[LEAPSECS] Schedule for success
greg.hennessy at cox.net
Tue Dec 30 22:41:28 EST 2008
>> Nothing, since they use UTC, even though many people incorrectly call it GMT.
> But which "many people" are we talking about here ?
Doesn't matter in my view.
> Why is the report using GMT ?
Probably because it is a more recognizable term than UTC.
> I find theory C entirely unpersuasive: NASA is clearly not afraid
> to lecture the public about the difference between UTC and GMT.
I find your logic unpersuasive.
> If, for the argument, we assume theory A to be false, then it follows
> that whichever editor or secretary did the vandalism in theory B,
> (or for that matter: C) would have gotten a scolding lecture by one
> of the involved rocket scientist, who would have insisted that the
> change to GMT be backed out immediately.
If you think that a scientist can change the contents of a report after
the policitaly appointed staff at NASA has edited it, you don't understand
how NASA works.
> QED: rocket scientists are not educated well enough to, or can not
> be bothered to, react when they see a national british timescale
> used instead of a the proper UTC timescale.
False conclusion due to faulty logic.
> Now, do you belive me when I say that 99+% of all programmers
> wouldn't get a leap-second right if they even knew what it was ?
Then my advice is to work on getting better programmers rather
than messing with leap seconds.
More information about the LEAPSECS