have a look at that potatoe-shaped thing. Makes you wonder how the earth manages to keep the poles pointing at exactly opposite directions anyway..

      feeling just got still a bit stranger? :-)

      --
      bickerdyke
    49. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Averages are no help. The Earth's rotation is slowing down.

    50. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      I'd agree that its stupid to let the longest day of the year mark the _begining_ of summer. I guess thats one reason why over the past years, the meteorological seasons start getting used more often.

      --
      bickerdyke
    51. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      you're assuming that for the next 7200 years we still would need leap seconds

      I wouldn't even assume that the human race will exist in 7200 years. Most of our "civilisations" haven't had a lifetime of more than a few hundred years, and with the lengths to which we've gone to turn the planet into a desert, it's unlikely that it will support us for long.

      If any remnants of our species do survive, I very much doubt if they will be in any condition to be worried about the odd second here or there.

    52. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Funny

      Averages are no help. The Earth's rotation is slowing down.

      Ah. I knew there was a reason why I find it that much harder to get out of bed in the morning. I thought it was due to the fact that I'm past my use-by date... ;-)

    53. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, that means that meanwhile, our clocks are far more precise than the earth rotation itself.

      Yeah, I just love it when our instruments are so precise that they wind up not correctly measuring the thing they're meant to measure. You and I have very different definitions of "precise", sir. When our clocks can automagically account for variance in the earth's rotation period, then they'll be precise...

    54. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by blueZ3 · · Score: 1

      Actually, the earth is fine. But we're going to start storing nuclear waste on the moon and in 1999, a spontaneous explosion will send the moon hurtling off into Space 1999.

      --
      Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
    55. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by PurpleBob · · Score: 1

      Your definition of "precise" seems to actually be a definition of "accurate". In fact, you're asking for accuracy at the expense of precision.

      --
      Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
    56. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 1

      But by doing this, we won't help our grand grandchildren. If they wake up at 8:00 am, 5 hours after the day started, well, it will be weird. And they will have something to care about.

      After thinking about this a bit, I'm not sure I can see the problem. In a lifetime, the sun will rise and set a couple minutes earlier - which no-one will notice. Eventually - after many lifetimes - the sun will rise at 4am instead of 6am and set at 5pm instead of 7pm. Big deal - seasons shift sunset and sunrise around by like 4 hours where I live anyway.

      When it's shifted by 4 hours and people consistently need to wake up "the day before", it might be worth changing something. They can deal with it then.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    57. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by lazarusdishwasher · · Score: 1

      According to wiktionary: The SI unit of time, defined as the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of radiation corresponding to the transition between two hyperfine levels of caesium-133 in a ground state at a temperature of absolute zero and at rest; one-sixtieth of a minute. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/second#Noun_2

    58. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You assumed a linear progression of leap seconds, leap seconds will be added quadradically as time goes on due to transfer of angular momentum from earth to the moon.

    59. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by shani · · Score: 1

      Doctor Hans Zarkov: Check the angular vector of the moon!

      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080745/quotes

    60. Re:Leap seconds fix a diferent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to wikipedia, there seems to have been 24 leap seconds in the last 36 years. For solar noon to move a single hour away would take over 5 millenia.
      Of course, they do give the news something harmless to report on every once in a while...

      Not quite. The drift increases quadratically, so you're actually looking at an hour's drift by 3500 or so.

  5. You and me both! by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'd be more interested in killing Daylight Savings Time than dealing with Leap Year.

    My cat wakes me up in the morning. She doesn't adjust. Because of her, I'm a morning person. Unfortunately, 90% of society are night people. Meaning, any social activity is past my bedtime and I become a wet blanket because I start yawning at everything at 20:00.

    1. Re:You and me both! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think your REAL problems are as follows:

      You have a cat.

      Your cat controls you.

      You characterize and categorize people (90%, society, night people) in terms of what they can give you (social activity).

      You speak in military (24 hour) time unnecessarily.

      You admit your own faults, but rather than fix them, you prefer to revel in your own meekness.

    2. Re:You and me both! by fm6 · · Score: 1

      And in fact people who work with animals are the biggest opponents of DST. Their livestock refuses to change its habits just because clock time has changed.

      What, you say you don't work with animals? Yes you do. You're a cat servant.

    3. Re:You and me both! by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think your REAL problems are as follows:

      You have a cat.

      Your cat controls you.

      You characterize and categorize people (90%, society, night people) in terms of what they can give you (social activity).

      You speak in military (24 hour) time unnecessarily.

      You admit your own faults, but rather than fix them, you prefer to revel in your own meekness.

      Dogs have masters.

      Cats have servants.

      I recognize my overlord and serve her. And as a result, my life is filled with a wondrous furry glory!

      The Egyptians worshiped cats as gods and the cats have never forgotten that.

      Military time is also computer server time. And if you deal with computers across at least one time zone you may want to use Zulu time too. Oooooo, I used another military term. You know why!? Because, I serve in the army of cats!

    4. Re:You and me both! by ktappe · · Score: 1

      If I had mod points, you'd be sure to get one.

      --
      "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
    5. Re:You and me both! by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      You speak in military (24 hour) time unnecessarily.

      No, they used 24-hour time, which I saw on a lot of clocks when in Europe.

      "Military time" doesn't have the colon in the middle.

      {Cue colon jokes in 3.....2....1....}

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    6. Re:You and me both! by techno-vampire · · Score: 5, Funny
      Cats have servants.

      I, for one, welcome our feline overlords. (I'd better, I have one watching me type this, ready to sink his claws into my leg if I type the wrong thing.)

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    7. Re:You and me both! by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      This and the increased fading of the curtains are the two most often cited reasons Queensland AU does not have DST.

    8. Re:You and me both! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Military time" doesn't have the colon in the middle.

      Indeed, +1 Informative.

      {Cue colon jokes in 3.....2....1....

      -1 Off-topic.

      Broke even; no mod point for you! (I have mod points, too!)

    9. Re:You and me both! by shaitand · · Score: 1

      I'm married too

    10. Re:You and me both! by Bodrius · · Score: 1

      I think your REAL problems are as follows:

      You have a cat.

      Your cat controls you.

      Is there a way to mod half a post Redundant to itself?

      --
      Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4, everything else follows...
    11. Re:You and me both! by YttriumOxide · · Score: 1

      You have a cat.

      Nothing wrong with that - cats are wonderful!

      Your cat controls you.

      Some people bring out the old, "dogs have masters, cats have slaves" thing, but I actually disagree. Honestly, I'd prefer having a cat in the house rather than a dog even if this were true, but in my opinion, BOTH can be a friend. The difference is that with a dog, it's more of the "social leader" friendship that you see with a group of teenagers where one is "in charge" of the others. With cats, it's more of a direct one-to-one relationship. Treat a cat right, and he/she will respect you, but you need to respect him/her equally.

      I had a cat that was completely in love with me once and she was great. She'd bring me gifts of dead animals at 3 in the morning (dropping things on me to wake me up), which wasn't so pleasant, but I knew her intentions were good, so I'd take the animal and dispose it of without her seeing, then let her sleep at my feet, happily purring. She'd also meet me at the bus-stop when I came home from work, then walk the last km or so home with me. I really miss her.

      You characterize and categorize people (90%, society, night people) in terms of what they can give you (social activity).

      I've been meaning to write a really long thing about altruism and selflessness, but I haven't had time, and don't have time right now unfortunately. The basic idea is that TRUE selflessness is a mental disorder - EVERYONE is (and should be) out for themselves only - it's the only way society and people can really function. There's nothing wrong with being "nice", but the vast majority of people are only nice because they're getting something out of it. I might buy someone a gift, but I'm honest enough with myself to know that I'm doing it because I want their opinion of me to improve. Or, to put a religious spin on it, a Christian will do good deeds and be a nice person because he's getting in to heaven for doing so. If God commanded him to be a complete arsehole, to get in to heaven, and told him that being kind to everyone around him would send him to hell, do you think most Christians would continue to be nice? (yes, some still would, and that's the mental disorder I'm referring to)

      You speak in military (24 hour) time unnecessarily.

      No, he spoke in 24 hour time, not military time as another poster has already pointed out. 24 hour time is standard here in Europe, so perhaps the poster is European? (compare 24hr time: "Hey John, I'll see you at twenty o'clock", to military time: "Hey John, I'll see you at twenty hundred")

      You admit your own faults, but rather than fix them, you prefer to revel in your own meekness.

