On Sat 2005-07-30T10:18:42 -0700, Tom Van Baak hath writ:
> So my question is - is the actual value of DUT1,
> as broadcast with single digit precision, still
> used? And if so, from where do they get the
> value?
We do not use them for our telescopes at Lick, but our big telescope
is built out of
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob Seaman writes:
>On Jul 30, 2005, at 12:05 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
>> I have three times been through what ended up being total reinstalls
>> from backups because some operator by accident (or stupidity) set
>> the clock forward in time and then backward i
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tom Van Baak writes:
>WWV and WWVB and perhaps other national
>systems transmit DUT1 as a 3- or 4-bit signed
>number of 100 ms.
As does MSF/Rugby in the UK.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
Fr
I can confirm that the text below is identical to the official proposal on 7A's table. (I have seen the official document, but cannot redistribute it).For the record, I can confirm that I got the document from an openly visible place on the web which Google knew about.A focus on such trivial burea
On Sat 2005-07-30T19:04:43 +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ:
> I can confirm that the text below is identical to the official
> proposal on 7A's table. (I have seen the official document,
> but cannot redistribute it).
For the record, I can confirm that I got the document from an openly
visible
A very apt case study has been provoked by the WSJ story.
Slash-dot is a gathering of IT-geeks of various sorts, but mostly
the dot-com generation.
See how well they grasp leap-seconds
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/30/135239&threshold=3&tid=103&tid=164
(I caution against setting a th
Markus Kuhn scripsit:
> We must be talking about different proposals then.
So it seems. I of course agree that leap hours in UTC are a terrible
idea.
--
Principles. You can't say A is John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
made of B or vice versa. All mass http://www.reutershealth.com
is
On Jul 30, 2005, at 12:05 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:I have three times been through what ended up being total reinstallsfrom backups because some operator by accident (or stupidity) setthe clock forward in time and then backward in time on a databaseinstallation.Are you asserting that these probl
WWV and WWVB and perhaps other national
systems transmit DUT1 as a 3- or 4-bit signed
number of 100 ms. I'm curious what sort of
instruments or operational systems use or used
this value? Several astronomers on the list make
a good case that they depend on UTC being
close enough to UT1 for their wo
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Markus Kuhn writes:
>the one submitted by the US
>delegation to ITU-R working party 7A on 1 September 2004
>(Document 7A/15-E), which I understand to be identical with:
I can confirm that the text below is identical to the official
proposal on 7A's table. (I have
"John.Cowan" wrote on 2005-07-30 15:35 UTC:
> > Let's not forget that this proposal is all about replacing a
> > reasonably frequent minor distruption (UTC leap seconds) with a very
> > rare catastrophically big one (UTC leap hours).
>
> No, it's about replacing an irregularly scheduled minor glitc
Markus Kuhn scripsit:
> I'm sorry, but I find these three badly documented second or
> third-hand rumours of leap-second scare stories neither very scary nor
> very convincing.
No more they are, and thanks for the pointers to debunking articles.
> It introduces leap hours into a time scale (UTC)
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Markus Kuhn writes:
>> And in 2003, a leap-second
>> bug made GPS receivers from Motorola Inc. briefly show customers the
>> time as half past 62 o'clock.
>
>It conveniently omits the minor detail that this long preannounced
>Motorola software bug actually manifeste
Steve Allen wrote on 2005-07-29 21:37 UTC:
> http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB112258962467199210-H9je4Nilal4o52nbYCIbq6Em4,00.html
The article repeats an old urban legend:
> In 1997, the Russian global positioning system, known as
> Glonass, was broken for 20 hours after a transmission to
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob Seaman writes:
>On Jul 29, 2005, at 2:11 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> From 1998 to 1999, I left the clock on my desktop Sun workstation
>set forward 11 years. This allowed me to test various Y2K
>remediation issues. (The 11 years was to select the next year
15 matches
Mail list logo
