[HN Gopher] US Senate votes unanimously to make daylight savings...
___________________________________________________________________
US Senate votes unanimously to make daylight savings time permanent
Author : enraged_camel
Score : 959 points
Date : 2022-03-15 18:29 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (twitter.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
| elmerfud wrote:
| The hooray the Senate is saving our daylight I'm glad somebody
| is. Take care so much what would we ever do if they didn't save
| this daylight for us. Maybe they can take some and put it in a
| lock box for when we need it most.
| mbg721 wrote:
| Are you saying that there's a threat to our children from lack
| of adequate daylight? And I am just finding out about it now??
| gscott wrote:
| Having kids, I would have them in a lot of activities and it
| was a big difference if there was daylight in the evening
| versus being dark.
| fluoridation wrote:
| Let's just move the clocks forward by 12 hours, so there
| can be sunlight all through the night!
| mbg721 wrote:
| It's just crazy enough to work!
| BearOso wrote:
| This adds an hour more darkness in the morning. Schools start
| earlier than most jobs, so the kids are bearing the brunt of
| this. If I was a kid, I'd certainly be grumpier about waking
| up and less alert.
| [deleted]
| lokar wrote:
| Huge win for solar power.
| readthenotes1 wrote:
| That might be the funniest comment so far :-)
| vohu43 wrote:
| Would love to see something like this in Europe as well.
| humansuit wrote:
| As long as they eliminate the constant inane switching back and
| forth. Sleep disruption is harmful in many ways and all this
| practice seems to actually do, old wives' tales about farmers and
| circumstantial localized benefits aside, is induce it.
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5449130/
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| I'm bipolar and extremely sensitive to "minor" things like
| changing timezones during travel. The switch between EST and
| EDT fucks up my sleep for at least a week, usually longer. This
| is not going to be a good month.
|
| I can't wait for this to be signed into law.
| soperj wrote:
| You should start trying to adjust it gradually. If you start
| by just a couple minutes every day in the start of February,
| you don't even notice it. Also can't wait for it to change.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| Adjust gradually how? Between ADHD, anxiety, depression,
| mania, and medication side-effects, my bedtime can vary by
| as much as 2 hours.
|
| By the end of the day any willpower I started the day with
| is usually gone, so going to bed at the same time each day
| just can't happen with any regularity. I have settle for a
| 90 minute window.
|
| What I can't handle is my window shifting by 60 minutes,
| especially when the sunlight changes. Suddenly, it's bright
| 60 minutes after the sun should have set and everything
| gets out of balance.
| metadat wrote:
| No offense intended, but it sounds like things won't be
| easy no matter what course this issue takes. Having had
| many a bi-polar friend, I feel for you, life's tough with
| mental health issues, particularly BPD.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| Eh... life is always difficult, but time changes push
| things from difficult to nearly unmanageable.
|
| The problem with time changes is the pattern of the day
| and therefore the energy and mental states tied to that
| changes. I can no longer predict how I will feel at
| specific times of day. This means I can no control my
| energy expenditure. I have to relearn how to cope from
| scratch.
|
| For example: ~2pm is when my brain starts to get foggy.
| 4~5pm is going to be hopeless depression until my next
| medication dose kicks in. When all of this shifts by an
| hour, my body no longer knows what time it is. It doesn't
| matter how many timezones I've moved.
|
| Removing EST<->EDT changes gives me a month of my life
| back each year.
|
| This isn't anything like traveling, because traveling is
| temporary. I spent the month before making sure my mood
| will carry me through the trip and end up in a manageable
| state on the other side. It's like running to jump. I
| can't stay in the air; I have to land properly so I don't
| get hurt.
| [deleted]
| soperj wrote:
| You adjust the start time, not the end time.
| RangerScience wrote:
| FTFY:
|
| I tried starting to adjust it gradually. I changed my sleep
| time by just a couple of minutes every day in the start of
| February, and I didn't even notice it.
| dmurray wrote:
| If you have the flexibility with your life to do this, why
| adjust at all? Just keep your routine the same and get up
| an hour earlier (clock time) when everyone else is on DST.
| bcrosby95 wrote:
| My youngest kid (4 years old) is like this. He wakes up at
| the "old" time for about a month.
|
| Normally he wakes up between 6am and 630am. 730am is too late
| for school, so right now I have to wake him up for him to get
| there on time. And 5am is too early for me. Heh.
| humansuit wrote:
| I am also bipolar, and yes, it sucks. It is the actual soul
| of suck, to the point that it feels cruel and purposeful. And
| sure, you can adjust gradually - but add that to the pile of
| little easy life hacks that I already do to convince people
| that I'm "functional" and you've got one giant mountain of
| mental load.
| echelon wrote:
| Night owl and average night enjoyer me thinks this was the
| right choice.
|
| I want more daylight after work to enjoy. I know the counter
| claim, "but you could start your day earlier".
|
| All I can say is that this change works for me. I love summer
| nights, having dusk arrive at almost 10 PM. They're the perfect
| days.
| zozbot234 wrote:
| The point of that 'switching back and forth' between standard
| time and DST is to let the clock approximate a constant time
| for dawn, which in turn should lead to the most efficient use
| of daylight. Permanent DST just ensures very dark mornings
| around the Winter Solstice period - December and January
| especially, Nov and Feb to a lesser extent - which in turn
| means more stress (since it's a lot harder to wake up with no
| natural light) and lots of car accidents as people commute to
| work. It's a pretty bad idea all around.
| SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
| But standard time in the winter means darkness by 4:30 PM
| around the winter solstice period, which in turn means lots
| of car accidents as people commute to work. It's a pretty bad
| idea all around, right?
| Apocryphon wrote:
| We have artificial lighting now and the older method just
| means more car accidents as people commute to home after
| work.
| zozbot234 wrote:
| Artificial lighting is less effective than natural light -
| which is why many people use special high-intensity lights
| to counter SAD (Seasonal Affective Disorder) in mid-winter.
| You could argue that shifting that daylight towards the
| mid-to-late afternoon is a preferable trade-off, but it's
| not a foolproof argument.
| teruakohatu wrote:
| > since it's a lot harder to wake up with no natural light
|
| In much of the world, and presumably some parts of the USA,
| people wake up in the dark just fine. Yet everyone in the USA
| has to deal with daylight savings time.
|
| It's fall where I am, we are still on daylight savings for
| another few weeks, and I woke up just fine in the dark at
| 7:30am this morning.
| ProfessorLayton wrote:
| _Shifting_ the time 2x a year is a bad idea all around and
| has measurable negative health impacts [1]
|
| [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7302868/
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| nullc wrote:
| Thank god. Every change causes hundreds of millions if not
| billions of dollars in damages.
|
| Case in point-- my pool cleaning pump that was supposed to run
| for <1 hour managed to stay running all night long because its
| shutoff time was during the missing hour. Fortunately, I was
| aware of the potential issue and checked it and stopped it before
| there was any damage.
|
| This is in spite of prior years effort to fix this specific
| issue.
|
| This same kind of dysfunction is repeated all across the country
| from homes to industry. Thousands of tiny cuts, significant
| increases in automotive accidents, and a measurable increase in
| all-cause mortality even excluding the auto accidents.
|
| After this is activated the next damage producing time meddling
| to fix is leap seconds: Without leapseconds it'll take 4000 years
| for solar time to drift an hour -- and if people still exist care
| about solar time agreement with some arbitrary clock numbers at
| that point they can simply adjust all the timezone definitions by
| an hour at that point and be good again for thousands of
| additional years.
|
| Like the DST changes leapseconds cause an enormous amount of
| disruption and failure and as more of our electronic systems
| depend on precise synchronization the amount of disruption is
| only increasing.
|
| While the displacement of leapseconds is shorter, they are more
| rare than DST changes so systems are less likely to be tested
| against against them. In particular, we haven't had a negative
| leapsecond before but they're possible and one will almost
| certainly happen in the not-distant future if we continue to
| apply them.
|
| Unlike DST whos times are perfectly predictable except for
| politics, leapseconds also have to be signaled shortly before
| they apply. This creates a massive amount of additional
| complexity and avenues for error and security vulnerabilities.
| With the development of solid state atomic clocks we could
| reasonably expect to see affordable timing devices that never
| need to be set in our lifetimes, -- but they couldn't keep
| accurate time in a world that used leapseconds.
| 9192631770_Hz wrote:
| As an avid astronomer and someone diagnosed with SAD, this hurts
| double. This is going to kill me in the winter.
| mobilene wrote:
| I live in Indiana, where we didn't change time at all until
| ...was it about 10 years ago? I forget. We were EST year round It
| was wonderful not to have to deal with DST.
|
| But then we started observing DST and ...glory be, we had
| sunlight in summer until after 9 pm! That was quite a revelation,
| and very welcome.
|
| So I'm all for permanent DST. Or putting Indiana in the Central
| time zone and observing permanent Standard Time.
|
| But that ignores the people on the other side of the Eastern time
| zone who have a very different experience with when the sun is
| out.
| acoard wrote:
| You also wind up not getting sunlight until close to 9am during
| winter in some places. Personally I don't mind, but I've heard
| that some sunlight-sensitive people can really suffer in those
| conditions. Personally, I'd say keep the winter-time hours all-
| year round, even if you give up an hour of sunlight during
| summer just to tack it on to winter mornings.
| throwaway48375 wrote:
| Changing the clocks doesn't change how much daylight there is.
| Just go outside earlier.
| sylware wrote:
| I guess this is removed useless complexity.
|
| EU should follow soon hopefully.
| aadvark69 wrote:
| Incoming mass patching of any and all Date/Time libraries
| itslennysfault wrote:
| Honestly.... California already approved a measure to do this
| (there are a bunch more steps to make it actually happen). So,
| this is WAY better than if WA/OR were an hour apart from CA for
| half the year. Also, Seattle/Portland (etc) would suddenly not
| be America/Los_Angeles timezone anymore.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| WA and OR already did permanent daylight savings time, same
| as CA. All 3 states were just waiting for the federal
| government to allow them to change.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Oh, we've changed them so many times at this point. In the
| 2000s we changed the dates that we move the clocks back and
| forth.
|
| This is probably just a configuration update.
| aadvark69 wrote:
| >probably just a configuration update.
|
| famous last words
| [deleted]
| lokar wrote:
| The zoneinfo files describe the rules, past, present and
| future
| foepys wrote:
| Which production-ready datetime library doesn't use zoneinfo?
| There should be no need to patch otherwise there would be quite
| a lot of patching happening each year. The current version is
| 2021e, meaning it's the 5th iteration for 2021.
|
| Notably Fiji decided to not use DST in 2021/2022 but apparently
| plans to resume using it afterwards.
| spiffytech wrote:
| Any software using an IANA zone (e.g., America/New_York)
| shouldn't have any trouble. But any software that uses zone
| labels like EST might do the wrong thing, since EDT is being
| renamed to EST but will still have EDT's offset.
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| True but hopefully this would be "the last time" in the US for
| this sort of thing.
| foxyv wrote:
| I will love it when my sleep schedule isn't disrupted twice a
| year for no good reason. I can stand waking up in the dark or
| getting off work in the dark. I just hate having to adjust my
| circadian in order to reduce candle usage...
| AngryData wrote:
| How about we just abolish the whole debate by moving the clocks 6
| hours and making it permanent. Then nobody can complaint about
| sunrise versus sunset times because they will have to choose new
| hours to start and close at anyways and they can make it whatever
| they want. It shouldn't be necessary, but I find this entire
| debate ridiculous to the extreme. The clocks don't determine your
| hours of activity and sleep, you and your business does and they
| can be changed at any time for any or no reason at all.
| site-packages1 wrote:
| I am an idiot. Would this mean that the time stays as it is right
| now (after the change from this past weekend)? Because I would
| love that so much.
| rockinghigh wrote:
| Yes, it means we would get more sunshine in the evening during
| the winter.
| D13Fd wrote:
| And we are going to have to go to bed one hour earlier, and
| get up one hour earlier, relative to sunset/sunrise. It makes
| no sense.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Who is the "we" _you_ 're talking about here
| D13Fd wrote:
| Every single person affected by this change?
| mmazing wrote:
| It makes perfect sense, we'll get an extra hour of sunshine
| in the evening.
| D13Fd wrote:
| But many people don't care about that, and would rather
| not get up an hour early every day relative to actual
| night and day cycles.
| mmazing wrote:
| But many people don't care about having extra sunshine in
| the morning and would much rather have an extra hour in
| the evening. Many probably consider "actual day and night
| cycles" to be a man made construct anyway.
|
| There's definitely two sides to this but it seems most
| people want daylight in the evening rather than the
| morning, so saying "it makes no sense" isn't being
| intellectually honest, to be honest.
| o4b wrote:
| Luckily enough, the (loud) minority on this one is
| getting overruled.
| asavadatti wrote:
| >time stays as it is right now Correct. We still have a couple
| of years/cycles before this goes into effect. So starting March
| 2024 we will "Spring forward" permanently
| annadane wrote:
| It's actually really hard to remember which is which, isn't it?
| lol. I get confused all the time
| goerz wrote:
| My understanding is that that the house has no plans to pick up
| this senate bill. So this was a purely symbolic vote. Nothing
| actually happened. This bill has not made it into law and most
| likely never will
| haste410 wrote:
| What is your understanding based on?
| goerz wrote:
| "Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, a sponsor of the
| legislation, said he doesn't have any assurance the House
| will take it up" in
| https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/15/politics/senate-daylight-
| savi...
|
| Plus the fact that this is not front page news, which I
| think it would be if we actually made daylight savings time
| permanent. :-)
| phailhaus wrote:
| Yes! Later sunsets in the winter!
| paxys wrote:
| Yes
| kalium-xyz wrote:
| Man I wish we could get rid of timezones. I know its
| psychologically impossible for humans to adapt to it but
| timezones really haven't made sense since clocks became a thing.
| gruez wrote:
| retort: https://qntm.org/abolish
| dijit wrote:
| I guess it's some form of nation-centricism that kills it. No
| country wants to change their dinner time to be 3am. Even if
| it's just the number on the clock.
|
| I find it super odd that we keep a record in of all the offsets
| of time and assume that everyone starts/finishes work and eats
| at the same regular interval as everyone else would given that
| the numbers on their local clock says the same as our local
| clock when we do those things.
|
| So arbitrary.
| ithkuil wrote:
| For me the main madness was not DST but the fact that countries
| (in particular US and EU) start and end DST at different dates.
|
| Honestly, I don't get the complaint about one hour change two
| Sundays a year.
|
| But the several weeks a year of conflicting meeting bookings in
| companies that cross the pond is much more infuriating.
| standardUser wrote:
| I love this. I'd even go as far as to support permanent double
| daylight saving time. Let's get those daylight hours in the
| evening where they can do some good!
| croes wrote:
| So more dark hours in the morning when it's more dangerous.
| wvaske wrote:
| Depending on how far north you live, it's academic at best;
| it's dark to and from work.
|
| We're already going to work in the dark in the morning in
| winter, why will it matter if its dark later?
| croes wrote:
| It's a difference if you just woke up or if you are already
| awake the whole day.
| standardUser wrote:
| Dusk is the most dangerous time to drive, and driving is the
| most dangerous thing most of us ever do. Standard time
| guarantees most rush hours, meaning most of our driving, will
| occur during part of dusk. Permanent daylight saving reduces
| the amount of rush hours that occur during dusk.
| ghaff wrote:
| I've been remote since pre-pandemic. I had to drive home to
| the west from an appointment a few weeks ago. I forgot just
| how bad one of the local highways could be when the sun is
| low on the horizon at certain times of the year. And one of
| the worst spots is at a major merge. Just blinding.
| croes wrote:
| So now your morning rush hour is longer in the dark,
| doesn't get safer that way.
| adam_arthur wrote:
| How many decades until a universal timezone?
| basisword wrote:
| Can someone explain why they actually care about this? I always
| see such strong opinions on it but really, why does it matter to
| you? Most clocks are digital and change automatically these days
| and otherwise changing your clocks twice a year is such a minor
| inconvenience. And whether or not the light should be preferred
| in the morning or vending is probably a pretty even split. Maybe
| it's better to get rid of it (I don't know) but to care about it
| strongly seems odd. What am I missing?
| yupper32 wrote:
| Light in the evening is massively more useful than light in the
| morning. Sports, hobbies, anything involving the outdoors. It's
| not really useful to have that hour in the morning when you're
| just getting ready for school/work anyway.
| kayson wrote:
| It's not really about the the hassle of changing clocks, or
| even really about the shift itself, though it is annoying and
| completely arbitrary. While the time shift itself does matter
| if you know people in locations that do not observe any DST
| (like Arizona), its mostly just about the time of day when its
| light out.
|
| I have yet to meet anyone in my circle who prefers standard
| time (lighter in the morning) over daylight savings time
| (lighter in the evening). Admittedly, its a small samples size,
| mostly made up of engineers who tend to start work later and
| end later. But there are also many teachers and parents who
| operate on the asinine schedule of schools which require
| children to be present and learning as early as 7:30am.
|
| Personally, I am never awake before the sun, whether in summer
| or winter, so I am much happier when the sun stays up later in
| my day. When the clock shifts back in the winter, it gets dark
| by around 4:30 or 5pm, and I find myself not wanting to work as
| late into the day. In the spring, when the clock shifts
| forward, I immediately start working later without any specific
| effort; it just happens naturally.
| ______-_-______ wrote:
| The human body likes a consistent schedule. When the schedule
| is disturbed, you get problems like these:
|
| https://healthblog.uofmhealth.org/heart-health/why-daylight-...
|
| https://www.healthline.com/health-news/daylight-saving-can-m...
| rurp wrote:
| I like doing things outside after work, while in the morning
| I'm always inside working or getting ready for work. Having an
| extra hour of daylight is a huge QoL improvement for evening
| activities.
| FredPret wrote:
| In part because not _all_ clocks are digital.
|
| So now I have to adjust my old thermostat, my stove, microwave,
| toothbrush charger, and who knows what else.
|
| It also messes with my sleep schedule for a whole week, whereas
| the body can easily adjust to the gradual changes of the
| season.
| __david__ wrote:
| No one cares about physically changing clocks--that's a minor
| annoyance at worst. I care because I get jet-lagged twice a
| year for no good reason. I've missed both my morning meetings
| this week because my body does _not_ like getting up earlier.
| As I get older it seems to get worse.
| [deleted]
| satsuma wrote:
| i prefer it being around, if only because i come from an area
| that, in the winter time, has 8 hours of daylight to kick off
| the season. it's nicer to have that start at 8:30 am instead of
| 9:30
| cheeze wrote:
| My kids hate it, there is data to show that children suffer a
| bit from it (although quickly correct)
|
| I hate it because I have to remember whether it's PDT or PST
| right now.
|
| Huge deal? No. Would I prefer it just be one or the other?
| Absolutely.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| a) if you're a software developer who works on anything related
| to time, changing up timezones is always scary
|
| b) if you're someone who has a strong preference for when they
| do outdoor activities, day vs night can make a big difference
|
| c) if you wake up in the dark, work all day, then drive home in
| the dark it's kind of a downer (latitude dependant)
| fshbbdssbbgdd wrote:
| Personally I enjoy being having the sun up after work. My
| fitness and general happiness immediately improves when
| daylight saving starts and drops when it ends. For me the year
| has eight good months and four shitty months. After this change
| it'll be more like ten good months and two mediocre months.
| Those additional hours of time when I can enjoy the world
| really do mean a lot to me.
|
| I understand that there are other people with lifestyles that
| benefit more from sun in the morning, and they aren't wrong,
| they are just different.
| geerlingguy wrote:
| For 1-2 weeks post-time-change, I used to adjust okay, it was
| just annoying.
|
| But kids and pets have no clue what's going on, and their
| bodies are basically jolted into a different sleep schedule
| since society doesn't have any ramp-up/ramp-down into the new
| hour difference.
|
| We have basically been fighting to get our kids up (fighting
| against their own bodies' sleep schedules and instincts) this
| week. And when the time changes again in the fall, we end up
| getting woken up "an hour early" since the kids don't care to
| sleep an extra hour that day.
| jtsiskin wrote:
| I propose we add add/subtract a second from every other
| minute over a 5 day smear.
| datalopers wrote:
| Because it's a huge annoyance and wrecks the schedule twice a
| year of many children, pets, and crontabs.
| basisword wrote:
| Yeah but my point is that this is a massive exaggeration.
| People are acting like a one hour shift in time gives them
| jet lag when most of them likely adjust their sleep times
| every weekend and week start anyway without complaint.
| Maximus9000 wrote:
| In "spring forward", people lose 1 hour of sleep. The fatige
| from that has life & death consequences (although I've heard
| this might be overblown).
|
| https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200130144410.h...
| TSiege wrote:
| As someone who suffers from insomnia, the switching of the
| clocks really messes with my natural circadian rhythm. I find
| it takes a least a week for me to naturally adjust and it
| sucks. It's also shown to lead to more heart attacks.
| https://www.acc.org/about-acc/press-releases/2014/03/29/09/1...
| paxys wrote:
| Priority 1a - Daylight saving all year.
|
| Priority 1b - Standard time all year.
|
| .... bottomless pit ...
|
| Last possible priority - Switch clocks back and forth twice a
| year.
|
| It would suck so bad if because of the fighting between the two
| preferable options we are stuck with the worst one.
| mlindner wrote:
| Finally! I'm glad this is finally happening. Time switching is a
| plague on society.
| charles_f wrote:
| I wish they passed a bill to make the _switch_ to standard time
| permanent. That extra hour of sleep once a year, that was gold.
| [deleted]
| neilv wrote:
| > _The Senate approved the measure, called the Sunshine
| Protection Act,_
|
| Not to be confused with "sunshine laws", and using that word for
| an unrelated legal measure could, uh, cloud things.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_information_laws_by...
| alerighi wrote:
| I will never understand why we change the clock instead of
| changing our habits. Well, maybe in a time when we didn't have
| computers it was simpler to just put the clock ahead or behind an
| hour, but nowadays it creates a ton of complexity for nothing.
| Isn't it simpler to just shift our times, for example in the
| summer start to work at 9:00 and in the winter at 8:00?
|
| Beside, if we have to choose a time, why not choose the solar
| time and shift all our times one hours, at least the sundial are
| right...
| Hercuros wrote:
| I don't really think it simplifies things to change every
| single meeting/appointment/agreed-upon time an hour
| forward/backward two times a year without changing the actual
| clock time. If I have a weekly appointment at 11:30 for the
| whole year, I don't want to be putting that at 10:30 in some
| months and 11:30 in others. But if you move the clock an hour
| forward or backward, it can just stay at 11:30 on every day
| (though the effective time will of course be different).
| phailhaus wrote:
| > Isn't it simpler to just shift our times, for example in the
| summer start to work at 9:00 and in the winter at 8:00?
|
| You make this sound so simple, but the "our" you're referring
| to is "hundreds of thousands of employers". Yes, it is simpler
| to change the time than to convince every single employer to
| voluntarily shift their working hours in tandem with everyone
| else. Even one would be practically impossible: everyone would
| have to sit down and adjust every single meeting by an hour.
|
| "Meeting's at 10am!" "Wait, is it 10am before or after fake-
| DST?" "I don't remember, did you change it?"
| tjader wrote:
| To me that just makes what DST really does transparent. It
| makes everyone shift their schedules, whether they want to or
| not.
|
| About the meeting example, I don't think GP meant purple who
| like DST should change their clocks, they should just change
| their schedules. If you want more sunlight after work, arrive
| earlier and leave earlier. After all, that is effectively
| what DST forces everyone to do.
| phailhaus wrote:
| > If you want more sunlight after work, arrive earlier and
| leave earlier.
|
| Too many people on HN assume that everyone has dream jobs
| with flexible work hours like them.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| It is difficult to get every business, school, and workplace to
| coordinate on changing habits together. If they don't, it
| causes a lot of problems for a lot of people
| eatsyourtacos wrote:
| Uh.. in this age of everyones important clocks (like phones,
| computers) auto updating.. there's literally nothing to do.
|
| You are suggesting changing work schedule hours, school times,
| etc half the year and you call that _more simple_? Wow.
| robbrown451 wrote:
| While we're at it, can we please get rid of leap seconds? (which
| we don't know are going to happen until ~six months beforehand?)
| Just wait until we are off by a full minute, and then we'd know
| at least a full decade ahead of time when the next leap minute
| will happen.
|
| I don't understand the need to have it so precisely align with
| astronomical measurements (to the nearest 0.9 seconds) when we
| already do so much roundoff due to time zones, daylight time,
| etc.
| mesozoic wrote:
| Personally I'm tired of coding around time zones can we just make
| the whole world GMT time and learn to deal with not having
| "noons" and "midnights"
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| Exactly. Lets just wake up when the sun dictates, go to bed
| when it doesnt. So what if it's 12:37 PM where you are in the
| world. It's just a label and our circadian rhythm dictates most
| of this, ignorant of what time society says is "slothful" or
| "eager" to rise.
| msoucy wrote:
| A couple of fun posts you might enjoy:
|
| So You Want To Abolish Time Zones: https://qntm.org/abolish So
| You Want Continuous Time Zones: https://qntm.org/continuous
|
| What I've gathered from these and similar articles is that time
| just kinda sucks in general, and no matter what we do we're
| going to suffer.
| CyanLite4 wrote:
| Won't take effect until 2023, but good to see it happen.
| waynecochran wrote:
| Can you explain to me why this is good. It seems like a pain,
| but I assume there must be a good reason for it. Does it truly
| save energy? Is this documented somewhere?
| dijit wrote:
| it's good that it's going away because switching DST to ST or
| vice-versa is correlated with a huge economic deficit and an
| influx of health issues.
|
| The severe disruption in schedules is correlated with
| triggering depressive episodes (great when we're going into
| winter!) and increase in obesity.
|
| What's more: the fact that we all do it syncronously and it
| negatively affects our mood means that there's a "DST
| meanness" wave that washes over cities during autumn and
| spring.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| > It's good that it's going away because switching DST to
| ST or vice-versa is correlated with a huge economic deficit
| and an influx of health issues.
|
| It's not "and vice versa" - the change to DST has a slight
| negative effect, the change to ST has a similar slight
| positive effect on these indicators.
| dijit wrote:
| I really do not care enough to argue for and against
| either one. Neither should you, because this discussion
| will be used as a justification to retain the status quo
| and I do not accept that either solution is worse than
| the status quo.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| Well, my point was that the status quo wasn't necessarily
| as bad as it was presented.
| kube-system wrote:
| The purpose of DST was to give people extra daylight time
| during the summer when people wanted to do things outside and
| needed the sun to do it. Like working their fields, etc. It's
| not as necessary now that we have electric lighting and farm
| tractors.
| kwhitefoot wrote:
| Farmers used to work according to the weather and the sun
| regardless of what the clock said.
| [deleted]
| selfportrait wrote:
| "In Sweden, researchers found an average 6.7 percent greater
| risk of heart attack in the three days after the spring
| change. Inspired by that finding, a group of U.S. researchers
| conducted their own study and determined that heart attack
| risk jumped 24 percent the Monday after switching over to
| daylight saving time. That risk then tapered off over the
| remainder of the week.
|
| By contrast, risk for heart attack dropped 21 percent on the
| Tuesday after the fall time change."
|
| https://www.heart.org/en/news/2018/10/26/can-daylight-
| saving...
|
| "A study of 732,000 accidents over two decades has found that
| the annual switch to daylight saving time is associated with
| a 6% increase in fatal car crashes that week."
|
| https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200130144410.h.
| ..