      I didn't see any faults being admitted... He didn't say that his traits were negative - he simply pointed out that he has these traits and that it's unfortunate it doesn't really sync with other peoples' traits.

      --
      My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
      Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
    12. Re:You and me both! by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      You have a cat.

      Your cat controls you.

      Ah, but you repeat yourself...

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    13. Re:You and me both! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      24 hour time is standard here in Europe, so perhaps the poster is European? (compare 24hr time: "Hey John, I'll see you at twenty o'clock", to military time: "Hey John, I'll see you at twenty hundred")

      Well I grew up in one European country, and now live in another, and I've never heard "I'll see you at twenty o'clock"

      (Posting anonymously to maintain moderation)

    14. Re:You and me both! by Tteddo · · Score: 1

      Well played!

    15. Re:You and me both! by Paperkirin · · Score: 1

      You speak in military (24 hour) time unnecessarily.

      Alternatively, they could come from the parts of the world which aren't the US, where 24 hour time isn't considered 'military', but normal. Just sayin'.

    16. Re:You and me both! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The whole rest of THE WORLD uses so called `military time.' America is not the world.

    17. Re:You and me both! by fm6 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If I may say so, Oz has a weird attitude towards time. Its the only country where the central region uses a time zone that's one half hour behind the eastern region. (Sign near the border: "Turn your clock back 30 minutes and your calendar back 30 years.") Then there's Western Australia, which tries to put things back in sync by making the whole huge state 2 hours behind the east coast. Doesn't quite work, because there's a tiny area near the border with South Australia that has its own unofficial time zone, 45 minutes ahead of the rest of the state!

      In 2006, several Australian states decided at the last minute to postpone the end of DST, so more people could stay up and watch the Commonwealth Games. This was a major hassle for software platforms with embedded time zone information.

    18. Re:You and me both! by zolaar · · Score: 1

      I serve in the army of cats!

      What you say !!

      --
      One man's constant is another man's variable.
  6. Automated and consistent leap seconds by syousef · · Score: 1

    This adding of leap seconds based on decisions by panels of experts or authoritative bodies is a nonsense.

    If you're going to do this sort of thing - adding seconds to the clock here or there - it shouldn't be decided upon by some review committee. There should be a planned algorithm that kicks in, and the simplest one that actually does the job should be used. The bottom line is that a watch should be able to do it. If you do this, you're able to program devices to account for leap seconds instead of having to manually put in fudges which is an error prone process. You also get the possibility of adding leap milli-seconds or micro-seconds so fine grained adjustments are possible where required, whereas it would be much harder (though not impossible) to do that if you're manually correcting.

    I'd be interested in hearing about specific instances where people work with equipment where this is a concern. I don't think I even own a time keep device where this level of accuracy matters. Perhaps my GPS???...

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    1. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by klapaucjusz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There should be a planned algorithm that kicks in,

      This assumes that we know when, in the future, we'll need to insert leap seconds. And we don't.

      Leap seconds are introduced in order to compensate for medium-term variations in the earth's rotation speed. We don't have a good understanding of the way the earth rotates -- knowing what UTC time it will be in ten years' time is about as difficult as predicting the weather for next week-end.

    2. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by Ron+Bennett · · Score: 1

      The Earth's rotation varies somewhat unpredictably and thus there's no simple way of automatically adding/subtracting leap seconds without observation first.

      Communications, such as cellular phone networks, often depend on very precise syncronized timing.

      Ron

    3. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by surmak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you're going to do this sort of thing - adding seconds to the clock here or there - it shouldn't be decided upon by some review committee. There should be a planned algorithm that kicks in, and the simplest one that actually does the job should be used. The bottom line is that a watch should be able to do it. If you do this, you're able to program devices to account for leap seconds instead of having to manually put in fudges which is an error prone process. You also get the possibility of adding leap milli-seconds or micro-seconds so fine grained adjustments are possible where required, whereas it would be much harder (though not impossible) to do that if you're manually correcting.

      It cannot be done. Leap seconds are dependent on unpredictable, chaotic natural events -- namely the fact that one day in not exactly 24 hours in length. The daily error is not constant, so the only way to determine when a leap second is required is through astronomical observations.

    4. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Informative

      > There should be a planned algorithm that kicks in, and the simplest one that actually
      > does the job should be used.

      There is none. The rate of rotation of the Earth is slightly irregular in a not entirely predictable way.

      > I don't think I even own a time keep device where this level of accuracy matters.
      > Perhaps my GPS?

      Definitely your GPS. It cares about nanoseconds.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    5. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wikipedia! (emphasis mine):

      Leap seconds are necessary because time is measured using stable atomic clocks (TAI or International Atomic Time), whereas the rotation of Earth slows down continually, though at a slightly variable rate. [...] The actual rotational period varies due to unpredictable factors such as the motion of mass within Earth, and has to be observed rather than computed.

    6. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      I'm with the 'remove them' crowd. It seems to be an absurd amount of work for something that does not actually appear to affect anything except sundials.

      More to the point, it appears to average out, so we could be inserting them just to have to remove them a decade later.

      I think, policywise, we should wait until we're 10 second ahead or behind, and then insert or remove them every year for a decade straight, which at least is less work setting up and removing.

      If we wait long enough, and three or four decades are probably long enough now, almost everything will be hooked into automated time-synchronization systems anyway, and it honestly won't matter.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    7. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by syousef · · Score: 1

      Definitely your GPS. It cares about nanoseconds.

      But so long as all the satellites are in sync with their atomic clocks showing the same time, does it matter??? Even without them being in sync, doesn't the GPS use time and rough location to locate the satellites (unitil it's logged on) and then isn't it the round trip time taken by signal that's being measured? Is there any dependancy on leap seconds?

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    8. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by techno-vampire · · Score: 5, Informative
      More to the point, it appears to average out, so we could be inserting them just to have to remove them a decade later.

      No they don't. If you'll look at the chart in the Wikipedia article, you'll see that since they started using them in 1972, they've never had to subtract a second. Either no change, or +1 second.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    9. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by __aajfby9338 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Definitely your GPS. It cares about nanoseconds.

      But so long as all the satellites are in sync with their atomic clocks showing the same time, does it matter??? Even without them being in sync, doesn't the GPS use time and rough location to locate the satellites (unitil it's logged on) and then isn't it the round trip time taken by signal that's being measured? Is there any dependancy on leap seconds?

      GPS doesn't use UTC for its measurements; it uses its own system of GPS time for its measurements, and then calculates UTC using a correction value transmitted by the satellites in order to be able to display UTC (or any other UTC-derived time) for the user.

      Also, it doesn't "log in" in any usual sense, as the communication is purely one-way, from the satellite broadcasts to the receiver. Thus, it also doesn't measure round trip time, because there is no round trip. What it does is to receive the signals from multiple satellites, each of which essentially transmits a signal saying "I'm satellite number A, my location is B, and the time is C", and then solve a system of equations to figure out what time it was when it received the signals from each satellite, and thus how long each one-way trip took. Then it can do the geometry to figure out where it must be. The actual mechanism of accomplishing this is a whole lot more complicated, but on a very simple level, that's what's being done.

      The reason it takes at least four visible satellites to produce a 3D fix is because it needs to solve a system of at least four equations with four unknowns: X, Y and Z spatial coordinates, and time. More than four satellites are normally needed for good accuracy, since the each measurement is usually a lot more noisy and less precise than is desired. Additional measurements let the receiver do more math to try and filter out the noise.

    10. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by Detritus · · Score: 1

      Anything involving space needs precise and accurate time. Determining the orbits of spacecraft and correlating measurements from different sensor platforms require high-quality time. Millisecond accuracy is the minimum level and some programs need microsecond accuracy. GPS operates at the nanosecond level.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    11. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by Detritus · · Score: 1

      It only affects anyone who does navigation on the sea and in the air. Who cares if a navigation fix is off by a few kilometers?

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    12. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by syousef · · Score: 1

      Yeah "log in" was sloppy wording on my part, and made me sound like a total GPS ignoramus. I meant until it "locks on" to the satellites rather than "log in".

      I assume the requirement for 3 satellites for a 2D fix and 4 for a 3D fix has to do with the trig you need to do. To triangulate any point on a 2D map requires 2 points from which to measure distance to find where the 2 lines intersect. On a 3D map it'd be easy to show you need 3. Then for height you'd need to do it against the perpendicular axis as well as against the sphere of the earth - presumably doing this accurately is harder because all the satellites are at similar heights so you're looking at the GPS from roughly the same plane (well not quite, the orbits are after all circular but those satellites visible to you near the surface of the earth are all in roughly the same plane.)

