On Feb 8, 2014, at 5:11 PM, Brooks Harris bro...@edlmax.com wrote:
On 2014-02-07 04:12 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message 20140206151947.ga25...@ucolick.org, Steve Allen writes:
Taken at face value Google's Site Reliability Team would seem to be
arguing for the return to the bad old days of the rubber second.
Yeah, they're totally opposed to having equal-length seconds, and they
really showing the world with this demonstration, aren't they ?
I have heard a fair bit in private communications about why and how
google did implement the leap-smear, and let me assure you that
they have a special place in Googles hell reserved for those who
prevented leapseconds from having a quick and swift death back when
that was first proposed.
I probably missed discussion of this survey a couple years ago.
Not as much as there should have been. Thanks for reintroducing it into the
mix.
I note two individuals at Google replied. One answered I am not satisfied
and prefer UTC redefined without leap of second, and one I am satisfied
with the current definition of UTC which includes leap second.
Maybe there's not really a consensus within Google either?
INTERNATIONAL EARTH ROTATION AND REFERENCE SYSTEMS SERVICE (IERS)
EARTH ORIENTATION CENTER
ANSWERS OF THE QUESTIONNARY CONCERNING A POSSIBLE REDEFINITION OF UTC
http://hpiers.obspm.fr/eop-pc/questionnaire/reponse_questionnaire.html
Regarding Google Hell, this has a particular meaning:
http://www.forbes.com/2007/04/29/sanar-google-skyfacet-tech-cx_ag_0430googhell.html
None of our factions has ever been particularly concerned about query
placement, and in general the various resources are easy enough to find. One
might, however, point out that the Google Blog itself doesn't show up until the
third page of results ;-)
If anything has prevented leap seconds from death it is the weakness of the
proposal itself. And the real-world distinction between Universal Time and
Atomic Time; Death to leap seconds! is the rallying cry of somebody who wants
to pretend that two distinct concepts are the same thing.
Regarding private communications, the most obvious thing about this mailing
list is the dearth of participation from supporters of the death penalty.
Rather than anecdotes in private email, such individuals are encouraged to
participate here. Or perhaps as the EOC questionnaire shows, there are simply
many more supporters of the status quo:
http://www.cacr.caltech.edu/futureofutc/2011/preprints/17_AAS_11-668_Gambis.pdf
The plural of anecdote is not data.
Rob
___
LEAPSECS mailing list
LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