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| extra hour of daylight after work in the north, during the
| winter the sun sets at 4pm in some places
| emodendroket wrote:
| Changing the clocks is a lot of hassle for dubious benefit.
| zcombynator wrote:
| This decision boosted my confidence in the US Gov dramatically
| that they're actually trying to get more efficient.
| [deleted]
| radley wrote:
| Obligatory link to previous attempt (1973) to make DST permanent:
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/1974/01/31/archives/schools-ask-end-...
|
| TLDR: schools asked to reinstate DST because more school children
| were killed in accidents walking to school in the dark that year.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Doesn't DST make it darker in the morning and lighter at night?
| germandiago wrote:
| Nothing is permanent? What silly thing is this? It is like when
| Sweden did recently a nuclear waste area until the 30th century.
| What is the meaning of making it "permanent"?
| globular-toast wrote:
| I'm completely in favour of not regularly shifting the clock
| backwards and forwards, but making daylight savings time
| permanent instead of standard time is so dumb. I guarantee this
| is because people think they will "get more daylight" or
| something stupid like that. I guess this is the pragmatic
| solution to getting people to agree to stop the shifting but
| damn, we are so far from Star Trek right now.
| jrootabega wrote:
| I would prefer we have permanent Standard Time so I can wait a
| year and then my car's clock will be correct forever.
| somenewaccount1 wrote:
| does this make the clock flip-flopping permanent, or that we will
| stop doing it?
|
| personally, i just want to punch the moving clock in the face. it
| nearly killed me last year when I was just starting to get an
| exercise routine at the end of winter, and then it sent me back
| into the dark by an hour, completely fucking up my schedule. i
| absolutely blame many of my problems on these flip flopping
| clocks, and I do not think i am alone.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| The flip flopping is currently "permanent", this bill would
| stop the flip flopping.
| bilalq wrote:
| We thought Y2K38 would be the next big industry challenge, but I
| expect a lot of things are going to go wrong with a change with
| just a year or two of notice.
|
| I love that this is happening, but I'm pretty certain a lot of
| random things are going to break when the cutover happens.
| Ekaros wrote:
| The way they do it is just so self-destructive. Changing the
| definition of timezone, not just changing to existing one...
| That is so lovely corner case to remember forever... Idiots...
| NovemberWhiskey wrote:
| Nah. We are getting good at this; we "just" did it in 2007.
| _greim_ wrote:
| When they shifted the transition time by a month a few years
| back I remember it causing grief. I had to get rid of an alarm
| clock that was hard-wired for the old cutover. There were a few
| other minor inconveniences. Random things definitely broke.
| capital_guy wrote:
| I am extremely surprised at all the people who are against this,
| saying that "Making DST permanent forces people to wake up
| earlier." I am not sure I know a single person whose morning
| wake-up time is dictated by the rise of the sun. Everyone I know
| wakes up whatever time that their work tells them to.
|
| I am happy to have more sun after I get out of work. It was a
| breath of fresh air this week getting out of work and seeing
| daylight.
| qiskit wrote:
| > I am not sure I know a single person whose morning wake-up
| time is dictated by the rise of the sun.
|
| I try to when I can. But you are right. Most people's lives
| revolve around work. For most of human existence, our lives
| revolved around the sun. Now it revolves around a job.
| Barrin92 wrote:
| >For most of human existence, our lives revolved around the
| sun. Now it revolves around a job.
|
| I blame our corporate reality as much as the next guy but tbh
| even without work most people's lives don't exactly revolve
| around the sun. Or else the clubs on the weekends would be
| empty
| carabiner wrote:
| Circadian rhythms and all that. The body reacts to sunlight.
| It's been shown that auto accidents are more common when people
| wake in darkness as the brain is still spinning up. It's why we
| use f.lux to help us go to sleep.
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| I think the problem is that people don't understand what this
| change really means.
|
| If you ask people "Would you like the sun to set later in the
| evening?" most people will say yes.
|
| If you ask people "Would you rather go to bed early and wake up
| early, or go to sleep later and wake up later?"--well, there
| might be some more disagreement, but most people would choose
| to sleep in. (Just look at when people choose to sleep during
| the weekend.)
|
| Everyone thinks of Daylights Savings Time as "yay, more
| sunlight," without realizing it also requires them to wake up
| earlier, relative to their circadian rhythms.
| dec0dedab0de wrote:
| I've been working from home for 7+ years, and I mostly let the
| sun wake me up. I never would have been able to do that in the
| winter when I was commuting, but it is very nice.
|
| I am totally in favor of this though, I was ranting about it to
| a friend on Sunday.
| ignu wrote:
| normalize work starting two hours after dawn.
|
| (i think i'm only half joking)
|
| also then just move everyone to GMT for the hell of it.
| downrightmike wrote:
| I'd rather have only two hours from coast to coast. Of course
| they want to make us all get up earlier all year long.
| gh0std3v wrote:
| I don't care about whether there's more sunshine in the morning
| or not (that's why I have blinds!). What I do care about is the
| fact that DST introduces needless complexity into the task of
| keeping time.
|
| I know it's stupid, but I just think DST is really unnecessary
| because of the fact that we have to adjust the clock on our
| microwaves, ovens, and cars. Not to mention, because not
| everyone observes DST, it leads to a lot of additional
| complexity when scheduling international meetings.
|
| Overall, regardless of your preferences, the world would be
| better if we didn't have to adjust the clock for no reason.
| [deleted]
| cylon13 wrote:
| Making DST permanent in this context means never changing the
| clocks again. So what was once "daylight savings time" is now
| just "time" and no more clock changes. Just wanted to make
| sure you were aware, since your view is actually popular and
| your wish has been granted (if you live in the US).
| emtel wrote:
| > Everyone I know wakes up whatever time that their work tells
| them to.
|
| Uh, yes, that's the point - and many businesses and schools
| will stick to a consistent nominal time (like 8am) which will
| now be one hour earlier in real terms.
| beambot wrote:
| > [...] which will now be one hour earlier in real terms.
|
| "Relative" terms -- i.e. relative to sunrise. Eliminating
| daylight savings means that all times are now "real" terms.
| dheera wrote:
| > I am not sure I know a single person whose morning wake-up
| time is dictated by the rise of the sun
|
| Well now you do
|
| I do everything in UTC, don't use daylight savings, and I do
| set my wake up time based on sunrise
| hertzrat wrote:
| Isn't this just some random Twitter account? There isn't even a
| link to a real source
| ebrewste wrote:
| https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-senate-approves-bill-
| tha...
| black6 wrote:
| > The change would help enable children to play outdoors
| later...
|
| The change would help enable the executive class to play
| golf after work hours...
| snek_case wrote:
| I think this is kind of a conflict between those who are
| morning people and those who aren't. Many morning people would
| prefer to have that sunlight in the morning. I'm not at all a
| morning person and I'd rather have that sunlight after work
| when I can actually benefit from it.
| fnordpiglet wrote:
| For folks with seasonal affective disorder, this makes winter
| even more hellacious.
|
| Timing of light and absence of light is critical - early
| morning light exposure greatly benefits people with SAD.
| keerthiko wrote:
| I think for folks with any kind of seasonal affective
| disorder, having a fixed time on the clock year-round is
| still beneficial. Take more vacation in winter. Push for
| slightly more flexible work hours or at least a later first-
| meeting-of-the-day.
| givemeethekeys wrote:
| Disagree. Having the sun set so early is far more depressing
| than it rising a little later in the winter. I'd rather have
| a 7am sunrise than a 4pm sunset.
| jsight wrote:
| Wouldn't quite a few people like this sleep through the
| sunrise and be happy to have an extra hour of daylight at the
| end of the day? I don't see how its any worse for the non-
| morning people in that group.
| eurasiantiger wrote:
| Buy a wake-up light, then. We can't force everyone to adapt
| to other people's disorders.
| bayindirh wrote:
| Wake-up light doesn't work for everyone (e.g. me).
|
| Not having affected by the light as much doesn't give
| anyone powers to tell others what to do.
| throwaway27727 wrote:
| This extra daylight in the evening is killing my babies sleep
| schedule - but I'm sure to enjoy it once they're older and they
| don't need such early naps.
| bluenose69 wrote:
| The comments on this item are the funniest I've seen in a long
| time. Who knew Usians were so witty?
| seangrogg wrote:
| I'm all for either implementation of this (standard or savings);
| I have no particular skin in the game when it comes down to where
| daylight hours are positioned. Having lived about a decade in
| Arizona it literally never negatively impacted my life once.
|
| Since moving I've come to participate in what seems to be the
| standard dread of moving hours back and forth. I either lose
| sleep and need to adjust my Circadian rhythm or I gain a one-off
| hour to... I dunno, lay in bed longer because I've already gotten
| my sleep?
|
| The worst is being a gaming raid leader (and I'd imagine anyone
| dealing with globalized scheduling), though, because every time
| we do this I have to reach out to my gamers in other
| states/countries who don't play collective clock madness and ask
| them to adjust to those of us that still do for what appear to be
| largely outmoded "reasons".
| mdavidn wrote:
| Scheduling recurring meetings that span the United States and
| Australia is always a calendaring shock. Both countries observe
| daylight savings time but, being in different hemispheres, they
| move in opposite directions. And on different dates.
| seangrogg wrote:
| Seriously though! One of my Aussie buddies recently switched
| over to a recently-opened Oceanic server and while I was
| lamenting the loss we joked about not needing to step on each
| other's toes with scheduling.
| Overtonwindow wrote:
| Will this mean sending out an update to every single phone and
| gadget that changes automatically? On the iPhone you can just
| turn it off, so I would imagine not seeing it in future updates?
| zupreme wrote:
| All I can say is that it must take alot of confidence, for lack
| of a better term, to look at what time the sun goes down and to
| decide that you are going to change that.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Really they're looking at the time people wake up compared to
| when the sun rises and deciding they're going to change that.
| mgkimsal wrote:
| I've suggested for years that we just split the difference, 'fall
| back' 30 minutes or what not, and call that done. Not sure why it
| doesn't get traction.
| dwighttk wrote:
| Let's get back to local noon!
| ZYinMD wrote:
| Something you don't realize but matters to certain people: this
| will lock the time difference between east coast US & east coast
| China to 12 hours, which is very convenient, a quality of life
| change for a variety of things.
| tptacek wrote:
| Obligatory: https://archive.ph/Aro0a
|
| Barro is very fond of pointing out that we tried this once in the
| 1970s and almost immediately rolled it back. Permanent DST means
| that it's dark between 8-9AM in large swathes of the US. Among
| other problems, having kids go to school in the dark or twilight
| hours is unsafe, so schools responded by adjusting their
| schedules, which is an even bigger problem than DST, because the
| rest of the economy has a de facto requirement to coordinate with
| school schedules.
| dlp211 wrote:
| There is a huge difference between the 1970's and now. Light,
| lot's of it. We have so much more light today then in the 70's,
| our headlights are brighter, we have more street lamps, and so
| much more.
|
| We'll also see more northern states adopt permanent DST while
| southern states adopt permanent ST. Kids already go to school
| in the dark in the northern states, but they also come home in
| it too. This change will give them some daylight in the
| afternoon to go out and socialize.
| nostrademons wrote:
| That makes this the perfect time to do this.
|
| There's tons of research out there that early school start
| times have a negative impact on students' learning, alertness,
| and well-being. We _should_ be pushing schools back to a
| 8:30-9:00 AM start time. My high school started at 8:30, which
| was much better than my sister 's 7:00 AM start time, and this
| was explicitly called out as a plus when my high school was
| accredited.
|
| The reason we don't do this is exactly the reason you mention:
| for the convenience of adults and the rest of the economy.
| Children don't get a voice, but corporations do. And that's
| also what makes this the perfect time to do it, when the future
| of work is in total disarray, nobody knows how they're going to
| be handling RTO, and large swaths of America is quitting for
| remote jobs (or just quitting) anyway.
| Mindless2112 wrote:
| For some definition of "we". I wasn't alive in the 1970s; half
| of people living today weren't.
| bluGill wrote:
| That doesn't pass the smell test. In my areas different schools
| start at different times and always have.
| tptacek wrote:
| Right, but they don't start at different times _during the
| school year_.
| 3836293648 wrote:
| Surely the idiots wouldn't use summer time permanently. Winter
| time is needed. Summers are bright day all day long, it's summer
| time that needs to be gotten rid of
| narrator wrote:
| 1084 comments? This is the ultimate bikeshedding issue.
| blhack wrote:
| As an Arizonan: welcome!
|
| (Arizona does not celebrate daylight saving time)
| arjvik wrote:
| So are we permanently going to be on
| "{Eastern,Central,Mountain,Pacific} Daylight Time"? Or are we
| redefining the time zones "{Eastern,Central,Mountain,Pacific}
| Standard Time"?
| cjm42 wrote:
| The bill would eliminate Daylight Time and redefine Eastern
| Standard Time etc. to be the same offset they currently are
| during daylight time.
|
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/623...
| puffoflogic wrote:
| Given that the US Congress doesn't really have the social
| authority to do the latter...
| ggrrhh_ta wrote:
| A comment above states exactly the opposite.
| gnulinux wrote:
| I think you're wrong. They really are re-defining e.g. EST to
| be the current DST but without yearly DST change.
| lfuller wrote:
| How would this work? Parts of Canada, parts of Mexico,
| Panama, Colombia, mainland Ecuador, Peru, parts of Brazil,
| and a bunch of islands are all on Eastern Time. Even if the
| US changed their own definition of EST it wouldn't change
| other countries' observations of EST.
| puffoflogic wrote:
| Shhh... The Narrative has now been decided, and going
| against it on HN is racist or something.
| rkagerer wrote:
| If this doesn't work out there's always Daylight Smearing Time.
|
| https://xkcd.com/2266/
|
| https://gregcochard.com/daylight-savings-time-smearing/
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| Hot take: permenant daylight time not permanent standard time
| because nightowls are more common than they used to be.
| mrfusion wrote:
| I prefer having more daylight in the evening. I never really
| understood the opposite argument.
| [deleted]
| freedomben wrote:
| Really? Seems pretty straight forward. For early risers it's
| nice to wake up to the sun...
|
| I think it comes down to, "what do _I_ prefer "
| yupper32 wrote:
| Early risers can just... turn on the lights.
|
| You can't just "turn on the lights" for outdoor activities
| except in very specific cases. Those activities can't
| really be done in the morning because people have to get
| ready for school/work during that time. I _really_ don 't
| want to waste perfectly good sunlight getting ready for
| work. Let me use it when it can actually be used.
| freedomben wrote:
| why is "turn on the lights" good enough for early risers
| but not for late-to-beds or night owls?
|
| I would suggest it's because the sun is a far better
| light, and most people don't have the ability to light up
| the entire area to make it seem like daytime.
|
| Note: I'm a late-to-bed person myself, so I'm happy about
| this, but I want to be honest about the fact that my
| support for it over a permanent no DST is my personal
| preference being imposed on others. In the US south
| there's a saying, "don't piss on my leg and tell me it's
| raining" and I try to honor that here.
| yupper32 wrote:
| > why is "turn on the lights" good enough for early
| risers but not for late-to-beds or night owls?
|
| I literally say my reasoning in my comment. It's much
| harder to light up the outdoors for outdoor activities
| after work/school. I can't use sunlight in the morning
| for anything other than a wake-up aid.
| freedomben wrote:
| You edited and added that after I posted my comment,
| because that was not there when I wrote my reply.
|
| But regardless, I still disagree. You seem to be assuming
| that early risers don't want to do outside activities,
| but that is not true. There are plenty of people that go
| for a run or jog, or morning hike, etc before work. At a
| previous company we had a rock climbing club called, "Get
| High in the Morning" :-D
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Climbing gyms are indoors anyway!
| SllX wrote:
| Which probably is the best argument for the status quo of
| changing clocks; but personally I'll take permanent
| daylight savings over permanent standard time every day of
| the week.
| freedomben wrote:
| Yes likewise. Now that we aren't a farm culture, DST
| makes little sense to me. We should make time permanent,
| and I'd prefer permanent DST personally.
| SllX wrote:
| Well, that isn't actually fair. You and I may not live on
| a farm, but there is still plenty of "farming culture"
| even in America and I don't think it is fair to dismiss
| their concerns out of hand. I just know that if we're
| going to pick a bad optimization, which one I prefer as a
| city dweller that enjoys the local beaches.
|
| And the way I personally always dealt with it is by
| having clocks that set themselves and barely noticing
| when they changed, or in some years, not even noticing at
| all unless someone else brought it up.
| kqr wrote:
| Daylight in the morning does wonders for resetting your
| circadian rhythm to the actual day, rather than its internal
| 25-something hour day.
|
| What would naturally happen by making daylight savings time
| permanent is that people's circadian rhythms would shift
| forward until daylight savings time basically becomes the
| same thing as standard time.
| NeoTar wrote:
| It would be really interesting to study this - in Europe
| the same time-zone covers between approximately 30m behind
| true time (e.g. in eastern Poland) and 1h 30m ahead (in
| Galicia) - do Galicians typically get up later than Poles?
|
| China has it even more so - a single time-zone covering
| what should be five - are people in Fuyuan waking up at
| 03:00 when the sun rises in summer, whilst people in Zanda
| sleep in till 07:30?
| valenaut wrote:
| I prefer daylight in the morning. It's easier for me to wake
| up and be alert after sunrise, and I feel like a zombie
| before sunrise. Don't really care if the sun sets at 5:30 or
| 6:30 p.m.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Most people like to get up when the Sun is coming up or close
| to it. People don't want to wake when it's dark for another
| 1-2 hours. Without DLST then the Sun would come up at around
| 8:30 in December and January in northern states. People are
| up at 6:30, 7AM - waiting around 2 hours would be awful. And
| a waste of energy in the morning.
| servercobra wrote:
| The wasting energy argument seems to be the opposite to me.
| People will get home and not have to immediately turn on
| lights, saving some energy. Not everyone is awake at
| 6:30am, so their lights remain off.
| freedrock87 wrote:
| Instead of a waste of energy in the evening?
|
| Your arguments have very subjective points and you could
| easily claim that due to WFH more people are waking up
| later.
| nemo44x wrote:
| WFH affects a very small part of the population. Most
| working people have to start early for various reasons
| and have to go to a workplace. Having the Sun is useful
| for them. Most people start work at 8AM.
| H1Supreme wrote:
| > And a waste of energy in the morning
|
| How is it not the same waste of energy in the evenings?
| People don't go to sleep when the sun sets.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Because you're awake for a longer period when it is dark
| out so you need to use energy.
| zuminator wrote:
| As a late riser I am thrilled by this development.
| depingus wrote:
| I see a lot of people arguing for and against DST. But, I can't
| imagine this is being done for anyone's comfort. DST is
| associated with higher consumer spending.
|
| https://www.jpmorganchase.com/institute/research/cities-loca...
| sjg007 wrote:
| At least they finally passed something..
| noveltyaccount wrote:
| I don't care if we pick permanent DST or Standard time, or
| abolish time zones altogether and just use UTC. It's the _change_
| that I dislike!
| codazoda wrote:
| How out of date is Congress.gov, which still shows this bill as
| having last action in March of 2021 and the status is "referred
| to committee" which is where all the legislation I care about
| seems to go to die.
|
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/623
|
| Why is Twitter a better place to get this news than a .gov
| website that seems like it was built for it?
| OrwellianChild wrote:
| The world moves at the speed of Twitter - this is confirmation
| with video from the senator who originated the bill:
| https://twitter.com/PattyMurray/status/1503804622087020545
| collegeburner wrote:
| Fuck this. Keeping the DST change is still better than keeping
| DST permanently. We should stay on standard time all year, I'm
| sick of having 0 daylight in the morning when I get up.
| scotuswroteus wrote:
| You get up too early. Relax
| collegeburner wrote:
| You get up too late. Relax. If I get up later I can't go to
| the gym and get a good workout, then sit and drink my coffee
| and eat breakfast before work.
| richardwhiuk wrote:
| You could go to work later.
| collegeburner wrote:
| That's not how the work world works. This site is biased
| because programming isn't the same, but most corporate
| jobs still need people working at the same time to get
| stuff done.
| cheeze wrote:
| I'd rather it be dark when I wake up and light when I am done
| working, but to each their own.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| I'm pretty sure sleep is significantly affected by not having
| sunlight when you wake up, and that's true for everyone, not
| a personal choice.
| collegeburner wrote:
| No, it's not each to their own because this is a society
| decision. Having dark for the first few hours of my day is
| crap for my mental health.
| jnsie wrote:
| To each their own means that people can have differing
| opinions - not that they can each get their own way. This
| is indeed a 'society decision' - it's moving through the
| democratic process...
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| > No, it's not each their own
|
| > Proceeds to complain about personal circumstances
|
| You can't have both sides. Either it's a personal problem
| for everyone, in which case you are free to complain about
| your specific issues with it, or it's a societal problem
| and therefore your specific mental health issues are
| irrelevant.
| agentwiggles wrote:
| In theory, this adds at most 1 hour of darkness to your
| day, regardless of when you wake up.
| throwaway48375 wrote:
| Is there a law that mandates you wake up at the same time
| every day?
| dade_ wrote:
| Wonderful news! I grew up without time changes in permanent
| "summer time" and watching the glorious sunrise winter mornings.
| I already wake up in the dark in the morning in the winter, so a
| few more precious moments of daylight in the afternoon will be
| great.
| mrfusion wrote:
| Does the house need to pass it? Will the president veto it? When
| can I literally set my clock to this?
| paxys wrote:
| > Does the house need to pass it?
|
| Yes
|
| > Will the president veto it?
|
| No
|
| > When can I literally set my clock to this?
|
| 2023 at the earliest, but probably much later, if ever. The
| legislative process is not known to move quickly.
| rurp wrote:
| Can you expand on why you don't think this will go into
| effect soon? This is the first I've heard of this bill but
| given the unanimous passage in the Senste it seems odd that
| it would fail in the House.
|
| Also, IIRC, bills must originate in the House, which makes me
| think something like this has already passed there at some
| point.
| blendergeek wrote:
| This bill "originated" in the Senate. Bills only have to
| originate in the House if they raise taxes [0]. All other
| bills can originate in either the House or the Senate.
| While there is a virtually identical piece of legislation
| in the House that pre-dates this one, it has not passed the
| House yet.
|
| [0] https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-
| 1/#ar...
| paxys wrote:
| I believe this is an equivalent house bill -
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-
| bill/69/a..., and it doesn't look like there has been any
| progress on it in over a year.
|
| > Also, IIRC, bills must originate in the House
|
| Only those related to revenue
| mywittyname wrote:
| It's veto-proof anyway.
|
| A lot of states have already passed similar laws and are merely
| waiting on the Federal law to come into effect. So it's likely
| to become law soon.
| llbeansandrice wrote:
| iirc states can only choose to either participate in the
| biannual time-change or to be on standard time year-round.
| verve_rat wrote:
| How does that work? I'm not an American, but I've heard the
| stories about some state that has three timezone because of
| an Indian reservation and some other stuff. I was under the
| impression that daylight savings was a state matter. Don't
| some states currently not observe DST while their neighbours
| do?
|
| What is the federal government's role in this? Can a state
| ignore this (almost) law and do DST anyway?
| henryfjordan wrote:
| There is some good context here: https://ballotpedia.org/Ca
| lifornia_Proposition_7,_Legislativ...
| verve_rat wrote:
| Awesome, thanks for that.
| [deleted]
| mjw1007 wrote:
| It would be nice if the title mentioned which country's senate
| it's talking about (particularly as the title is made up for HN
| rather than taken from the source page).
| nfw2 wrote:
| My personal pet peeve is when people write the Standard Time
| acronym when scheduling cross-timezone meetings, despite the fact
| that it is Daylight Saving Time. (Eg. "I'll call you tomorrow at
| 4pm PST.")
|
| In the past, I've gotten paranoid that they may live somewhere
| that doesn't observe Daylight Savings, but I also don't want to
| seem like a pedant by bringing up their mistake.
|
| I'm curious if this change will make this sort of thing more or
| less common.
| jsw wrote:
| I wish "Prevailing Time" would catch on. Eg PPT
| mehrdada wrote:
| It's just PT: _Pacific Time_.
| nfw2 wrote:
| I usually write out Pacific Time out of concern that not
| everyone would immediately recognize PT as an acronym. Most
| scheduling systems use the full acronym.
| rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote:
| What you're talking about is just "PT", but I usually just
| write out the word "Pacific".
| NaturalPhallacy wrote:
| I've never known anyone who wasn't a programmer who even knew
| the difference between say, PST and PDT. Like, if they didn't
| schedule it through a computer with up to date timezone code, I
| would confirm verbally.
| oconnor663 wrote:
| When there's an obvious reference city for at least one side of
| the conversation, I just use that. "Talk to you at 3pm [New
| York, SF, Tokyo] time." Apart from avoiding any possible
| confusion about what PST/PDT means, this is also less likely to
| suffer from typos, and it's more likely that the recipient
| actually reads it and notices any mistakes. Easier for people
| from different countries too, if they aren't familiar with each
| other's timezones.
| redwall_hp wrote:
| My personal pet peeve is giving times in their local time zone
| when they know full well everyone is going to be in different
| time zones. Convert it to UTC so everyone can just worry about
| their offset.
| tshaddox wrote:
| I'd rather people not do that, simply because I wouldn't
| trust most people to do the conversion in either direction.
| At least if the person setting the meeting gives the time in
| their local time time I can be relatively confident that at
| least they'll be there on time.
| coryfklein wrote:
| If you attach a time zone, then at least _some_ won 't need
| to do a conversion in their heads.
|
| If you just use UTC, then EVERYONE has to do some conversion
| in their heads.
|
| (Unless some participants happen to live at the prime
| meridian, in which case using UTC as "the timezone" is
| equally as good.)
| lelandfe wrote:
| I doubt most of my colleagues even know what their offset is
| - keeping track of that with DST is just not fun. Personally
| I just Google e.g. "2pm PT in CT," as Google has an info box
| that handles time conversions and is smart enough to know
| when you want DST.
| macintux wrote:
| Ah, yes, precision without accuracy.
|
| I constantly ride people about it. I don't care about being
| perceived as a jerk.
| mbg721 wrote:
| Move it all twelve hours back forever, then we'll have eternal
| daylight!
| jimbokun wrote:
| Does this still need to pass the House?
| nimbius wrote:
| S.623 spent nearly a year languishing it seems...better late than
| never i guess
|
| https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/s623
|
| curious if govtrack is following this development? id be stunned
| if it makes it out of the house alive, as efforts to repeal DST
| frequently face stiff opposition from fast food and entertainment
| lobbies that insist its value.
| russellbeattie wrote:
| California passed a prop about this, but implementing it has been
| stalled for a couple years because why? You guessed it: Half the
| reps want to stick to PST and the other PDT.
| cwt137 wrote:
| We need a lot of new embedded devices. Lots of them have
| hardcoded when the time changes and have no way of taking it off.
| amaranth wrote:
| If that's true they've already been wrong in recent history.
| The US changed when they do DST in 2007 and I believe other
| countries have moved it around recently as well. If you're
| dealing with timezones (which DST is) you either need the
| ability to do frequent updates or you need to stop dealing with
| timezones.
| mbg721 wrote:
| Thus proving that they are robotic idiots designed specifically
| to annoy people. What exactly did that accomplish????
| TheCoelacanth wrote:
| Such a terrible idea compared to permanent standard time.
|
| There is plenty of light during the summer, so there's no need to
| optimize for that. The winter is when daylight is scarce, so
| that's what should be optimized for.
| joe_the_user wrote:
| _The winter is when daylight is scarce, so that 's what should
| be optimized for._
|
| Yes but so-called Standard Time was only optimizing that for a
| small group - the intention was rural children walking to
| school could do so in daylight. And otherwise it pessimized the
| use of scarce sunlight by moving forward the time workers left
| to when it was dark.
|
| Always Standard Time might be better than awful switch but
| permanent Daylight Savings would offer most people who work 9-5
| more sunlight over the year, the actual optimal solution.
| D13Fd wrote:
| In reality it means that people have to get up earlier and go
| to bed earlier relative to sunset/sunrise.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| _Who_ are these people? Pre-industrial farmers? Solar
| collectors?
| D13Fd wrote:
| Literally every person affected by this change unless
| their work or school schedule also adjusts (in which case
| the change was pointless anyway).