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    13. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by syousef · · Score: 1

      Yes but in most cases this time can presumably be measured without regard to leap seconds so long as it's measured consistently.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    14. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by Starker_Kull · · Score: 3, Informative

      More to the point, it appears to average out, so we could be inserting them just to have to remove them a decade later.

      No, they don't. The Earth's rotation rate is slowing due to tidal friction (and slowly pushing the moon away in the process, since angular momentum doesn't just vanish). The SI second was set based off of the average solar day back in the 1700's or so, and the Earth's average rotational period has slowed measurably since then. We have only added leap seconds, never subtracted them, and likely never will, despite a significant variation in the rate of slowing.

      The problem is that we want to measure different periodic processes via the same unit - the second. The second was originally based off of the average length of the solar day, but then was redefined in terms of atomic standards. The average solar day, according to atomic standards, has been lengthening somewhat erratically. Either we give up using the second as a fundamental unit in the SI system, suitable for meausring times vast and small, or we give up having our clocks based on the second but choose some other 'variable' unit, synced to the sun (such as UT1 time), or we compromise and stick a leap second in from time to time to assure that UTC and UT1 remain within a second of each other - which is what is currently done. There really isn't an easy way out since the periodic processes of nature that matter to us are not neatly in ratios. Do we really want a 'science' time, and a 'civilian' time?

      As you say, one day, programmers will wrap these difficulties up in libraries nicely and neatly so that it just 'works', but it will be based on an arbitrary table of leap seconds, much like we have an arbitrary table of time zone rules in our zoneinfo files. Part of the problem was due to the POSIX standard for time NOT being done properly. UTC actually specifies that the 'extra' second means that there are 61 seconds in a particular minute - i.e. 23:59:60 is a valid UTC time when a leap second is inserted. Unfortunately, POSIX time 'repeats' a second instead. POSIX time goes.... 23:59:57....23:59:58.... 23:59:59.....(zip! leap second!) 23:59:59.... 00:00:00.... 00:00:01... etc.

      There are some complex tradeoffs associated with this. It simplifies the numerical calculation of traslating POSIX time (since POSIX time really is represented as the integer number of seconds since 1970-Jan-01 00:00:00, and the leap seconds are ignored) to 'clockface' time (i.e. The year, month, date, hour, minute and second). On the other hand, it yields incorrect answers when two POSIX times are naively subtracted to figure out the time delta between the time marks; one has to modify the 'obvious' subtraction algorithm with a somewhat complex lookup table procedure to get an accurate delta. UTC is more complex because the occassional 61 second minute requires that you consult a lookup table to translate UTC seconds to year-month-date-hour-minute-second form, but subtraction easily yields the correct delta between the time marks. If we want to stick with SI seconds and schedule ourselves with the sun, there will always be some messiness!

    15. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by __aajfby9338 · · Score: 1

      Yeah "log in" was sloppy wording on my part, and made me sound like a total GPS ignoramus. I meant until it "locks on" to the satellites rather than "log in".

      :-) Yes, lock on is a better term.

      I assume the requirement for 3 satellites for a 2D fix and 4 for a 3D fix has to do with the trig you need to do. To triangulate any point on a 2D map requires 2 points from which to measure distance to find where the 2 lines intersect. On a 3D map it'd be easy to show you need 3. Then for height you'd need to do it against the perpendicular axis[...]

      Ok, somebody correct me if I'm wrong... I do GPS for a living, but I'm mostly a PCB designer and I don't understand the math/firmware/algorithms like the Smart Folks at my company. ;-)

      I think that the three points give you all three coordinates including altitude; that is, for a general triangulation problem, three well-chosen measurements to known locations gives you the full 3D solution. In other words, a system of three equations is needed to solve for three unknown variables. However, the range measurements in GPS are performed by making time-of-flight measurements, and the receiver doesn't know what time it is with enough precision. Thus, there's a fourth variable to be solved for (precise GPS time when the measurements were made), so a fourth equation is needed. Again, somebody please correct me if I have stated anything incorrectly here.

      Now, it's still helpful for a GPS receiver to know the approximate time of day when it first starts trying to acquire satellites, particularly if has been turned off for a short period, so it still has recent data about the satellite constellation (ephemeris data), its clock hasn't had a chance to drift very far yet, and it can make a good guess about what satellites will be visible and where they will be in the sky. This lets the receiver conduct a much smaller search to find that first satellite, and then find a few more even more quickly. The satellites all transmit on the same frequency, but their apparent radio frequencies at the receiver are shifted quite a bit by the Doppler effect. Thus, the receiver is in effect only looking at one little slice of the sky when it's tuned to a particular frequency, and it scans across the sky by adjusting its receiver frequency. If it already knows that a particular satellite should be in a particular patch of sky, then it can look right around the corresponding Doppler-shifted frequency for that specific satellite. So, a GPS receiver that has been turned off for a short period of time (under four hours, if I'm not mistaken), knows about what time it is (generally from a low-power clock running off a battery and using a cheap 32kHz watch crystal as a timebase), correctly guesses that it's still located at about the same position where it was turned off, and has current ephemeris data, might go from power-on to a full 3D fix in a few seconds. At the other extreme, a receiver that doesn't know what time it is, doesn't know where it is, and doesn't have good ephemeris data will need to do a full-sky search for arbitrary satellites which may or may not be visible, and will take a much longer time to get its first fix. Then, that fix might not even be very accurate until the receiver can download the current satellite almanac, which takes 12.5 minutes minimum if I recall correctly.

      Wow, I sure can ramble on. What was the topic, again? :-)

    16. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There should be a planned algorithm that kicks in

      We could just prompt the user peridiocally to insert, remove or do nothing with the possible leap second.

      In Vista Home Basic once every day should be enough, but Vista Business Ultimate should provide more accuracy prompting user every 10 minutes!

    17. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by evilbessie · · Score: 1

      No there should be some formula which is applied and everytime, time meets those criteria a leep second should be added. Oh no wait, that is what happens. Leep seconds are added to keep UTC within 1 second of GMT, being that the sidereal day is not quite 24 hours exactly.

      Because you can't write an algorithm to work this out (there isn't one becasue these things just vary randomly) you think it's bad. There are criteria and if you don't know them you obviously are too stupid to comment on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second

    18. Re:Automated and consistent leap seconds by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      There is one...

      if ( abs(UT-UTC)>0.9seconds) insertleapsecond();

      IIRC UT1 is used for UT

      --
      bickerdyke
  7. No leap seconds prior to Jan. 20, 2009 please by jayveekay · · Score: 4, Funny

    We don't need even one more second of Bush presidency. :)

    1. Re:No leap seconds prior to Jan. 20, 2009 please by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 1

      I guess that depends on who exactly is getting elected.

    2. Re:No leap seconds prior to Jan. 20, 2009 please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modded up as funny? You gotta be kidding. This Bush trashing ceased being funny and became lame a long time ago. In case you haven't noticed, he's not running. Get over it.

    3. Re:No leap seconds prior to Jan. 20, 2009 please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How very trendy of you... Dork.

  8. The sun is overhead at noon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ohhhh.....in my world the sun is RARELY directly overhead at noon... not by the common definition of noon that all watches, cell phones, computers, media, etc. etc. use but by astronomers definition of noon. However isn't that the definition of "noon" when the sun is overhead?
    I just wish we could get rid of Daylight Saving Time
    The twice-yearly stupid time shift is just retarded. I think we should shift our schedules to fit daylight, not the other way around.

    Lets define the daily "work period" as: "three hours after sunrise to three hours before sunrise". And yes, I realize that in Winter, I'll be working a four-hour day and in the summer, I'll be working a twelve-hour day. But it's my idea and I like it.

    1. Re:The sun is overhead at noon? by sexconker · · Score: 1

      You enjoy those 18-hour workdays, do you?

    2. Re:The sun is overhead at noon? by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      Lets define the daily "work period" as: "three hours after sunrise to three hours before sunrise".

      That's great, unless ya live in Barrow, Alaska...

      Better have a caffeine stash ready by mid-June!

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
  9. So long as we don't have leap nanoseconds by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 0, Troll

    I fail to see why there's any urgency to decide this, as we don't have leap nanoseconds or even leap milliseconds.

    I set my non-existent watch by the solar-powered parking meters along the street, actually.

