What I saw was, a listed time on main page/LRPD for most recent post, that was ~8 min ahead! of my also pretty accurate clock. [??] Anyway, seems we're both on NIST time - not that anyone cares a lot, even if it were a few minutes bonkers..
Ashton
DST/PST time
- (Ashton)
- (12)
- April 8, 2002, 03:43:03 PM EDT
Heh, no, went over this in October IIRC
-NT
- (admin)
- (10)
- April 8, 2002, 04:35:17 PM EDT
Thought maybe tweaked since: er you're ~ 8 minutes fast, BTW
-NT
- (Ashton)
- (9)
- April 8, 2002, 06:34:44 PM EDT
Not according to the atomic clock...
-NT
- (admin)
- (1)
- April 8, 2002, 07:08:10 PM EDT
Just checked it against my Rb standard: 2 sec = web overhead
- (Ashton)
- April 8, 2002, 07:28:03 PM EDT
apt-get install ntpdate :-)
-NT
- (pwhysall)
- (6)
- April 8, 2002, 07:21:01 PM EDT
Actually, that's...
- (kmself)
- (5)
- April 9, 2002, 12:03:28 AM EDT
Re: Actually, that's...
- (pwhysall)
- (4)
- April 9, 2002, 03:07:38 AM EDT
*Please* make those into links?
- (ben_tilly)
- (3)
- April 9, 2002, 07:31:09 AM EDT
Re: *Please* make those into links?
- (pwhysall)
- (2)
- April 9, 2002, 07:33:42 AM EDT
It is still too long
-NT
- (ben_tilly)
- (1)
- April 9, 2002, 07:45:54 AM EDT
As much as I hate to say it, one point to Microsoft:
- (CRConrad)
- April 9, 2002, 10:20:24 AM EDT
Not everyone.
- (static)
- April 9, 2002, 06:06:54 AM EDT