We already have rules that are much rarer and more impactful than leap minutes would be. For example on Feb 29th 2000 an entire extra day was inserted on a century, an event that only happens once every 400 years! It was a complete non-event and only time nerds remember that it happened.

In the case of a leap minute, the worst that can happen is that your clock is 1 minute out every couple of centuries. Doesn’t seem so bad and certainly much better than dealing with leap seconds every few years.

We don’t need to constantly rehearse for such an event, we can just do nothing and die without worrying about it.

> People can't get the regular changes of DST and February 29 correct, and you want them to get a one-off change right?

Leap seconds are already rare enough that people can't handle them properly. Every time one happens the bug fixes from the last one have been undone.

Not really. Adding leap seconds at the end of years is inferior because a year is a human-scale duration.

Planning something “next year” is human-scale. Planning something “next century” is not human-scale because I won’t be alive then.

If we use leap minutes then most people will not see one in their lifetime, compared to everyone seeing multiple leap seconds in their lifetime.

Indeed, leap day, leap hour, leap minute, etc is a distinction without a difference because either way the solution is the same: do absolutely nothing and let future humanity decide how much drift it can tolerate.