    And why are we still keeping to a 60 second or 60 minute clock anyway?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:So long as we don't have leap nanoseconds by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Changing the length of a second will end up changing almost everything in our lives. It would be an enormous undertaking, redefining, among many other things, electromagnetic wavelengths and the speed of light. Speed limits would change, computers would have to handle travel time calculations differently, and the length of the workday would change slightly.

      It was hard enough to get the world to change to the metric system (with notable holdouts still remaining). Changing the very definition of one of the six core SI units would be nearly impossible.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    2. Re:So long as we don't have leap nanoseconds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And we would just have to keep doing it over and over and over...

    3. Re:So long as we don't have leap nanoseconds by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1, Troll

      I didn't mean to alter the actual measurement of time per se - e.g. as the world slows or speeds we adjust the length of a second.

      What I meant was that, in actual fact, there should be leap nanoseconds and atomic clocks handle those adjustments, but we don't record them per se.

      As to changing time, the Sumerians didn't even agree as to the precise definition, and many cultures have accurately kept time using wheels and water clocks using other measurements - China, Aztecs, Toltecs, etc.

      We really only keep clock seconds - changing the names of the units above it shouldn't matter.

      Besides, humans have a natural 25 hour clock, so it seems the earth may have rotated much faster originally, so our current "hours" are probably not correct.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    4. Re:So long as we don't have leap nanoseconds by setagllib · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      Sam ty sig.
    5. Re:So long as we don't have leap nanoseconds by Starker_Kull · · Score: 1

      What I meant was that, in actual fact, there should be leap nanoseconds and atomic clocks handle those adjustments, but we don't record them per se.

      That sounds great, until you want to compute the DIFFERENCE in two times. How can you do that with any accuracy if you don't know how many leap nanoseconds have been inserted (because no record was kept) between them?

      As to changing time, the Sumerians didn't even agree as to the precise definition, and many cultures have accurately kept time using wheels and water clocks using other measurements - China, Aztecs, Toltecs, etc. We really only keep clock seconds - changing the names of the units above it shouldn't matter.

      They did not ACCURATELY keep time by any stretch of the imagination. All those clocks you mentioned had to constantly be resynced with more authoritative sources on a constant basis - those authoritative sources being the position of the sun, moon, etc. Being able to create a device that could even take a stab at a unit of time as short as a second with any accuracy (if your second was 88,000 per day one day and 66,000 the next, it's not very useful!) had to wait until the invention of the pendulum clock in the late 1600's by Huygens. If by clock seconds, you mean track solar time, we have a clock that does that - it's called UT1. It can only be determined by measurement, so no devices that present a time readout independently use it. We instead keep UTC within a second of UT1 by inserting leap seconds from time to time.

      Besides, humans have a natural 25 hour clock, so it seems the earth may have rotated much faster originally, so our current "hours" are probably not correct.

      Actually, the 25 hour circadian rythum argues for the Earth rotating SLOWER in the past, not faster - but, in fact, it did rotate FASTER in the past. Or, if you are a fan of intellegent creation or whatever it's called, when the Earth's rotation period slows to 25 hours (and presuming that an hour == 86,400 SI seconds) in however many millions of years, the time is right for ponies! Or something.

  10. Why not just change time pieces to include the by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 1
    increasing time?

    Yeah, I guess the clocks would have to take into account the increases in orbits and whatnot mentioned, but so what? Computation has become dirt cheap. So the Naval Observatory does an extra calculation for GPS and things that require that kind of accuracy.

    And as far as I'm concerned, my clocks are all within 10 minutes of each other - in other words, I don't give a shit about 10 minutes either way.

    1. Re:Why not just change time pieces to include the by klapaucjusz · · Score: 1

      I don't give a shit about 10 minutes either way.

      It depends on the application. Having one's NFS file server just a second fast will break most Makefiles.

    2. Re:Why not just change time pieces to include the by robo_mojo · · Score: 2, Funny

      It depends on the application. Having one's NFS file server just a second fast will break most Makefiles.

      I think that says more about make than it says about timekeeping.

    3. Re:Why not just change time pieces to include the by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      Nah. It just gets bitchy. "Blah blah has modification time in the future!"

      You might wind up generating a couple of .o files more than you need to, but I wouldn't call that breakage.

      Now, an NFS server that's running SLOW, OTOH....

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    4. Re:Why not just change time pieces to include the by rrohbeck · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's exactly the point. Changing software in military or even space systems isn't exactly trivial, maybe not even possible, plus you need a method to constantly provide (UT1-UTC) to the systems that rely on UT1 (astronomical time) being equal to UTC by less than a second. Like the radio controlled clock in your home. Or the time signal transmitters would have to be redefined not to transmit UTC but some new time scale, which would be a mess for GPS.

      UTC without leap seconds is basically TAI (international atomic time) - a strictly linear SI second timescale as precise as we can reproduce it.
      Just distribute (TAI-UTC) and (UT1-UTC) together with the usual time signals, leave UTC alone (with leap seconds) and you're all set and can use what you need. There is no one time scale; Einstein told us so. Better accept it.

    5. Re:Why not just change time pieces to include the by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      Just distribute TAI, publish zoneinfo with leap seconds included, and calculate whatever you need for local use or display as needed.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    6. Re:Why not just change time pieces to include the by compro01 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The problem being, the need for a leap second is not predefinable, unlike a leap day. Leap seconds are needed to compensate for slight (millisecond range) variations in the length of each day, due to the earth's rotation speed not being constant. We currently cannot predict those variations, and as such, the leap seconds are determined based on astronomical observation and applied as needed.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    7. Re:Why not just change time pieces to include the by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > We currently cannot predict those variations, and as such, the leap seconds are
      > determined based on astronomical observation and applied as needed.

      I know that, but zoneinfo has to be updated frequently anyway to accomodate the whims of princes.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    8. Re:Why not just change time pieces to include the by igb · · Score: 1
      I don't know about European (DCF77) and US (WWV) transmitters, but the UK broadcast time (MSF) contains UT1-UTC corrections anyway. Not much equipment uses it, but it's there, so you could trivially build a clock that displays UT1. However, being based on astronomical observations, UT1 is inherently retrospective, which makes it hedged around with caveats --- there's UT1 in reality at the current second, which is unknowable, and UT1 at that second as seen from later, which is knowable.

      ian

    9. Re:Why not just change time pieces to include the by klapaucjusz · · Score: 1

      Nah. It just gets bitchy. "Blah blah has modification time in the future!"

      Now, an NFS server that's running SLOW, OTOH....

      Yep, you're right, I got confused.

  11. Re:You and me both! (cat clock adjustments) by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    My cat wakes me up in the morning. She doesn't adjust. Because of her, I'm a morning person.

    Try not feeding her - I think you'll find she'll wake you up a lot earlier ...

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  12. Americans are by JustOK · · Score: 1, Funny

    too lazy to deal with anything that even sounds like physical exertion unless they have a multi-million dollar contract.

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
    1. Re:Americans are by oldhack · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's cuz our times are valuable, unlike yours, you third-world poor trash!!! Go recycle copper and stuff.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  13. Or played with GPS etc by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Keeping leap seconds synced is pretty important across comms networks.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Or played with GPS etc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:Or played with GPS etc by snowraver1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not surprised, there is really no need to. Your GPSr doesn't care what time it is in human terms, it just needs a number that it can use to caclulate signals relative to each other. That could be anything, possibly even the number of seconds that have passed since 1970.

      I would be more surprised if they acutally didupdate GPS satellites with leap second fixes. I would think you would have to recilibrate all the satellites.

      *Note* I do office magic, not satellite magic.

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    3. Re:Or played with GPS etc by digitig · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's correct, because correcting the epoch for leap seconds would cause glitches in positioning as the corrections were applied. Instead, GPS broadcasts a UTC correction so the receiver can convert to UTC if required: ahref=http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/gpssps1.pdfrel=url2html-16574http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/gpssps1.pdf>

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    4. Re:Or played with GPS etc by stickdogRob · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not surprised, there is really no need to. Your GPSr doesn't care what time it is in human terms... I would be more surprised if they acutally didupdate GPS satellites with leap second fixes.

      Actually that is one of the jobs of the US Naval Observatory. They constantly update the GPS satelights time and position information. If you have a hand held gps receiver you have an atomic accuracy clock in your hand. The USNO mission is to: 2 Provide astronomical and timing data required by the Navy and other components of the Department of Defense for navigation, precise positioning, and command, control, and communications. http://www.usno.navy.mil/mission.shtml If you have one clock you know the time but as soon as you have two clocks time becomes relative.

