The whole idea is bonkers and self-contradictory. If NLP hasn't advanced to understand the context of shorthand dates in old texts in 10,000 years time, I'd say thats a pretty pessimistic view on long term progress. Yet the idea is to add 0s because of a long term view on human progress? Doesn't make sense to me.
Regarding the RFC - check out the publication date.
From my impressions on the Long Now (and I found Deep Time a rather interesting read) the issue is not just sticking a zero on to say "think about the future" but rather that our current culture doesn't think about the future beyond the next news cycle, quarterly report, or election.
I'd contend that The Clock of the Long Now (and the intended level of technology to repair it) and the Rosetta Project are very pessimistic about the future of humanity. ( https://rosettaproject.org/about/ )
> Upon further inquiry it was discovered that when the College was founded, a grove of oaks had been planted to replace the beams in the dining hall when they became beetly, because oak beams always become beetly in the end. This plan had been passed down from one Forester to the next for over five hundred years saying “You don’t cut them oaks. Them’s for the College Hall.”
That a several hundred year old grove was planted because the builders, being familiar with wood construction, knew that in a few hundred years that it would need to be repaired and they'd need the materials to do the repair.
> The answer to the question, have new oaks been planted, is probably. Somewhere on the land owned by the New College are oaks that are, or will one day, be worthy of use in the great hall, assuming that they are managed in the same way they were before. It is in this management by the Forester in which lies the point. Ultimately, while the story is perhaps apocryphal, the idea of replacing and managing resources for the future, and the lesson in long term thinking is not.
I had a professor who was very excited about their work. Coming from an environmental and ecological point of view with a decent amount of idealism, I thought the whole thing was a little pie-in-the-sky wackadoodle. I feel like they do have some projects that made some sense and had some promise, but I sure can't find them to cite now.
The idea of planning for further out is not a bad one. I'm not sure how a giant clock inside a mountain helps with that.
So here's a question to think about... how do you tell a culture 5000 years from now of an arbitrary technology that the nuclear waste dumps that we have are "bad"?
The Clock of the Long Now is an artifact from thinking about that and other questions.
I'll certainly grant that many times the art or artifact that comes from that idea may become more visible than the idea itself... but for people who are inspired by the artifact and go on to disover the idea behind it, it can be, well, inspirational - and a way of doing something today that will have repercussions centuries and millennia from now.