The second is broken: Difference between revisions
From PhysWiki
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
[https://engineering.fb.com/2022/07/25/production-engineering/its-time-to-leave-the-leap-second-in-the-past It’s time to leave the leap second in the past] | [https://engineering.fb.com/2022/07/25/production-engineering/its-time-to-leave-the-leap-second-in-the-past It’s time to leave the leap second in the past] | ||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
While the leap second might have been an acceptable solution in 1972, when it made both the scientific community and the telecom industry happy, these days UTC is equally bad for both digital applications and scientists, who often choose TAI or UT1 instead. | "While the leap second might have been an acceptable solution in 1972, when it made both the scientific community and the telecom industry happy, these days UTC is equally bad for both digital applications and scientists, who often choose TAI or UT1 instead." | ||
"At Meta, we’re supporting an industry effort to stop future introductions of leap seconds and . . . we believe it is time to introduce new technologies to replace it." | |||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
</td> | </td> | ||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
</table> | </table> | ||
Revision as of 17:43, 27 December 2023
| JULY 25, 2022 |
It’s time to leave the leap second in the past
|