    5. Re:Or played with GPS etc by snowraver1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You missed the point. In a system like GPS accuracy is paramount. The birds need to know where they are, and are updated as they deviate. Likewise the need to be synched and need to be kept in synch. They do not run off the same clocks as humans though, so do not need to be updated with a leap second update. To the satellites, time goes on...

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    6. Re:Or played with GPS etc by kakofb · · Score: 1

      GPS navigation doesn't need to know the time, but the second use of GPS is providing accurate time - and that does need to know the real time.

    7. Re:Or played with GPS etc by snowraver1 · · Score: 1

      Nope, it send it's time to the GPSr as it does now in it's own format. Your GPSr knows how to convert that to human time. You would update your GPSr for the leap second fix, but even if you didn't no one would notice.

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
  14. Re:Why did you Brits send us... by neokushan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Quick! Someone say "Russell Brand called George Bush a retard" for some cheap +1 informative mods.

    Then spend the rest of your day wondering if you were modded informative for explaining the situation, or for repeating what Russell said.

    Then realise that if anyone knew what you were thinking, they'd probably mod you +1 Troll.

    Then realise you spend too much time on slashdot.

    Then realise you've got no girlfriend.

    Then realise you'll probably never have a girlfriend.

    Then realise you've got no life.

    Then mod yourself +1 offtopic.

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
  15. Uhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there is a demonstrated way to respect the history, remove leaps from navigation and POSIX time, yet keep the sun overhead at noon.

    If having the sun overhead at noon is a concern, the intentional inaccuracy of an hour might be the first thing to fix instead of a leap second.

  16. Explain the Article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kdawson, I tried to read the article, but I was confused. In the future, can you post a link to explain what TCB, TCG, TDB, TDT, TT, ET, TAI, UT1, and UTC are? And what is the proleptic TT and proleptic TCG?

    But I must admit that I'm very impressed. The fact that kdawson was able to read and understand this article before approving it means that he (or she) is much smarter than I thought.

    1. Re:Explain the Article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "The fact that kdawson was able to read and understand this article..."

      You must really be new around here.

  17. Re:You and me both! (cat clock adjustments) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    or that she won't wake you up at all!

  18. quick fix by floatingrunner · · Score: 0

    adjust the orbit of the Eart, just axe people in China and India all jump at the same time

  19. Yep... by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and if anyone doesn't like leap seconds, all they have to do is use one of the time scales which don't use them, like TAI.

    It's exceedingly silly and stupid for people to keep trying to change UTC so it doesn't track solar time. That what it was intended to do. If you made the wrong choice, live with it, or change time scales. If it's being forced on you, quityerbitchin', and convince whoever decided on UTC to change. Stop trying to turn UTC into something it isn't, there are other people out there who made an intelligent decision, and depend on it's characteristics.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:Yep... by amorsen · · Score: 1

      there are other people out there who made an intelligent decision, and depend on it's characteristics.

      They are so few and far between they are hardly worth considering. Anyway, switching all of society (including the POSIX clock) to TAI is fine with me. I really don't care what the clock is called, as long as everyone uses it, and it doesn't have leap seconds.

      Solar noon is more than 80 minutes away from 12 o'clock right now where I am. If people can live with that, leap seconds are unnecessary.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    2. Re:Yep... by Permutation+Citizen · · Score: 1

      100% agree. It's a pity to see current lobbying against leap second in UTC. It is plain wrong, yet it has chance to succeed for ununderstandable political reasons.

      Ok we don't need solar time accurate to the minutes for everyday life. Having a time system whose purpose is to avoid issue in thousands year is perhaps over long term thinking.

      But now everybody has it and is used to it, by bother changing it ? It cost much more than just keeping counting leap second has we do : if we remove leap seconds for UTC, some systems that rely on UTC to be on par with solar time will break.

      Switching to TAI would be a real mess, as nobody will switch at the same time. That's why they want to keep UTC with just stoping adding lead second.

      This lobbying itself is just a waste of resources. Just stop it now, keep leap seconds, and think about more important matters.

    3. Re:Yep... by Phil+Karn · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You are absolutely right. UNIX and its derived systems simply made a big mistake in choosing UTC for internal use. They should use an atomic time scale, either TAI or GPS time internally, I don't really care which.

      If they really have to, UNIX could define their own epoch with a zero offset to UTC as of right now. Then timestamps made in the past few years won't have to jump in the changeover. This would give exactly the same benefit as no longer applying leap seconds to UTC without removing UTC's ability to track earth rotation time.

      Whatever timescale UNIX chooses, it MUST have a known offset to TAI that remains fixed for all time. Period.

      It's just absurd that every time there's a leap second it ripples through the whole NTP network for hours. GPS receivers ride smoothly through leap seconds because they don't see them. Why should glitches happen in NTP/UNIX?

      It should be up to the library routines to properly handle conversations between internal time and human-friendly UTC representations, driven by updated tables of leap seconds in the same way they're already driven by updated tables of daylight savings time. Both are unpredictable and subject to administrative whims. You can't base internal timescales on them. I'm tired of having to write these routines myself for my satellite tracking programs.

      It's important to remember that timescales based on the rotation of the earth simply didn't exist before certain specified dates. Before 1961, UTC simply didn't exist. There's simply no proper way to date an astronomical event back in 1900 in UTC.

      Even worse, between 1961 and 1972, frequent ad-hoc frequency offsets were introduced into UTC to keep it close to earth time. The UTC second and the TAI second differed slightly, and this difference was constantly changing! Only in 1972 did the present leap second system start, with the lengths of the UTC and TAI seconds exactly equal. It was an improvement over the previous system, but it's still no substitute for an atomic time scale for basic use.

    4. Re:Yep... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pay careful attention - In 3,600 years the relationship will be off 1 hour if we stop using leap seconds. It's better to stop messing with UTC so all of the systems are easy to manage then worry about your day being a minute darker some 60 years from now.

    5. Re:Yep... by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Bad news.... Most people use UTC exactly because it fits their needs best...

      --
      bickerdyke
    6. Re:Yep... by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Most people use UTC because most people use UTC, and they need to interoperate. Or because they don't know better.

      Basically noone uses UTC because they actually considered their needs and UTC was the best fit. In fact, I challenge you to find someone who did. Outside astronomy, because astronomers need to work with multiple times (or simply correct for the difference) anyway.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    7. Re:Yep... by Jerry+Coffin · · Score: 1

      But now everybody has it and is used to it, by bother changing it ? It cost much more than just keeping counting leap second has we do : if we remove leap seconds for UTC, some systems that rely on UTC to be on par with solar time will break.

      The why is simple: because some systems use UTC as input, but attempt to use it to measure time intervals rather than just what the current time is. Any such attempt is almost guaranteed to be broken, and nearly impossible to fix. Admittedly, many are also broken by daylight savings time changes, but those at least could be fixed. Dealing with leap seconds is substantially more difficult.

      As such, there's a real question: how many systems need the current time to sub-second precision, vs. how many need intervals to sub-second precision. A third possibility is systems that just need a coordinated time, and don't care all that much about whether it's consistent with anything else.

      The answer, for the most part, is that nearly everything and everybody who cares about sub-second precision cares far more about time intervals than they do about that time being consistent with solar time. In fact, nearly everything and everybody who needs something related to solar time has to apply (often substantial) corrections to their time anyway -- time zones are an hour wide, so there's only a narrow strip (theoretically 1/3600th the width of the time zone, but time zone boundaries are often adjusted to fit political boundaries -- in which UTC corresponds to solar time without adjustment. In fact, the most obvious way to get your longitude to the necessary accuracy is from GPS, derived from a clock without leap seconds.

      Systems that need solar time:

      1. are mostly fairly sophisticated
      2. already need adjustments
      3. are relatively few

      Leap seconds make life substantially more difficult for many while making it only marginally simpler for a few. That's not a good compromise.

      --
      The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
    8. Re:Yep... by Permutation+Citizen · · Score: 1

      As msauve said, when a system need accurate time intervals and don't want to bother with lead second, it can just use TAI.

      The "UTC without leap second" proposal is a workaround, an ugly hack some clueless guy want to impose to the whole world because of wrong design in their own systems.

      See the DoD poll, they reduce the problem to a cost issue, in the most naive way "how much line of software code: less than 20, 20-40, 40-100, more than 100." This is ridiculous.

