9 ms·
> So, as you can see, leap seconds do nothing to make an astronomer's life easier. In fact, we jump through a lot of hoops to make the average person's life eas
by jefftk 4y ago
> So, as you can see, leap seconds do nothing to make an astronomer's life easier. In fact, we jump through a lot of hoops to make the average person's life easier. It sounds like Meta wants to change the definition of time for everyone just to make their programming a little easier. I find the very premise just out right ridiculous.
Meta (and everyone else behind this proposal) are arguing that leap seconds are more trouble than they're worth. Just as you are in the specific case of astronomy.
- wumpus 4y agoKnowing where the Earth is is vitally important for much of astronomy. You can't point at something small in the sky without knowing it. Personally, I think we should return to the Julian calendar. Leap years are too complicated otherwise, not worth the trouble.
- gmiller123456 4y agoAll I did was make the argument that they didn't make an astronomer's life easier, at no point did I say it was more trouble that it's worth.
- alecbz 4y agoYou also said: > It sounds like Meta wants to change the definition of time for everyone just to make their programming a little easier. I find the very premise just out right ridiculous. ... Meta is just trying to make their problem someone else's problem. Meta's argument is: we should get rid of leap seconds because even though they're helpful for astronomers, they're bad for everyone else. Your counterpoint was: Actually leap seconds are _also_ bad for astronomers. Which implies then that Meta is even more right to suggest that we get rid of leap seconds, because it seems like they help nobody.
- gmiller123456 4y agoI can see how you'd read it that way, but my point was that they were not invented for astronomers, with the implication being the author didn't research the topic thoroughly enough to be making recommendations.
- jefftk 4y agoAstronomers have been one of the groups most vocal in favor of retaining leap seconds: https://www.nature.com/articles/423671a https://www.nature.com/articles/423671a
- MikePlacid 4y agoAstronomers may just understand that the problem exists: [the ITU group’s chairman] says he needs more input from people who use universal time. “Many people don't even know that leap seconds exist,” The decision to ignore leap seconds reminds of the decision by Russian and some other orthodox churches to ignore changes introduced by Gregorian calendar. The decision saved them some internal political problems, like the need to decide which saints will have their celebrations missing, but now the Orthodox Christmas is moving to summer with the speed of about 1 day per 100 years. Eventually somebody will have to deal with this, but not now - there’s a lot of time - same thinking. Meanwhile, if you leave in a Gregorian country you can have your Christmas tree for free on Orthodox December 12th…
- eshch 4y agoI'm not sure Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas with a tree. At least in Russia the tree is mounted for New Year celebration and it lasts till Orthodox Christmas for granted. Actually it usually lasts to the so-called Old New Year - New Year in Old Style (meaning Julian Calendar before introduction of Gregorian one by Bolsheviks).
- crimony 4y agoOrthodox Christians in the Southern Hemisphere already celebrate Christmas in summer, as do other Christians. #borealocentrism
- MikePlacid 4y ago> borealocentrism Guilty as charged. Thinking of that - there could be no more Russian winter as we used to it at all, even in the Northern hemisphere. My friends are now growing apricots in the Russian temperate zone. Apricots! - in the place there the “Baptismal Frosts” (to happen each year just before Christmas) used to kill all such fancy vegetation. #climateasitwasbeforechangecentrism
- panda-giddiness 4y agoTheir point is that Meta's argument is a straw man.
- alecbz 4y agoIt's not really a straw man because Meta's not really attacking that position, they're ceding that point. Like a straw man would be Meta saying "astronomers think that leap seconds are helpful but in fact they're not useful for anything!" Here, if anything, Meta is attempting to steel man leap seconds a bit by saying "look, sure, leap seconds are at least useful for some things, like astronomy, but they're still not worth it overall". And GP is claiming that it's not a very good steel man because even astronomers don't like leap seconds.
- panda-giddiness 4y agoBut Meta's not actually ceding the point. They're essentially arguing that (1) leap seconds are an esoteric concept that only astronomers care about, and that (2) we shouldn't care about their esoteric concerns, so (3) we should therefore dispose of leap seconds. The GP's point is that astronomers find leap seconds annoying too, so Meta's argument is based on a faulty premise.
- alecbz 4y agoOk sure, I don't think I quite got that from what GP wrote, but I can see that as a valid argument: "There are actually valid uses for leap seconds, but just not within astronomy. Meta's claiming that leap seconds were made for astronomy so that we assume that's why they exist and ignore the other real reasons leap seconds exist and the benefits they provide."
- ncmncm 4y agoThey do not provide any. Unless it is "programmers' employment assurance".
- panda-giddiness 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- afiori 4y agoI like meta-bashing as much an any other facebook hater, but their point is that leap seconds are by definition used to keep UTC in almost sync with earth rotation and their argument is that it is not something useful to do.
- jrochkind1 4y agoYou made a case that leap seconds don't make astrononmy easier. But you seem to be implying that you do not want to get rid of them, which surprised me. After you made your case for how they actually make things harder for astronomers, I thought you'd be in favor of eliminating them. You seem to be against eliminating them, but are not saying so clearly, or explaining why. Unless I am misunderstanding. Can you explain why you object to getting rid of leap seconds? Is it because of value to astronomy, or because of value in other domains despite the inconvenience to astronomy? Other? Or do I misunderstand?
- robbrown451 4y agoSo what is the benefit then?
- bnjms 4y ago> But eventually it will build up enough error that it eventually has to be addressed I also misread their argument until this point. But there is no reading that makes sense except that Meta’s programming problems protect everyone else from dealing with the drifting time. I think this is right. There will still be calculations for sunrise and sunset which will have to make the calculations.
- teknopaul 4y agoSeconds don't matter for sunset and sunrise to humans. Move a bit and your off no matter what timezone you are in. If you need really really precise sunset and sunrise leap seconds don't help. You are more likely to hit a bug than be helped by them. I'm all for ending leap seconds and ending daylight savings while we at it. In Spain, in summer, some people start work at 08:00 or 07:00, no need to change clocks to change habits.
- Dylan16807 4y agoSunrise and sunset take half an hour or more, and depending on location and time of year can shift by over a minute every single day. The shifting will be invisible, and someone can update the formula once a century.
- Maursault 4y agoI'm not really sure why sunrise and sunset times are being discussed when what leap seconds are designed to do is have noon occur when the sun is highest in the sky, which is a fraction of a split-second event.
- Dylan16807 4y agoLeap seconds get applied to time zones, so I don't feel like solar noon is a top priority.
- JohnHaugeland 4y ago> Meta (and everyone else behind this proposal) are arguing that leap seconds are more trouble than they're worth "Everyone should change how they do things because it isn't valuable to us personally" Nah
- mycall 4y agoOne cool thing about leap seconds is that it is bidirectional, so a time proxy could introduce time traveling into any supported system aside from vector clock issues.