Re: [LEAPSECS] Mechanism to provide tai-utc.dat locally

From: John Cowan <cowan_at_CCIL.ORG>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 23:24:07 -0500

Rob Seaman scripsit:

> Indeed. Go for it. I look forward to reading your report. Who and
> what interests are adversely affected in each case? How are these
> effects mitigated as a function of the limit on DUT1? Also, contrast
> what benefits accrue. One would think that the responsibility for
> quantifying the implications of a change to a standard would fall on
> the parties proposing said change.

It can't possibly be. Nobody can know what a change is going to
cost except those who are going to have to pay for it (or not
pay for it). And even their word cannot necessarily be trusted.

In this case there are really two questions: how much it would
cost to loosen DUT1 but leave it bounded, and how much it would
cost if it were only statistically, not absolutely, bounded.

Don't be so humble.  You're not that great.             John Cowan
        --Golda Meir                          
Received on Thu Dec 28 2006 - 20:24:28 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 04 2010 - 09:44:55 PDT