On Jan 28, 2015, at 1:34 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> "Derives from" is not a "physical reality", it's merely a social custom.
So many replies to choose from - and so many that have been posted in the past
- let's go with some (unvetted) quotes on custom:
- Truth always originates in a minor
It would be interesting to poll the USNO staff once a year as to what they
think the UT1 divergence form TAI will be in 2100. I wonder what that graph
would look like :)
Warner
> On Jan 28, 2015, at 3:03 PM, Matsakis, Demetrios
> wrote:
>
> Oops - I was referring to the predictions.Of co
Oops - I was referring to the predictions.Of course, any group of people
will have disagreements about all kinds of things, and that can be healthy.
But I am not aware of anyone disagreeing with me on that one point.
-Original Message-
From: LEAPSECS [mailto:leapsecs-boun...@le
On 01/28/2015 01:42 PM, Matsakis, Demetrios wrote:
To Steve mostly,
It would be misleading to reference the comment in Wall Street
Journal article, because people might conclude that staff at the USNO
disagree among themselves. This is not the case, at least this
time.
Are you sure the USNO
In message , Rob Seaman writes:
>And length of day most assuredly derives from the synodic day,
>i.e., mean solar time. Is there not one fewer day in the year than
>sidereal rotations?
"Derives from" is not a "physical reality", it's merely a social custom.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp
On Jan 28, 2015, at 10:02 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> We each wear multiple hats. Two of mine are 1) to point out that
>> physical reality trumps standards and software, [...]
>
> And one of my hats is to point out that you have no monopoly on
> defining "physical reality" and have a great
To Steve mostly,
It would be misleading to reference the comment in Wall Street Journal article,
because people might conclude that staff at the USNO disagree among themselves.
This is not the case, at least this time. Ed Powers, who is right now
heading to the airport, was interviewed beca
Maybe we should find out if that is reasonable, or maybe just a
journalistic misunderstanding. That's is a huge difference to the
sources you quote. I was quite comfortable that there would be no more
than a couple of adjustments required per year out at 200yrs.
Unfortunately there are no source
In message <20150128152743.ga12...@ucolick.org>, Steve Allen writes:
>If there is a problem with my web pages I will be happy to debate
>it either publicly or discus it privately.
So why don't you simply list all the estimates as we find them ?
As far as I can tell, these guesses/estima
>We each wear multiple hats. Two of mine are 1) to point out that
>physical reality trumps standards and software, [...]
And one of my hats is to point out that you have no monopoly on
defining "physical reality" and have a great tendency to define it
to support your opinions.
Likewis
We each wear multiple hats. Two of mine are 1) to point out that physical
reality trumps standards and software, and that 2) that there are precious few
conversations here that haven’t occurred before:
- Warner has explained his use case in the past. There are likely no
engineering use case
> On Jan 28, 2015, at 2:33 AM, Martin Burnicki
> wrote:
>
> Warner Losh schrieb:
>>
>>> On Jan 27, 2015, at 7:18 PM, Steve Allen wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue 2015-01-27T21:41:17 +, Matsakis, Demetrios hath writ:
Equally unfortunate is that 30 servers in the NTP pool inserted a
leap se
> On Jan 28, 2015, at 5:25 AM, Tom Van Baak wrote:
>
> Hi Warner,
>
> Keeping cold spares is a good example. I can see that having to acquire GPS
> lock and waiting up to 12.5 minutes for current leap second information would
> be a problem. There must be a way to cache that state so rapid f
On Wed 2015-01-28T15:10:09 +, Alex Currant via LEAPSECS hath writ:
> I have trouble believing people who keep misleading and outdated
> information on their web pages
Following up the issue from last week about how big will the
difference between Atomic Time and Universal Time get during
this
My company got burned by mis-programming for Y2K. It's hard to test things
that happen every few years.