      In such a matter, you just have to perform the right thing. Even if you consider cost, a wrong decision will alway cost more in the long term.

    9. Re:Yep... by Jerry+Coffin · · Score: 1

      The "UTC without leap second" proposal is a workaround, an ugly hack...

      Clearly the moderators are clueless today, or this was just posted too late to get noticed. Somebody apparently in favor of leap seconds calling anything else (and I do mean anything, up to and including MS-DOS) an ugly hack deserves a "funny" moderation more than if Robin Williams started posting.

      --
      The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
    10. Re:Yep... by Philip+Shaw · · Score: 1

      The logical solution would be for the 32-bit time to be replaced with a 64-bit timestamp without leap seconds, and for leap seconds to be stored separately and added before doing timezone handling. Since the 32-bit time will have to be dealt with soon (so that all software in use in 2038 has epoch-safe time), 64-bit POSIX should specify a new time call which should be used in place of the existing one in all new programs.

      --
      "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."- Winston Churchill
    11. Re:Yep... by Phil+Karn · · Score: 1

      I like the idea. Might as well fix two things at once. Should the new 64-bit counter count seconds, milliseconds, microseconds, what?

    12. Re:Yep... by Phil+Karn · · Score: 1
      The original UNIX clock counted seconds. That was always much too coarse, so BSD soon introduced a clock in microseconds. A 64-bit count of microseconds would wrap around in 584,542 years. That's probably long enough.

      But is a microsecond small enough? GPS pseudorange accuracies are typically a few meters, so GPS timing is already good to ten to a few tens of nanoseconds. Future systems will undoubtedly do better, especially if atomic clocks become cheap and small enough to be standard PC motherboard items.

      A 64-bit count of nanoseconds would wrap around in 584.5 years. Is that too soon?

      A compromise would be 10ns counts, wrapping around in 5845 years. That would be a good match to current GPS timing precision.

      Maybe we should jump right to a 128 bit count of femtoseconds. That would wrap around at about a million times the age of the universe.

  20. LOLOLOLOLOMG!!!!!!!11111 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Congress' approval rating since Do-Nothing Nancy took over has consistently been about 1/3 that of George Bush's. But I guess you'd actually have to pay attention to politics instead of sniping from the sidelines during American Idol commercial breaks.

    1. Re:LOLOLOLOLOMG!!!!!!!11111 by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

      So his opinion is wrong because it doesn't conform to the majority? I think you might be the one watching too much American Idol.

  21. Re:You and me both! (cat clock adjustments) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Depends on how you train them. My cat is on a special diet and gets fed at exactly the same time every day and has a very limited amount of food. She also gets screwed up with daylight savings time, HOWEVER she has learned that she doesn't get fed when I'm sleeping and if she wakes me up then she's getting a pillow/shoe/whatever to the head. She learned not to wake me up real quick.

    Once I'm awake it's a different story though, so annoying. I wish she could tell time so she wouldn't bug me for the hour or so beforehand.

  22. I know! by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Let's just remove the problem entirely!

    I suggest... the French Republican calendar.

    And a good Tridi, 23 Fructidor, Year 216 to you too.

    1. Re:I know! by adavies42 · · Score: 1

      It's BoomTime, Bureaucracy 33, 3174 on my desk calendar. fnord

      --
      Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
      -kfg
  23. Shakespeare was first by andreyvul · · Score: 1

    "to leap or not to leap"
    Time scales Prince Hamlet make.

    --
    proud caffeine whore
  24. superman could help by Tr3vin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why don't we just get Superman to fly around the Earth really fast to slightly change its rotation. If he can reverse time, surely he could adjust it sightly so that everything would work out.

  25. Why is this the DoD's responsibility? by k1e0x · · Score: 2, Funny

    I don't understand what the DoD has to do with time, standards or measurements.

    Is the DoD trying to say now Muhahaha! Now we control time itself, submit all ye to "civilian time"?

    We need to get the opinion of an expert, not some random poll.. perhaps the DoD should seek the advice of the master of timecube theory Dr. Gene Ray.

    --
    Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
    1. Re:Why is this the DoD's responsibility? by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      I think you've got the wrong DoD here.

      The Denizens of Doom are trying to control time, because indirectly, time controls doppler RADAR.

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    2. Re:Why is this the DoD's responsibility? by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't understand what the DoD has to do with time, standards or measurements.

      Navigation depends on time. The Navy is very interested in navigation. That's why they established the Naval Observatory in 1830.

      We need to get the opinion of an expert, not some random poll..

      USNO employs some of the formost experts on the subject. They are soliciting the opinions of some of the other stakeholders.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:Why is this the DoD's responsibility? by Zordak · · Score: 1

      Because the guy with the thermonuclear weapons is always right.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    4. Re:Why is this the DoD's responsibility? by tigre · · Score: 1

      Navigation depends on time.

      Absolutely. I remember a PBS documentary that talked about the main driving force behind developing accurate timepieces rather than just using sundials was so that ships could calculate longitude based on the position of the sun.

    5. Re:Why is this the DoD's responsibility? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      Was it interesting to you? Then you must read "Longitude". That is a seriously wonderful book.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    6. Re:Why is this the DoD's responsibility? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scientific Time is relative to speed and gravity, therefore there is no easy standard. That is why astronomical measures such as the day are the only way to measure time for humans. The day gets longer therefore you have to insert a leap second to keep the days in sync.

  26. Who cares about all this timezone crap? by Dogun · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Who gives a damn about the sun being overhead at 12PM? China operates in a single timezone, despite spanning something like five, and they do just fine.

    Give us GMT. Let noon drift where noon drifts. Just keep the seasons in line with the longest and shortest days and forget the rest.

    1. Re:Who cares about all this timezone crap? by Starker_Kull · · Score: 1

      Who gives a damn about the sun being overhead at 12PM? China operates in a single timezone, despite spanning something like five, and they do just fine.

      They did that because Eastern China, containing 95% of their population, is at +8 UTC 'naturally'. The fact that Western China, containing such pesky places as Tibet has their typical sunrise at 0830 and sunset at 2030 and has a jump of 2.5 to 3 hours when you cross over into India or Pakistan, doesn't bother the Chinese government much. I'm not so sure the people living there feel the same way. Or, to put it differently - I live in NYC. I think the US should have one time zone, and it should be based on NYC time. -5/-4 UTC for everybody! Who cares if California would have the sunset at 2230 today? Forget about Alaska and Hawaii....

      Perhaps you live in a different world, but most people like to be awake and work roughly when the sun is up. Many places in the world are a little too poor to have the luxury of cheap nighttime lighting, and have large agrarian communities, all of which make the hours of daylight supremely important.

      If you find timezones and the sun too tedious, why don't you set your own personal watch to TAI, and schedule your life that way? Nothing is stopping you... other than the fact that I've never seen a watch display TAI, and you might have to meet other people from time to time, thus requiring a translation. Oh well, it sounded good.

    2. Re:Who cares about all this timezone crap? by mr_matticus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the US should have one time zone, and it should be based on NYC time. -5/-4 UTC for everybody! Who cares if California would have the sunset at 2230 today?

      Fine by me, and I'm a native Californian.

      There's no rule that says business hours need to be 9 to 5. Since you already have to convert what "time" it is in a faraway place you're calling, it's not a big deal. In San Francisco, I can't make any calls after 1pm to East Coast offices and expect to get anything done. What the clocks say over there doesn't really matter. For all intents and purposes, New York business hours are 6am to 2pm from my perspective.

      I'd be content for the entire planet to move past the idea of time zones entirely. It's an outdated idea from a time when you needed physical references to the passing of time, and when it didn't matter that the times didn't line up in faraway places. Just think of all the things it would simplify: flight arrivals/departures, conference calls, news stories--and it would make am/pm an unnecessary distinction, too. 0514 would really be 0514. Everywhere. I'm okay with "business hours" for me being, say 0100 to 0900, and 2200 to 0600 in some other place. They're just numbers.

      Tradition and conditioning, however, are unbeatable--and the idea of "noon" being the middle of the day has undeniable intuitive appeal (even if it's rarely accurate).

    3. Re:Who cares about all this timezone crap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I proposed this idea once to a friend, and the example he gave where this breaks down is when you are reading a novel and it says the "he woke up at 6 o'clock." Some readers would wonder why so early, others why so late...

    4. Re:Who cares about all this timezone crap? by floateyedumpi · · Score: 1

      It's not unprecedented. China, which would natively contain 5 times zone, operates under a single time zone, without DST.

