Justin Blanton writes "Discover magazine is running an article about a clock designed to run accurately for 10,000 years. It's essentially a "future-proof" clock that blurs the line between art and functionality through advanced engineering. From the article: 'Everything about this clock is deeply unusual. For example, while nearly every mechanical clock made in the last millennium consists of a series of propelled gears, this one uses a stack of mechanical binary computers capable of singling out one moment in 3.65 million days. Like other clocks, this one can track seconds, hours, days, and years. Unlike any other clock, this one is being constructed to keep track of leap centuries, the orbits of the six innermost planets in our solar system, even the ultraslow wobbles of Earth's axis.'" A Clock That Runs for 10,000 Years Log in/Create an Account | Top | 387 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion Display Options Threshold: -1: 387 comments 0: 381 comments 1: 314 comments 2: 214 comments 3: 61 comments 4: 28 comments 5: 16 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way. (1) | 2 I have to change mine... by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:01AM Re:I have to change mine... (Score:4, Funny) by maxwell demon (590494) on Wednesday October 19, @08:04AM (#13825348) (Last Journal: Wednesday August 14, @01:33PM) If this one fails in 2000 years as well, where do I get my warranty refund? [ Reply to This | Parent Re:I have to change mine... (Score:5, Funny) by macklin01 (760841) on Wednesday October 19, @09:22AM (#13825851) (http://easybmp.sourceforge.net/) Dear Customer,It has come to our attention that your Clock of the Long Now (TM) was exposed to a liquid spill 500 years ago. Although it may not have caused the failure, AwesomeClock, Inc. does not cover the repair or exchange of a machine resulting from misuse, accident, modification, unsuitable physical or operating environment, improper maintenance by you, or failure caused by a product for which AwesomeClock is not responsible. The warranty is therefore voided.However, you can buy a new mechanical system board for 895 KiloDollars, and your warranty will be extended for 90 days. If you wish to dispute this finding, we can email you pictures that will never actually reach your inbox. Thank you for choosing AwesomeClock, Inc.AwesomeClock Warranty Claims Dept. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:I have to change mine... by koweja (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @11:52AMRe:I have to change mine... by Columcille (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @05:19PMSomething seems to be missing... by Solonas (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @09:26AMRe:Something seems to be missing... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @10:27AMRe:Something seems to be missing... by antispam_ben (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:36AMRe:Something seems to be missing... by glider0524 (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @10:43AMRe:Something seems to be missing... by Kadin2048 (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:01AMRe:Something seems to be missing... by arminw (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @12:28PM how very useful (Score:4, Funny) by somersault (912633) on Wednesday October 19, @08:01AM (#13825331) (http://kermon.deviantart.com/) *sets alarm to wake himself up in 10,000 years* [ Reply to ThisRe:how very useful by Anonymous Coward (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @08:04AMThe clock requires maintenance by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:19AMRe:The clock requires maintenance by AndersOSU (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @08:45AM1 reply beneath your current threshold. Re:The clock requires maintenance (Score:5, Interesting) by bpowell423 (208542) on Wednesday October 19, @09:01AM (#13825692) I read the article before it was slashdotted. He intends to build the final version of this clock in a limestone cave, half-way up the side of a 10,000 foot cliff. The entrance will look natural enough, especially after several thousand years, but as you go deeper into the cave, you begin to see the workings of the clock. First, the slowest moving things like the zodiac, then years, months, etc, getting to faster moving pieces as you go deeper into the cave. All the way back, you finally get to where the heart of the clock is ticking. This guy is definitely trying to create a "wonder of the world" and it's not hard to imagine an "Indiana Jones" type of event where some future archaeologist rediscovers this thing. The fact that the display freezes until someone else winds it (he mentioned stepping on a plate to wind the display), is genious. Imagine you're this explorer, sweeping away cobwebs to get a closer look at the machine. The display reads sometime in the 23rd century. As you step closer, you step on a plate in the floor that sinks under your weight. The display begins to move and when things settle down, the current date, maybe in the 57th century, is displayed. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:The clock requires maintenance by ultranova (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:21AMRe:The clock requires maintenance by slicer622 (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:08AMRe:mice spiders and rodents by johnrpenner (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @11:36AMRe:mice spiders and rodents by OgreFade (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @02:23PMRe:mice spiders and rodents by khallow (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @12:56PM2 replies beneath your current threshold.Re:The clock requires maintenance by gtm256 (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @03:03PMAnd they'll study it by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @03:19PM Re:The clock requires maintenance (Score:4, Insightful) by Holi (250190) on Wednesday October 19, @09:37AM (#13825969) The Idea behind the The Long Now Foundation is to think about the future, not in the terms of tomorrow or next week or even next year, but int the terms of next century and next millenium and so on. They want us to have a far reaching view of the future so as to understand our actions have consequences beyond our generation. