5 ms·
> The only reliable time stamp is UTC without leap seconds. That doesn't make a lot of sense, as UTC does have leap seconds. It is similar to saying that the f
by espadrine 10y ago
> The only reliable time stamp is UTC without leap seconds.
That doesn't make a lot of sense, as UTC does have leap seconds. It is similar to saying that the fastest car has no wheels, when you really mean that the fastest vehicle is a rocket.
TAI is the most reliable and easiest to work with. It relies on atomic clock seconds at sea level. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Time
However, it already has a difference of roughly 40 seconds with UTC (and therefore civil time), and dropping leap seconds in civil time will shift midnight to later in the day.
But as the frequency of leap seconds rapidly increases, maintaining UTC will become harder. They will consider dropping leap seconds from UTC in 2023. It is unlikely that people care about having the sun rise at midnight in 30000 years.
- thymelord 10y ago> That doesn't make a lot of sense, as UTC does have leap seconds. Pedantic much? Posting in technical forums is such a bother. People pick at any unimportant detail. Reworded just for you: The only reliable time stamp would be something like UTC but without leap seconds.
- espadrine 10y agoI am sorry. My intention was not to sound pedantic. I only wanted to point out that we are fortunate enough to already have what you describe. I too wish we used TAI-based timestamps instead of Unix timestamps in a more widespread manner! It is a bit silly that we cannot determine any duration involving a UTC time a couple of years in the future…