    5. Re:Who cares about all this timezone crap? by metamatic · · Score: 1

      Give us GMT. Let noon drift where noon drifts.

      Making it obvious that you don't know what GMT is.

      GMT is defined based on astronomical observation, so there are no leap seconds needed to keep GMT noon aligned with actual noon.

      The problem is with UTC, which is based on atomic clocks rather than astronomy.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    6. Re:Who cares about all this timezone crap? by mr_matticus · · Score: 1

      No one would wonder that, because everyone would know that morning isn't the same everywhere. Without any context, people would simply assume that he woke up wherever it is morning at 6. From your example, I have no idea whether he means 6am or 6pm, or whether it is important. If the next sentence were, "He had missed lunch, and nearly dinner, too," then I'd know what was going on.

      People would, however, wonder about the significance of the time if they did not know the location of the character, but like many details in a novel, it may not be immediately apparent. All I can tell from the sentence alone is that it's early morning or in the evening. An author could easily say "early morning" or "evening" instead of "6 o'clock" if the time itself was unimportant and the location unknown.

    7. Re:Who cares about all this timezone crap? by uigrad_2000 · · Score: 1

      I think the US should have one time zone, and it should be based on NYC time. -5/-4 UTC for everybody! Who cares if California would have the sunset at 2230 today?

      Fine by me, and I'm a native Californian.

      In San Francisco, I can't make any calls after 1pm to East Coast offices and expect to get anything done. What the clocks say over there doesn't really matter.

      I think you'd like India. The coutry is the size of two timezons, but they wanted to have common time for the whole country. So, all of India (and now Sri Lanka) are on IST, which is UTC+5:30.

      We could do the same in the US. We have 4 time zones for the continental US, so we could standardize on UTC-6:30 for standard time and UTC-5:30 for the summer. If we want to include Alaska and Hawaii, we could change it to UTC-7:30.

      --
      Free unix account: freeshell.org
  27. i propose... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...just redoing the calendar correctly. metric maybe? like with only 10 months, or maybe 100 months. one day could be a milliyear. (we've come a long way technologically since they came up with the current calendar, it's time to get with the program.)

    1. Re:i propose... by corsec67 · · Score: 1

      http://www.newearthcalendar.com/

      13 Months of 28 days, with a leap week occasionally.

      The problem is if you want weeks and months, there aren't many ways to split up the 365.24 days in a year.

      Having a time notation that is based on fractional days would be cool, with .0 being midnight and .5 being noon would be nice.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    2. Re:i propose... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lousy Smarch weather....

    3. Re:i propose... by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      On a related note, I would have been all for the Swatch "Internet Time" deal, if they had actually made it useful by basing it off of GMT. But no, some marketdroids were all "let's base it off time in our headquarters in Switzerland!" So there wasn't much chance of anyone taking it seriously...

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  28. I don't see what all the debate is about... by EGenius007 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Everyone knows we'll just accept whichever standard the porn industry decides to embrace.

    --
    I know what you did last summer. Just kidding, I don't work at the NSA.
  29. Why match time to sun position? by dtecmeister · · Score: 1

    All time can be universal (UTC). Noon can be "When the sun is directly overhead." which will locally be different. Start time for work can be Noon-3 Hours (3 hours before noon) to Noon+5 Hours (5 Hours after noon). No DST necessary and no leap-seconds necessary. Why do they want to overcomplicate things here?

    Reminds me of the Outer Limits show where the clocks were all adjusted to stretch the workday to be longer and longer while shortening off-work hours.

    1. Re:Why match time to sun position? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > All time can be universal (UTC)...no leap-seconds necessary.

      Without leap seconds it isn't UTC.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    2. Re:Why match time to sun position? by Starker_Kull · · Score: 1

      All time can be universal (UTC). Noon can be "When the sun is directly overhead." which will locally be different. Start time for work can be Noon-3 Hours (3 hours before noon) to Noon+5 Hours (5 Hours after noon). No DST necessary and no leap-seconds necessary. Why do they want to overcomplicate things here?

      ...and so how do I know when to be at work? Look at my UTC watch? Consult my portable sundial?

      Your system was tried and in widespread use until the 1800's with the spread of railroads. With increasingly fast and common transportation (and nowadays, communication), the 'every town has it's own time' system made it almost impossible to schedule trains, business, meetings, armies, etc. - so the train companies came up with the time zone system. It was such a vast improvement and massive success that essentially the entire world adopted it.

    3. Re:Why match time to sun position? by dtecmeister · · Score: 1

      You're correct. I meant UTC the way my computer understands it. This would not stay in sync with true UTC time though. After reading more it seems that UTC-SLS is the best idea which allows for slight adjustments at the last 1000 UTC seconds days containing leap-seconds so there are always 86400 seconds in the day.

      I still like adjusting work hours to start/end based on noon +/- a number of hours (or fractions of hours).

    4. Re:Why match time to sun position? by dtecmeister · · Score: 1

      Yes, you would look at your UTC-SLS watch. All schedules would be tracked in UTC-SLS so this isn't the system they had in the 1800's. I wasn't refering to actually changing local time based on sun location. Just work hours could be adjusted. With today's technology, it is easy to broadcast/post start/end times. Companies could go ahead and round off to nearest hour or quarter hour if they prefer. Just indicating local scheduling can vary from place to place or company to company without changing the UTC-SLS time.

      The "Everyone starts at the same time" model doesn't work anymore. Groups are spread across time zones and countries. It's nearly as likely for someone working in Chicago to work with someone in Minneapolis, New York City, Denver, or even Bangalore. Computers can adjust fragments just as easily as whole hours. People would be able to adjust as well over time.

  30. There is no problem here. by blair1q · · Score: 1

    The problem isn't with UTC or TAI or any other timekeeping system used by the world.

    The problem is with the cheap crap you have in your home which assumes every day is 86400 seconds long and every year is 365 days.

    You bought it, you adjust it. I got better problems to solve.

    1. Re:There is no problem here. by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Cheap crap? This is a problem with atomic clocks being too precise for our time system, which assumes every day is 86,400 seconds long, when it's actually a few milliseconds longer or shorter due to irregularities in the earth's rotation, hence why we need to add in leap seconds when we observe that it is getting too far out of sync with solar time.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    2. Re:There is no problem here. by blair1q · · Score: 1

      The atomic clocks know what time it is.

      What you want is a nonatomic clock that senses the position of the sun and tells you what your current angle is.

      Or the position of a particular star.

      Or the position of the hands of the clock at your next appointment.

      Your TiVo is cheap crap, and so is your cable company, so you will never be able to delete those extra minutes you add before and after every scheduled recording.

      The atomic clocks, on the other hand, are all averaged together to tell us what TAI time it is, to an accuracy greater than any single clock yet devised can achieve. And TAI time can be converted to any other kind of time you want in less than a second, maybe less than a millisecond, maybe even less than a microsecond, but not likely less than a nanosecond on retail hardware.

    3. Re:There is no problem here. by compro01 · · Score: 1

      This IS NOT anything most average Joe hardware has anything to do with, so I do not know why you are bounding off about Tivos.

      Leap seconds are about combining the extreme accuracy of atomic clocks while correcting them to keep them reasonably in-sync (within 0.9 seconds) with the solar time of day due to minor failings in our system of timekeeping, namely that our definition of a day is not exact due to (at our current understanding) practically random variations in the Earth's rotation speed.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  31. Nope! by gbutler69 · · Score: 1

    It just shows that you don't understand the issue.

    --
    Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
    1. Re:Nope! by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      It just shows that you don't understand the issue.

      Ah.... What a typical Unix-Geek response.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  32. Re:The force is strong with this one... by glittalogik · · Score: 1

    No, it's what one of the Batman villains does in the bathroom. Also referred to as 'spouting a one-liner.'

  33. Correction by quizzicus · · Score: 1

    The sun is directly overhead at 1 PM for most of the year due to Daylight Savings Time.

  34. keep the sun overhead at noon? by idommp · · Score: 1

    I'd like to just get it somewhere close and I don't much think a second or two is gonna help. I'm just outside of Chattanooga, TN at about longitude -84.90037 or physically at GMT -5.66 hours. [-84.90037 degrees / 15 degrees/hour ~= -5.66 hours ]. Legally, thanks to the idiots we elect to congress and the lobbyists who love them, my civil clock has to be set to GMT -4 for most of the year. In the cold of winter my sundial and the atomic clock only differ by about 40 minuets. The rest of the year the sun reaches zenith between 1:40 and 1:50. I can't bring myself to add post meridian to the time that the sun is actually at meridian. And 1:42 NOON just doesn't quit sound right either.

