On Jul 6, 2006, at 12:46 PM, Brian Garrett wrote:
I was told that the station delays their broadcast in order to enable on-the-spot editing of objectionable material.
Surely the requirement is to permit review of *potentially* objectionable material. A time signal is no such thing and need not be delayed. Proper system design would interpose time signals (and perhaps other safe content such as weather reports or what have you) after the delay line. Am also skeptical that most stations employ a 24 hour censor to monitor and bleep all content before it reaches the air. (And who would want such a horrific job?)
it's in networks' best interests to do this even if it means setting your watch to their time signal means being 9 seconds late.
That's just one use case, of course. Folks who set their watches using well synchronized time signals, or who consult their cellphones or NTP driven laptops, will be ahead of this particular radio station. Nine seconds is meaningless for many purposes, but a 9s "simulcast" delay would be intolerable, for instance. Usage issues might also be revealed when switching between stations. My thought when we reach one of these topics is to marvel at the chutzpah of proposing a "solution" like leap hours without investing the slightest effort in characterizing potential issues. Timekeeping can't simultaneously be the deeply important issue we all must think it is (or else would not be reading this :-) and also be worthy of such abject neglect.
"The 'time' as most of us know it is simply inexpensive crumbs from the tables of the few rich "gourmet" consumers of time and frequency information."
Astronomers have traditionally been not only among the most demanding gourmets, but have also employed some of the greatest temporal chefs. This is indeed a pretty good analogy, although the word "inexpensive" is out of place. The point is that a crumb from the table of a gourmet is still a gourmet crumb. A parvenu of time can also aspire to become a gourmet should the need or interest arise. I believe this describes the world we currently inhabit.
we're being served chronological junk food and most folks couldn't care less.
This is a different analogy. It isn't a question of "most folks", it is a question of for "most purposes". Even gourmets sometimes appreciate a simple meal. And on the other hand, the temporal hoi polloi are dependent more-and-more on chronological caviar through the offices of various technological agents. Cellphones don't only report high quality timing information, they and their networks require this to operate. But your analogy is quite apt for the world that would follow the adoption of the Absurd Leap Hour Proposal. All time signals would then become junk food. All gourmets would find themselves in the position of dumpster divers. Rob NOAO