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Does it matter if someone doesn't care about when sunset
| or sunrise is? Oh they're "affected" but not really.
| dghughes wrote:
| Standard Time would make more sense than DST since that would
| mean noon is at 12pm (give or take a few minutes depending on
| latitude) not 1pm.
| tempestn wrote:
| And why does that matter?
| glglwty wrote:
| It makes sunrise and sunset symmetrical
| HWR_14 wrote:
| Noon shouldn't be at 12pm. It should be at 1pm _or later_.
| CogitoCogito wrote:
| I thought what you were saying was crazy, but the etymology
| of "noon" interesting:
|
| https://www.etymonline.com/word/noon
|
| ---------------------
|
| noon (n.) mid-12c., non "midday," in exact use, "12 o'clock
| p.m.," also "midday meal," from Old English non "3 o'clock
| p.m., the ninth hour from sunrise," also "the canonical
| hour of nones," from Latin nona hora "ninth hour" of
| daylight, by Roman and ecclesiastical reckoning about 3
| p.m., from nona, fem. singular of nonus "ninth," contracted
| from *novenos, from novem "nine" (see nine).
|
| The sense shift from "3 p.m." to "12 p.m." began during
| 12c., and various reasons are given for it, such as
| unreliability of medieval time-keeping devices and the
| seasonal elasticity of the hours of daylight in northern
| regions. In monasteries and on holy days, fasting ended at
| nones, which perhaps offered another incentive to nudge it
| up the clock. Or perhaps the sense shift was based on an
| advance in the customary time of the (secular) midday meal.
| Whatever the cause, the meaning change from "ninth hour" to
| "sixth hour" seems to have been complete by 14c. (the same
| evolution is in Dutch noen).
|
| From 17c. to 19c., noon sometimes also meant "midnight"
| (the noon of the night).
|
| ---------------------
|
| Of course the meaning of the word centuries ago doesn't
| really matter much for what people think about the word
| today, but it's interesting none the less.
| doodpants wrote:
| DST makes more sense simply because we are already on DST for
| 8 months of the year, vs. 4 months for "standard" time.
| TomVDB wrote:
| That only matters for those who keep time with a sundial...
| SubiculumCode wrote:
| Depression equals darkness after work.
| dheera wrote:
| Just change your waking/sleeping hours then. It's just a
| number. Set your sleeping hours based on actual daylight times
| instead of the number on the clock.
|
| Personally I'm happy they just pick one and stick with it.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| Most people have a fixed work schedule. If you work for
| Walmart and the store opens at 8 AM, you can't arbitrarily
| decide to wake up at 8AM because that's when the sun rises.
| dheera wrote:
| Most people start work at 8-9am and sunrise is well before
| that with plenty of time for commute with or without
| daylight savings.
|
| There is another much smaller cluster of people who start
| work at 4-6am because they're in transit or service
| industry and they are before sunrise either way.
| TheCoelacanth wrote:
| Not during the winter if this change goes through. In
| much of the northern US, sunrise won't be until after 8
| am on many days.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| To get to work at 8AM, you can't wake up at 8AM. Sunrise
| often occurs around 7:30-50AM in northern latitudes even
| in ST during December and January. With DST, this would
| mean sunrise occurs at 8:30-50AM.
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| If you're a person with a normal day job or who goes to school
| (i.e. practically everyone), an extra hour of sunlight in the
| morning is wasted on the job or school; an extra hour of
| sunlight in the evening is more likely to be on _your_ time.
|
| My seasonal affect disorder kicks in hard when we leave DST
| every winter. This is the first bit of great news I've heard
| all year.
| FearTheTrees wrote:
| I think I speak on behalf of most computer people when I say
| this: we prefer our extra hour of sunshine in the evenings not
| mornings.
| H1Supreme wrote:
| My after work bike rides basically end in the fall, so I'm
| happy for the change.
| salawat wrote:
| Not for me. I prefer timekeeping libraries to not have to be
| changed. Ever. If they have to, should be simplified. If
| simifying, it should be in a way that doesn't cause
| grammatical issues.
|
| Which this does, because now DST is now the standard time.
| dhritzkiv wrote:
| Nothing about timekeeping is simple, with or without this
| change. Not only do some regions already not observe DST
| (even within the same state/region); some switch to/from
| DST at different times of year (and this date changes from
| year to year).
|
| For a timekeeping library (which likely uses a system-level
| source of data / the IANA tz database) this shouldn't have
| any effect.
| salawat wrote:
| Never in my career is there more chaos than around any
| type of change having to do with timekeeping.
|
| It _shouldn 't_ be a big deal. Inevitably though, it
| always seems to bring the bugs out of the woodwork.
| redwall_hp wrote:
| Absolutely. Fuck mornings. I'd rather not be awake before
| noon in the first place.
|
| Also, some states would have a real problem with permanent
| standard time. Maine, in particular really belongs in the
| Atlantic time zone, as standard time puts sunset way too
| early most of the year. Having the sun down by 4:00 sucks.
| metafunctor wrote:
| Doesn't that mean you should prefer standard time? DST
| moves the clock forwards, so the sun won't be as high at,
| say, 7am.
| mdoms wrote:
| Speak for yourself, you certainly don't speak on my behalf.
| ginko wrote:
| Why? I would say a large number of computer people owls,
| meaning they get up late and go to bed late. Permanent DST
| means you have to get up one hour earlier forever. Seems
| absolutely terrible to me.
|
| It's also stupid from an astronomical point of view.
| dml2135 wrote:
| I've thought about this, being a night owl myself. I vastly
| prefer daylight saving time, but doesn't that mean I'm just
| getting up an hour earlier? Which I should hate, because I
| hate getting up early.
|
| It's made me realize that my being a night owl is less
| about the actual time and more about how I'm spending it in
| relation to the rest of society. There's just something
| about being awake when others aren't that's preferable.
| geerlingguy wrote:
| Ditto.
| toast0 wrote:
| As a computer person, I really could care less when the
| sunshine is. I prefer my days to be exactly 24 hours. Not 24
| hours +/- 1 hour.
|
| Also, where I live there's a max of 16 hours of sunlight, and
| a min of 8 and a half. In the summer, it doesn't matter what
| the clock says, it's going to be bright when you wake up and
| bright when you go to sleep; so much sun. In the winter, it's
| most likely dark when you get up and dark when you go to bed,
| not enough sun that fiddling with the clocks is going to be
| really helpful anyway. Maybe there's a little more twilight
| in the morning the week after Halloween, and then it's back
| to morning commute in the dark. And it's pretty chilly, so
| while sure, I don't want to bike in the dark, I also don't
| want to bike in the cold, either, even if there is sun.
| FredPret wrote:
| I'll take permanent Zulu time at this point
| bduerst wrote:
| Why not just ditch time zones altogether and have everyone on
| the same clock?
|
| DST was good enough to implement while in an agrarian society,
| so why not the universal clock in a global connected society?
| Just imagine the precision.
|
| </half-joking>
| FL410 wrote:
| This is my dream. It's just a number. But getting the general
| population to wake up at say 2130 and go to sleep at
| 1030...well, good luck.
|
| Also destroys the idea of a 9-to-5 job. Make it start at :30
| if that's better for the longitude.
| TheMerovingian wrote:
| Then I can't joke that "it's 5pm somewhere"...
| Buttons840 wrote:
| "It's always Friday somewhere" is what I like to say.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| I legitimately want a time gradient. Time changes by a few
| minutes everyday at midnight or whenever so that the sun
| always rises at 8. Obviously the hardest solution, but
| everyone who is trying to coordinate with people has a phone
| so they'll be fine and it's not like this is a technological
| impossibility. Seems like having a consistent morning routine
| would be helpful enough to balance the downsides.
| bena wrote:
| Natural time wasn't good enough while in agrarian society.
| Natural time was good enough in an unconnected society. When
| it took days to traverse the country, solar time worked. You
| couldn't really keep pace with the sun. People were
| academically aware of the difference, but it didn't mean
| much. The fact that it was daytime for the king of England
| while it was nighttime for the emperor of Japan didn't
| matter. That trip would take months regardless. So
| coordinating events was expressed in terms where even half-
| day variances didn't matter.
|
| Planes, trains, and automobiles changed all of that. That and
| modern communication. Today, it matters. Now if I need to
| talk to someone in Japan, I have to coordinate things so that
| we're both awake. It matters if it's nighttime to them. Which
| is why we do have a universal clock. It's just expressed
| differently based on your distance from the prime meridian.
|
| But, it's not the expression that matters.
|
| Daylight Savings Time (DST) is a very stupid way to deal with
| a lot of stupid people. Everyone here arguing about making
| people adjust schedules, etc. That's exactly what DST is. But
| instead of your local grocery saying "Yeah, we're opening at
| 5am for these months" we just tell the entire country to
| change their clocks. Which is the same net effect. It's a
| fiction we engage in to pretend we're not inconveniencing
| ourselves. And in some ways, it probably _is_ easier this
| way. It 's controlled, determined, and doesn't require a ton
| of signage to be changed. We already have to set clocks, so
| it all works out.
|
| I think a lot of the arguments about the "extra hour of
| sunlight" are kind of stupid. Because, it's not an hour. It's
| not going to be pitch black regardless. And most of what
| people do after work involves walking from the inside of one
| building to the inside of another. But then again, I wake up
| between 5 and 6 and go to bed between 10 and midnight.
|
| I'd prefer for it to be on Standard time year round because
| if you are X zones from the prime meridian, you should be
| +/-X based on that. But, once again, time zones are really
| stupid because they don't conform to distance from the prime
| meridian. Morocco is +1 UTC despite being completely to the
| west of prime meridian. Most of Greenland is -3 despite
| spanning 5 zones, with one small section actually observing
| UTC despite being in the zone that should be -1 and the
| section that is -1 actually should be observing -2.
|
| And look at the US on this map (https://upload.wikimedia.org/
| wikipedia/commons/8/88/World_Ti...)
|
| Central Time is the most dominant zone going from the
| westernmost point of Texas to most of the Florida panhandle.
| Most of Texas should be -7, not -6. And so on and so forth. I
| bet if you "fixed" this kind of bullshit, more people would
| be in favor of Standard time year round. Or at least less
| opposed to it.
| jnwatson wrote:
| It strongly depends on your latitude and your longitude within
| the time zone.
|
| There were always going to be winners and losers in this
| situation.
| wolrah wrote:
| I agree on permanent standard time, but just because I think
| it's silly to make the words "noon" and "midnight" permanently
| lies. Unless someone is at the edges of an extremely wide time
| zone solar noon and legal noon are generally to be within 30
| minutes of each other. Likewise for midnight. With time zones
| generally set on hour intervals that's as good as it gets.
|
| In a "daylight savings only" world solar noon will instead
| center around 13:00 and solar midnight around 01:00. To me
| that's just absurd.
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| It is.
|
| If "people want more daylight hours after work" and it's
| worth making sweeping disruptive changes to make it happen...
|
| Then just make the workday from 8 to 4 instead of 9 to 5.
|
| No no, instead of making a sane clock and using whatever
| times we want on it, it obviously makes more sense to make a
| messed up clock.
|
| What other measuring implements and scales should we move
| around so the numbers please us better?
|
| Everything is expensive, let's change the way any monetary
| value is written to be -1 based. Henceforth all prices shall
| be written on a scale that starts at -1 instead of 0. If a
| thing cost $4 yesterday, it now costs the same 4 dollars, but
| the price is written as $3. This will give e eryone more
| money! I call it permanent wallet saving prices!
| fuzzer37 wrote:
| Who cares when it's light out. Just stop changing the time.
| vhodges wrote:
| That's not really true... with permanent DST, instead of it
| getting dark on the 21st of December at 4:30pm it will now not
| get dark until 5:30 in the afternoon. (I am not really that far
| north, but that's sunset on the solstice for me)
|
| It's also nice for me personally since my circadian rhythm
| seems to be on 'Summer' time, all the time.
|
| CA, OR, WA and BC were all on the same page wrt to doing this
| so this just removes one of the blocks from making it happen.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| Honestly don't even care at this point, would take either way
| to end this nonsense.
| mbg721 wrote:
| Let's not be hasty; we could use math to accelerate time
| itself. Right? Right??
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| I would also accept making clocks illegal
| mbg721 wrote:
| Then only outlaws could tell time! Brilliant!
| bmj wrote:
| This was my response, too. I have a slight preference for
| standard time, but anything to avoid the twice-a-year switch
| is appreciated.
| mrfusion wrote:
| When it's scarce you want to waste it on the early morning?
| munk-a wrote:
| I too am a night owl - but we need light in the morning more
| than later into the evening. A lot of kids have weird school
| start times which leads the morning commute being a lot more
| distributed than the evening one. Walking to the bus alone on
| dark streets isn't safe for a good chunk of the population.
| FredPret wrote:
| Then school should start much later!
| eMSF wrote:
| Isn't that just a great way to ensure kids have that
| precious sunlight for after-school activities... wait,
| what? Should we do double-DST also?
| collegeburner wrote:
| No it shouldn't. The benefit of forcing the discipline of
| getting up early on children is greater than any health
| impact or inconvenience.
| mbesto wrote:
| Sure, this is true if you don't believe sleep has
| anything to do with health...
|
| You might want to read more about the impact for lack of
| sleep on people's health.
| collegeburner wrote:
| They're fine if they go to bed early. That's the actual
| discipline part, going to bed early and getting up early
| is harder than going to bed late and getting up late. But
| overindulgent parents let kids stay up so they never
| learned good habits and now they're entering the
| workforce and whining about it.
| mbesto wrote:
| > They're fine if they go to bed early.
|
| They're not. This ignores diverging chronotypes. I
| suggest you read up on the science around sleep before
| commenting on whether "they're fine".
|
| https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-
| earth/chronotypes-ev...
|
| https://www.sleepfoundation.org/how-sleep-
| works/chronotypes
|
| https://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Sleep-Unlocking-
| Dreams/dp/1501...
| collegeburner wrote:
| Obviously we can't control this, so I see no evidence
| that "chronotypes" are formed by nature and not by
| nurture. Lots of other stuff we do is influenced by our
| social structure and we could probably fix most teenagers
| and young adults by changing that.
| mbesto wrote:
| > Obviously we can't control this, so I see no evidence
| that "chronotypes" are formed by nature and not by
| nurture.
|
| _Here's why: The Hadza are hunter-gatherers whose
| lifestyle is very similar to that of early humans._
|
| The observations were found in people with lifestyles
| that represent that of early humans. What part of nurture
| would affect those people? They have no concept of a
| clock...
| munk-a wrote:
| As stated above, I'm a night owl myself and tend to have
| a pretty off kilter sleeping schedule. A bunch of things
| have contributed to that - I've got ADD and have been on
| stimulants for most of my life, I worked as a game dev
| for a few years which involved months of overtime where
| we'd often work 12hrs three times a week that played
| absolute hell with my sleeping schedule and still plagues
| me to this day - lastly, I'm light sensitive, I can't
| comfortably see and operate in full daylight.
|
| I can't say for certain where my night-owlish self comes
| from, but it predates taking stimulants and working at a
| game dev company - so maybe it's a side effect of light
| sensitivity or maybe it's a neurological thing... or
| maybe it's just a natural clock thing.
| FredPret wrote:
| There is no value in messing up your sleep pattern.
|
| It's self-discipline theatre.
|
| We used to need early rising when we milked cows and
| hunted at dawn.
|
| But now we primarily need sharp minds and being awake at
| dawn has no special benefit.
|
| I say this as an early riser.
| munk-a wrote:
| That'd be the same benefit that forces sugar and caffeine
| dependencies on adults so they can maintain unnatural
| working schedules and has contributed heavily to the
| obesity epidemic, right?
| collegeburner wrote:
| Rising with the sun is much more natural than getting up
| when it's dark. Most people need time before work, so we
| need the sun to rise a few hours before work. I learned
| some discipline and started getting up early without
| sugar and caffeine, if the young people today would
| rather complain than do the same that's not my problem.
| JadeNB wrote:
| > No it shouldn't. The benefit of forcing the discipline
| of getting up early on children is greater than any
| health impact or inconvenience.
|
| Since tone can often travel poorly across the wire--that
| _is_ sarcasm, right?
| collegeburner wrote:
| No. I don't see what I wrote that comes across as
| sarcastic.
| JadeNB wrote:
| It didn't come across as sarcastic, but I _hoped_ it was.
| As it stands, though I can imagine arguments for or
| against the current school set-up, the idea:
|
| > The benefit of forcing the discipline of getting up
| early on children is greater than any health impact or
| inconvenience.
|
| that a particular arbitrary method of instilling a
| particular arbitrary form of discipline is more important
| than _any_ health impact or _any_ inconvenience is
| horrifying to me, and I hope it doesn 't find many
| adherents.
| FredPret wrote:
| Just send them to kid bootcamp and have them do pushups
| if "forcing discipline" is so important
| collegeburner wrote:
| Also helpful, things like scouts often involve that and
| help boys become men.
|
| Edit: reply is dead so I can't respond, but 'beeboop, do
| you really have a problem with scouts? It's helped form a
| lot of good young men in America.
| [deleted]
| FredPret wrote:
| Boy Scouts: sure.
|
| Getting up early: maybe for some people.
|
| But forcing society to get up at a time that suits almost
| nobody purely _because_ it is hard: no.
| munk-a wrote:
| That's a great idea - as someone with no kids I can see
| absolutely no downside to it.
| LargeWu wrote:
| During the winter in the northern latitudes it's not so
| early.
| CogitoCogito wrote:
| How can you call it "wasted" when it's up to person
| preference. You do understand there are people who prefer
| being awake early instead of late right?
| nemo44x wrote:
| It's not wasted then, it's quite useful. Having kids walk to
| school or to the bus in the dark is ridiculous. In northern
| areas the Sun won't come up until 8:30AM.
|
| Not to mention the extra energy use.
| NovemberWhiskey wrote:
| Right. It's going to be twilight until 8am in NYC for the
| whole of December and January under this proposal.
| btmorex wrote:
| Where I am, it's light out from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. during the
| shortest days of the winter. The thing is a lot of people
| aren't even awake at 7 a.m. and if they are (I am), they're
| doing indoor things like making breakfast/showering/etc. So
| for a lot of people, that hour or two of morning light is
| really just wasted. In the afternoon though, everyone can
| take advantage of the daylight.
| giantg2 wrote:
| "lot of people aren't even awake at 7 a.m."
|
| I wonder what the actual percentages are. It's probably a
| thing where each group can't believe that there's a
| significant number of people in the other.
|
| "that hour or two of morning light is really just
| wasted."
|
| Only for people who wake up late. There could also be
| benefits to aligning one's circadian rhythm to morning
| light.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Go out and watch the highways at 7:30AM. They're packed.
| Most people start work at 8AM. Which means they're
| probably on the road by 7:30 and probably awake by 6:30.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Found this.
|
| https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/overflow-data-
| finds-th...
| nemo44x wrote:
| Thanks! A lot of people here I assume can make their own
| hours more or less, don't have kids, and sleep until 8AM
| or so. But the vast majority of people have to be to a
| workplace by 8AM and wake up at 6AM so they can get
| themselves and their kids ready. They don't want 2.5
| hours of darkness in the morning. Some light before and
| after work is ideal.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Neither option is great. Permanent standard time might be
| better, although I assume blackout curtains will be
| popular with twilight starting around 4am in the summer.
| There's really not going to be light both before and
| after work in the winter for many places. Current
| twilight is about 630am now, so it would be more like 1.5
| hours, not 2.5.
| colordrops wrote:
| This is a problem of schools and other organizations being
| stuck to a particular time/number, rather than using the
| sun to determine when they should start. It's a perfect
| example of confusing the map with the territory.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| Ok, but any situation where you start your day with light
| in the mornings in winter in the North will necessarily
| mean that you end your day with darkness in the evenings.
| Whether we call the time the day starts "7AM" or "8AM"
| doesn't change this.
|
| The fundamental trade-off is: sunlight when you wake up
| and you're going to school/work, or sunlight when you're
| coming back from school/work? Unless you reduce the
| school/work day, this is unavoidable.
| colordrops wrote:
| I don't disagree with you at all, I think you missed my
| point. We should decide when we want people to be in
| light and dark, and not shift numbers on a clock to match
| that.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| Sure, but it's functionally impossible to make this
| choice without changing the clocks. Too many events are
| coordinated - shop opening times have to account for
| other business start times that have to account for
| school start times.
|
| Changing the clock is, realistically, the only way to
| coordinate all the necessary actors.
|
| Otherwise, if schools decided to start at 9AM, they would
| put a huge burden on parents starting work at 9AM, who no
| longer have time to drop their kids off and still make it
| to their workplace.
| nemo44x wrote:
| It's functional and deliberate. Many people have to work
| and commuting, getting the kids ready, getting yourself
| ready means you need to be up early so you can get to
| work by 9AM. Sunlight in the morning is far more useful
| for the functioning world.
| ghostly_s wrote:
| We here in the Northern states are walking to school in the
| dark either way. Give me sunlight in the evening when I can
| use it.
| vidarh wrote:
| I went to school in the dark during winter my entire
| childhood. We played out after dark after getting home too,
| because otherwise there'd be no opportunity to play outside
| during winter. It worked just fine.
| collegeburner wrote:
| Some of us get up at 5 or 6 and hate the effect on our
| mental health of having the first few hours every day being
| dark.
| ddoolin wrote:
| Some of us get off at 5 and hate the effect on our mental
| health of always leaving work in darkness/never having
| any free time in the sunlight.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Most people don't have this problem though. Most
| functional people have to wake early to get everything
| ready for the day. So although there isn't a perfect
| system, for the vast majority of people having daylight
| in the morning would be ideal.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| I don't really "get everything ready for the day". I need
| to take a shower, brush teeth and make coffee. It's your
| problem if you push everything to the morning.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| Do you have a study for this? Or just your own opinion
| and feelings?
|
| While also anecdotal, the responses here seem to favor
| evenings as opposed to mornings.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Most people begin work at 8AM. I know that probably isn't
| the norm on this Website of younger skewing skewing
| people that can make their won hours (that includes me!)
| but it's true for most the country. Also people with kids
| - you need to get them ready and off before you go to
| work. Sunlight is really useful for this.
| collegeburner wrote:
| Computer people probably skew heavily towards night owls
| and young people. They also probably go outside a lot
| less than average so I don't really care what their
| preference is. This is basically an argument of everybody
| wanting their preferred schedule to line up with maximum
| sun.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| Cool, then show a study which shows what everyone's
| preference is, or stop antagonizing people-- whose
| opinions you yourself said you don't care about-- for
| having an opinion which differs from yours.
|
| Preferably both, but the study which shows you are in the
| majority would be a great start.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Here:
|
| https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/overflow-data-
| finds-th...
|
| Most people arrive at work between 7:45AM and 8:00AM.
| Which means they are up at 6-6:30 probably. Having some
| Sun during this time is nice for most people.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| > Having some Sun during this time is nice for most
| people.
|
| Is there a study that actually proves this? That people
| prefer daylight in the mornings when they're an early
| riser? I don't think they're as correlated as you and the
| other person are making it seem to be.
| collegeburner wrote:
| Americans are one of the early riser nations, waking up
| before 7: https://www.vox.com/2016/5/10/11639214/how-
| people-around-the...
|
| There's your study. Having sunlight when people wake up
| is good. And if people pass stupid laws that make my life
| harder for it, I will bitch about it and antagonize them
| until they change them. Just like pretty much everybody
| else on this comment page.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| I asked for a study which shows people would prefer more
| daylight in the mornings rather than evenings. Not
| everyone who gets to work early prefers daylight in the
| mornings. Some would like later evenings but also happen
| to get to work early, my mom being an example of it.
|
| Once again, your opinion is just that, _your opinion_. It
| doesn 't mean everyone else shares it.
| collegeburner wrote:
| Move south? Even in winter, there's some time with light
| left after 5. I guess this is washington catering to
| yankees again. I shouldn't lose light to accomodate some
| northerner.
| giantg2 wrote:
| "Move south?"
|
| This would also address your morning light concerns.
| collegeburner wrote:
| Appreciate the idea, but I'm already at one of the lowest
| latitudes in the continental US.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Then shouldn't twilight be starting around 5:30am-6:15am?
| It seems this would contradict your claim that waking up
| at 5-6 requires you to spend a few _hours_ in darkness
| every morning, right?
| collegeburner wrote:
| Not for most of the year if we move up an hour.
| Especially not during the winter when this would apply.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Your comment was written in the present tense so I
| assumed it was currently happening. It would still be
| less than a few hours though (maybe 1.5).
| vkou wrote:
| > Having kids walk to school or to the bus in the dark is
| ridiculous.
|
| Correct, which is why the _correct_ solution is to not have
| school start so bloody early.
|
| For everyone not between the ages of 6 and 18, an extra
| hour of daylight in the evening is far more useful.
| seanalltogether wrote:
| If school starting time get shifted, work starting times
| get shifted, and then you're right back where you
| started.
| grey-area wrote:
| Except without everyone adjusting clocks and all the
| confusion that goes with it.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Parents have to get their kids off to school before work.