    I think we should set aside leap seconds and make them the only time during the year that Congress is allowed to vote on anything that has to do with physical constants like time and distance.

    1. Re: keep the sun overhead at noon? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > Legally, thanks to the idiots we elect to congress and the lobbyists who love them, my
      > civil clock has to be set to GMT -4 for most of the year.

      Legally, you are free to set your own personal clocks however you please.

      BTW, while I think that "daylight savings time" is a loony idea, I can't quite figure out which lobbying group you think is responsible for it.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  35. Yea, Yea, Yea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is all very interesting, but what I really want to know is this: am I the only one who was delivered a freaking Scientology ad when I brought up this page? Seriously, I actually clicked the ad (first time I've done that in year) to see if it was some kind of joke. But no! It was a Scientology ad. On science.slashdot.org. At it was for real.

    I mean, I'm all for religious tolerance and all, but I fail to see the connection between leap seconds and the insane, ossified teachings of a dead hack science fiction writer (and of course I mean that in a tolerant, ecumenical spirit of acceptance).

  36. Obligitory jwz post by farnsworth · · Score: 1
    --

    There aint no pancake so thin it doesn't have two sides.

  37. Sun Overhead? by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    What significance does this have for people who live in their parents' basement?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Sun Overhead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd explain to you it if I could come up with a car analogy...

  38. Slightly OT: Earth Rotations? by cgenman · · Score: 1

    Slightly offtopic, but does anyone know if the rotation of the earth around the sun mean that we actually rotate 366.25 times per revolution, or 364.25?

    1. Re:Slightly OT: Earth Rotations? by jeepien · · Score: 5, Funny

      ... does anyone know if the rotation of the earth around the sun mean that we actually rotate 366.25 times per revolution, or 364.25?

      Yes, of course someone does.

    2. Re:Slightly OT: Earth Rotations? by Starker_Kull · · Score: 2, Informative

      We rotate the same way we orbit, so the Earth rotates (from the point of view of the distant stars - the sidereal day) one more time in a year (366.24) than the number of solar days (365.24) - the number of times the sun circuts the sky. The length of the sidereal day is 23:56:04.1 long, and the solar day is 24:00:00 (roughly!). That extra 4 minutes is the Earth rotating 'a little extra' to put the sun in the same place in the sky since it's moved around it a little since the last noon.

      If you have ever tried the coin rotation trick, that might help you out visualizing it. Glue one coin to a piece of paper with the 'head' up. Align another coin above the first, with the head also up. Now, rotate the second coin around the first, keeping the edges in contact (no slipping). How many times does the second coin rotate?

      Most people will guess once, because the circumferences of the coins are the same. However, because the second coin 'orbits' the first as well as rotating on its own axis, it actually rotates TWICE. In our simplified coin scenario, there are 2 sidereal days, but only one solar day in a year. Look at how many times the bottom of the rotating coin 'sees a noon', and you'll be convinced.

    3. Re:Slightly OT: Earth Rotations? by endymion.nz · · Score: 1

      365.26

      --
      mediocrity rules, man
    4. Re:Slightly OT: Earth Rotations? by Anpheus · · Score: 1

      That's honestly the hardest experiment I've ever been asked to perform in order to teach me something. I can't even get the number to be a simple rational, let alone an even "2."

      Coincidentally, I can't get the the second coin to have two noons.

    5. Re:Slightly OT: Earth Rotations? by OolimPhon · · Score: 1

      You do know that the two coins are supposed to be the same type, don't you?

    6. Re:Slightly OT: Earth Rotations? by Anpheus · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and quarters are used because the edge makes it less slippery, but I still can't get it to work.

  39. Re:You and me both! (cat clock adjustments) by YttriumOxide · · Score: 1

    I've never managed to teach a cat to tell time, but I DID teach a cat to feed itself using an old Amiga 500, a custom feeding device connected via parallel (didn't NEED to be parallel, just that's what I wrote the software side as) and an oversized pad that technically was a 2 button mouse with no movement. If the large button on the left of the pad were pressed, a small amount of dry catfood would fall in to a bowl. If the button on the right were pressed, a small amount of water would fall in to a different bowl. I'd also occasionally buy soft food (fresh rabbit meat) as a special gift, but in general, he lived on the dry food and whatever he'd catch outside (birds, rats, baby possums etc). Once he got used to it, he never bugged me for food again.

    Note: If you live somewhere where your cat can't hunt, this won't work without some modifications since cats need their soft/moist food as well as the dry stuff and that of course needs to be refrigerated.
    It's also probably a no-go for your cat, since you said she's on a special diet.

    --
    My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
    Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
  40. It's 4:20 Somewhere! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not like I was the first person that that meme occurred to, but....

  41. you should write that down by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    I've had a few different folks who worked on GPS over the years try to explain how it worked and it never made sense to me until just now. Maybe it's just because I drank a margarita but that explanation seemed particularly lucid. Thanks!

    1. Re:you should write that down by __aajfby9338 · · Score: 1

      I've had a few different folks who worked on GPS over the years try to explain how it worked and it never made sense to me until just now. Maybe it's just because I drank a margarita but that explanation seemed particularly lucid. Thanks!

      I was drinking a beer when I wrote it. Maybe that was the key... :)

  42. Lets go back to the 28 day calendar too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean if we're changing things up and all...

  43. Oh dear... by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 1

    ...my eyeballs dried up while I was reading the article. Is this possibly the most boring Slashdot story ever ?

  44. The solution seems obvious. by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 1

    There is none. The rate of rotation of the Earth is slightly irregular in a not entirely predictable way.

    Massive magma pumps are what's needed.

    The Earth's getting a little ahead of time? Rotate the Earths surface a little by pumping magma in the earths core in the opposite direction.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  45. Pronunciation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Completely off-topic, but as a non-native speaker could someone tell me how to pronounce "sidereal"?

    Is it ZAJ-DEER-I-AL or is it ZAAJD-REEL?

    1. Re:Pronunciation by Meumeu · · Score: 1

      It's on wiktionary, can't put it here thanks to slashdot's handling of unicode...

  46. Is /usr/share/zoneinfo/right ... enough to use TAI by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 1

    I keep wondering, is linking /usr/share/zoneinfo/right to /etc/localtime enough to use TAI? The only problem with that is when I had to report a bug in an old version of Evolution, its calendar would do weird shit, like display the wrong day as "today."

  47. Timestamps should be in TAI by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 1

    At least that's what this guy does. I know, he's a pain the ass. You know, he's been right every time so far.

  48. The RIGHT way is to use both UTC and TAI by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 1

    The right way to go about this is to use TAI for internal computations, and merely *display* UTC, so that when you want to measure the duration of an event, you just compute time_end-time_start. This does not work with UTC. Yet many brain dead systems do that, and apparently, if I'm not mistaken, every Linux distro.

  49. An attempt at comparison: by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    I can't touch that!

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  50. It can make a difference by ygor · · Score: 1

    when you are dealing with multi-year timespans where a second or two one way or the other can make a significant difference -- mainly astronomy, celestial mechanics, and satellite stuff.

    Last time I had to deal with leap seconds in software, I found this: Sources for Time Zone and Daylight Saving Time Data which describes a system level time information database that includes leap seconds as well as Daylight Savings Time and time zones.

    There are leap-second-aware time functions available that can be rolled into GNU C. Once they are in place, adding a leap second is a trivial sysadmin operation to update the time-info-database. Then all software using it will be correct without need to re-build or recompile.

  51. obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously, the solution is to install mechanical regulators on the poles such that the planet's rotation conforms to the clock, rather than the other way around!

  52. Remind me... by Legion_SB · · Score: 1

    ... never to ask Slashdot "what time is it?" again.

    --
    'a';DROP TABLE users; SELECT * FROM DATA WHERE name LIKE '%'... if you're reading this, it didn't work.
  53. Best answer. by k1e0x · · Score: 1

    ..and we have a winner!

    --
    Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
  54. Re:The force is strong with this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    both of you guys, shut the god damn hell up!!

  55. Easy to fix that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To fix that problem, all you have to do is instead move the time zones east a few feet each time! If you averaged 1 leap second every 2 years, then every 7200 years or so you would end up in a time zone one hour earlier.