Bob George wrote:
>
> of "timezones" is, and what an inconvenience it is. Any arbitrary global (if
> not universal) "time" reference would work. 0100 should be 0100 everywhere.
> I might wake up at 1300 to go to work, but so what? Why are we insisting on
I do...
> sticking to an antiquated timebase intended to help early farmers which has
> become totally out of sync with today's reality anyhow?
>
This has been done by Swatch. The call it Internet beats.
A day consists of 1000 beats IIRC. beat 1 is at 0:00 at the Swatch
offices.
> We then moved on to how absolutely insane it will be to try to keep earth
> time during space travel with no daylight references at all.
>
> So when you start to spout claims of "logic", please don't insult the rest
> of the universe by insisting on referencing everything from a terrestial
> point of view. BOTH sides of this stupid debate are known to be wrong as the
> "event" the whole concept is based on didn't actually happen in either year
> zero OR year one. At best, both are off by a half dozen years. So let's just
> GET OVER this. 2000 is kind of fun. Some people are enjoying celebrating. It
> doesn't really CHANGE ANYTHING. Nobody's the wiser for "winning" either side
> of this discussion.
>
my solution: celebrate both 1999->2000 and 2000->2001
--
Casper Gielen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
I think hacking a birthday card (my birthday card, at that) is truly
a new low. Get thee back to kernels, Alan. Telsa Cox
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
