5 ms·
It's disingenuous to call this a "clock", given clocks keep their own time through a rigorous standard of counting the passage of precisely measured causality.
by kordless 10y ago
It's disingenuous to call this a "clock", given clocks keep their own time through a rigorous standard of counting the passage of precisely measured causality. While we may be "closer" to doom by some arbitrary consensus mechanism, only humans can choose the causality of enabling that final "doom" event, or putting it off for another day. Or, put another way, it ain't over till it's over.
- andrewclunn 10y agoThe use of a "doomsday clock" as a measurement seems like such an anachronism that it's almost adorable.
- mikeash 10y agoWhy? The threat of global nuclear annihilation didn't disappear with the USSR.
- macintux 10y agoDoomsday vector clock.
- imglorp 10y agoYeah, something the military's Defcon scale seems more appropriate, if anything.
- grzm 10y agoThe Doomsday Clock is a symbolic clock face that represents a countdown to possible global catastrophe. It has been maintained since 1947 by the members of The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists' Science and Security Board, who are in turn advised by the Governing Board and the Board of Sponsors, including 18 Nobel Laureates. The closer they set the Clock to midnight, the more vulnerable the scientists believe the world is to global disaster. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_Clock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_Clock These are sharp people. They're fully aware it's not a clock in the strict sense you're pedantically ascribing. It's a useful analogy.
- sodafountan 10y agoThere's nothing "sharp" about these people. If they were sharp they'd be spending their free time solving hard problems (which include cancer, aids, Alzheimer's) rather than maintaining an imaginary clock. Absolute nonsense, these "scientist" should be ashamed of themselves and in my mind they've already lost all credibility.
- edgarvaldes 10y ago>they'd be spending their free time solving hard problems. Well, this update in the clock can't take a significant amount of time.
- throwanem 10y agoWith a board empaneled to decide? Are you sure about that?
- sp332 10y agoPart of a scientist's job is communicating results to non-scientists.
- westbywest 10y agoA glance at the board's membership suggests the clock is a side project. Their daytime pursuits include nuclear research, environmental policy, public health preparedness against bio-attacks, climatology, and quantum physics. http://thebulletin.org/science-and-security-board http://thebulletin.org/science-and-security-board
- okreallywtf 10y agoSo they are not scientists? They haven't done anything to solve the worlds problems? I take it you are in a position to judge, since you seem to be handing out judgement even more freely than they are?
- anigbrowl 10y agoSo if you were smart, you'd be spending time solving hard problems instead of wasting time chatting to people on HN, yes? Well no, you're able to maintain a social life and hold political views and so on in parallel to your professional activities. Why wouldn't you think the same to be true of these scientists?
- hsod 10y agoit's a metaphor