| Most people wake up by 7:30AM (you may not but the rest
| of the functioning world does) and need the Sun in the
| morning.
|
| It also saves energy.
| ddoolin wrote:
| I was going to the bus stop in the dark even with DST and I
| didn't even live in the north. First bell was generally 8
| AM and you needed to be at the bus stop well before then
| obviously, especially if you lived in the earliest parts of
| the route.
| [deleted]
| sophacles wrote:
| > Having kids walk to school or to the bus...
|
| Will get family services called on you. I don't think this
| affects more than a handful of people in 2022.
| JoyfulTurkey wrote:
| Huh, I lived in a suburb of Cleveland a few years back
| where everyone still was walking. Thought it would be
| more common in densely populated areas. Guess not.
|
| https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-lakewood-ohio-
| walking-...
| nostrademons wrote:
| Common in my Bay Area suburb. People will even sell their
| houses when their kids get to elementary school and pay
| half a million more to move a mile away, so that they
| don't have to deal with drop-off.
| giantg2 wrote:
| If you're one of those people, the effects can be brutal.
| CogitoCogito wrote:
| What 3rd world country do you live in where kids can't
| walk to school or the bus?
| briffle wrote:
| My kids enjoy playing outside after school with the other
| kids on our street after school. I understand your point,
| but my family wants the opposite.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| > Having kids walk to school or to the bus in the dark is
| ridiculous.
|
| I agree. The solution to that is not to have kids go to
| school stupid early. Studies show that kids prefer to learn
| later in the day.
|
| Besides, after school activities continue into the dark in
| the winter. Better to let the kids be able to be
| outside/playing/doing band/whatever in the evening instead
| of stuck inside because it's dark with their free time.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Studies also show that parents have to get the kids
| dropped off before work. And 8:30 is stupid early.
| spiznnx wrote:
| It's a shame that public transit can't take kids to
| school in America. There would be a lot of economic
| benefit.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| Everyplace in America (except apparently California, and
| a couple major cities like NYC where there is areal
| public transit) there are school buses.
| spiznnx wrote:
| Genuinely curious, why do working parents drop off their
| kids if there is a school bus?
| giantg2 wrote:
| I know a kid in middle school that wasn't allowed to
| literally walk across the street to school (wasn't even a
| busy road). The bus would pick up the kid, move about 10
| feet, and turn into the parking lot.
|
| Supervision and legalities related to it can be
| boarderline oppressive in some places.
| colordrops wrote:
| 8:30 is a number. We should base schedules around when
| the sun is out rather than a number.
| asdfasgasdgasdg wrote:
| Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of this shift? If we are
| trying to give workers more daylight in the evening, then
| we shift the work and school day later, the impact would
| be nil.
|
| Fundamentally, for this change to satisfy its mandate,
| the kids _have_ to to to school in the dark during the
| winter.
|
| Fwiw, I think it's a fine thing. I always found it very
| romantic to go to school when it is still dark when I was
| young.
| colordrops wrote:
| No, we should get rid of any shift of the clock, and then
| set schedules for work and school based on the sun. The
| start and end times of school and work should change
| during certain parts of the year if there is concern
| about daylight.
| asdfasgasdgasdg wrote:
| I understand you feel that way, but that's more or less
| the purpose and effect of the daylight savings time
| shift. That's the status quo. It's exactly what many of
| us want to see eliminated.
| colordrops wrote:
| No, changing school and work times only changes school
| and work systems. Changing the entire clock time adds
| endless complexity to computer systems and society as a
| whole. It's like global vs local vars, the scope is too
| much.
| asdfasgasdgasdg wrote:
| Okay, but most folks who want to change to permanent DST
| don't care about the effect on computer systems. They
| want more light in the evening.
|
| Your proposal would not satisfy the primary goal of the
| proponents of this policy. It would also still require
| one or more coordinated, discrete shifts in the schedules
| of schools and workplaces, which would likely be more
| complicated for computers and other systems than the
| status quo.
| colordrops wrote:
| We shouldn't satisfy their goal. It's not their business
| to impose this on all of society. We should stick to a
| standard time and let individuals or groups do whatever
| they need at the local level. Most other countries do
| this and they are fine. YAGNI. No need for additional
| complexity.
| asdfasgasdgasdg wrote:
| The status quo is more complex than what the senate has
| voted for (it requires transitions, the shifting of
| schedules twice a year, etc.). The new approach is less
| complex.
|
| The assertion that the time is "not someone's business"
| is incorrect. The time is everyone's business. We are
| going to stick to a standard time after this policy --
| it's going to be daylight savings time all the time,
| although we will probably stop calling it that after we
| all get used to the policy. Individuals or groups will be
| equally free to adopt their own schedules both before and
| after this policy change -- this policy is not a change
| on that front.
| colordrops wrote:
| > The assertion that the time is "not someone's business"
| is incorrect. The time is everyone's business.
|
| You misunderstood my meaning. I understand that everyone
| is concerned and affected by time. What I meant is it's
| not in their purview to push such things on the public.
|
| Once again, the rest of the world works perfectly fine
| without the added complexity, so it should be proven with
| strong evidence rather than vague arguments that the
| added complexity is worth it. The rest of the world works
| perfectly well without DST.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| Each school and business choosing a different time to
| change (and half of them choosing not to at all) is far
| more complex than changing which timezone a specific
| lat/long translates to twice a year.
|
| Now, I favor never changing the time of each place and
| keeping on daylight time, but that's just me.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Why is 8:30 "stupid early"? It doesn't seem bad at all to
| me. The majority of people have to be at work before then
| too.
|
| https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/overflow-data-
| finds-th...
| HWR_14 wrote:
| Because schools don't pick up kids at 8:30. If you look
| up that stupid article whining about _kids waiting for
| the bus in the dark_ (which is a non-issue), they were
| waiting at _7 am_
| giantg2 wrote:
| It should at least be twilight at 7am, not fully dark.
| And that's using a high latidute (US) example of
| Massachusetts.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| It was using NYC, not Massachusetts. And why shouldn't it
| be dark at 7am?
| giantg2 wrote:
| I'm not sure I understand the question. On a side note,
| it's never really dark in NYC (unless a blackout
| happens).
| nemo44x wrote:
| Typo - was saying it isn't stupid early.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Oh, ok.
| CWuestefeld wrote:
| Virtually no parents _have to_ get the kids dropped off
| at all. The vast majority, afaik, can rely on a school
| bus to pick them up.
|
| And IMHO, beyond elementary school (and perhaps earlier)
| there's no reason most kids can't be unsupervised briefly
| before letting themselves out to get to the bus, or after
| being dropped off by the bus.
|
| See the whole thing about free range kids, helicopter
| parents, and so forth.
| geerlingguy wrote:
| Agreed; there are too many school districts that start at
| 8 or even 7(!) AM.
| giantg2 wrote:
| What's wrong with starting at 8? Starting much later than
| that doesn't leave a lot of time nor night for other
| activities. And really just pushes back the rest of their
| schedule and bed time.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Growing kids need their sleep
|
| https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/child-sleep-
| zzzs/202...
| giantg2 wrote:
| Care to add something to that? That link doesn't have any
| of the data or methods used. It also completely ignores
| the realities of childcare, normal work schedules, etc as
| it only evaluated one angle (systems thinking analysis
| would be preferable) and did not look into the
| feasibility of it or n-order effects.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| There's more links elsewhere
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30690965
| giantg2 wrote:
| Again, anything that looks at this from a systems
| thinking standpoint? It's just focused on sleep and they
| don't take a n-order impacts into consideration like
| burden on parents, loss of job/income, etc. Not to
| mention some of the links are done by an industry group -
| the Nation Sleep Foundation (potential for bias). Some of
| the articles are pure anecdotes and opinions too.
|
| It says _as late as_ 11pm. Another one says some of the
| later time can be explained by _other things_ like light
| exposure. This seems to indicate that a 10pm bed time
| could be attainabke with a wake up time of 6 or 6:30
| providing adequate sleep. Some of the studies show that
| even on weekends without the waking constraint teens are
| getting 7-8 hours or less. It 's also indicative of weak
| influence when we see the remote learning being called a
| disaster yet these articles are touting the benefits of
| the extra sleep associated with them - where is the
| mitigating impact then?
|
| Also from the articles, "As I often phrase it, multilevel
| interventions are needed,". Why not start with the less
| intrusive interventions? Not all kids require a later
| start time, and could even be hurt by it. A later start
| time would have hurt me, for example. We need to make
| sure we aren't hurting some people in an effort to help
| others.
|
| Perhaps the strongest evidence is that adults are not
| affected by the hormone related shift and yet they too do
| not get the recommended sleep. This points to the idea
| that environment and habit could be factors.
|
| So far I see no absolute evidence of societal net
| benefit, largely because the studies ignore n-order
| impacts and fail to fully explore alternative
| explanations and remedies.
|
| Don't forget, a lot of this is psychology and is just
| towing the line. They don't even know why bi-phasic sleep
| disappeared. I would love to see the data for adolescent
| sleep times and duration for the past 150 years, but it
| appears the studies completely ignore this. For knowing
| so little, they certainly are pushing hard for a specific
| change (a change that some of the studies don't believe
| will fix the issues, such as achievement gap, hormone
| altering light exposures, etc).
| [deleted]
| km3r wrote:
| This would give us an "extra hour" of sunlight in the evening
| during the winter.
| runarberg wrote:
| No, it is moved from the morning. In return for this "extra
| hour" you have to pay with waking up in the dark and doing
| your morning commute in the dark.
|
| I grew up in a permanent DST and I don't have fond memories
| of it. Over there public health officials are actually
| advocating to moving back to standard time because teenagers
| in particular are sleep deprived. Going to bed earlier is not
| a realistic option as proven by experience.
| rory wrote:
| > doing your morning commute in the dark
|
| This really depends on location within the timezone. And
| some places, e.g. Michigan, are simply in the wrong time
| zone.
| runarberg wrote:
| Indeed, however public policy makers must be aware of how
| this affects majority of people. Having natural noon
| between 12:00 at the eastern edge of a time zone to 13:00
| on the western edge, is much preferable to 13:00 (east)
| and 14:00 (west). Even though the effects are the same
| for east on permanent DST and west on standard. They are
| very much detrimental--as in increases risk of sleep
| deprivation--for west on DST and public policy makers
| must take that into account when making decision.
| coolso wrote:
| > In return for this "extra hour" you have to pay with
| waking up in the dark and doing your morning commute in the
| dark
|
| Unless you're a senior citizen who's retired and doesn't
| like late nights, I don't get why for most people, darkness
| wouldn't be preferred for those "nothing" activities, so an
| extra hour of light can then be enjoyed after they get home
| from work/school/whatever. Otherwise, yeah, you're enjoying
| the light in the morning... from the inside of a car... on
| your way to a day of obligations where you're stuck inside
| usually doing things you have to do rather than things you
| want to do.
|
| I think most people would rather have that extra hour of
| light for after they get home from work/school/whatever, so
| they can actually enjoy the outdoors a bit when they get
| home.
|
| I always hated the feeling from late fall until early
| spring of being excited to be done school/work... only to
| get home and it be dark so basically the only thing I can
| do is walk inside and stay in there until the next day.
| runarberg wrote:
| > I think most people would rather have that extra hour
| of light for after they get home from
| work/school/whatever, so they can actually enjoy the
| outdoors a bit when they get home.
|
| People thank that they do, but their brain disagrees.
| There are numerous other posts on this thread indicating
| that public health experts agree with peoples brains in
| that the extra hour in the after noon is not worth the
| early rise.
|
| > I always hated the feeling from late fall until early
| spring of being excited to be done school/work... only to
| get home and it be dark so basically the only thing I can
| do is walk inside and stay in there until the next day.
|
| So here we have a problem, it can be solved by changing
| the clock to give you an extra evening hour at the cost
| of an early rise which leads the sleep deprivation for a
| large group of people. However it can also be solved in a
| number of different ways. Labour laws can be passed which
| mandates shorter working hours and/or winter vacation.
| Your local government can invest in more public spaces
| with good lighting and commercial activities close to
| peoples work places so that you can e.g. jump to a bar
| with your classmates/colleagues for the last hour of sun
| during mid-winter. Etc. Moving the clock seems like the
| radical option here, especially given the detrimental
| public health effects.
| 8ytecoder wrote:
| It also gets worse in the western edges of each time zone.
|
| https://www.vox.com/science-and-
| health/2020/3/6/21167826/day...
| sokoloff wrote:
| People who live on the eastern extreme of a timezone likely
| feel quite different than those who live on the western
| extreme.
|
| Boston, MA and Marquette, MI are in the same time zone.
| Boston's sunset today is 6:51 PM. Marquette's sunset today is
| 7:55 PM. It's no surprise that residents of each of those
| cities would have a different view as to "what should we do
| about DST?"
| clairity wrote:
| for that, time zone boundaries should be straight lines
| rather than following arbitrary political whims. then you'd
| only have a half hour variance at most.
| sokoloff wrote:
| It seems extremely impractical for a city to be in two time
| zones.
| mark-r wrote:
| And then you'd need to know your exact longitude to know
| what time it is - doesn't sound workable to me. Although it
| would make life easier for GPS makers.
| jacobmartin wrote:
| I agree. I live in Boston and winters are oppressive in large
| part because sunset is at 4:30 (or earlier). For Boston at
| least, I strongly feel we should just move to Atlantic time
| and just bite the bullet on the difficulties this causes with
| teams elsewhere. This proposal effectively does that for
| Boston, but I understand why the people of Marquette would be
| opposed.
| ghaff wrote:
| Yes but you're still only 3 timezones away from California
| if the whole country switches--while potentially being
| further away from Europe in winter. (I think :-))
| jjav wrote:
| > The winter is when daylight is scarce, so that's what should
| be optimized for.
|
| That is what this is doing. Make that scarce daylight available
| after work, when it is useful.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| Standard time in June means the sun comes up at 4AM. I prefer
| DST, but either way let's just stop fiddling with the clocks.
| Maybe we could split the difference and just fall back 1/2 an
| hour this Fall? (and then just hold it there)
| TomVDB wrote:
| Mornings are for work. Evenings are for fun.
|
| DST is just what's needed.
| bilalq wrote:
| Which is what this effectively does. We can get sunset at 5pm
| instead of 4pm in the winter in Seattle now.
|
| Really, the choice is a tradeoff between earlier sunrises or
| later sunsets.
| TheCoelacanth wrote:
| An hour of sunlight from 4-5 is useless. Most people will
| still be working. The tradeoff is that most people have to
| wake up and go to school/work in complete darkness during the
| winter.
| tempestn wrote:
| It's only in the very dead of winter that the extra hour is
| from 4-5 (which still means it's lighter at 5 than it would
| have been). In the shoulder seasons you definitely get more
| light after work.
| heleninboodler wrote:
| Yeah, and we're going to get sunrise at 9am in the winter.
| Good lord, that is going to piss people off.
| hinkley wrote:
| The weirdest thing about DST is that from what I recall of
| history, it came about at a time when unions were pretty
| strong. I don't know why the unions didn't just insist on
| getting off an hour early at a certain time of year.
|
| Though it's possible they were the ones paying lobbyists to get
| it through Congress in the first place. Sometimes paying
| someone else to do your dirties is the most efficient way.
| thehappypm wrote:
| Oh my, such a hard disagreement! In my time zone (Eastern), DST
| means sunset is at its earliest around 5:30PM, compared to
| 4:30PM in the hell that is Standard Time. I would so rather
| have a sliver of daylight at the end of my day!
|
| Sunrise at its latest would still be reasonable, around 8:00am,
| with plenty of predawn lights for kids and early risers.
| standardUser wrote:
| Personally, I have wanted more daylight in the evening hundreds
| of times in my life, at least. It's the obvious result of
| average workdays ending at 5 or 6 (or later) and our "free
| time" being restricted to a sliver of daylight much of the
| year. But how often have I wanted more daylight in the morning?
| Basically never.
| collegeburner wrote:
| Umm no, I get up early and have free time before work and
| want light then. It's a great time to be outside because it's
| the coolest part of the day. Yet again society accomodates
| the people who can't be bothered to go to bed on time.
| standardUser wrote:
| Please explain to us, what precisely is "on time" and why
| do you think that such a time is universal for all people,
| regardless of background or circumstance? The more detail
| the better please.
| collegeburner wrote:
| "On time" is obviously whatever time somebody has to go
| to bed to get enough sleep and get up in time for their
| schedule.
|
| People don't like going to bed on time because they don't
| like discipline.
|
| So instead of learning some, like their parents should
| have taught them, they complain and demand the schedule
| move because it's "too hard".
|
| When I started working I had to be there at 7 AM every
| day no matter what so I got disciplined and grew up.
|
| Today's new hires want to come in late all the time and
| complain that they can't get enough sleep when they
| should be going to bed earlier instead of going out
| drinking on a weekday or staying up playing fort nite or
| whatever.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| Spend less time complaining about those whippersnappers
| being on your lawn and listening to rock and roll. Maybe
| you too could be fun and enjoy life.
|
| Is it enjoyable for most people to get up and be at work
| at 7? No. Why tolerate it just because parents generation
| tolerated it? Old people also tolerated polio. People
| aren't more productive at one time versus another,
| especially if they're being forced against their will to
| lose sleep for no good reason.
|
| There is nothing wrong with starting work later-
| especially if you're still getting all your work done
| during the day anyways. Young people who roll into work
| at a healthy time probably outperform all the curmudgeony
| old people who are miserable anyways. I start work at
| 10am and get more done than coworkers who start at 7.
| It's just simply false to assume earlier is better. I
| perform way better now than when I arrived early.
|
| We should be encouraging people to care less about their
| work and more about having fun. Work is not the purpose
| for your life. There is nothing wrong with drinking with
| friends on a weekday or playing Fortnite in the evening.
| collegeburner wrote:
| You could try being less snarky, it's not necessary.
| Despite what you clearly think, I'm a young person. I
| think your perception is biased by working in tech (which
| most people on this site do) with lots of young people.
| Americans get up before 7:
| https://www.vox.com/2016/5/10/11639214/how-people-around-
| the...
|
| So, we should make sunrise closer to that, not further
| away. My above point stands: young people want to move
| things later because they like staying out, staying up,
| etc. They learn to curb this as they get older, but this
| generation is trying to move time instead of growing up.
| Peter pan can't stay out all night playing when he has a
| real job in the morning.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| 1. I like the snarky tone. I feel like it goes reasonably
| well against condensation. That whole Peter Pan quip is
| BS virtue signaling against nothing.
|
| 2. It's a public forum. Lots of people hold beliefs that
| rising early is somehow "better" or less lazy or
| something. That belief is more strongly held amongst old
| people when the 20th century culture pushed it on people.
| It's as much for you as for others.
|
| 3. Do people get up before 7 because they want to or have
| to. My point still stands that we shouldn't force a
| schedule on people (my argument falls a bit for service
| workers I admit where time open is actually impactful on
| revenue).
|
| 3. No young people are not trying to move this because
| they don't want to learn. There is a natural distribution
| in times when people naturally rise. I happen to
| naturally rise around 9, so i like to start work at 10,
| and thats at the far end, so i've become a strong
| advocate for this. It's not natural to put everyone on
| the same schedule when there is no valid reason. This
| generation is the first one to truly call BS on applying
| farmers' schedules to all of society. Why must software
| engineers start work at 7 and not 9? There is no good
| reason. It does not improve productivity, it is not
| required for business.
|
| 4. Why is your way the right way? What about if 10am was
| the natural start of work time? All those 7am'ers are
| just trying to end work at 3 so they don't have to work
| till EOD. SMH they get so sleepy they can't do the rest
| of their life past 5pm. They need to learn to drink a
| coffee and keep working instead of being lazy and going
| to bed before society is done with the day.
|
| 5. This bill is sponsored by Rubio, who i don't think is
| a fan fav among the young, so idt it should be seen as
| "this generation" passing the bill. Besides, similar
| bills have been proposed for generations.
| Uehreka wrote:
| When I was in college I scheduled my classes late so I
| could sleep in. When I graduated college I moved abroad
| and taught at a school where I had to show up at 7AM
| showered in a shirt and tie. It kind of sucked, but I was
| able to make it work. When I got back stateside, I
| started a software job where I didn't need to be in the
| office until 10 and only had to commute 4 days a week. It
| was awesome.
|
| Sample size of one sure, but I had no problem developing
| discipline when I needed it, and was happy to discard it
| and stay up later when I didn't. I don't know what you're
| so worked up about here.
| standardUser wrote:
| OK boomer, thanks for the info. For a moment there I
| though you might have something novel to say. Enjoy
| grinding all these axes until your blessed retirement.
| collegeburner wrote:
| > Don't be snarky.
|
| > Please don't post shallow dismissals.
|
| HN Guidelines,
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
|
| Who said I'm a Boomer, anyway? I don't see the problem
| with pointing out that a reasonable wake up time helps
| push people to get over their perpetual adolescence.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Boomer is a state of mind, and "reasonable" wake up time
| is arbitrary and varies case by case. If people have
| responsibilities that allow for waking up later in the
| morning then it is hardly adolescent to be able to wake
| up later, irrespective of when the sun rises.
| [deleted]
| vineyardmike wrote:
| Oh look another person who goes to bed too early and rises
| before the sun. Yet again they want society to cater to
| them even though the rest of society prefers to rise later
| in the day.
|
| I bet they'll tell everyone else they're lazy like my 95yo
| grandfather did when he woke up at 4am.
|
| /s
|
| Can't we all just accept that everyone's body is different
| and has different preferences. There is a measured Gaussian
| distribution in rise times for humans like everything else.
| collegeburner wrote:
| That's unreasonably snarky. I didn't much like waking up
| at 4 AM when I had to.
|
| The point is, it's better to rise _with_ the sun and
| still have time to get ready before work. Americans get
| up before 7 AM:
| https://www.vox.com/2016/5/10/11639214/how-people-around-
| the...
|
| We should line up sunrise closer to the center of that
| distribution. This law does the opposite.
| yowlingcat wrote:
| Very interesting way of expressing your preference.
|
| Personally, I'm agnostic. I prefer to be an early riser
| most days and it does suit me better on the whole. But it's
| also great in the summer to have more time in the evening
| to socialize with my friends who work a 9-5 and are only
| available on weekdays after work.
|
| Do you have any friends that you would like to socialize
| with in the summer on weekdays after work?
| collegeburner wrote:
| Yes sometimes we'll meet for dinner. But more often we
| meet for breakfast before work. This is actually very
| common in most of the country outside of the tech job
| bubble that makes up most of this site.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Then meet them for dinner instead of breakfast, when
| you're more rushed because there is work after your meal
| anyway. Or simply meet them for lunch instead, as most
| people in the country do.
| sorenjan wrote:
| Or the people that prefer to have a contiguous time span
| for their leisure, instead of a couple of hours in the
| morning and then a few more in the evening.
| bbarnett wrote:
| Yet who has thought of the corn, the oat, the wheat in
| all of this? Who has thought of the oak and maple, the
| petal of the rose, the daisy?
|
| None, I suppose, and so with less light available to
| them, the american farmer will once again lose ground to
| competitors in other, more sane nations.
| AlexAndScripts wrote:
| Is this a poorly executed joke?
| bkirkbri wrote:
| I thought it was a well executed joke myself.
| vgel wrote:
| Thanks to the Ent lobby, an amendment has been proposed
| to this bill to keep changing the clocks specifically
| within the bounds of farms, orchards, timberlands, and
| national parks. We must keep American foliage the
| greatest on Earth.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| Corn, oat, wheat, oak, maple, rose, and daisies do not
| sleep, nor do they have the concept of daylight savings
| or standard time. They will get literally the same amount
| of light as before, and farmers generally will work from
| sunrise regardless if their clocks say 5AM or 6AM.
| jnwatson wrote:
| Whoosh.
| pkulak wrote:
| How often do you "want" more fiber? It's about being healthy.
| Waking up in the dark for 3 straight months isn't as healthy
| as the alternative.
| standardUser wrote:
| People are obviously adaptable to many different daylight
| schemes. But far more of society is up and running in the
| mid-evenings than the early mornings on any given day.
| Let's put the daylight where it can be the most use to the
| most people.
| JeremyNT wrote:
| It's easy enough to replicate the "wake up in the light"
| experience in your bedroom with a sunrise alarm clock.
|
| It's not as easy to replicate the sunshine when you want to
| do an outdoor activity after work...
| pkulak wrote:
| > It's easy enough to replicate the "wake up in the
| light" experience in your bedroom
|
| No, it absolutely is not. Light you get from some Walmart
| alarm clock is the wrong temperature, the wrong CRI, and
| about 1/1000th of the right intensity.
|
| You can replicate it for the low-to-mid 5 digits:
| https://www.coelux.com/
| verall wrote:
| That's because people don't actually want a portable sun
| (say, 10-20k lum D65) in their room. If you do want one,
| you can buy one for less than $100, and plug it into a
| $10 timer.
|
| You're buying into their marketing pretty hard...
| humanlion87 wrote:
| Personally, I have wanted the exact opposite. I need more
| light in the morning so that I can go for a run and enjoy the
| cool, fresh air.
| untake wrote:
| True.
| lazide wrote:
| Don't worry, employers will move things back to be
| inconvenient again soon.
| hinkley wrote:
| Now that I work closely with a team in India, my morning
| meeting doesn't care about DST.
|
| But at least now it's only slightly early instead of
| when/before I would normally get up.
| lazide wrote:
| Yeah, that always messed me up too. So silver linings I
| guess?
| hinkley wrote:
| Literally #1 on my list of reasons to get a new job by
| November is I'm not going to that meeting ever again.
|
| There's the objective set of reasons to do something, and
| then there's the list your emotional brain actually pays
| attention to, and this is #1 on that list. Most of our
| weird behaviors and a lot of our difficult conversations
| are caused by trying to stuff an emotional decision into
| a business suit.
| Uehreka wrote:
| I don't think they will. There's no incentive for them to
| do so, and there's absolutely monolithic inertia behind
| "nine-to-five" in most places on Earth.
| lazide wrote:
| Ah, there are plenty of employers and industries that
| don't have that luxury though. Also, even my 9-5 was not
| so 9-5 a decent chunk of the time when I was working big
| corp due to having to work with folks in other countries.
| It does remove one variable though.
| mark-r wrote:
| That's regional though. Where I live, work generally
| starts at 8.
| hinkley wrote:
| As a late riser, I have never had a good time getting up
| before the sun. If you woke me before sunup and asked how
| much I would pay you to let me sleep until dawn, I would
| probably try to sell you sell my own mother for the
| privilege, if it were permanent.
| dcdc123 wrote:
| I think the idea was to give an hour of light later in the day
| for when people are off work.
| [deleted]
| tempestn wrote:
| We're already on DST 2/3 of the year; it's considerably less
| disruptive to keep it year-round than to switch to all standard
| time. Not to mention many of us find DST strictly superior
| given the common work/life schedule. In the summer, standard
| time would mean it gets light even more ridiculously early than
| it already does, so you just lose useful light, rather than
| having it to enjoy summer evenings outdoors. In the winter it's
| certainly more of a preference thing, but there are plenty of
| us who would sacrifice light in the morning for more light
| after work.
| paxys wrote:
| The amount of sunlight stays the same. The question is whether
| you want more of it in the morning or the evening, and there
| isn't a "correct" answer there. Going by general public
| sentiment I'm willing to bet it's more towards the latter
| though.
| runarberg wrote:
| I think it is wrong to ask the general public what they
| prefer. Most people honestly don't know, and if they do, they
| might prefer the option which is more harmful for their
| health without realizing it.
|
| Much better is to ask public health experts. Which will look
| at sleeping patters, at risk groups, etc. I'm particularly
| worried about teenagers which will be forced to wake up
| before sunrise and are unlikely to go to sleep earlier under
| social pressure (including from their own family).
| moralestapia wrote:
| >The amount of sunlight stays the same.
|
| Lol, no.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight_sun
|
| I know that's an extreme, but you get the idea.
| shkkmo wrote:
| I grew up in the land of the midnight sun. I am not sure
| what point you are trying to make. People really don't
| complain much about it being light until late. It is much
| more common to hear people complain about the sun setting
| sooner as fall approaches.
| lanternfish wrote:
| The above poster is referring to the amount of sunlight
| between a savings and standard time basis - not between
| summer and winter.
| asdfasgasdgasdg wrote:
| You've misread the parent. They are saying that on a given
| day, the number of hours of sunlight is the same whether
| it's daylight or standard time. The only thing that changes
| is when in the day the sun is shining.
| moralestapia wrote:
| Oh, I see.
|
| TheCoelacanth was arguing about summer vs. winter so
| that's the thread I was following in my mind.
| technofiend wrote:
| I believe he meant you get _n_ hours of sunlight in the
| summer, regardless of whether you arbitrarily decide to
| call it 6 AM or 7 AM when the sun rises.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| The amount of sunlight stays the same, but you have to
| rename the phenomenon to "1am sun" or whatever
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _The question is whether you want more of it in the morning
| or the evening, and there isn 't a "correct" answer there._
|
| The folks at various chronobiology and sleep study societies
| say otherwise:
|
| > _The choice of DST is political and therefore can be
| changed. If we want to improve human health, we should not
| fight against our body clock, and therefore, we should
| abandon DST and return to Standard Time (which is when the
| sun clock time most closely matches the social clock time)
| throughout the year. This solution would fix both the acute
| and the chronic problems of DST. We therefore strongly
| support removing DST changes or removing permanent DST and
| having governing organizations choose permanent Standard Time
| for the health and safety of their citizens._
|
| * https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0748730419854
| 1...
|
| Lots of footnotes here in this paper if you want to get into
| the details:
|
| * https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.009
| 4...
|
| The position papers of various societies:
|
| * https://srbr.org/advocacy/daylight-saving-time-presskit/
|
| * https://old.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/dq2nv3/
|
| * http://www.chronobiology.ch/wp-
| content/uploads/2019/08/JBR-D...
|
| * https://www.chronobiology.com/impact-daylight-saving-time-
| ci...
|
| * https://esrs.eu/wp-
| content/uploads/2019/03/To_the_EU_Commiss...
|
| There seems to be a consensus on what's "best", and it
| doesn't appear to by Year-round DST.
|
| I'd be curious to know what hearings, if any, were held on
| this topic, and with whom.
| Beltalowda wrote:
| The entire idea of DST is that it provides a nice balance
| between the two: still reasonably light in the morning in
| winter, and move some of the very early morning sunlight to
| the evening in summer.