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:The clock requires maintenance by networkBoy (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:18AMRe:The clock requires maintenance by rah1420 (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:27AMRe:The clock requires maintenance by networkBoy (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:58AMRe:The clock requires maintenance by zecg (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @06:13PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Marvin the clock by SiliconTrip (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:37PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Which format? by kimmo (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:02AMRe:Which format? by Nighttime (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:12AMRe:Which format? by Lucractius (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @12:55PMRe:Which format? by LiquidCoooled (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:16AMWhat Time Is It Now? by deathCon4 (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:03AMRe:What Time Is It Now? by polysylabic psudonym (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:21AM Re:What Time Is It Now? (Score:5, Funny) by Eridanis42 (843311) on Wednesday October 19, @08:33AM (#13825493) Will we leave a detailed description of Daylight Savings TIme? Goodness knows it confuses enough Earthlings. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:What Time Is It Now? by SEWilco (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:40AMRe:What Time Is It Now? by johnrpenner (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:23AMRe:What Time Is It Now? by AndersOSU (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:03AMRe:What Time Is It Now? by xSauronx (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @09:26AM Outta time (Score:4, Insightful) by WiseOwl2001 (742135) on Wednesday October 19, @08:03AM (#13825337) How will we know it is keeping accurate time if nothing else is as accurate to check it against? [ Reply to ThisRe:Outta time by maxwell demon (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @08:14AM Re:Outta time (Score:5, Insightful) by TummyX (84871) on Wednesday October 19, @08:21AM (#13825429) Yeah, either that or you're in the southern hemisphere. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Outta time by caluml (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @10:26AM2 replies beneath your current threshold.Re:Outta time by G-funk (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:58AMRe:Outta time by mrogers (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @01:03PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Outta time by WiseOwl2001 (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @09:18AMRe:Outta time by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:26AMRe:Outta time by ifwm (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @08:27AMRe:Outta time by clbell (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:16AMRe:Outta time by Kadin2048 (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:20AMRe:Outta time by igny (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:42AMRe:Outta time by Baddas (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @10:17AMRe:Outta time by kzinti (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:40AMRe:Outta time by b4k3d b34nz (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @10:31AM Re:Outta time (Score:5, Insightful) by Just Some Guy (3352) <kirk+slashdot@strauser.com> on Wednesday October 19, @01:16PM (#13828088) (http://subwiki.honeypot.net/ | Last Journal: Thursday March 03, @08:24PM) On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!], "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion ofideas that could provoke such a question.-- Charles Babbage [ Reply to This | ParentMOD PARENT UP! by Idarubicin (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @02:42PMRe:Outta time by Kehvarl (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @01:53PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Is it noon? by jmichaelg (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @09:41AMRe:Is it noon? by cornjchob (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @01:20PMRe:Is it noon? by jmichaelg (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @02:47PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Is it noon? by dajak (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @03:16PMRe:Is it noon? by NearlyHeadless (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @04:22PMRe:Is it noon? by dajak (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @06:50PMRe:Is it noon? by freeweed (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @05:57PMRe:Is it noon? by dajak (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @07:44PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Is it noon? by Phurd Phlegm (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @04:03PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Outta time by Wellspring (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:30AMRe:Star field accurate? Why no modern tech.? by dreamchaser (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:11AMRe:Star field accurate? Why no modern tech.? by cpt kangarooski (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:49AM Re:Star field accurate? Why no modern tech.? (Score:5, Insightful) by maxwell demon (590494) on Wednesday October 19, @09:12AM (#13825767) (Last Journal: Wednesday August 14, @01:33PM) Why doesnt the clock have an LCD display?Do you really think an LCD display will last 10000 years? BTW, it would go against the project goals (which is