On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 10:31:40 Alliance for the Advancement of Technology (AAT) wrote: >Hello all, > >I can appreciate the concerns posted about a AAT ICAS metric-time initiative, >however please keep in mind that the AAT is using a process to help ensure that >technical and use issues are appropriately addressed. > ? I suppose it would make your point clearer to us if you shared with us what these 'technical and use issues' are. ... >ICAS is not designed as a proposal for time reform, but rather as a >chronological alternative which may be used concurrent with or independent >of other calendar and clock systems.
? And why would we need a 'chronological alternative' if not one that should *replace* the current one? I guess you and I both know and/or realize that our current calendar is simply inadequate and hence needs indeed *fixing*. Therefore, I'd go much further and claim that what we need is a way to definitively and conclusively address the shortcomings of the present system, instead of just coming up with 'alternatives'. > The objective of ICAS is not to speak >for SI, but to explore the development of measures via principles upon which >SI is based. And ICAS features have been designed to support these >conditions of use. > Well... If this is one of your objectives, then why do it "outside the SI framework"? Unfortunately I'm afraid you won't find much sympathetic ears from people here as the very thing that we have been fighting all along is to do away with the plethora and confusion of 'alternatives' for measurements that our societies are being plagued by. Most of us (if not all!) feel that it's the mentality of creating frameworks that suit specific applications that is behind the mess we're in. When it comes to *measurements*, Mr. Stone, there can be only ONE solution, a solution that is encompassed by the creation, promotion and implementation of a universal system of units for measuring things. That system is what we call SI! >The AAT knows that there is some interest in metric time by at least some >number of folks. Where practical, the AAT has used ICAS as a time system >for AAT programs, which include ICAS development. The AAT is working to >analyze and prepare additional studies of ICAS not yet reported on the >aatideas web. >... Well, yes you're quite right about what you said in the beginning of your statement above. But please bear in mind that this is mostly due to our agreeing about the inadequacy of our present calendar/time system vis-a-vis that global universal system of units we all desire. It's fair to say though that most (if not all) of us would be highly interested in hearing 'alternatives', hence our interest in what you have to offer. But I honestly doubt it very much that any here would be satisfied with defending "just" 'alternatives'. What most would like to see and advocate is *change*, but most of us realize that when it comes to time/calendar such change is quite unrealistic at this time (nonetheless we do welcome discussing it!)... Marcus Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail. Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com