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| That is the idea, but such an idea is not objectively
| correct.
| [deleted]
| ghaff wrote:
| It also varies by where you're located in a time zone and
| what latitude you are at. Somewhere like Boston, you
| basically have dark at both ends of the day in the winter no
| matter how you move things around. And it's also pretty light
| in the morning and light until quite far into the evening in
| winter. Boston should really be in Atlantic time based on
| longitude but it doesn't make sense to be in a different time
| zone than the rest of the East Coast.
| moralestapia wrote:
| (Congrats. paxys, you got me to reply twice to you :))
|
| >and there isn't a "correct" answer there
|
| For me, personally, I like the concept that noon is when the
| sun is at it highest point or closest, I can adjust
| everything else around that.
| adolph wrote:
| "Or closest" is a mildly significant caveat.
|
| _The real Sun and the imaginary "mean Sun," from which
| mean solar time is measured, may be as much as 16 minutes
| apart because during the course of the year the apparent
| motion of the real Sun against the background of the stars
| (the ecliptic) alternately slows down and speeds up._
|
| https://www.britannica.com/science/solar-time
|
| _The east-west component [of the analemma] results from
| the nonuniform rate of change of the Sun 's right
| ascension, governed by combined effects of Earth's axial
| tilt and orbital eccentricity._
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analemma
| collegeburner wrote:
| I actually like this as a compromise. Otherwise it's just a
| matter of how many people prefer leisure at what time.
| paxys wrote:
| Considering how wide time zones are that is pretty much
| impossible to standardize on regardless of which clock you
| pick. Then it becomes a question of which cities you are
| going to prioritize, and I doubt any politician wants to
| start that conversation.
|
| Plus, "solar noon" itself shifts by ~20 mins throughout the
| year due to the Earth's orbit.
| ginko wrote:
| >Considering how wide time zones are that is pretty much
| impossible to standardize on regardless of which clock
| you pick
|
| With standard time you will still have the rough center
| of the time zone match with solar time with about +/- 30
| minutes give or take on the sides. With DST it may well
| happen that no part of the timezone actually matches
| solar time since everything is essentially shifted 1 hour
| to the East.
| mindcrime wrote:
| An awful lot of us can't "just adjust around that" though.
| A significant portion of the population work jobs with
| relatively fixed hours, working something like 8-5, 9-6,
| etc. So if you don't get off work until, say, 6, and then
| have an hour commute home, DST is _really_ nice to allow
| for some sunlight for outdoor activities after work.
|
| Sure, it's easy to say "just leave work an hour earlier"
| and _some_ people have that flexibility. But far from most,
| I 'd wager.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > then have an hour commute home
|
| That's where the problem is.
| hinkley wrote:
| I would like to see this change in conjunction to moving
| to a 32-35 hour work week. As a developer it is still
| often socially difficult to take time during the day to
| do errands or go to appointments, and so I am constantly
| reminded of the times when I simply could not take the
| time off.
|
| I'd love to live in a world where bankers and dentists
| and optometrists all kept different hours, so the bankers
| could get glasses, and the dentists take out loans,
| without having to drop everything to do it. With smart
| phones this is somewhat more tenable. I don't need to
| memorize when the dentist is open, so there is less
| immediate value in reducing the world to a small set of
| common numbers.
| acegopher wrote:
| > For me, personally, I like the concept that noon is when
| the sun is at it highest point or closest, I can adjust
| everything else around that
|
| Then you must not like time zones, as that is true only in
| one particular sliver of a time zone. You want true local
| time, like before the railroads time.
| moralestapia wrote:
| Actually, time zones are the best approach we have now to
| "noon is when the sun is up".
| [deleted]
| chapium wrote:
| I could think of something worse than both :)
| [deleted]
| soheil wrote:
| If you ask me we need more light in summer and winter, damn the
| tyranny of time.
| freedrock87 wrote:
| This isn't going to effect the summer months. Only winter when
| we would revert to standard time. If am getting up at 7am its
| going to be dark I don't care if it dark for another hour . I
| would prefer more day light after work
| jcadam wrote:
| No shortage of sunlight up here in Alaska during the summer,
| so this will make little difference then. I will actually
| appreciate having an extra hour in the afternoon during the
| winter. More opportunities for some cross-country skiing
| after work :)
| [deleted]
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Woo hoo! This is going to be really great for Seattle, where the
| sun sets at 4PM in the winter.
|
| Washington state has already voted on this change locally, and
| are only waiting for congressional approval at the federal level.
| equivocates wrote:
| Is daylight savings time such a hassle? All my clocks update
| themselves. I hardly ever notice the difference.
| windows2020 wrote:
| Wondering if you have a nice microwave, stove, coffee machine
| and thermostat or none at all.
| xattt wrote:
| Looking forward to the boost of crop production with the extra
| hour of daylight!
| hbarka wrote:
| When do we see this take permanent effect in California? It feels
| like this has been decided many months ago but why is the
| implementation in limbo?
| runlevel1 wrote:
| Federal law currently allows states to opt out of DST and use
| permanent Standard Time. It doesn't permit states to use
| permanent DST.
|
| This is a byproduct of the Uniform Time Act.[^1]
|
| CA's Prop 7 was contingent on federal authorization. CO, WA,
| OR, and many other states are all waiting on that too.[^2]
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Time_Act [2]:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_time_observation_in_...
|
| EDIT: Fixed 2nd link.
| hbarka wrote:
| Whether it's PST or PDT, let's pick one please and get it
| done. When do you see it taking effect?
| runlevel1 wrote:
| The House still needs to pass it and President needs to
| sign it, but based on another comment it sounds like
| they're targeting November 2023. That would mean the last
| clock change would be March 2023.
| zentiggr wrote:
| Let's end the debate, assuage the farmers who opposed time
| changes from the beginning, and honor every other timekeeping
| system in our earlier history:
|
| From now on, sunrise is 0700. The clock runs from 0700 sunrise to
| whatever time necessary overnight to arrive at sunrise again, at
| which point the time becomes 0700. For the part of the year where
| that duration is greater than 24 hours, the time past 06:59
| simply counts up extra seconds until reset.
|
| Now we can have computers and every other carefully regulated
| timekeeping system on milliseconds since an epoch timestamp, and
| regular old clock time fits everyone's schedules regardless of
| time of year, and never needs 'adjusting' again, since its sun-
| synchronized.
|
| And people said Y2K and the Year 2038 issues were hard...
| bayindirh wrote:
| I recommend you read time keeping on the computer systems.
| Without NTP and some atomic clocks on the network, computers
| can't keep accurate time themselves.
|
| And using a moving window / sun synchronization like that is
| just _brave_ to put it mildly.
|
| [0] https://blog.codinghorror.com/keeping-time-on-the-pc/
|
| Also, there was an excellent article about clock drift, but I
| failed to find it.
| talaketu wrote:
| sure, except obviously sunrise at 6AM and sunset at 6PM.
| ethbr0 wrote:
| Having seen a colleague deal with northern hemisphere Guam ->
| Puerto Rico times, thinking about implementing the above gives
| me heart palpitations.
| throw0101a wrote:
| Unequal hours were a thing:
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hour#Unequal_hours
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_clock
| slavik81 wrote:
| This is nice to see. A provincial referendum to make DST
| permanent failed in Alberta last year (49.9% in favour to 50.1%
| against).
|
| I have no strong opinions on whether we should make it permanent
| daylight saving time or standard time. To me, the important thing
| is just picking one and sticking with it.
| mincer_ray wrote:
| this is the first time ive felt something in weeks
| ZYinMD wrote:
| Sorry I'm too lazy to do mental gymnastics, could someone tell
| me, does this mean 8am will be darker or lighter than before?
| o4b wrote:
| Darker
| siruncledrew wrote:
| I am so ready for permanent DST. More daylight to actually do
| stuff. Plus it's nice to not have to come out from work and it's
| all dark in the Fall/Winter.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| If we're going to stop switching clocks, shouldn't it obviously
| be for permanent _standard_ time, not DST?
| beefman wrote:
| The lack of agreement on this point tells us something about
| why we change clocks and why we should continue to do so
| (albeit more smoothly).
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > The lack of agreement on this point tells us something
| about why we change clocks and why we should continue to do
| so (albeit more smoothly).
|
| Personally, I see the options from best to worst as:
|
| 1. permanent standard time
|
| 2. permanent daylight time
|
| 3. change clocks twice a year
|
| 4. change clocks more frequently but by a smaller increment.
|
| Lack of consensus as to which of the first two should be #1
| isn't an argument for #4.
| Smithalicious wrote:
| Watching Americans freak out about post-8AM sunrises is surreal
| to me. The sun doesn't rise until 8:45 during the darkest times
| of the year here in the Netherlands and its really not much of an
| issue.
|
| Whether standard time or summer time is the better choice here is
| something I hold no opinion on, but the sheer hysteria some
| people here express is very overblown.
| CyanBird wrote:
| It will be funny to see what happens with Alaska, they might
| have just forgotten about the state
|
| Same thing happened in Chile a while back, the entire country
| was left on "summer time" which then meant that the southern
| tip of Chile had very, very little sun during the winter during
| the mornings, the "proper day time" was notoriously "shifted"
| ghaff wrote:
| I remember a guide on a trip a number of years back telling
| that she rather liked the northern latitude (Alaska). In
| winter you're screwed anyway and in summer you have more
| light than you know what to do with. I'm sure an hour shift
| doesn't make things much different. Most of the people
| arguing are arguing around states where there is sort of
| enough light most of the year but some people like it earlier
| and some later.
| tshaddox wrote:
| It's odd that most places seem very used to longitudinal time
| zones, but no one seems to be suggesting latitudinal time
| zones.
| henrikschroder wrote:
| When you're as far north as Alaska, daylight savings stops
| making sense, because the difference in daylight hours over
| the year is _huge_.
|
| At Anchorage's latitude, two weeks after changing back to
| standard time, sunrise is back at the same time it was before
| the change, and mornings will get a lot darker until you
| reach midwinter.
|
| In California, the effect of the change is noticeable,
| because the difference in daylight hours is small over the
| year, so people who have only ever lived in California or
| similar are the ones complaining about "having to go to
| school in the dark" as if that was some weird anomaly or
| tragedy.
| manmal wrote:
| There's a growing body of research on the circadian clock,
| and, yes, going to school in the dark could turn out to be
| a tragedy eventually.
| henrikschroder wrote:
| What you're saying is completely irrelevant for people
| living closer to and above the arctic circle, because
| Daylight Savings does _nothing_ at those latitudes
| anyway.
| zozbot234 wrote:
| That just means that the problem gets worse as the latitude
| gets farther away from the equator. It may be pretty
| unavoidable in such places, but why make it pointlessly worse?
| SubiculumCode wrote:
| Maybe timezones should be based on longitude and DST should
| be based on latitude?
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| The subset of Americans in question doesn't have much in the
| way of big problems hence why this is getting a "the sky is
| falling" response rather than a "ok, whatever" response.
| ipaddr wrote:
| Some people will always try to downplay other people's
| success or misfortune then they stereotype them into a
| category that isn't themselves but it turns out to represent
| their unspoken views.
| metafunctor wrote:
| Wasn't there a study or two that living on the western edge of
| a time zone poses higher health risks, presumably because
| people have to get up before sunrise to get to work.
|
| This why I, personally, would prefer standard time over DST. I
| really hate early mornings, and DST causes all mornings to be
| one hour earlier.
|
| EDIT: Googled a quick link about this:
| https://www.sciencealert.com/a-neurologist-explains-why-dayl...
| stult wrote:
| Yeah, this is what makes me mad about this debate. Permanent
| DST proponents talk about how they like having daylight at
| the end of the day after work. Well, weigh that mild
| preference against the very real physiological harm it
| causes. They want to enjoy their afternoons. I want to work a
| normal 9-5 job without getting heart disease because of the
| stress of waking up before sunrise eight months out of the
| year.
| dham wrote:
| But standard time is only 4 months right now.
| stormbrew wrote:
| That's funny, I'd also like to avoid the stress of having
| the sun rise at 2-3am in the summer. It's almost as if
| there's no right answer here and the current status quo
| just makes everyone unhappy and unhealthy.
| stult wrote:
| The earliest that sunrise happens in the continental US
| is around 5AM during DST, so the earliest it would go is
| 4AM. That is in the extreme north of the country
| (excluding Alaska, which I'd say is not worth including
| in the conversation given its unique circumstances), on
| the eastern edges of time zones. So I don't know what
| you're talking about. If you read the article linked
| above, it specifically points out that there are
| measurable, concrete negative health effects from DST but
| not from standard time. So no, the sun rising early
| doesn't really stress you out the same way getting up
| before sunrise does. Not at all.
| stormbrew wrote:
| I live farther north and not in the US, but since your
| decisions on this inevitably impact my own country's I
| still care about what you do, even if I don't get a say
| in it.
|
| At any rate, yes, the sun rising at 4am would also stress
| me out. In fact, given that I'm in a position to tell you
| what it's like in a place where that happens for part of
| the year, I can inform you from personal experience that
| it is indeed disruptive to circadian rhythm to have the
| sun rise even "moderately" early.
|
| I'm sure people in Alaska think you're a great person for
| telling them they don't matter, though.
| ghaff wrote:
| Don't need to go to Alaska. Sunrise ( _with_ DST) is 5AM
| with EDT in downeast Maine at the summer solstice and as
| early or earlier in pretty much every major Canadian
| city.
| oasisbob wrote:
| Don't neglect twilight.
|
| Here in Seattle, sunrise is as early as 5:10am or so in
| the middle of June. However, with civil twilight
| included, you're looking at a pretty bright sky from
| 4:30am to 10pm.
|
| We're not even that far north here, but waking up out of
| a light sleep at 4am can certainly be bothersome.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Leaving work in the dark probably causes stress as well.
| Not to mention that the constant DST switch in of itself
| causes health stress:
|
| https://healthblog.uofmhealth.org/heart-health/why-
| daylight-...
| DonHopkins wrote:
| I'm a night owl myself, but willing to meet daytime people
| halfway.
|
| How about DST with a 12 hour offset?
| layer8 wrote:
| As a kid, I always enjoyed the time of year when i would
| walk to school in the dark before sunrise. It had a quiet
| serenity, and bonus points if it was snowing.
|
| My takeaway is that it's a matter of personal
| predisposition. Maybe people should move to the east or
| west end of their timezone based on their light-vs-dark
| time-of-day preferences. :)
| almog wrote:
| It's worth mentioning a satirical essay Benjamin Franklin wrote
| when he stayed in Paris as part of a diplomatic mission in
| which he basically chastises the citizens of Paris for not
| waking up with the sun.
|
| http://www.webexhibits.org/daylightsaving/franklin3.html
|
| Here is a quote of how he suggest to change their lazy manners:
|
| "Every morning, as soon as the sun rises, let all the bells in
| every church be set ringing; and if that is not sufficient?,
| let cannon be fired in every street, to wake the sluggards
| effectually, and make them open their eyes to see their true
| interest."
|
| To me it bears so much resemblance to people's imminent fear of
| having a late sunrise.
| collegeburner wrote:
| I guess you're used to it. Making that change for people who
| were born and raised in early morning sun will probably not be
| good for them.
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| I moved from Indiana to Norway. You just get used to it and
| it isnt a big deal (sunrise is closer to 10am in December,
| with sunset around 2 or 2:30pm). Folks with winter depression
| sometimes struggle more here than they did in Indiana, but
| the doctors are prepared for this.
| collegeburner wrote:
| > the doctors are prepared for this.
|
| I don't think putting people on antidepressants is a good
| answer, either. Those are meant to be used for about a year
| to get people back to normal.
| stormbrew wrote:
| It's far more likely they're referring to vitamin D
| supplements and SAD lamps than antidepressants, though
| I'm sure antidepressants are used when other things don't
| work.
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| Well, then don't take them. I'm pretty sure you aren't
| responsible for other folks' medical care, though, and
| that's between them and their doctor. It doesn't matter
| how you think they should be used if you aren't a
| professional treating folks - especially considering that
| not all mental illnesses resolve within a year or at all.
| collegeburner wrote:
| > not all mental illnesses resolve within a year or at
| all
|
| This passive language is the problem... sure there are
| probably some people with serious problems, but young
| people these days take antidepressants and go to therapy
| like it's normal. For most of them, depression is a
| choice, they choose to be lazy, not exercise, have bad
| sleep, eat junk food, use too much social media, never go
| outside, then wonder why they have "depression". Not so
| different from how some people try to call obesity and
| addiction diseases when they are also choices.
| piva00 wrote:
| Moved from Brazil to Sweden. Yeah, the darkness sucks but
| you adapt after a couple of winters. What really sucks much
| more getting a crappy winter with no snow and no sun,
| that's a soul killer.
| jgwil2 wrote:
| > Folks with winter depression sometimes struggle more here
| than they did in Indiana
|
| Presumably this has more to do with the total hours of
| light in winter being lower, not what time of the clock
| they correspond to.
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| That is my assumption as well, but honestly, I don't know
| if the clock is a contributing factor or not.
| fleddr wrote:
| I'm from the Netherlands, and I'll never get used to it.
|
| I don't care about the hour of more or less sleep, I don't
| even notice it nor do I ever suffer from jet lags.
|
| It's the torturous period from roughly October to March where
| daylight roughly aligns with the workday or less. Meaning I
| drive in the dark to work, sit inside all day under
| artificial light, then drive back home in the dark. Months
| without daylight, and the little you get to experience is
| moody, not direct sun light.
|
| The flip side is that we get ridiculous amounts of light in
| the summer. All the way up to 10:30 PM and even around
| midnight there's still a hint of faint light.
| [deleted]
| op00to wrote:
| I think it's not so much post 8am sunrises as pairing it up
| with pre 5pm sunsets that drive people insane.
| contravariant wrote:
| Well that's winter for ya.
|
| Changing the clock isn't going to create more hours of
| sunlight (except arguably if you switch to DST at noon and
| back to winter time at midnight).
| anikan_vader wrote:
| Not really a fair comparison, given that the Netherlands's
| latitude would put it in the Hudson Bay were it to be in North
| America. There are no major North American cities as far north
| as Amsterdam besides Anchorage.
| stygiansonic wrote:
| Edmonton, AB is at a higher latitude than Amsterdam and has a
| larger population. Calgary's latitude is similar and also has
| a larger population than Amsterdam.
| anikan_vader wrote:
| Guess I definitely should have limited the scope of my
| claim to America, thanks for the correction!
| [deleted]
| conductr wrote:
| It's mostly because US is a big place (lng/lat diversity) and
| folks are rather mobile within it's borders. So, it becomes
| common to hear stories of the Floridian that moved to Seattle
| and how depressing it is.
| kitten_mittens_ wrote:
| Having lived in both Hamburg (55deg lat) and Seattle (46), I
| can say that northwest Europe daylight hours are _brutal_ in
| the winter.
|
| The first winter I was in Hamburg, I think we got 10 hours of
| sun all of December.
| dathinab wrote:
| Is Hamburg also permanently clouded in Winter like Berlin?
|
| (In Berlin we often have a non-stop gray sky pretty often
| from somewhere in December to "mid" or so February with
| just a few days exceptions, especially January is super
| painful. I honestly would prefer shorter colder but clear-
| skyed days with snow).
| kitten_mittens_ wrote:
| Pretty much. It'd get below freezing some days when it
| was clear and then snow. But that only happened a handful
| of times. I think Berlin is probably colder than Hamburg.
| Most of the Fall/Spring was 8C and raining in Hamburg.
| tshaddox wrote:
| I can't imagine that large latitudinal moves are common
| enough to be a notable driver of public opinion in favor of
| nationwide daylight saving time.
| tooltower wrote:
| But they are the loudest opinion. It's a lot like how
| people are more likely to write an online review if they
| have had a negative experience.
| deanCommie wrote:
| I have lived my entire life in 3 different cities, all of
| which have regional reputation for "it rains a lot".
|
| I do NOT understand the complaining, I'm sorry. First of all,
| "grey" isn't dark - grey overcast days are still plenty
| bright. Blue skies are lovely, sure. But you know what every
| place I've lived in gets for all that rain? LUSH, GREEN
| FOILAGE. Grass, trees, everywhere. LIFE.
|
| You know what else comes with all that rain? Temperate
| climates. It's never too hot or too cold. We don't need
| airconditioning in the summer (except for a couple of days),
| nor have to shovel snow in the winter (except for a couple of
| days).
|
| I look at something like Arizona that people rave about the
| climate over and I see dusty desolate deserts, where people
| have to spend exhorbitant amounts of water to keep tiny
| patches of parks and grasses alive.
|
| I understand comparing tropical oceanfront climates like
| Florida and California unfavourably - there is a reason we
| think of these areas as vacation getaway hotspots. But most
| people complaining aren't from those climates - they are just
| from other parts of the world that are more "seasonal" and so
| they expect big snowstorms in the winter, and long hot days
| without rain in the summer. But all complaints about needing
| the sun, or the lack of vitamin D, are all subjective
| personal experiences.
|
| Having grown up and lived with it all my life, I think it's
| highly offensive how people complain about the rain without
| acknowledging all the benefits that it brings.
| kokx wrote:
| I'm from the Netherlands as well, and I'm very scared of the
| talks of permanent DST over here. Which means that the sun
| would rise at 9:45 if we permanently switch to DST. Our country
| would be better suited at UTC, instead of UTC+1. Keeping it
| permanently at UTC+2 would be a special form of hell for me.
| sporkland wrote:
| Trying to analyze the impact of this I used my favorite tool for
| thinking through DST issues:
| https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/@z-us-94114
|
| Seems like with this law in effect, near the winter solstice in
| San Francisco what would have been 7:21am - 4:54pm will now
| instead be 8:21am - 5:54pm day light hours. Is this accurate?
|
| On the one hand, the 6pm night time feels pretty reasonable, but
| 8:20 for sun in the morning seems pretty early. Although I think
| I prefer this to having standard time year around.
|
| My favorite option on this topic is to change the clocks smaller
| amounts way more often to try and achieve good alignment between
| clocks and day light. I haven't worked it out with precision, but
| it seems like it should be better than than these hour jumps or
| not jumping at all.
| [deleted]
| riffic wrote:
| if we're doing permanent daylight saving time, I propose just
| doing year-long standard time because it's effectively the same
| thing.
| coding123 wrote:
| This is not law yet, does anyone know what hurdles remain?
| [deleted]
| robotcookies wrote:
| Making DST permanent is essentially forcing everyone to wake up
| earlier in the day. All we're doing is calling 7 am, now 8 am to
| get people to psychologically accept this. This is a win for
| morning people who function better earlier... AND this is a loss
| for all the non-morning people who will now be forced to work, go
| to school, etc at a time when they don't operate optimally.
| whymauri wrote:
| I work in another time zone and have to shift my hours pretty
| aggressively so I get >3 hours sunlight total, most of which
| happen when I'm working.
|
| No idea why it's preferable to have the sun go down sooner...
| lol.
| Crash0v3rid3 wrote:
| The change would only happen once, so it might take you a few
| days to adjust but afterwards it shouldn't matter.
| divbzero wrote:
| This means permanently EDT/CDT/MDT/PDT? Or would EST/CST/MST/PST
| all be shifted by +01:00?
|
| I am also curious if Canada or other countries would follow suit.
| tempestn wrote:
| At least in BC we already have legislation to do this as soon
| as the western states do.
