7 ms·

The technically correct thing to do would be to educate on precision, perhaps even display it, such that people know that 12:00 means a time between 11:59 and 1

by brnt 2y ago

The technically correct thing to do would be to educate on precision, perhaps even display it, such that people know that 12:00 means a time between 11:59 and 12:01, not 12:00.000.

timerol 2y ago
The point is that we use 12:00 to note a time between 12:00:00.0 (inclusive) and 12:01:00.0 (exclusive). Saying that 12:00 is a time between 11:59 and 12:01 implies that the range of error is twice as big as it actually is. How long between 12:01:00.0 and 12:00 (as read on a clock)? Between 0 and 60 seconds. How long between 11:59:00.0 and 12:00 (as read on a clock)? Between 60 and 120 seconds.
- brnt 2y ago
  What I am saying is that that use is incorrect as well. There is only one way to understand numbers, and that is scientifically. I.e. significant digit.
lxgr 2y ago
Good luck educating people on why they should change lifelong habits that actually even make more sense most of the time too.
snowfarthing 2y ago
With the lack of precision for clocks the way they are, and worries about variance in travel time due to traffic, distractions, potty emergencies, and so forth, the more natural way to handle precision is to give yourself a 5-to-15-minute-to-an-hour buffer to ensure that you're in your seat when the clock ticks from 11:59 to 12:00. And yes, 5-to-15-to-an-hour is something that varies, depending on the length of your trip. 5 is appropriate when you're in your office and you need to get to the conference room, 15 if you're driving from your nearby home, an hour if you're flying in, or if you have to drive 200 miles or so -- particularly if it's a trip you don't regularly take! For meetings, I actually give myself 16 "precise" minutes -- one minute less than 15, with 4-minute-30-second snoozes, so I can have both adequate warning, and regular pokes, to make sure I can do something on time.

7 ms·

The technically correct thing to do would be to educate on precision, perhaps even display it, such that people know that 12:00 means a time between 11:59 and 1

by brnt 2y ago

The technically correct thing to do would be to educate on precision, perhaps even display it, such that people know that 12:00 means a time between 11:59 and 12:01, not 12:00.000.

timerol 2y ago
The point is that we use 12:00 to note a time between 12:00:00.0 (inclusive) and 12:01:00.0 (exclusive). Saying that 12:00 is a time between 11:59 and 12:01 implies that the range of error is twice as big as it actually is. How long between 12:01:00.0 and 12:00 (as read on a clock)? Between 0 and 60 seconds. How long between 11:59:00.0 and 12:00 (as read on a clock)? Between 60 and 120 seconds.
- brnt 2y ago
  What I am saying is that that use is incorrect as well. There is only one way to understand numbers, and that is scientifically. I.e. significant digit.
lxgr 2y ago
Good luck educating people on why they should change lifelong habits that actually even make more sense most of the time too.
snowfarthing 2y ago
With the lack of precision for clocks the way they are, and worries about variance in travel time due to traffic, distractions, potty emergencies, and so forth, the more natural way to handle precision is to give yourself a 5-to-15-minute-to-an-hour buffer to ensure that you're in your seat when the clock ticks from 11:59 to 12:00. And yes, 5-to-15-to-an-hour is something that varies, depending on the length of your trip. 5 is appropriate when you're in your office and you need to get to the conference room, 15 if you're driving from your nearby home, an hour if you're flying in, or if you have to drive 200 miles or so -- particularly if it's a trip you don't regularly take! For meetings, I actually give myself 16 "precise" minutes -- one minute less than 15, with 4-minute-30-second snoozes, so I can have both adequate warning, and regular pokes, to make sure I can do something on time.