News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Should the leap second be eliminated? by Lewton on Thursday January 19, 2012 @05:19AM (#3483875)
>Over decades, the difference between Earth-based time and atomic clock time would amount to a few minutes, but over 500 years, they would be out by an hour. Over millennia, the discrepancy would grow even more.

Is this really true? Based on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second

It seems like there's only been 25 leap seconds in 40 years. That's around a minute every century..

Re:Should the leap second be eliminated? by chalst on Thursday January 19, 2012 @05:22AM (#3483888)
Leap seconds are expected to become more frequent, and the last decade has had unusually few leap seconds.
Re:Should the leap second be eliminated? by Lewton on Thursday January 19, 2012 @05:26AM (#3483896)
Does that mean we expect there to be more than a couple of leap seconds every year? (Based on the "more than an hour over 500 years" statement)
Re:Should the leap second be eliminated? by chalst on Thursday January 19, 2012 @05:35AM (#3483918)
Err, yes, that does sound an order of magnitude out, now I come to think of it.

The original proposal allows updates four times a year, though only the July and December updates have been used.

Re:Should the leap second be eliminated? by maggit on Thursday January 19, 2012 @06:04AM (#3483973)
Four times a year, with up to two seconds added each time should put an upper bound for adjustments accumulated over 500 years to:

500 years * 4 updates/year * 2 seconds/update = 4000 seconds = 66 2/3 minutes

So an hour in 500 years seems to require adjusting almost as much as we can, which isn't realistic.