It would be like silently changing the start of unix epoch time to 1800 instead of adding a new “Unix time since 1800” and asking people to switch.
It would be like silently changing the start of unix epoch time to 1800 instead of adding a new “Unix time since 1800” and asking people to switch.
This change only affects people who need UTC to be close to UT1 and also somehow don't know what UT1 is.
The people who would be unaffected by the redefinition can already just trivially switch manually (as we already assumed that just redefining things under them would work), leaving the UTC people alone. There is no good reason to silently break all programs carefully designed to use UTC correctly to fix all of the programs haphazardly written by people who did not know what they were doing and used UTC when they actually wanted TAI. Especially since fixing the wrong use of UTC is so trivial that we assume it can be done with no modification.
A few applications should switch standards, the question is whether solar concerned applications should switch to UT1, or continuity concerned applications should switch to TAI. The former is simpler, easier, cheaper, and only causes unexpected behavior (quite slowly), NOT systematic failure.