And god forbid we respond with "that's not a good solution." To restate, here's the problem, quoted from the original article: > "As an industry, we bump into

And god forbid we respond with "that's not a good solution." To restate, here's the problem, quoted from the original article: > "As an industry, we bump into problems whenever a leap second is introduced." Their suggested solution is: > "As engineers at Meta, we are supporting a larger community push to stop the future introduction of leap seconds and remain at the current level of 27, which we believe will be enough for the next millennium." Most folks are rightly pointing out that there are many other solutions that we could introduce, which wouldn't have the downsides of UTC drifting away from our wall-clock time. Facebook didn't even discuss those solutions though. An example possible other solution: programmers (especially programmers at Facebook) should stop using UTC and should instead use TAI (which is literally UTC but without leap seconds). Indeed, using UTC time as anything other than a wallclock time should trend towards the norm. Even though this is a clear tru-ism, seeing it adopted would be way harder (due to language inertia and habits) compared with just changing the standard (nevermind that changing the standard would break a ton of logic built around expectations like "midnight UTC falls on an integer multiple of 86400").