not to impress future visitors). As the article states, the clock shall be understandable without taking it apart.It seems like they used lame tech. Sure they demonstrate some knowledge of analog mechanical computing ability .. but this ability has been around since the forties .. before the space age.The point is not a technology demonstration. The point is to alter the thinking of the people about long time spans.We want humans of the future to know that we understood that the stars themselves are moving (ie, certain stars would no longer have the same relative positions in the sky ..example: Barnard's star is moving at 10.3 arcseconds per year against the background. We want to show we have that knowledge ..Again, the project isn't about teaching future people about our knowledge, it's about teaching current people to think long term. However, I could imagine that the star movement would be a great tool for that. Assuming those 10.3 arcseconds per year will not change in the future (and neither the direction), in 10000 years it will have moved about 28.6 degrees. This is indeed a quite visible difference. Of course, if the clock should track the movements of the stars as well, its price might grow from exorbitant to unaffordable ...Heck even include a copy of Wikipedia on HD DVD in a simplified binary format without any complicated enoding scheme.I bet that in 10000 years any HD-DVD produced today will be completely unreadable. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Star field accurate? Why no modern tech.? by antispam_ben (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @02:26PMRe:Star field accurate? Why no modern tech.? by LS (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:15AMRe:Outta time by S.O.B. (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @09:22AM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Star field accurate? Why no modern tech.? by TheGavster (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:08AMRe:Star field accurate? Why no modern tech.? by Gandalf04 (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @02:28PMRe:Outta time by kd5ujz (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:54PM4 replies beneath your current threshold.Obviously.... by Capt James McCarthy (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:04AM lame (Score:5, Funny) by LittleGuernica (736577) on Wednesday October 19, @08:04AM (#13825350) (http://www.threadles...tteam=littleguernica) No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame. [ Reply to ThisRe:lame by JoshNorton (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @11:56PMWhat about the human factor? by aendeuryu (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @08:05AMRe:What about the human factor? by oneiros27 (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:32AM10.000 year is a long time. by leuk_he (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:36AMRe:10.000 year is a long time. by SimilarityEngine (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:00AMRe:10.000 year is a long time. by Kadin2048 (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @11:37AMRe:10.000 year is a long time. by mrogers (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @01:08PMRe:10.000 year is a long time. by ThePelt (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @02:17PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Some ideas? by Grendel Drago (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:14AM Re:10.000 year is a long time. (Score:5, Interesting) by Meostro (788797) on Wednesday October 19, @09:33AM (#13825938) (http://www.dullsville.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday December 22, @12:41PM) The pyramids are still standing. Stonehenge is too. This clock [longnow.com] is made out of stainless steel and monel, a "nickel-copper alloy" that is known to be corrosion resistant. The final version is expected to be made of the same, plus some bronze and other long-wearing substances. The overall design principles [longnow.com] of the Long Now clocks will make them physically durable, it seems like mechanical longevity is going to be the least of their problems.The anthropologic aspect of this project is going to be the most difficult, simply because society is a factor. The rise and fall of civilizations happens much more often than the rise and fall of material objects. We can still recover bronze-age artifacts (circa 5000 years old), and even some from the stone age (anywhere from 8,000 to 30,000 years old), but we have very little information on what the societies were like. Most of what we have is just a guess.The good news is that those same design principles that make it physically longstanding address these problems from a sociologic / anthropologic POV also.Maintainability - The clock should be maintainable with bronze-age technologyMaintainability and transparency:Use familiar materials Allow inspectionRehearse motionsMake it easy to build spare partsExpect restarts Include the manual (emphasis added) [ Reply to This | ParentRe:10.000 year is a long time. by timeOday (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:17AMTen Thousand Years of Solitude by IAN (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @11:15AMRe:10.000 year is a long time. by farmerj (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:37AMNot only ruins by joggle (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @01:23PMRe:Not only ruins by MemeRot (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @04:32PMRe:What about the human factor? by Sky Cry (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:57AM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:What about the human factor? by zippthorne (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:41AMBoring old news... by wsxyz (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @08:08AM Re:Boring old news... (Score:5, Funny) by Baddas (243852) on Wednesday October 19, @08:13AM (#13825391) Remember, we're talking about 10,000 year timescales. A