|
| In Alberta it just got voted down by a very slim margin, so if
| the US made the switch I expect that would be enough to swing
| it there as well. I expect other provinces would follow suit as
| well, assuming the federal government didn't just make the
| decision for everyone (which they probably would if the whole
| US went to permanent DST).
| slimginz wrote:
| Question from a dumb American: Does Canada have a lot of laws
| that only go into effect if the US or nearby US states do the
| same? I've never heard of that before.
| tempestn wrote:
| I can't recall any others (edit: aside from obvious things
| like laws relating to trade agreements or defense
| cooperation), but this one makes some sense to keep the
| time zones consistent. Also since I made that last comment
| I learned that Ontario has a similar plan w.r.t. NY. So it
| definitely appears Canada will switch when the US does.
| nullc wrote:
| In California the law of the land is already that we'll
| switch to permanent DST when the federal government allows
| it.
| SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
| The text of the bill shows the latter: EST/CST/MST/PST/HST/AKST
| shift by 1 hour.
| zht wrote:
| Ontario has already passed a bill saying that it will make DST
| permanent if 1) Quebec and 2) New York State make it permanent
| slimginz wrote:
| The bill (which you can read here, it's super short:
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-
| bill/623...) adjusts EST/CST/MST/PST etc to be +01:00. If you
| dig into the bill it's referencing, it defines US timezones
| based on UTC so this is just adjusting the time +1 hour based
| on that original bill.
| Ekaros wrote:
| Oh that will be a massive mess. So now the poor sod writing
| libraries have to take in account the offset changing in
| 2023...
| jackjeff wrote:
| I really hope the UK does not imitate this. I moved from France
| to the UK over ten years ago. According to geography, France and
| the UK should be on the same time zone, but in practice France is
| using Germany's time zone. In France thanks to the perfect combo
| of DST and the wrong time zone, you're permanently shifted by
| either +1 or +2. The net effect is almost never see the sun in
| the morning when you wake up if you have to abide to standard
| office/school hours. When I moved to the UK I realised I was much
| less tired and happier to just wake up with the sun (at least for
| part of the year).
| engineer_22 wrote:
| This is the kind of change I can live with!
| wolverine876 wrote:
| The whole world going to the same time zone, usually proposed in
| these discussions, doesn't work - sun-time dissociates with
| clock-time, making words like "night" and "noon" confusing.
|
| However, I would like to see a North American Standard time
| (NAT): Set the clock at half-way between US Mountain and Central
| times and apply it to all of North America (with maybe a few
| extreme exceptions, such as western Alaska and Hawaii). The
| coasts would be off ~30 minutes more than DST, which I hope isn't
| too far, and nobody in North America would have to think about
| time zones again.
| ballenf wrote:
| And I think we should move to ultra-local time zones for IRL
| conversations, local retail, etc. that get auto-translated to
| the universal time.
|
| I want Noon to be the time when the sun is highest in the sky
| on that day.
| captainmuon wrote:
| Or you could go the exact opposite, and do solar-local time
| everywhere.
|
| We introduced time zones historically to make train travel
| easier. Now, we use navigation systems almost every time we
| travel long distances. It always shows me time of departure,
| time of arrival, and since they are non-round times and I can't
| be bothered to calculate the duration, it shows me that, too.
| If every city was in its own timezone, nothing would change.
| Just that duration would be slightly different than arrival-
| departure.
|
| TV programming is basically dead, so you wouldn't have a
| problem with announcing when a show will run.
|
| The only problem would be when scheduling online meetings.
| Frankly I rely on calendars for that, too. And often different
| places already have weird rules like meetings start 15 minutes
| later, or you should be there 5 minutes early.
|
| The benefit of solar-local time is, I hope, that it will help
| people live more attuned to nature. You know at 12:00 the sun
| is at highest, that the daylight is symmetric around noon.
| People will be encouraged to make longer days in the summer and
| shorter days in the winter, maybe.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| It's interesting to think about the implications. It's
| obviously not practical on a broad scale, but I wonder if I
| could try it myself for a little while. We need an app!
|
| > TV programming is basically dead
|
| You need to get out more! :)
| ianmcgowan wrote:
| Sounds crazy, but works for India and China, so it's not
| impossible, just very very improbable ;_)
| wolverine876 wrote:
| What are the greatest dislocations there? How has it worked,
| both for the time-dislocated and in terms of the benefits?
| collegeburner wrote:
| I'd be pretty ok with this, but I'm also biased because I live
| in central. Calis probably won't like it much because they'll
| be getting up hours before the sun.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Calis will have even longer summer nights though, with the
| sun setting into the ocean ...
| richardfey wrote:
| EU to follow soon? It's been in the talks at least since 2018.
| kristopolous wrote:
| And people say bipartisanship is dead...
| xnx wrote:
| Daylight Saving Time Gripe Assistant Tool "A handy tool to help
| make your case when whining about a biannual time change"
| https://observablehq.com/@awoodruff/daylight-saving-time-gri...
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| >Sunshine Protection Act
|
| Jesus, does everything need to be hyperbolic virtue signaling.
| Won't someone please think of the children!
| guelo wrote:
| huh? What virtue is being signaled here? It's just a marketing
| name.
| enraged_camel wrote:
| I would love someone to propose a bill that requires the
| elimination of hyperbolic virtue signaling from all future
| bills, perhaps as an additional step in whatever pipeline is
| used to produce bills.
|
| Just need a hyperbolic virtue signaling name for it!
| Nition wrote:
| Honesty Act
| DocTomoe wrote:
| The old art of the backronym was once florishing in the IT
| sector ... but like so many fun things, it eventually got
| axed by corporate.
|
| Tag Regulations Understandable To Humans - TRUTH Act
| readthenotes1 wrote:
| American Integrity Act
| schoen wrote:
| Aren't there some legislatures that have guidelines on
| promoting neutral naming of legislation, in order to reduce
| the marketing or manipulation value of act titles?
|
| It does seem like the "AWESOME Goodness Act" or "CUTE Puppies
| Act" phenomenon is especially strong here in the U.S.
| LarrySellers wrote:
| jrockway wrote:
| It's modeled after a Florida law with that name:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunshine_Protection_Act
|
| Florida is "The Sunshine State", so the name was a little more
| clever in that context. I can't emphasize enough that I call it
| _a little_ clever, not a lot clever.
| anikan_vader wrote:
| When did virtue signaling become a bad thing? If the goal of
| the act is to protect people's access to sunshine, why not say
| as much -- at least the act has a human readable name.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Virtue signaling the act or virtue signaling the term?
|
| Hollow signaling has always been crap as far as I'm
| concerned. The term became a dirty word in left leaning
| circles and a slight pejorative in right leaning ones in the
| last ~10yr or so which IMO is a shame because it describes a
| wide variety of modern behavior and there is no good
| replacement.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| There's probably a rhetorical term for it. Claiming that
| someone or something is good, but not demonstrating or
| justifying why it is good
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| Virtue signaling is a problem when it injects a moral aspect
| into areas that are disputed or subjective.
|
| In this case, it frames the issue as the enlightened who want
| to"protect people's access to sunshine" against the evil
| forces of darkness.
|
| In reality, there is no moral highground, good guys, or bad
| guys.
|
| Some people simply like sunshine at different times. It would
| be nice if we could act like adults and start from this
| premise. We can try to come up with a solution for how to set
| our clocks without claiming the preference of the other side
| is illegitimate or morally bankrupt.
| Rayhem wrote:
| > When did virtue signaling become a bad thing?
|
| I'll offer no commentary on whether "Sunshine Protection Act"
| is virtue signaling, but I think virtue signaling is less
| "talking about having done virtuous things" and more "talking
| about doing virtuous things with the intent to gain social
| capital". It's the facade, the ulterior motive that most
| people balk at. In that sense it has always been a "bad"
| thing.
| guelo wrote:
| Therefore, using virtue signaling as an epithet is a bad
| faith claim to be able to peek into people's minds and
| determine bad intent in order to discourage people from
| publicly supporting a cause.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| Or it can be used as a condemnation after comparing their
| professed values against their actual behavior.
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| While it is indeed impossible to read people's minds,
| people can reasonably sense a mix of insincerity and
| attention seeking behavior.
| gxs wrote:
| It's a bad thing when they are passing laws that violate your
| privacy but call the act "the protect the children act" - I
| think this is the habit OP was referring to
| sdflhasjd wrote:
| When you end up with bills called things like the "Patriot"
| that whitewash the dangerous capabilities of the laws and at
| the same time create a name thats immune to criticism.
|
| Obviously ending DST isn't like that, but you have SOPA, EARN
| IT, etc, etc.
|
| I believe this kind of branding should have no place in
| legislature.
| spacemanmatt wrote:
| It's not a bad thing, but in the eyes of people who genuinely
| believe they do not do it.
| DocTomoe wrote:
| Virtue signalling usually is juxtaposed with being virtuous
| for its own sake: Those who have to tell everyone how
| good/enlightened/progressive they are usually aren't.
| bumby wrote:
| "Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell
| people you are, you aren't."
|
| -M. Thatcher
|
| Just substitute the word "virtuous" in
| [deleted]
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| >Jesus, does everything need to be hyperbolic virtue signaling.
|
| It's a bit ironic given the current anti-Russia everything when
| Russia is the largest country in the world on permanent DST. If
| the bill had been subject to debate instead of going through so
| fast, I suspect someone would have brought up the Russia
| connection and the whole thing would have died a quick death as
| "we don't want to be like the Russians".
| ginko wrote:
| >Russia is the largest country in the world on permanent DST.
|
| Actually, Russia tried permanent DST, but then switched to
| permanent standard time 3 years later after that turned out
| to be a terrible idea:
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29773559
| aaomidi wrote:
| This is just funny to me honestly.
| standardUser wrote:
| Nothing these days sounds more like virtue signaling than
| calling things out as virtue signaling.
| LordDragonfang wrote:
| I find the term "vice signaling" is often appropriate in
| these contexts:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling#:~:text=%22v.
| ..
| cbanek wrote:
| Mr. Burns doesn't like this at all!
| ackfoobar wrote:
| Maybe "self aggrandizing" is a better description of this name
| if you take it seriously. I just find it amusing.
| sjm-lbm wrote:
| It's extra funny in this case, because the main point of those
| opposing this bill seems to be "Won't someone think of the
| children? They'll have to walk to school in the dark!"
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| Schools here frequently have a delayed start on winter days
| because of black ice on the roads. Permanent DST will only
| make that happen more frequently. Perhaps this will cause the
| school system to look into a schedule adjustment during the
| winter months that accounts for the reality that black ice is
| a problem here during those months instead of acting like
| it's an unexpected situation that couldn't be foreseen each
| time it happens.
| jahewson wrote:
| Given the darker mornings that would result it's clearly an
| anti-woke measure.
| Epiphany21 wrote:
| >does everything need to be hyperbolic virtue signaling
|
| Yes. And our tax dollars fund it.
| mc32 wrote:
| Agreed. Maybe sunshine exploitation maximization act would be
| more accurate.
| mirntyfirty wrote:
| That is pretty funny. Don't want to be caught voting against
| the Sun
| trhway wrote:
| Until your constituents are vampires. Or you sold short
| sunglasses stock.
| bmitc wrote:
| As much as our Congress annoys me, I think it's possibly a
| little tongue in cheek in this case. Because if that's the
| name, it would be the SPA act.
| thehappypm wrote:
| People literally die more because of these changes. Statistically
| measurable increase in mortality on these days. Save lives, stop
| changing the clocks.
| RONROC wrote:
| I hate to be that guy but if you're dying because the clocks
| changed and it was too much of a burden for you to re-adjust
| (like literally everyone else does) then oh well.
|
| Policy decisions based on dodgy, whataboutism-esque figures is,
| in my opinion, what undergirded the incredibly incompetent
| COVID response here in the US, and elsewhere.
| davis_m wrote:
| > if you're dying because the clocks changed and it was too
| much of a burden for you to re-adjust (like literally
| everyone else does) then oh well.
|
| It's a good thing everyone's actions take place in a bubble
| and have no effect on others.
| RONROC wrote:
| You strike me as one of the people in the "even if it saves
| one life" camp.
|
| The type of person who encounters the trolley problem and
| asks "can we just play a different game?"
| 6chars wrote:
| I suspect you don't hate to be that guy all that much
| RONROC wrote:
| You're probably right. You must be the other guy.
| 6chars wrote:
| Yep, and I'll admit I love being this guy!
| seangrogg wrote:
| > Policy decisions based on dodgy, whataboutism-esque figures
|
| You're arguing that people should increase their exposure to
| acute myocardial infarction (among other concerns) to account
| for dodgy whataboutism-esque energy consumption figures from
| the 1910s and 40s-50s that have been observed to actually
| increase energy consumption in modern times?
| RONROC wrote:
| Energy consumption? Myocardial infection?
|
| What are you blabbering on about?
| seangrogg wrote:
| The US observance of DST was done for energy consumption,
| largely coming out of our 2 world wars when energy was a
| key issue. That said, in watching a state that relatively
| recently adopted DST, it actually _increased_ energy
| consumption[1].
|
| Meanwhile, research has shown that the impact of losing
| an hour due to DST observation has an impact on the
| heart[2][3][4].
|
| So this policy appears to be one that literally saves
| lives while at the same time having the additional
| benefit of potentially reducing energy consumption at a
| time when we're dealing with an energy crisis.
|
| [1] https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w144
| 29/w144... [2]
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4189320/ [3]
| https://openheart.bmj.com/content/openhrt/1/1/e000019.ful
| l.p... [4] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
| abs/pii/S00029...
| mmazing wrote:
| Somehow other parts of the world (like the Netherlands) still
| manage to exist.
| dgritsko wrote:
| Interesting, I've never heard that, although it seems like it
| would make intuitive sense (people more tired than usual from
| lack of sleep?). I searched around a bit and found a couple of
| articles that others might find interesting:
|
| [1]: https://www.businessinsider.com/daylight-saving-time-is-
| dead...
|
| [2]: https://www.usnews.com/news/health-
| news/articles/2021-03-12/...
| tasty_freeze wrote:
| Yes, more people die in the few days after the short night in
| the spring, but then there is a lower average mortality in the
| few days after that, and overall there is no net difference.
| Likewise in the fall, there is a slight dip in the day or two
| after the long night, but it washes out over the next week.
| nobodywasishere wrote:
| Yes mortality increases on that day, but does not increase over
| the week.
| [deleted]
| elwell wrote:
| Does it increase by 1-hour's worth of death? If so, may be
| bad statistics.
| ibejoeb wrote:
| What are the modalities of these deaths? Are they a result of
| the time change, or are they coincident to the time change?
| dqv wrote:
| A bunch of missed healthcare appointments (not everyone uses
| their phone to tell the time!) happen after the change and
| diminishes over the following weeks.
| thehappypm wrote:
| Presumably, being late to work or more tired leads to more
| car crashes. Super anecdotal but I saw two horrible wrecks
| yesterday, when I normally see 0.
| xeromal wrote:
| I'm too dumb to know what modalities means but simply, a lot
| of people end up with 1 hour less sleep because they're not
| tired at the normal time and over a population of 300+
| million, more mistakes are made driving and people with poor
| health experience elevated stress due to lack of sleep. A
| non-zero amount of people pass away the day of from these
| issues.
| trgn wrote:
| And people only die more because they get run over by drivers
| at a higher rate. I'd say here the glaring problem is not the
| timekeeping, but designing our urban infrastructure for cars,
| so that when a person is just a teensy tiny bit more sleepy,
| they end up killing people by accident, rather than you know,
| putting on their shirt inside out and having people point and
| giggle. Cars pretty much make worse everything they touch, like
| in this case, the ability to flexibility set a clock however we
| see fit.
| stormbrew wrote:
| I'd kill for a peek into the parallel universe where it was
| permanent standard time that was likely to get adopted and see
| how much effort went into researching the ill effects of that
| choice to convince people with enough FUD to keep daylight time
| switching going.
|
| Here's the thing: If you're a proponent of permanent standard
| time, you should be in favour of turning off the switching no
| matter what. Even if it means daylight time. Because you know
| what? Your local time zone is changeable. You can lobby to change
| it. If permanent DST really results in the entire country turning
| into sleep deprived zombies having spontaneous heart attacks as
| they arrive at work and crashing into children going to school,
| then there'll be pressure to change it -- but we will have at
| least already started the process of eliminating the worse thing:
| changing twice a year.
| screye wrote:
| Does permanent DST mean :
|
| A. The sun rises earlier and sets earlier.
|
| B. The sun rises later, but sun sets later too.
| ghaff wrote:
| B (relative to standard time)
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| B. We just entered DST, moving our clocks forward, so we get
| more daylight at the end of the day.
| michaelt wrote:
| Before permanent DST, on 31 December in San Francisco,
| sunlight ran from 07:24-17:00
|
| With permanent DST, it will instead be 08:24-18:00
| betwixthewires wrote:
| No, the sun rises and sets when it rises and sets. All this
| means is that at noon the clock says 1:00pm. It's still noon.
|
| People are so disconnected from the world that their
| abstractions of it become more real to them than actual
| reality. I don't think it is a good thing.
|
| Why not just make daylight savings time go away and do things
| "an hour earlier"? You'd literally be waking up at the same
| exact time, just that the clock will say 6 instead of 7 or
| whatever. Are we really so far gone as a society that we will
| go to such great lengths to fool our brains? It's madness.
| necovek wrote:
| Your argument is an argument against any time zones at all.
| It could equally apply to abolishing timezones and
| switching to UTC time everywhere (or maybe fractional
| Julian Day/JD numbers).
|
| > People are so disconnected from the world that their
| abstractions of it become more real to them than actual
| reality. I don't think it is a good thing.
|
| But then you do the same thing. :D There is never a jump of
| 1h: the "daylight" time changes gradually, so if you want
| to move 1h one way in 182 days, you only need to note how
| today, as you woke up at the same time as yesterday, it's
| now 7 - 1h/182... And it will be 7-2h/182 the day after,
| and... That's very confusing.
|
| This is not an argument for DST, but an argument against
| any "artificial" adjustment (both DST and the one you
| propose where you wake up at the "same time" but it's
| suddenly 1h of a difference in wall clock time?).
|
| Basically, it's easy enough for a region to decide on the
| most suitable timezone (eg. with or without DST of today,
| or even something entirely different), and keep that on for
| the entire year. If you end up waking up at night for work
| and that bothers you, make sure to affect that regional
| decision when it's being made. If, like me, you care more
| about having daylight hours after work is done, then vote
| the other way. Ideally, find work that will have flexible
| start times (this is generally hardest for institutions
| dealing with plenty of people like schools and government
| administration).
| betwixthewires wrote:
| You're misunderstanding my argument.
|
| "Noon" is when the sun is midway through its daylight
| cycle. We call that "12:00(pm)" for the sake of
| measurement.
|
| Switching to UTC worldwide is just as bad as switching to
| DST, except at meridian.
|
| Time does _not_ change naturally; noon is noon is noon is
| noon.
|
| I'm not proposing what you think I'm proposing. I'm
| saying the only sane solution to this is permanent
| _standard_ time, which is what I think you want too, and
| that permanent daylight time is not more sane than
| switching twice a year.
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| > People are so disconnected from the world that their
| abstractions of it become more real to them than actual
| reality.
|
| Because my job starts at 9 am regardless of the position of
| the sun.
| reificator wrote:
| Changing your working hours means a talk with your boss
| and maybe HR. If we didn't have DST maybe it would be a
| box you check when you get hired.
|
| We spend so much on engineering systems that handle DST
| changes, there's an increase in sleep deprived auto
| accidents, people die from heart attacks... All to avoid
| individuals asking for different hours at work?
|
| Sorry, "changing" time twice a year is not a reasonable
| substitute for scheduling work appropriately depending on
| the season.
| [deleted]
| watwut wrote:
| That is not true for wast majority of jobs where boss
| sets time ... and pretty often have reason for it. And
| schools won't adjust schedule just for you personally.
|
| Nor clubs nor churches and even friends when they do
| party they set time.
| reificator wrote:
| They already change schedules though, we just launder it
| through the time "change" despite clear evidence of costs
| in both productivity and literal human life.
| grogenaut wrote:
| Clubs and churches will be based on when people can most
| likely make it. I think those things will sort themselves
| out. They already accomodate for things like weather,
| light, etc.
| [deleted]
| grogenaut wrote:
| I'm betting for certain types of jobs schedules are not
| flexible, and for other types of jobs it doesn't matter.
| For my job, I skipped an important meeting this morning
| because they scheduled it at 8am and I didn't want to get
| up that early. Not sure anyone cared.
| betwixthewires wrote:
| So then what's the point of any of this? If you live your
| life based on what the clock says, why change what the
| clock says in relation to the position of the sun at all?
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| The last few weeks before the DST switch in the fall are
| hell for me every year. The sun doesn't rise in earnest
| until ~7:30, but my job starts at the same time, so I
| always wake up groggy and feeling terrible. It usually
| lasts the whole day.
|
| Now I'm going to have that for three months, while the
| sun rises even later!
|
| I'm not in favor of switching clocks, but I'd rather
| switch than have permanent DST. This change caught me out
| of nowhere and I'm already dreading it, I'm going to be
| miserable all winter!
| jedberg wrote:
| Maybe this will finally be the push that gets companies
| to change their start and end times in winter.
| johnfn wrote:
| > People are so disconnected from the world that their
| abstractions of it become more real to them than actual
| reality. I don't think it is a good thing.
|
| Goodness. The guy is asking a simple question. People
| shouldn't have to frame up everything from axiomatic
| principles before asking for some extremely basic
| information.
| chimeracoder wrote:
| DST is "summer time", so the sun rises later but sets later
| too.
| daveslash wrote:
| As others have said, B. is the answer to question.
|
| But to add to that, the U.S. has 4 timezones[1]: Eastern
| Time, Central Time, Mountain Time, and Pacific Time. Each
| zone has a "Standard" time and "Daylight" time - that is, for
| the winter half of the year, California is in the Pacific
| Standard Time (P _S_ T), whereas in the summer (B., in your
| question), California is in the Pacific Daylight Time (P _D_
| T). It's a _very petty_ pet peeve of mine when people confuse
| they two - when they say "Let's meet at 3pm, PST" to mean
| 3pm Pacific Time, but it's in the summer ~ so 3pm PST would
| really be 2PM PDT. I know, I know, it's petty... and normally
| I don't say anything and roll with it... but on the inside I
| weep.
|
| [1] Note: 4 Timezones isn't _exactly_ correct. There is
| Hawaii and Alaska of course, and the U.S. Island Territories
| too. And then there 's Arizona, which is permanently on
| Mountain Standard Time (MST), so when the rest of the
| Mountain Zone jump ahead an hour to be in MDT, Arizona is
| still MST, which is the same "time" as PDT ~ is that a
| different timezone? Oh... and only _most_ or Arizona avoids
| MDT - most (but not all) of the Native American Reservations
| in Arizona _do_ observe MDT. _WHY HAVE WE DONE THIS TO
| OURSELVES?!?_ -\\_(tsu)_ /-
| bhauer wrote:
| I am in favor of permanent standard time, but failing that, I
| am _super happy_ with permanent daylight-saving time.
|
| Far more important to me is ridding ourselves of the twice-
| annual insanity of changing clocks. I'd be okay with adopting
| UTC if that meant our clocks never changed again.
| bayindirh wrote:
| I'm reporting from a permanent DST country, and let me tell
| you something. You'll probably leave your home at dark in the
| morning and will return again at dark.
|
| Waking before light is very demanding for some people's
| bodies. I can't sleep past beyond 9AM, but waking up at night
| is a big no no for my body. I can't wake up, I can't
| function, and it creates all kinds of adverse effects.
|
| Health is more important than changing clocks two times a
| year.
|
| No, I'm not simply _dreading_ waking up before sunrise. My
| body can 't function until sunrise regardless of the number
| of hours I sleep. It's built like that. You might not be
| suffering like me, but I'm not the only one. Half of our
| office comes in half-asleep during winter hours.
|
| And no, sunrise clocks doesn't work for me.
| joconde wrote:
| > You'll probably leave your home at dark in the morning
| and will return again at dark.
|
| That's what happened in my high school years in France,
| which still changes clocks twice a year. Wake up in
| complete night, take the bus and wait for classes to start
| under yellow lightbulbs, then go out in the sun for the
| first time in the day at noon.
|
| I don't understand why people are afraid that this will
| bring what was already happening.
| y4mi wrote:
| > _You 'll probably leave your home at dark in the morning
| and will return again at dark._
|
| i live in a country with daylight saving and that happens
| anyway for a quiet long time each year.
| bayindirh wrote:
| Are you leaving at dusk, or at complete darkness? I'm
| talking about the latter. Leaving at dusk/sunrise is nice
| and enjoyable. Complete darkness throws my whole body off
| metabolically.
| walnutclosefarm wrote:
| For many years in Minnesota, I arrived at work in the
| dark, and left in the dark, from roughly mid-November to
| late January. And that was in Minnesota. Most of Europe
| is North of Minneapolis. When I worked in Paris, I walked
| to and from the office in the dark for many weeks of the
| winter.
| bayindirh wrote:
| I'm somewhere between Iowa and Missouri latitude wise. As
| I stated elsewhere, it's more about my metabolism, and
| the DST keeping me at the same side of the sunrise all
| year long.
|
| Permanent DST throws me just before sunrise (aka the
| darkest hour) which wreaks havoc in my body. I'm aware
| not everybody is affected this adversely, but mine is
| affected since forever. It doesn't have a switch for
| that, sorry.
| simonh wrote:
| Where do you live that a one hour shift makes any material
| difference? Where I am the time of sunset shifts by more
| about 4 hours. DST is an annoying band aid half arsed
| effort of a non solution.
| bayindirh wrote:
| Turkey. Normal shift is around 2.5 - 3 hours, however
| where I live, changing clocks means you either wake up
| late sunrise/morning in the summer or just at sunrise in
| the winter.
|
| Permanent DST throws you to 15 to 40 mins before sunrise
| in the winter, it's the hardest time frame for my body to
| wake up.
|
| So, with changing clocks, I can always see my
| surroundings all year long, and with permanent DST, I
| have to use headlights for ~3 months to be able to drive.
|
| It's drastic, and it affects my metabolism badly.
| michaelt wrote:
| Could I recommend a sunrise clock? It's like an alarm
| clock, but with a built in light it gradually turns on over
| the course of 30 minutes or so, simulating the rising of
| the sun.
| bayindirh wrote:
| Artificial light doesn't work for me, unfortunately. I
| immediately wake up when the sun shows its light,
| regardless of presence of artificial light.
|
| I'm built like that, everyone to their own.
| walnutclosefarm wrote:
| > I am in favor of permanent standard time, but failing that,
| I am super happy with permanent daylight-saving time.
|
| Ditto. Switching is the issue for me. And it's not because
| it's all that disruptive to me personally. But it is highly
| disruptive, and dangerous to shift workers. The fall change
| in particularly raised hell in the hospital where I worked,
| since it literally created an hour that occurred twice.
