On 31 January 2011 15:59, Poul-Henning Kamp <[email protected]> wrote: > In message <[email protected]>, Rob Seaman writes: >>On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >>Is there really a requirement to render the concept of "universal >>time" meaningless? Or is UTC merely collateral damage from an >>intellectually lazy campaign to "suppress TAI"? > > There is a desire to see computers work reliably together.
Is that the only desire driving the abolishing of leapsecs? What about the desire for a human day to remain meaningful (midnight at night et al)? Is that irrelevent/not considered/secondary? Stephen _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