nine year old story is practically lightning fast! [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Boring old news, even older than that by antispam_ben (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @10:42AMRe:Boring old news... by pjc50 (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @06:55PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.I'm impressed by chrisnewbie (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:09AMenough? by tezbobobo (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:10AMRe:enough? by real_smiff (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:15AMRe:enough? by Sockatume (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:18AMRe:enough? by vidnet (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:34AM Re:enough? (Score:4, Insightful) by bpowell423 (208542) on Wednesday October 19, @08:52AM (#13825624) The thing that most impresses me about this clock is that it will run by itself with no required interaction for 10,000 years. It requires no external power, no attention at all. It is self-winding (he mentions barometric pressure change as a power source). As far as accuracy goes, it synchronizes to the sun when sunlight through a peep-hole heats a bimetal strip. That should re-sync the time every sunny day, so it should be accurate until it quits working. Imagine a future, several thousand years from now... maybe there's been another "dark ages" and people are just rediscovering bits of technology. Some explorer notices this cave in the side of this mountain, climbs up there, and discovers this massive clock. That's what this guy is after. He's trying to create something on the scale of a "wonder of the world" that will exist (and continue running) for millenia and cause future generations to marvel at the technology that these ancient people had.Sure, an atomic clock is more accurate, and more useful, but it requires electricity, and I'm sure some attention to keep things running smoothly.Although, I wonder if this mechanical clock will need to be lubricated every now and again... 5000 years from now there'll probably be some wierd religion where the priest pours holy oil over the sacred time keeper, or some such... [ Reply to This | ParentRe:enough? by Sockatume (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @09:15AMRe:enough? by Baddas (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @10:22AMRe:enough? by polysylabic psudonym (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:49AM Once bitten, twice shy (Score:5, Funny) by Dekortage (697532) on Wednesday October 19, @08:11AM (#13825375) This is just a bunch of marketing fru-fru. The last 10,000-year clock I bought only lasted 6,738 years (give or take a month). Even if you take into account my time travel, I still should have gotten a good 8,500 years out of it, at least.The real question is support. Will the manufacturer still be around in 3,000 years when you need to replace the little rubber feet? Are vendors and repair centers going to stock replacement parts? How much does an extended warranty cost? [ Reply to This Re:Once bitten, twice shy (Score:4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 19, @09:15AM (#13825794) How much does an extended warranty cost?Does it matter? In 10,005 years, you think you'll find the receipt? [ Reply to This | ParentSupport in 10000 years by sita (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @09:19AMRe:Once bitten, twice shy by IronChef (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @01:11PMRe:Once bitten, twice shy by rssrss (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @02:27PMRe:Once bitten, twice shy by njh (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:43PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. I want to have one! (Score:5, Informative) by Vario (120611) on Wednesday October 19, @08:11AM (#13825378) The clock looks like ThinkGeek could sell quite a lot of them, it may be a little on the expensive side. A lot of high-tech mechanic combined with a polished look so that any other clock looks childish.The article is rather slow to get already so use mirrodot instead: http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/608e5b4931282247b 42f18bb66f3c291/index.html [mirrordot.org] [ Reply to ThisRe:I want to have one! by luisdom (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @11:39AMRe:I want to have one! by !splut (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @02:36PMRe:I want to have one! by Suidae (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @04:02PMRe:I want to have one! by anymouse (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:08PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Too Complex by N8F8 (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:13AMRe:Too Complex by LiquidCoooled (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:23AM Re:Too Complex (Score:5, Insightful) by Itchy Rich (818896) on Wednesday October 19, @08:52AM (#13825633) For every variable you introduce, the liklihood of defects rises fivefold. For every generalised statistic you quote, the likelihood of talking accurately about any specific application decreases fivefold.These people seem to have put so much effort into thinking through possible variables that could effect this clock, from the value of the materials to the transparency of the operation, that I'd be very surprised if they didn't stop to consider one of the two most fundamental aspects: reliability. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Too Complex by Hatta (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:49AMRe:Too Complex by bleckywelcky (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @03:47PMRe:Too Complex by Compuser (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:07AMRe:Too Complex by mlush (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @09:34AMRe:Too Complex by Compuser (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:13AMRe:Too Complex by Dun Malg (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:12AMRe:Too Complex by Compuser (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:40AMRe:Too Complex by Dun Malg (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @01:10PMRe:Too Complex by blincoln (Score:2) Thursday October 20, @12:28AMRe:Too Complex by cratermoon (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @07:58PMRe:Too Complex by Nimey (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:37AMRe:Too Complex by elmartinos (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @10:26AMRe:Too Complex by LWATCDR (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @10:54AMRe:Too Complex by joshv (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @12:22PMRambaldi by kannibal_klown (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:13AMNot mentioned in the article... by Andrewkov (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:14AMRe:Not mentioned in the article... by DiscoDave_25 (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:29AMRe:Not mentioned in the article... by benito27uk (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:32AMRe:Not mentioned in the article... by wild_berry (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:02AMRe:Not mentioned in the article... by AndersOSU (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:50AMRe:Not mentioned in the article... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:58AMThe Danger of Vandals and Other Human Disasters by Alien54 (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @08:15AMRe:The Danger of Vandals and Other Human Disasters by surprise_audit (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @08:53AMRe:The Danger of Vandals and Other Human Disasters by drew (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @12:20PMTime as a cultural concept by 8tim8 (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:17AMRe:Time as a cultural concept by FinestLittleSpace (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:27AM2 replies beneath your current threshold. Actually, it just occurred to me... (Score:4, Interesting) by GReaToaK_2000 (217386) on Wednesday October 19, @08:19AM (#13825420) Anyone remember how "some" people get/got all worked up about the Mayan Calendar? How it "ends" at, oh I don't remember exactly, but it was supposed to end sometime around 2005 or 2006 I believe...So...Who's to say that the Mayan Calendar creators simply didn't do the SAME thing these people did? That is to make a Clock/Calendar which is accurate for 'n' number of years into the future.There is NOTHING cosmic, or "End-of-the-world-doom-and-gloom" about the Mayan calendar either... It was probably something as simple as some Mayan's decided to make their Calendar last for a LONG DAMN TIME!!!It is probably just THAT Simple!Just a thought. [ Reply to ThisRe:Actually, it just occurred to me... by nagora (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @08:45AMRe:Actually, it just occurred to me... by GReaToaK_2000 (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @09:00AMRe:Actually, it just occurred to me... by nagora (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @12:07PMRe:Actually, it just occurred to me... by Pfhorrest (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @02:20PMRe:Actually, it just occurred to me... by ErikRed1488 (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @02:15PMRe:Actually, it just occurred to me..Maya Calendar by rssrss (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @02:21PMRe:Actually, it just occurred to me... by Dr_Barnowl (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:51AMRe:Actually, it just occurred to me... by grimJester (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @09:17AM3 replies beneath your current threshold. Surprising (Score:4, Interesting) by BronxBomber (633404) on Wednesday October 19, @08:19AM (#13825421) I am surprised by the questions/comments regarding practicality. Whatever happened to doing something neat simply because "you could"? [ Reply to ThisRe:Surprising by maxwell demon (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:32AM2 replies beneath your current threshold.Some similarities by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:20AMRe:Some similarities by m50d (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @08:54AMRe:Some similarities by bohemian72 (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @09:34AM A clock (Score:4, Insightful) by FidelCatsro (861135) <fidelcatsro@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Wednesday October 19, @08:22AM (#13825433) (Last Journal: Wednesday October 19, @07:35AM) Which lasts 10,000 years.A server which last 10,000 Milliseconds .A story about an atomic clock being 9 years out of date has a certain poetry to it . [ Reply to This I first read about this in 1998 (Score:4, Informative) by EchoMirage (29419) on Wednesday October 19, @08:22AM (#13825434) I'm not usually one to complain about the age of articles on Slashdot, but I first read about the Long Now project in a Wired cover story published in 1998 [wired.com]. Perhaps the article submitter didn't know about it until now, but this is far from a new project. [ Reply to ThisRe:I first read about this in 1998 by sita (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @09:27AMRe:I first read about this in 1998 by Derek Pomery (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @11:48AMRe:I first read about this in 1998 by dubl-u (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @01:06PMRe:I first read about this in 1998 by cpeterso (Score:2) Wednesday October 19, @04:08PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold.However... by jettoki (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:24AMToo good to pass up... by farnsaw (Score:1) Wednesday October 19, @08:27AMflashes 12:00 by dreadlocks (Score:3) Wednesday October 19, @08:28AM Great, does it have an alarm? (Score:5, Interesting) by MrDelSarto (95771) <ianw&ieee,org> on Wednesday October 19, @08:29AM (#13825466) (http://www.wienand.org/)