| Computers can store time in universal time, but a nurse
| medicates or does a procedure on a patient by clock time, and
| that duplicate hour and compressed shift increased risk of
| patient harm, misrecording of data, and overall stress a lot.
|
| And really, it's just dumb.
| betwixthewires wrote:
| At this point your main clocks, your phone and your computer,
| change themselves for you. Daylight savings time is no big
| deal really, it's just something to gripe about.
|
| That said, I'm heavily in favor of ending it. It's stupid.
| But I disagree that permanent DST is less stupid than time
| changes. I think the idea of permanently having the clock say
| an hour later than it is is just as senseless or more so than
| the yearly switch. Just end this madness and be done with it.
| ariwilson wrote:
| DST has a high cost to anyone who is responsible for
| creatures that do not understand it - children and pets.
| Johnny555 wrote:
| Somehow our dog adjusted to DST on his own this time. I
| don't know how, he normally wakes us up at 7:30 am to go
| out in the morning (right before my alarm goes off)...
| since Sunday's DST change he's been waking us up when the
| clock reads 7:30 under DST - I don't know what cue he's
| using, it's got to be traffic or a neighbor, my best
| guess is that a neighbor is letting their dog out at the
| same time every morning and our dog hears it.
| betwixthewires wrote:
| Yeah, but that doesn't explain why permanent DST instead
| of just ending DST. "People don't like switching clocks,
| and I've got the solution! Let's make the mass delusion
| permanent!" Can we just end the madness altogether?
| dzikimarian wrote:
| All of them are delusion. It's simply something we, as
| society, agreed on, many years ago. It comes to personal
| preference and for many people more daylight in the
| afternoon is more convenient.
| betwixthewires wrote:
| No they're not all delusion, one is an abstraction, the
| others are delusion.
|
| Noon is when the sun is 50% done with its cycle from rise
| to set. We base our clocks on that. Not delusion,
| abstraction. It is simply a measure of objective reality.
|
| Deciding that noon is at 1:00pm on the longest days of
| the year so that the sun can set at night instead of
| evening is delusion. Deciding to make that permanent all
| year around isn't any better.
| monocasa wrote:
| Noon hasn't meant high noon in nearly 150 years. With the
| establishment of timezones in 1883, we shifted from "noon
| is the highest point in the sky" to "noon is when we
| decide makes the most sense logistically for your general
| region". It came with an outcry of the same argument
| you're making.
| jedberg wrote:
| It depends where you are in your time zone. For a good
| chunk of the land in the US, DST is closer to solar time:
|
| http://blog.poormansmath.net/images/SolarTimeVsStandardTi
| me....
|
| But of course a whole lot of the population lives in the
| part where it's worse.
| irrational wrote:
| Cars, appliances, wall clocks, alarm clocks, sprinkler
| system, even my garage door opener has a manual clock that
| has to be reset manaully.
| taway01239 wrote:
| Unfortunately, young kids circadian rhythms are pretty
| backward in that they don't change themselves
| automatically. They just either get up too early or one
| hour before too early.
| asiachick wrote:
| not my experience with my kids or myself as a kid (or
| myself as an adult). Not saying your experience is wrong.
| Just suggesting others might not have the same experience
| xtracto wrote:
| This has been the impact for me:
|
| - There's a 3 week span where the US changes to DST but my
| country don't, meeting times get hectic.
|
| - My dog goes out at 6:30 am in the morning, 6:30pm
| afternoon and eats at 9:00pm. After DST changes, the poor
| guy gets all confused, and wants to go out at 5:30 in the
| morning.
|
| - I do find it harder to fall asleep after the daylight
| time change. It disrupts my sleeping/resting for at least 2
| weeks.
|
| I am happy that the USA got rid of it, HOPEFULLY the
| Mexican government will as well, and fingers crossed, they
| also decide to stay with DST, otherwise the timezone
| differences will be crazy.
| Gigachad wrote:
| My watch and bike computer still don't change time
| automatically which is enough to be annoying.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| As I posted elsewhere, I'm bipolar and the time changes
| literally ruin 4 weeks out of the year for me.
|
| I wish they had choose EST but fuck it, I'll take EDT. I
| don't care. I just want this to stop.
| AussieWog93 wrote:
| Serious question, but how/why is your life ruined, and
| why so long? I can't imagine a single hour ruining sleep
| patterns that badly?
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| I don't mind the question. :) Discussed that here:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30692209
| AussieWog93 wrote:
| Christ. That sounds horrible. So glad it'll soon be a
| thing of the past.
| edflsafoiewq wrote:
| What's people's deal with changing clocks? It's never
| bothered me.
| derefr wrote:
| My grandfather broke his hip when he fell off a step-ladder
| while changing a wall clock. At the hospital, I learned
| that this sort of thing is not all too uncommon among the
| elderly, since "changing the time on a clock" seems like
| such a simple task that it slides right past the conscious
| awareness of one's own diminished physical abilities.
| judge2020 wrote:
| It's less the act of changing the clocks and rather the ill
| effects of losing an hour of sleep and readjusting for a
| few days of the year.
|
| > DST is linked to a six percent increase in car accidents.
| The study analyzed 20 years of data and found that DST is
| responsible for around 28 deaths each year.
|
| https://www.phillypilaw.com/2021/03/15/car-accidents-
| dayligh...
| ghaff wrote:
| People really shouldn't fly I guess. Because many of us
| deal with multi-hour time changes on a regular basis.
| Going to be dealing with a 5 hour one in a couple of
| days.
| dzikimarian wrote:
| You probably have a good reason for it and it's probably
| going to suck. I don't see why do this to everyone twice
| a year for no reason.
| ghaff wrote:
| Honestly, 1 hour doesn't even qualify as jetlag for me.
| My wakeup time _easily_ varies by that across a week. 5-6
| hours is a lot (and travel to Asia is worse). But I
| wouldn 't even describe it as "sucking." It's just
| something I deal with when traveling over the course of a
| couple of days. In pre-pandemic times, cross-US trips
| were pretty routine and East Coast to Europe trips
| common.
| dzikimarian wrote:
| I actually find regular changes worse. When I flied
| across the pond, schedule was constructed around it.
| Switch to and from DST requires semi-permanent shift in
| daily routine with is much more annoying.
| 0xCMP wrote:
| Jet Lag is a well known phenomenon and if you're changing
| time zones regularly you probably have a system to
| minimize it. If you did not you'd likely suffer much more
| from it.
|
| Also flying is optional, but changing from XST to XDT is
| not.
| scrumbledober wrote:
| i only fly north/south
| Johnny555 wrote:
| And that's a big problem for lots of people - I plan on
| the few days of a long trip to get accustomed to the
| local time and feel comfortable and well rested.
|
| But just because I'm willing to put up with it when I
| travel that I want to put up with it twice a year for no
| apparent benefit.
|
| If I had the option to not have to deal with time zone
| changes when I travel across the country (or world), I'd
| vote for that solution. Even if ballistic air travel
| means I can fly from LA to Tokyo in an hour, the 17 hour
| (well, 7 hour) time difference means it'll never be a
| seamless trip even if I can do it in an afternoon. I'm
| told that if you have the time, taking a cross-atlantic
| trip to Europe is great because there's no jet lag, you
| slowly adjust to the time over the course of the travel.
| rlt wrote:
| That's a choice you get to make. I'm sure some people
| chose not to fly to avoid dealing with it.
| Etherlord87 wrote:
| In Poland, trains literally stop for an hour when switching
| to standard time. Since it's during the night, it's not
| many trains, but still, people literally have to wait an
| hour, making their travel an hour longer, because of the
| time change. It happened to me once, I was robbed of an
| hour of my life due to this ridiculousness.
|
| Granted, time switching doesn't directly force trains to
| stop, but I imagine the risks related to the time change or
| just travelers' confusion is the reason why that happens.
| swader999 wrote:
| Good thing you didn't fly.
| sacrosancty wrote:
| My dog learnt when she would get fed until her first
| daylight savings shift when she'd get all clingy and whiney
| for an hour wondering why dinner was late.
| psyc wrote:
| It never bothered me. This new deal won't bother me either.
| Apparently other people have an awful lot to say about it
| though.
| ghaff wrote:
| I think in an earlier life when I was commuting to fairly
| specific hours, I'd have cared a lot more--both about
| changing times and EST/EDT. These days I'm really pretty
| flexible and don't commute so it doesn't much matter.
| dijit wrote:
| It's not even about the manual clock changes honestly for
| me.
|
| I never thought that changing clocks was the pain.
|
| It's that everyone gets jetlag kinda randomly.
|
| One hour extra of sleep or one hour less. It's just random,
| seemingly comes out of nowhere and knocks me on my ass for
| a couple of days while my body gets used to doing
| everything the same but an hour earlier or later.
|
| It's literally the same as jetlag except I don't have any
| environmental clues to help my body understand it's
| _supposed_ to be doing something different
| Johnny555 wrote:
| _It's not even about the manual clock changes honestly
| for me._
|
| I think that depends on how many clocks you have. My wife
| likes clocks and we have one in nearly every room,
| including 2 that are only reachable with a ladder. That's
| in addition to the stove, microwave, and even the
| refrigerator and toaster oven have a clock for no good
| reason. Plus the rice maker, bread maker and coffee maker
| also have clocks to allow timed cooking (i.e. have the
| rice ready by 6pm).
| warent wrote:
| I just enjoyed a nice short weekend thanks to DST. Horrible
| jupp0r wrote:
| It takes weeks to get my kids to adapt to getting to bed an
| hour earlier. Before I had kids I too was wondering what
| the fuzz was about.
| jedberg wrote:
| I had a massive parenting win this week. Normally it's a
| chore to get my kids to bed before 10pm, but yesterday I
| had them both _asleep_ by 9:30pm. It was a damn miracle.
| dan-robertson wrote:
| I work in Europe and have colleagues in the east coast of
| the US. The dst switches happen a few weeks apart so twice
| a year everyone gets fucked up schedules for two weeks
| because meetings move with the time zone of the person who
| created them. We have specialised tooling to notice if
| computer programs will behave weirdly because a job is
| scheduled to run during the hour of the night that happens
| twice/not at all (obviously one solution is to avoid
| scheduling jobs in local time but if you need to react with
| the real world where things are scheduled in local time,
| this becomes harder).
| joshspankit wrote:
| Literally just had this happen this week: We have a
| standing meeting between NA and London, and I thought we
| would have to have a talk when they were showing up "an
| hour late".
|
| Turns out we all just forgot the offset changed between
| us.
| II2II wrote:
| Yeah, we even have the technology for clocks to adjust
| themselves automatically. Which is great when everything
| goes according to plan. The thing is, sometimes it doesn't.
| I woke up awfully confused last year when I noticed my cell
| phone's clock (thus my alarm clock) did not agree with my
| microwave's clock. The time change was not supposed occur
| that weekend, but somehow the mobile provider confused the
| UK with Canada (or so the story went). Even without that
| error, there was always a risk of someone showing up for
| work early or late due to the time change simply because
| they were not paying attention.
|
| I never really cared for the time change. Even though there
| was a time when I would have preferred one over the other,
| at this point I would be happy enough to say "good
| riddance" regardless of which is decided upon.
| neutronicus wrote:
| It's a nightmare with young kids, let me tell you
| AYBABTME wrote:
| There's evidence that accident rates and health issues
| increase by a significant margin right after the clock
| change that causes a reduction of night sleep by 1h. The
| book "Why We Sleep" makes a really good argument about it
| all, and is a generally great book.
| ksala_ wrote:
| I usually realised that DST is on/off a few days after it
| happens because people complain. Otherwise all my clocks
| just adjust themself, I wake up whenever my alarm clock
| ring and that's it. I never understood the hate for it.
| OJFord wrote:
| Yeah my sleeping is no where near regular enough to be
| worried about a forced hour lost or gained.
|
| I think the same logic that gives us different timezones
| would suggest summer hours (or in the limit, a continual
| shift) though - so perhaps we should just go the whole
| hog and have GMT (or whatever, doesn't matter) as a fixed
| global time!
| jedberg wrote:
| It's fine for adults, but kids and pets do not go by the
| clock, they go by the sun. It's a challenge to get them
| to switch.
| irrational wrote:
| Each of our car clocks have to be changed manually. The
| clocks on the stove and microwave have to be changed
| manually. We have 7 wall clocks in the house that have to
| be changed manually. Our kids have alarm clocks that all
| have to be changed manually. The sprinkler system has a
| clock that has to be set manually. Even our garage door
| opener has a clock that has to be set manually. It is a
| huge pain every six months.
| lovich wrote:
| Do what normal people do and never update those clocks.
| It's not like +1/-1 math is hard, and I can't imagine
| trusting a manually adjusted clock if I actually cared
| about the time
| Johnny555 wrote:
| That's what I do, and that's a more viable solution than
| it used to be since I carry a pocket watch (i.e. a phone)
| with me everywhere I go, and I usually use Android Auto
| while driving, so my phone's clock is displayed in my
| car.
|
| But I used to rely on my car's clock to know what time it
| is, and kept it updated for DST.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| > Do what normal people do
|
| [citation needed]
|
| I would think that changing clocks is actually the more
| "normal" thing to do.
| yurishimo wrote:
| Yea, most people change the clock.
|
| The only clock I don't change is my motorcycle because I
| can't be bothered to use the archaic menu system to
| update something I never rely on.
|
| That said, it does take me a few weeks usually to update
| all the clocks as I'll only do it when it starts to
| bother me or if that specific clock contributes to me
| being late/early.
| FastMonkey wrote:
| I've been around, and there very few 9-to-5 places that mind if
| people work 10-to-6 or 8-to-4 instead.
| ghaff wrote:
| I think you're overestimating the percentage of jobs that
| have that level of flexibility.
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| The one hour switch doesn't bother me that much. I didn't even
| notice this week when the time changed, because all of my
| clocks adjusted themselves. A friend had to remind me yesterday
| when I remarked how it was still light outside.
|
| What bothers me is having to wake up when it's still dark
| outside. The last few days before the DST switch in the fall
| are always _super_ rough for me, every year. Going through that
| all winter, every winter... I 'm absolutely dreading this!
|
| Society is already optimized for early risers and all we're
| doing is making it worse. _Maybe_ there will eventually be a
| movement to switch time zones, but it would take at least
| another decade.
| Ar-Curunir wrote:
| I prefer to have some sunlight left after getting done with
| work. This makes life so much better.
| asiachick wrote:
| Agreed. For me this is a, slightly, better work-life
| balance. Instead of giving all the nice daylight hours to
| work on weekdays I sometimes get 1 more for myself.
| NAHWheatCracker wrote:
| I bought hue bulbs last year everything in my apartment
| slowly turns up to full brightness over ~30 minutes around
| the time that my alarm goes off.
|
| I also have the light switch through two phases of red at
| night which signals to me to do things in the evening and
| prep for sleep.
|
| I don't know if that will help you personally, but I can
| recommend it.
| qubitcoder wrote:
| Personally, as someone with DSPS (Delayed Sleep Phase
| Syndrome), I absolutely love waking up and going to work when
| it's still dark in the morning. It feels so productive and
| motivating.
|
| On the contrary, when the sun is already blaring, it feels
| like you're already running late & behind. Not to mention
| interfering with already precious sleep.
|
| The world is already hyper-optimized for early risers. For
| once, let those of us who don't naturally fall asleep until
| well into morning hours enjoy a perk! :-)
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| I don't understand at all! If you don't fall asleep until
| well into morning hours, and you have trouble sleeping when
| the sun "is already blaring"--don't you need to go to bed
| later and have time to sleep in?
| Arubis wrote:
| Agreed. The posted decision (permanently DST) is stupid, but
| less stupid than switching.
| moffkalast wrote:
| I feel like the permanent DST option is a bit stupid in
| principle since as the other guy says it's about switching
| time zones and time zones should be primarily longitude
| based, not I-feel-like-being-in-whatever based because that's
| nonsense.
|
| As an example France and Spain have no business being in
| CET/GMT+1 at all. France is geographically entirely in GMT,
| while some of Spain is in GMT-1 even, I mean what the actual
| fuck.
|
| Time zones should be based on science, and work/school
| schedules should be flexible enough that people can decide on
| a company/institutional level when to start. If you want to
| start later, start later, don't fuck with the countrywide
| clock and make timekeeping a nightmare you goddamn idiots.
| frereubu wrote:
| > France and Spain have no business being in CET/GMT+1 at
| all
|
| Technically of course you're correct (and you'd probably
| need to include the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg in
| there), but thousands of people drive across those borders
| every day. Clearly the timezones need to have borders
| somewhere, but it's probably easier in practical terms to
| keep the timezones of adjacent countries synchronised
| wherever possible. It also makes sense of the very late-
| night culture of Spain when compared to countries further
| east, because they're probably eating around the same solar
| time as the other countries. The one I find weirdest is the
| western hold-out Portugal.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Portugal is always the exception :)
| rob74 wrote:
| Tell that to China, who should have at least 3 time zones,
| but have only one - and that's not even "centered", it's
| Beijing time, which is pretty far east. But yeah, for the
| people in Tibet and Xinjiang, living in the completely
| wrong time zone is the least of their worries...
| chias wrote:
| Timezones are based on who you do business with, and who
| you primarily need to coordinate with. Timezones aren't
| _inherently_ anything, they 're purely a measure that
| humans use to make our lives more convenient. If you want
| to argue hard science, you'll have an uphill job of
| explaining to me why there should be 24 timezones and not
| 1440 of them.
|
| With that in mind, picture how annoying it would be if you
| crossed a timezone line on your way to your (or your
| child's) school. Picture how annoying it would be if half
| the restaurants, shops, and businesses in your town were in
| one timezone, and the other half were in another. These
| issues are what timezones address, just on a governmental
| level.
|
| Timezones don't try to be "correct", they try to be useful.
| moffkalast wrote:
| > and not 1440 of them
|
| Well actually there are 96 of them in practice, I think
| it's tracked in increments of 15 minutes since anything
| less is a bit meaningless.
|
| Of course in reality it's continuous so there are
| infinite timezones, but the only practical thing we can
| change are hours so minutes don't get offset and make
| planning even more of a nightmare. If we used a more
| sensible base 10 time keeping one could probably do more.
|
| > picture how annoying it would be if you crossed a
| timezone line on your way to your (or your child's)
| school
|
| I'm pretty sure this happens in the US to people on a
| daily basis? It's the unfortunate reality of living on a
| rotating sphere that you really can't avoid if you cross
| country/state lines often.
|
| > they try to be useful
|
| I don't see how it's useful to keep west Spain 2 hours
| late to their actual sunrise time. It must be rather
| maddening.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| > Well actually there are 96 of them in practice, I think
| it's tracked in increments of 15 minutes since anything
| less is a bit meaningless.
|
| I don't think most of those exist, actually. If nobody is
| observing (for example) +6:45, I wouldn't count it as an
| actual time zone.
|
| Even :30 tzs are fairly rare, I think the number of
| :15/45 is counted on one hand.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Nepal uses a 15 min offset I think, but I wouldn't expect
| anyone to really use that in a practical fashion.
|
| I'd expect it to be used in say astronomical
| observations, where this sort of thing actually matters
| and isn't treated as made up or subject to stupid
| opinions. Or other kinds of calculations that need the
| sun's position to match more accurately.
| jedberg wrote:
| > I'm pretty sure this happens in the US to people on a
| daily basis?
|
| Not really. The time zones are pretty crooked so that the
| borders go through desolate areas. Only place that really
| happens is near Chicago.
| internet2000 wrote:
| A lot of people live near Chicago.
| jedberg wrote:
| In the grand scheme of things, not really. And most of
| them aren't crossing into Indiana every day.
| chimeracoder wrote:
| > Timezones don't try to be "correct", they try to be
| useful
|
| This is correct. As engineers we can design the most
| symmetric and "perfect" system, but at the end of the
| day, if it's not useful, people will just adopt something
| else instead.
|
| > If you want to argue hard science, you'll have an
| uphill job of explaining to me why there should be 24
| timezones and not 1440 of them.
|
| There's a good argument against having too many time
| zones (this article is about continuous timezones, but
| the arguments are still applicable)
|
| https://qntm.org/continuous
| nomdep wrote:
| Spain is in GMT+1 because Franco wanted to be in the same
| time zone as Nazi Germany https://www.washingtonpost.com/ne
| ws/worldviews/wp/2016/12/14...
| moffkalast wrote:
| Ah another one to add to the pile of things made by nazis
| that are still in use, along with the olympic torch relay
| and Fanta.
| asiachick wrote:
| One requires one entity, the US government, to make a
| decision. The other requires millions of entities to make a
| decision. For this case, the government making the decision
| makes more sense IMO. Every restaurant, coffee-shop,
| supermarket etc, doesn't have to do anything (they're
| already on DST). Everything is already happening.
| Deliveries are already scheduled for opening hours etc...
| Your suggested way would require millions of not billions
| of little coordinations.
|
| That said, every old non-updated OS is going to F up once
| this happens.
| KerrAvon wrote:
| CryptoBanker wrote:
| Read the whole reply. If you want permanent standard time,
| then one path would be to adopt permanent daylight savings
| and _then_ change your local time zone to compensate.
|
| It would take more effort up front but eliminates the need to
| change clocks twice a year
| nulbyte wrote:
| Isn't this effectively what the legislation does? I read it
| as striking DST and shifting time zones. Permanent DST is
| just marketing.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| Yes.
|
| But "Permanent DST" is a lot easier to say and type than
| "Eliminate DST and shift the time zones".
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| You could also write "permanent standard time". Does the
| legislation include shifting time zones?
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| You're parsing it wrong. Or rather, you're not parsing the
| entire comment.
|
| What they're saying is that there are two positions:
|
| 1. Permanent Standard Time > Permanent DST > Switching
|
| 2. Permanent DST > Permanent Standard Time > Switching
|
| And that NOBODY (or at least, an extremely small minority)
| would rather choose switching over either of the permanent
| options.
| notriddle wrote:
| I know a few people who would choose options 3 and 4...
|
| 3. Switching > Permanent Standard Time > Permanent DST
|
| 4. Switching > Permanent DST > Permanent Standard Time
|
| It's the ones where Switching is in the middle that are
| basically unheard-of.
| runarberg wrote:
| I think it is disputed among public health experts which
| is better:
|
| 1. Permanent Standard Time > Permanent DST > Switching
|
| 5. Permanent Standard Time > Switching > Permanent DST
|
| That is it is some believe that the sleep deprivation
| imposed by permanent DST is so bad that even with all the
| downsides and health detriments of switching, it is still
| preferable over permanent DST. I don't know how wide
| spread this is though and I think most public health
| experts agree that permanent standard time is always the
| preferred option.
|
| Having lived in Permanent DST and switching timezones
| (but never in permanent standard) I definitely prefer
| permanent DST. However I do not have fond memories of
| permanent DST and I wished policy makers would listen to
| experts and move to permanent standard.
| oddthink wrote:
| I'd definitely choose #3. I don't mind switching, but
| it's what I'm used to. I'd be OK with dropping it, but if
| we did, I'd want standard time.
|
| Permanent DST makes no sense to me. Maybe it's my
| astronomy background, but "noon" means something,
| something that involves the position of the sun and the
| earth. We quantize that to timezones for coordination,
| but it doesn't mean it's meaningless.
|
| If we stop switching, fine, but don't mess with noon.
| Just change your schedule to 8-4 or whatever. Permanent
| DST seems like wanting everyone to be above average. Or
| deciding that everyone would be happier if they're
| taller, so we're shrinking the foot by 10%.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| > Just change your schedule to 8-4 or whatever.
|
| Most people don't have the privilege of deciding their
| work hours.
|
| > Permanent DST seems like wanting everyone to be above
| average.
|
| Not at all. I'd simply rather have more daylight in the
| evening when I'm awake. To me, any daylight before 10 AM
| is mostly wasted, as on the weekends, I don't even wake
| up until 10 or 11 AM. Granted, I do acknowledge how much
| of an outlier I am.
|
| Simple fact is, most people would rather have the extra
| daylight in the evening, even if that means that "noon"
| no longer has the special meaning of "The halfway point
| between sunrise and sunset" or "The time when the sun is
| highest in the sky". I'd rather that time be 1 PM.
| dkonofalski wrote:
| Can you clarify for me? I genuinely can't see a benefit
| to switching. All I see is that switching complicates
| things for everyone. As someone that lives in a place
| that didn't observe DST to begin with, I'm confused as to
| why anyone would want to switch.
| watwut wrote:
| That is not true. I don't mind switching at all. Pretty
| much everyone I know prefers switching over the bad
| permanent time.
| Ansil849 wrote:
| Does anyone else find it incredibly fucked up that the government
| gets to dictate our concepts of time?
| Freak_NL wrote:
| Let's hope the EU manages to follow; it seems to be in the cards,
| but politically tricky. This is something that has gained a lot
| of traction the last decade though; lots of popular support too
| (parents of young children will rejoice).
| tested23 wrote:
| Sleep is one of the most important bodily functions, disrupting
| it because of silly reasons such as not waking up in light is
| ridiculous
| hirundo wrote:
| Because it is such an important function, and because light
| disrupts sleep, it is important to sleep mostly in the dark. If
| it gets light naturally in time to wake you up when you need
| to, great. If it gets light earlier, not great.
| throwthere wrote:
| Just when you thought your timezone display code was finally
| functioning. Now what do you call non-DST timezones? Just PST?
| Will we refer to our timezone as PST (DST) for the rest of our
| lives?
|
| Let's drop this madness and go to one worldwide timezone.
| MrZongle2 wrote:
| I can understand the concern of other posters about going to DST
| as opposed to standard time... but at this point, I just want the
| switching to end. It is such an unnecessary disruption and fixing
| it seems so trivial.
| nemo44x wrote:
| It's total necessary and a great design. Without this then it
| would be dark until 8:30 in the morning during winter and the
| other way the Sun would rise at 4:30AM. These are both bad
| outcomes so we adjust the clocks so optimize these.
| barrucadu wrote:
| > These are both bad outcomes
|
| Why?
| nemo44x wrote:
| Because having the Sun rise at 8:30 is really late. We
| waste energy and secondly people are spending 2 hours of
| their morning in the dark.
|
| Having the Sun rise at 4:30 is bad because it's just too
| early to get up and makes for poor sleep. Having the Sun
| set later in the day is better in this case.
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| whats 9:30 vs 8:30? Just a label.
|
| Work when the sun is up, call that 9AM. Wake up at X AM
| so you can get to work on time. It's all just a label, so
| long as humans can agree.
| nemo44x wrote:
| For a lot of people it's the difference between having a
| job and being fired. Try telling your boss that you're
| coming in at 9:30 because it's just a number.
