News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of J... by gcb0 on Monday January 05, 2015 @01:14PM (#8840165)
i for one vote to a base 10 system that takes all that into account.

imagine splitting time not exactly in seasons begin/end (what was the last time you synched your clocks with a solstice?). no leap seconds. no 28-31 months. no 365+-1 years. even daylight saving time benefits can be worked in the system if we don't sync 100% with the solar day but skew it just enough that you get the drift to align things on daylight saving benefits and still can tell the time by simply looking at the sun.

it's not hard. just nobody has the balls to even suggest this seriously out of math circles.

Re:A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of J... by dogecoinbase on Monday January 05, 2015 @01:19PM (#8840190)
At least most people who suggest this use one of the existing could-actually-work-even-though-it-will-never-be-implemented approaches (usually 364+1 "year day" or +2 for a leap).

There are a fractional number of days in a year. You can't have a year with an integral number of days (without varying the number of days in a year, i.e. leap years).

The proposal to abandon leap seconds is appealing but as short-sighted as two-digit years. You'll have to dynamically adjust times eventually because the rate of the earth's rotation changes. We can either do it right, incrementally, and programmers can manage to implement a standard that's been around for over forty years, or we can ignore it and pass the problem along. I suppose I can guess what will happen there.

Re:A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of J... by peterwwillis on Monday January 05, 2015 @02:03PM (#8840476)
I don't think anyone should bring up DST when talking about time representations. DST is a stupid hack for artificially controlling economic forces, and has no meritorious bearing on timekeeping itself.

Let's face it: decimal time was really only intended for people doing lots of math work involving time. If the argument for base 10 is that calculations and representations are "easier" than base 12 (mainly because all modern human civilizations use base 10), why not make the argument that base 2 should be used, since computers virtually think for us at this point?

The real reason our representation of time is still so fucked up is that it has to be used by all humans, and all humans don't want to deal with lots of digits, fractions, floating point, etc. Sexadecimal is just simpler, even if we do have to occasionally jump through some hoops to keep this piece of crap timekeeping system in order. One second every couple years? Converting to decimal just to deal with little problems like that seems like a completely unreasonable suggestion to most people.

Re:A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of J... by morganvachon on Monday January 05, 2015 @02:44PM (#8840666)
Ever since I was a kid, the concept of a seven day week threw me. Way back then I came up with a ten day week, three weeks a month, 13 months a year, and five non-month "holidays" calendar in my head. The five non-month holidays were (if I recall correctly) summer and winter solstice, spring and fall equinox, and New Year's Day.

I never could get around the 1/4 day problem, and still had to account for leap years with a sixth non-month day every four years. It was a fun thought experiment as a teenager interested in math and science though.

Re:A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of J... by toast0 on Monday January 05, 2015 @04:49PM (#8841433)
FYI, you have reinvented the French Republican Calendar[1], only you missed out on decimal time (1 day is 10 hours, 1 hour is 100 minutes, 1 minute is 100 seconds; 1 second is 0.864 conventional seconds)

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Republican_Calendar

Re:A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of J... by aragot on Monday January 05, 2015 @05:50PM (#8841780)
Why are you all looking for base-10 hours, when it's rather the base-10 which is wrong??? Numbers should be switched to base-12. I mean we often need to divide 1kg by halves, quarters and thirds, and it should fall even.
Re:A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of J... by cortesoft on Monday January 05, 2015 @07:14PM (#8842156)
We should do base 16, though, so it lines up with binary.
Re:A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of J... by gchpaco on Monday January 05, 2015 @08:38PM (#8842458)
Not divisible by three, which comes up a lot. 12 is superior.

60 is probably best, tho.

Re:A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of J... by morganvachon on Monday January 05, 2015 @04:50PM (#8841443)
Oh, I'm not surprised it's not an original idea, and I never claimed it was. Just the musings of a child fascinated by the seasons. :-)

edit: And I just realized I had a typo up there; I wrote "13 months" when I meant "12 months". D'oh.

Re:A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of J... by Ygg2 on Monday January 05, 2015 @01:53PM (#8840408)
You sir, are a beacon. A bacon of hope, light, justice and marshmallows!

Your idea has definitely never been tried or abolished. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_time