It might be a good debating point to say that in one specific incident the
future ITU decision would not help, but it's a diversion. I have trouble
believing people who keep misleading and
In message , "Tom Van Baak" writes:
>Keeping cold spares is a good example. I can see that having to acquire
>GPS lock and waiting up to 12.5 minutes for current leap second
>information would be a problem. There must be a way to cache that state
>so rapid failover is possible, in both
Hi Warner,
Keeping cold spares is a good example. I can see that having to acquire GPS
lock and waiting up to 12.5 minutes for current leap second information would
be a problem. There must be a way to cache that state so rapid failover is
possible, in both the hot and cold spare case.
I know
On 2015-01-28 05:49 AM, Brooks Harris wrote:
On 2015-01-28 05:31 AM, m...@lumieresimaginaire.com wrote:
Oops - that last one got away while I was trying to quit HTML!!!
Le 28.01.2015 11:09, Poul-Henning Kamp a écrit :
In message <54c8b26d.6050...@edlmax.com>, Brooks Harris writes:
On 2015-01-28 05:31 AM, m...@lumieresimaginaire.com wrote:
Oops - that last one got away while I was trying to quit HTML!!!
Le 28.01.2015 11:09, Poul-Henning Kamp a écrit :
In message <54c8b26d.6050...@edlmax.com>, Brooks Harris writes:
It says - "Until now the solution has been to
Oops - that last one got away while I was trying to quit HTML!!!
Le 28.01.2015 11:09, Poul-Henning Kamp a écrit :
In message <54c8b26d.6050...@edlmax.com>, Brooks Harris writes:
It says - "Until now the solution has been to introduce a 'leap
second', in other words to stop 'official
Point taken. Sorry. They probably do understand it, and just made a
careless statement.
But too many folks don't get it. I think its because the specs are not
clear in the first place and the misunderstandings have been piling up
in mismatched applications for years. Somebody somewhere needs t
Le 28.01.2015 11:09, Poul-Henning Kamp a écrit :
>
> In message <54c8b26d.6050...@edlmax.com>, Brooks Harris writes:
>
>> It says - "Until now the solution has been to introduce a 'leap second', in
>> other words to stop 'official/scientific' time (Co-ordinated Universal Time,
>> '
In message <54c8b26d.6050...@edlmax.com>, Brooks Harris writes:
>It says -
>
>"Until now the solution has been to introduce a 'leap second', in other
>words to stop 'official/scientific' time (Co-ordinated Universal Time,
>'UTC'), for one second every so often."
>
>Hold the phone. "to st
It says -
"Until now the solution has been to introduce a 'leap second', in other
words to stop 'official/scientific' time (Co-ordinated Universal Time,
'UTC'), for one second every so often."
Hold the phone. "to stop 'official/scientific' time"?!? How worrisome is
it that the chair of the c
Looks like there is still work in progress even this close to the WRC.
ECC seems to be recommending what I consider to be the least bad option
on the table, but I am not sure that the individual European
governments, who in the end are those that vote, are all in the same
boat. IIRC France was f
Martin,
Ideally, all software should be flawless and bugfree.
This lofty goal would come at a cost, I don't think I need to convince
you that it would be a very high cost, for civilization as such.
We can argue if it would be worth the investment.
I personally think it could be, but o
Le 28.01.2015 10:07, Poul-Henning Kamp a écrit :
>
> In message <20150128021831.ga31...@ucolick.org>, Steve Allen writes:
> On Tue 2015-01-27T21:41:17 +, Matsakis, Demetrios hath writ: Equally
> unfortunate is that 30 servers in the NTP pool inserted a leap second last
> Dec 31.
Warner Losh schrieb:
On Jan 27, 2015, at 7:18 PM, Steve Allen wrote:
On Tue 2015-01-27T21:41:17 +, Matsakis, Demetrios hath writ:
Equally unfortunate is that 30 servers in the NTP pool inserted a
leap second last Dec 31.
There is no action that the ITU-R can take which will change this
In message <20150128021831.ga31...@ucolick.org>, Steve Allen writes:
>On Tue 2015-01-27T21:41:17 +, Matsakis, Demetrios hath writ:
>> Equally unfortunate is that 30 servers in the NTP pool inserted a
>> leap second last Dec 31.
>
>There is no action that the ITU-R can take which will c
29 matches
Mail list logo
