this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Memes

45731 readers
177 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

It absolutely is tho. Usually more precise, 1:1 translatable into written text, can use the superior 24h system and uses the same reading system that is already taught in school anyways.

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Right! Just to prove a point, I am going to make an NTP enabled rolex, and sync it to my microsecond accurate local NTP server! :P

[–] Incandemon@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

To be fair, I did have a watch that automatically synced itself to the us naval observatories atomic clocks over the air.

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, but you need to factor in the distance to the transmitter. Going to add at least a few microseconds to your time accuracy!

[–] Unforeseen@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Latency is accounted for in the sync process

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 0 points 3 months ago

Sync process? The other comment was talking about the old receivers for the atomic clocks on SW/MW frequencies. It was a one way thing.

Now in theory if a receiver also had GPS they could account for the distance. But, then they'd get far more accurate time from the GPS receiver so..

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The watches/clocks they are talking about listened to WWV, a set of radio stations transmitting from Fort Collins, Colorado. The system long predates the Network Time Protocol you're referring to. Radio controlled clocks/watches had no means for accounting for latency.

[–] Unforeseen@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago

Ahh OK my bad. I've only worked with NTP for a long time and wasn't aware of the earlier stuff.

[–] loaExMachina@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago

"Ususally more precise" > This depends on how precisely it is set, not on the display. Unless it's a connected watch, but then it's much more expensive and less energy efficient.

"1.1 translatable into written text" > Both are, you're reading the same number

"Uses the superior 24h system" > Adding 12 to a number isn't complicated. And with habit, most people who use analog watches and the 24h system know which position of the needle means what number in 24h format without doing the math. Some clocks don't even have digits. Unless you've been sedated and woke up in a room without windows, you'll know which side of 12 you're on. And otherwise, you've got more pressing issues.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

There's nothing stopping an analog clock face from representing 24h time:

Image

[–] Emmie@lemmings.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

🤢 what an utter abomination

This is why puppies die

[–] RogueBanana@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 months ago

I was ready to hate it but after a good look, it doesn't look that bad. Doesn't work for small wristwatches but could look nice for a big wall clock.