[tz] draft of change summary for next tz release
Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
sdaoden at gmail.com
Wed Sep 18 11:15:44 UTC 2013
Meno Hochschild <mhochschild at gmx.de> wrote:
|Am 18.09.2013 10:28, schrieb Alan Barrett:
|> If we know that old data was wrong, then we should correct it, but if
|> we merely suspect that the old data is unreliable then we should
|> retain our best estimate, not remove it.
|So I support the removal, since I think the discussed data obviously
|appear to be of very questionable nature. We cannot even consider the
What do you mean by that? The people who collected the data are
Bachelor of Science and Master of Science. Sorry? (Not that
i give anything on that, i'm German ;) Do you know it any better?
|discussed data as "our best estimate". Of course, there is no 100%
Well of course tz can, because it did and does and continues to do
so. You do not get used to anything better than that, can you?
I still fail to understand the discussion. It is clear that it
gets fuzzy in the past, and the only problem about that is that
pupils don't learn anything about it all. Of course we can ask
the question wether knowing an exact time is of any value at all,
or wouldn't it be cooler to wear only the titanium, gold and
diamonds? A few seconds here and there, they will get eroded away
soon anyway, the leap-second specialists will do it and drop 'em,
so as to make algorithms easier or i-don't-know-why.
To be honest, i don't even know if life was at all possible before
1972, as i don't have any serious data to confirm it.
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Meno Hochschild <mhochschild at gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [tz] draft of change summary for next tz release
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:59:16 +0200
More information about the tz