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| i guess this is where we post /r/antiwork or other great
| resignation or something.
|
| But yeah I hear you, some people can be so unreasonable.
| Nonetheless we should refuse to design our society around
| unreasonable people.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Make chronotypes into a protected class and institute
| national flex-time.
| freedrock87 wrote:
| The Sun isn't rising any earlier since DST is being changed
| for the summer
| gspr wrote:
| Is it really such a disruption? People fly across timezones all
| the time. Daylight savings and return to normal happen twice
| per year at entirely predictable times, and are modest changes
| - is it really so hard?
| n_plus_1 wrote:
| https://www.c-span.org/video/?518686-2/senate-session-part-2... I
| love hearing who I assume to be the speaker of the Senate say "oh
| I love it" on a hot mic.
| solidsnack9000 wrote:
| The rule should be that each state can decide which one it wants
| but can only pick one. Arizona's case for standard time ("spring
| forward" just puts more of the day in the hottest time) is pretty
| reasonable.
| betwixthewires wrote:
| Goodness. Just end daylight savings time, problem solved. Oh you
| don't like waking up at 6, you'd rather wake up at 7? Well I've
| got news for you, you're waking up _at the same time either way_
| it 's just that the clock shows an hour later. What time it is is
| when the sun comes up and goes down, not what number it is on the
| clock, the clock is supposed to be indicative of where the sun is
| in the sky, not the other way around.
| ColinEberhardt wrote:
| For those of you who are interested in the changing shape of the
| various timezones, moving to standardised offset, the rise and
| fall of daylight savings, I wrote a blog on the subject a little
| while back, "Exploring 120 years of timezones"
|
| https://blog.scottlogic.com/2021/09/14/120-years-timezone.ht...
| captainmuon wrote:
| This is ridiculous. Why don't they make the regular time
| permanent? And if people want to have more light in the evening,
| then they just leave work earlier. Surely that is easier than
| permanent daylight savings time.
|
| I know people will say it's too hard to change habits and (clock)
| work hours, but with permanent DST you will have to change that
| anyway, when people realize how dark winter mornings will be. I
| predict a lot of people will want to move school start to a later
| hour then.
| HideousKojima wrote:
| The problem is that there are three options:
|
| 1) Permanent DST 2) Permanent Standard Time 3) Status Quo
|
| And the problem is that, at least based on what I've gathered
| anecdotally from speaking to people and from which side the
| media pushes, preferences are usually 1-2-3, followed by 2-1-3,
| followed by 2-3-1, with anyone who prefers the status quo in
| dead last.
|
| Personally I prefer standard time to DST as well, but we don't
| really have any power to make that decision.
| sschueller wrote:
| What about a 30 min shift? There are already time zone that
| are shifted by 30min.
| HideousKojima wrote:
| I'm guessing that would be crazy unpopular (for Americans
| at least) but I'm not sure. I actually had a 30 minute
| shifted timezone bite me last week, I ended up being 30
| minutes late to a conference call with our team in Mumbai
| DangitBobby wrote:
| Seems like it would make much more sense for locales to add
| their own timezones then to try to globally split the
| difference.
| tempestn wrote:
| I must be a weirdo with my 1-3-2 preference then! I hate the
| time change, but I'd hate to give up evening sunlight even
| more.
| antisthenes wrote:
| > And if people want to have more light in the evening, then
| they just leave work earlier
|
| Feel free to follow your own advice and come into work later.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| The sun currently rises at 5:30 in the summer where I live. It
| would just not be acceptable for it to rise at 4:30.
| Asooka wrote:
| Why? Just get up earlier to get that hour in the morning.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| I prefer to wake up at the perfect time to get ready for
| work. Personal activities happen after work. Most people I
| speak with seem to have the same schedule. The hour of
| light from 5:30 to 6:30 is already wasted, really more
| since I wake up at 7 most of the time.
| [deleted]
| babypuncher wrote:
| I do not see how either daylight or standard time is
| fundamentally easier than the other. I could just as easily
| tell people who want brighter winter mornings to just wake up
| later.
|
| The argument in favor of DST generally goes that people have
| more spare time in the afternoon than in the morning. So
| extending afternoon sunlight hours benefits more people.
| cbarrick wrote:
| The government wants everyone to have more daylight hours
| after work, since that's correlated with higher economic
| activity.
|
| From the government's perspective, they cannot force all
| companies to shift their working hours, but they can shift
| the clock. They're changing the abstraction once instead of
| changing all concrete implementations.
|
| This change doesn't make a difference for most of us in tech,
| since we can usually set our own hours. But it does make a
| difference for shift workers.
| stygiansonic wrote:
| What do you mean they can just leave work earlier? There are
| tons of jobs where the shift hours are defined, eg 9-5 or 8-4
| and you can't simply leave earlier.
| hnov wrote:
| I've noticed people with kids tend to share this position,
| while those without prefer DST.
| aqme28 wrote:
| > I predict a lot of people will want to move school start to a
| later hour then.
|
| I'm a proponent of this regardless. Forcing teenagers to be
| awake at 6AM is not helpful.
| chaorace wrote:
| > Why don't they make the regular time permanent?
|
| There's a pro-DST lobby because more post-work daylight hours
| is correlated with higher consumer spending. For that reason,
| permanent DST is more politically expedient in relation to
| permanent standard time.
|
| > And if people want to have more light in the evening, then
| they just leave work earlier. Surely that is easier than
| permanent daylight savings time.
|
| I don't think it's possible to lobby employers to change their
| shift hours. It is, in fact, much easier to lobby the
| government to change the clocks.
|
| > I predict a lot of people will want to move school start to a
| later hour then.
|
| This is probably a good idea, though... good ideas don't really
| seem to have much bearing on the way we arrange school
| schedules.
| tempestn wrote:
| I think school hours are mostly set as early as they are to
| allow parents to get kids to school before going to work.
| jonahhorowitz wrote:
| If this was rational, you'd be able to drop your kids off
| on the way to work and pick them up on the way home (ie:
| 8am to 6pm or something similar).
| _greim_ wrote:
| > There's a pro-DST lobby because more post-work daylight
| hours is correlated with higher consumer spending. For that
| reason, permanent DST is more politically expedient in
| relation to permanent standard time.
|
| You're probably overthinking this. Not every government
| action is a five-level Machiavellian scheme. Sometimes
| overwhelming public sentiment carries the day.
| throitallaway wrote:
| To be fair, economic incentives seem to be what drives most
| decisions.
|
| https://www.npr.org/2021/11/01/1050492391/daylight-saving-
| ti...
| aiisjustanif wrote:
| I wish we could change the phrase "economic incentive".
|
| At the very essence of Economics it is the focus on
| actions human beings, fundamentally trade and labor. And
| it seeks the most optimal level of benefit or utility for
| humans.
|
| This is an incentive for companies, not necessarily
| humanity.
| throitallaway wrote:
| Corporations are people, my friend. At least in the US.
| KerrAvon wrote:
| Rubio literally said they did this after talking with
| airline/hospitality lobbyists.
| standardUser wrote:
| "...then they just leave work earlier."
|
| I don't like when people accuse others of living in a "bubble",
| but this is a particularly egregious example of being deeply
| out of touch with the lives of most working people.
| caditinpiscinam wrote:
| Because DST currently lasts longer (almost 8 months)
| avl999 wrote:
| This is ridiculous. Why don't they make the _DST_ permanent?
| And if people want to have more light in the _MORNING_ , then
| they just _WAKE UP LATER_. Surely that is easier than permanent
| _REGULAR_ time.
| deathanatos wrote:
| Because, aside from that noon should be at noon (roughly,
| allowing for the obvious error that standard time and mean
| solar time introduce, but which are present in both perma-
| standard and perma-DST) and you shouldn't be legislating
| business hours by screwing around with what the clock
| says..., it's a bad decision:
|
| > _Permanent standard time is considered by circadian health
| researchers and safety experts worldwide to be the best
| option for health, safety, schools, and economy, including
| the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, National Sleep
| Foundation, American College of Chest Physicians, National
| Safety Council, American College of Occupational and
| Environmental Medicine, Canadian Sleep Society, World Sleep
| Society, Society for Research on Biological Rhythms, and
| several state sleep societies._
|
| > _It is supported by environmental evidence, owing to
| evidence that DST observation increases driving, morning
| heating, and evening air conditioning, which all in turn
| increase energy consumption and pollution._
|
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_time_observation_in_
| ...)
| cheeze wrote:
| > Because, aside from that noon should be at noon
|
| I disagree. Noon should be whatever noon's offset from UTC
| should be.
|
| We should all use UTC.
| rory wrote:
| This is ridiculous. Why don't they make _AEST_ time
| permanent? And if people want to have more light in the
| _DAYTIME_ , they can just _MOVE TO AUSTRALIA_. Surely that is
| easier than _PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO SEE MY FACE DURING ZOOM
| MEETINGS_.
| mortenjorck wrote:
| I see this as ultimately a conflict between morning people and
| non-morning-people.
|
| I am not a morning person, and so naturally I welcome this
| trading away of brighter winter mornings to get brighter winter
| evenings. But I recognize there are many, presumably yourself
| included, who prefer the opposite.
|
| I don't have a good solution to suit everyone, and I certainly
| don't want to gloat at having "won." If anything, perhaps just
| as workplaces are sorting into remote-first and non-remote-
| first to address different employee preferences, the same will
| happen with times of day.
| Monkoton1 wrote:
| Not everyone has the freedom to choose when to get off work as
| many have commitments from looking after children and to
| commute. Given a fixed schedule, I think more people have free
| time in the afternoon and would like to have that time be in
| the light and spend the time like commuting in the dark.
| fknorangesite wrote:
| > And if people want to have more light in the evening, then
| they just leave work earlier.
|
| What percentage of people do you think get to choose what time
| they can leave work?
| joezydeco wrote:
| We did this before. 46 years ago. And it went badly.
|
| https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/10/30/the-year-daylight-sav...
|
| Why do we have such short memories?
| noahtallen wrote:
| You'd have to be over 60 years old to have any memory of that,
| and even then you would have been a kid at the time. Plus your
| memory gets worse as you age. So why would anyone here have a
| memory of that experience? The only memories we have are of DST
| messing up our sleep schedules twice a year for no apparent
| benefit to us.
|
| But more to the point, the article doesn't really talk about
| why it went badly. In fact, the only thing it mentions (kids
| getting up too early for school) is a very solvable problem and
| one which should be solved regardless of DST.
| davidsawyer wrote:
| Because a lot of us are only half that old?
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| Oh the children!
|
| Give me a break. Go to school in the dark, or come home in the
| dark. Do that one time of year, or another. It all comes out in
| the wash.
| nemo44x wrote:
| It's unsafe. A child is more likely to be hit by a car when
| it is dark. With the current system they can leave for school
| and come home when there is light.
| matsemann wrote:
| Ban cars around schools.
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| Some places, at some times of year.
| r0m4n0 wrote:
| Shouldn't they just go to school later when it's darker?
| They could come up with a policy to start school later and
| get out later in the winter or something. Why does the
| entire country have to modify their clocks for a few
| minority use cases?
| nullc wrote:
| Sure, then move the start times of the school to a safe
| time. The time zone changes kill people.
| [deleted]
| bradlys wrote:
| Cool. Teach your kid to not run into the middle of the
| street then?
|
| Provide pedestrian pathways/walkways? Idk maybe make
| walking a good thing?
|
| Many ways to do this instead of, "children can only be
| outside when the sun is at high noon!!"
| jahewson wrote:
| Day 1: teach small child French
|
| Day 2: child now speaks fluent French!
|
| And so it is with running into the street.
| moron4hire wrote:
| Is it society's time-keeping system that is at fault, or
| the school system's start time? Cuz I kinda think organized
| school systems with rigid start times are a later
| development.
| richardwhiuk wrote:
| That's not true in the northern states anyway.
| ghaff wrote:
| I have a feeling quite a few people commenting don't live
| in northern states and thinks there's plenty of light to
| go around if it were just aligned right.
| cr1895 wrote:
| Or living in countries north of northern US states. They
| should come visit a higher latitude in winter
| ghaff wrote:
| Basically because of the Gulf Stream influence on
| climate, I suspect a lot of Americans would be surprised
| how far north Europe is compared to the US. (And
| therefore that you deal with darkness in the morning
| _and_ the evening for a decent chunk of the year.)
| twiddling wrote:
| The demographic center of the US has drifted South over
| the past 50 years
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_center_of_the_United_S
| tat...
| stadium wrote:
| Morning and evening sunlight depends a lot on the latitude.
| falcolas wrote:
| I would also note that in the northern states, children go to
| school in the dark (and often also come home in the dark)
| regardless of DST/ST, because we hold school over winter, and
| we get about 8-9 hours of sunlight a day in the winter.
| ibejoeb wrote:
| How did it go badly?
| yupper32 wrote:
| That article doesn't say why it was a bad idea.
|
| Are we really rejecting this because it'll be dark at 7:35am?
|
| Sorry, but that's not even close to a compelling reason not to
| do this.
| nemo44x wrote:
| It absolutely is. And the Sun won't come up until 8:30AM. No
| one wants their first couple hours of the day to be darkness.
| Secondly, it's more dangerous for kids walking to school. And
| lastly we use more energy since a larger part of our day is
| lived in the darkness for most people.
| throwaway48375 wrote:
| You don't have to change the clock to change when you wake
| up.
| yupper32 wrote:
| > No one wants their first couple hours of the day to be
| darkness.
|
| Why? What are you using the first couple hours of your day
| for except to get ready for work? Complete waste to do that
| in the daylight.
|
| > Secondly, it's more dangerous for kids walking to school.
|
| We should be pushing back school starting times anyway. If
| they're old enough to walk to school, then they don't need
| their parents to wait for them to leave before going to
| work, so that typical argument goes out the window.
|
| > And lastly we use more energy since a larger part of our
| day is lived in the darkness for most people.
|
| A weak argument IMO. Studies are not conclusive on the
| actual savings, and most of the ones that are out there say
| they save minimal energy. Besides, I think the mental
| health benefits of having more useful hours in the evening
| are worth the extra 0.5-1% energy usage.
| collegeburner wrote:
| > What are you using the first couple hours of your day
| for except to get ready for work?
|
| Here's 1 day from last week, before DST:
|
| 5:00 AM: wake up
|
| 5:15 - 6:30: lift
|
| 6:30: breakfast, coffee, and paper on the porch, watch
| the sun rise.
|
| 7:15: go shower, dress, pack lunch, get ready for work
|
| 7:30: leave for work
|
| 7:50: arrive at work
|
| 2 things I enjoy, a few hours of "free time", before
| work. And by the way, showing up at work around 8 is more
| common than arriving at 9 for most corporate jobs. The
| tech bubble is real on this site. Guess why? Because we
| like having some light left in the evening/ending our day
| earlier, among other reasons.
|
| > We should be pushing back school starting times anyway.
|
| No, learning to get up early forces kids to learn to go
| to bed on time, that's a valuable skill that teaches
| discipline. If a kid has to suffer through getting up on
| 5 hours sleep they probably won't make that mistake
| again.
|
| > A weak argument
|
| Living a larger part of the day in darkness isn't good
| for most people's happiness, energy use aside.
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| > No, learning to get up early forces kids to learn to go
| to bed on time, that's a valuable skill that teaches
| discipline. If a kid has to suffer through getting up on
| 5 hours sleep they probably won't make that mistake
| again.
|
| You are arguing against many well-documented studies
| about what school hours work best for kids to learn. "on
| time" is entirely based on what time you need to get up.
| The whole point of moving school later is for "on time"
| to be compatible with the hours that kids are more
| functional. This is not a matter of discipline; deciding
| you're going to be up and functional earlier does not
| change your body or the sun's position in the sky to be
| compatible with that. (If you want to argue otherwise,
| argue in published studies refuting the ones that exist,
| not in replies to this comment.)
|
| Move school hours to start several hours later than they
| currently do, and then by all means encourage the
| discipline of getting up in time for school.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| From what I can tell most people do not do anything other
| than get ready for work in the morning. Yes, there are
| outliers like yourself who actually utilize that
| daylight, but that's the minority. Most people want a
| later sunset.
| yupper32 wrote:
| You wake up 2 hours earlier than the average American
| (which apparently is about 7:09am). Things aren't and
| shouldn't be optimized for your abnormal sleep pattern.
|
| > If a kid has to suffer through getting up on 5 hours
| sleep they probably won't make that mistake again.
|
| ... I don't think you've met kids before. The vast
| majority absolutely won't learn.
|
| > Living a larger part of the day in darkness isn't good
| for most people's happiness, energy use aside.
|
| Standard time moves sunlight to the morning, when people
| are sleeping. Permanent DST should give people the same
| or more sunlight during their waking hours. You'd have
| the same amount, waking up at 5am and assuming you don't
| sleep until at least 8:30pm.
| collegeburner wrote:
| I learned when I was a kid. It took me a few days, and I
| made the mistake a few more times, but I eventually
| learned. Americans wake up before 7:
| https://www.vox.com/2016/5/10/11639214/how-people-around-
| the...
|
| We should try to move sunrise closer to when people wake
| up. This does the opposite for most people, not just me.
|
| Also, we should teach more people to get up early and go
| lift/exercise. We have too many fatties in this country.
| Making it a national habit would be a great thing.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| > Also, we should teach more people to get up early and
| go lift/exercise.
|
| With permanent DST people will have more opportunities to
| do that in the daylight after work, as the day will be
| longer.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| > I learned when I was a kid.
|
| From my experience, having experienced being a kid does
| not prepare you very much for the task of raising one.
| yupper32 wrote:
| I don't see the raw numbers, but the chart seems to
| indicate Americans waking up slightly before 7, maybe
| 6:50am? Not too far off from the source I found of
| 7:09am, and is still approximately 2 hours after you wake
| up.
|
| And congrats at being disciplined. The vast vast vast
| majority of Americans aren't. And changing the habits of
| hundreds of millions of people is a pipe dream and really
| irrelevant to this conversation.
| nemo44x wrote:
| You have to understand that most people start work at 8
| and many start earlier. For this majority that means they
| are on the road by 7:30 - which is rush hour. This means
| they are probably awake by 6:30 or earlier in some cases.
| So they already begin in the dark. Now imagine that going
| for even more time, until 8:30?
|
| At least this way you get some Sunlight before you're at
| work and some when you're done.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| So you're saying you're fine with them leaving work in
| the evening in the dark, because that's the trade-off.
| Not to mention your post-work leisure time will be in
| darkness.
| yupper32 wrote:
| I don't understand. If I'm at work, why would I care if
| it's light out or not? I'm not using that light for
| anything useful.
| mattw2121 wrote:
| There are people in the world who do not work inside.
| yupper32 wrote:
| The jobs I've worked outside we started the day in the
| dark often times (construction, landscaping). What jobs
| have you worked that required perfect natural lighting
| the entire time? I'm assuming it's a decent minority of
| jobs.
| jjav wrote:
| You're going to work or at work, so it's irrelevant
| whether it's sunny outside or not. That hour of sun
| sitting in morning traffic is completely wasted.
|
| Much better to have the hour of sun after work to do
| things outside.
| TheCoelacanth wrote:
| Morning is the most important time to have daylight for
| controlling circadian rhythm.
| labster wrote:
| The good news is that there is always daylight every
| morning. The bad news is that some places have a few
| months between mornings.
| prakhar897 wrote:
| Yes, it will be. Schools should adjust time according to the
| season. Time shouldn't adjust itself according to the school.
| twiddling wrote:
| Most parents of school age children in the US are dual
| income. School times are tied to before and after school
| care to support the parents employment
| dilap wrote:
| I don't know, it can definitely really suck having to wake up
| in the dark. Waking up to natural sunlight is the way.
|
| Of course the real problem is there's just not enough light
| in the winter. Not much we can do about that. :-)
| yupper32 wrote:
| It sucks more not being able to do any outdoor physical
| activity after work for much of the year.
| [deleted]
| thehappypm wrote:
| What time do you wake up?
|
| In Boston (Northernmost major metro on East Coast) the new
| latest sunrise would be at 8:13am, with a substantial
| period of twilight before then. Night will officially end
| at 6:32am, then astronomical twilight ends at 7:06, then
| officially sunrise at 8:13am. Point is you're waking up
| during the dawn even if you're waking up at 6:30 to get the
| kids to school.
| bin_bash wrote:
| Boston is on the Eastern edge of its time zone so it's
| not a great example. Seattle's latest sunrise will be
| almost 09:00.
| collegeburner wrote:
| Lots of people wake up well before then to go
| lift/exercise. And looking at obesity rates in America,
| we could stand to change time to better suit that habit.
| Some of us also like sitting on our porch with a
| newspaper and a cup of coffee and some eggs to watch the
| sun come up.
| beeboop wrote:
| $10 wifi enabled light bulb makes it easy to schedule when
| it turns on to help with this :)
| collegeburner wrote:
| $10 is a lot for a light bulb. If working on computers
| has taught me anything, it's to not trust fancy new
| gadgets. I don't want some stupid box to glitch so my
| light doesn't work. Given what moving away from a natural
| "rise with the sun" schedule has done, maybe we should go
| back to that instead of trying to substitute.
| zbtaylor1 wrote:
| I don't think I could roll my eyes any harder if I tried.
| collegeburner wrote:
| > Don't be snarky.
|
| > Please don't post shallow dismissals.
|
| HN Guidelines,
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
|
| If you disagree, I suggest explaining why. My arguments
| are reasonable.
| zbtaylor1 wrote:
| Wifi light bulbs aren't fancy new gadgets. The Phillips
| Hue, for example, first hit the market nearly a decade
| ago. I'm sure there has been much development of the
| concept since and $10 is, for most people, very
| affordable. Especially the HN crowd.
|
| I can't speak to their efficacy personally, can you? Do
| you know for a fact that they are error prone? All makes
| and models? Or did you shallowly dismiss the other
| person's suggestion?
| 93po wrote:
| While he was snarky, expressing disdain for technology
| solutions to every day life problems on a website
| called... hacker news... is sort of counter-culture here.
| I get that you have some strong traditionalist views
| based on this and your other recent commenting, but it's
| also important to know your audience and that some of
| those views aren't going to be well received here.
| collegeburner wrote:
| Are we really doing this because it'll be light at 7:35pm?
|
| Sorry, but that's not even close to a compelling reason to do
| this.
|
| See how easy it is? I can dismiss others' preferences just as
| easy. Waking up when it's dark out isn't good for people. We
| should rise with the sun, more or less, and "time" should
| change to accommodate that.
| scotuswroteus wrote:
| Because of paywalls, like the one preventing public access to
| the parade of horribles that is apparently detailed in this
| article I can't read
| nemo44x wrote:
| Because our politics are in many ways a clown show. It probably
| polls well when you ask regular people who haven't considered
| why we do this. That they feel sad because the Sun goes down at
| 5:00AM when it's cold but don't consider that without this then
| the Sun won't come up until 8:30AM.
| nightski wrote:
| Or that everyone except yourself isn't an idiot and they did
| in fact consider it and don't view that worth the trouble.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Nah, it's an emotional thing for a lot of people who
| haven't considered it - they just hate that it gets dark
| early and it makes them sad. I've had this conversation
| with a lot of people and almost all of them agree it's a
| good system when they understand why we do it. Especially
| for people in the Northern parts of the country.
| falcojr wrote:
| I've considered it. I live in the northern parts of the
| country (WI). I have children that walk to school.
| Anything other than permanent DST is absolutely asinine
| to me. Most people do things in the evening. Very few
| people do things in the morning other than get ready for
| and go to work/school. Why would anybody choose to have
| light during that time and not later in the day?
| nightski wrote:
| Hmm, I live in the northern part of the country and that
| isn't my experience at all. But I'm sure you have
| surveyed a statistically significant amount of the
| population, not just your little bubble.
| twiddling wrote:
| More Americans live South then 50 years ago :
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_center_of_the_United_S
| tat...
| joezydeco wrote:
| "In a Roper poll conducted in February and March, just 30
| percent remained in favor of year-round daylight saving time,
| while a majority favored switching times again. Louis Harris
| polling in March showed just 19 percent of people said it had
| been a good idea, while about twice as many -- 43 percent --
| said it was a bad one."
|
| https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/15/no-
| more-c...
| mbesto wrote:
| FTA
|
| > By fall, the dark mornings were apparently wearing on the
| American people.
|
| This is the reason for "it went badly"? Since that article
| didn't address it, what exactly happened when we didn't have
| DST?
| MBCook wrote:
| This is exactly what I was wondering. Why do we think it will
| go better this time?
|
| Also isn't 9 months a relatively short warning given all the
| systems that will need updates?
| geerlingguy wrote:
| Timezone changes are practically a weekly thing... 9 months
| is a lot more warning than many other changes.
| MBCook wrote:
| Around the world perhaps, but time zones in the US have
| been quite static for a long time right? I wonder how many
| US based systems aren't well tested/prepared for a possible
| change.
| ncmncm wrote:
| Everybody carries a phone that knows what time it is. And,
| looks the same sun-up or sun-down. Nobody needs to look out
| the window anymore.
| anotherman554 wrote:
| "WE" didn't do this 46 years ago. I wasn't born then. Hopefully
| "we" can do a better job of handling the change this time.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| It worked fine 46 years ago. People bitched then "about the
| children" while insisting that schools couldn't start later.
| That's just crazy. What is different this time? It wasn't bad
| before, that's what.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Schools can't really start later. Parents need to drop kids
| off before they start work. I guess we could have everyone
| start work an hour later too, but I don't see that happening.
| throwaway287391 wrote:
| > Parents need to drop kids off before they start work.
|
| I see a comment like this in all of these discussions and
| I'm always confused: did something change in the past ~15
| years since I graduated from high school and school buses
| stopped being a thing? Where I grew up (Texas, which is
| generally not the most politically enthusiastic place when
| it comes to school funding) it was required that a school
| bus be available within a few minutes' walk of every
| student's home in the school zone. I thought this was a
| pretty universal part of American life based on every
| movie/TV show ever.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Many parents don't trust their 5 year to get on the bus
| everyday. High school can surely be moved back for areas
| with 100% bus availability (my district has not had buses
| since covid), but elementary school would be a much
| tougher sell.
| throwaway287391 wrote:
| That's a fair point for kindergarteners, but by 1st or
| 2nd grade kids in my district walked to the bus stop on
| the corner all by themselves just fine. Also, my district
| had elementary school start the earliest (and middle/high
| school would start later) which for some reason is
| uncommon but makes a lot of sense for a whole bunch of
| reasons and would seem to mostly solve this problem for
| parents who need to walk their kindergartener to the bus
| stop before work.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| People have faced legal issues for letting their 6 year
| old safely roam in my area. That may be crazy, but it's
| the reality in much of the US.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| I suspect HN skews Californian, and as a Californian with
| 4 kids, none of them have ever ridden a school bus.
|
| In theory the secondary school kids can take the city
| bus, however to use my junior high kid as an example,
| that changes a sub 10-minute drive into a 20 minute walk
| that crosses a state highway plus a 20 minute bus ride,
| so what actually happens is the school parking lots all
| back up onto the local streets every morning as each
| parent drops their kid off at school.
| throwaway287391 wrote:
| Huh, interesting -- why doesn't California have school
| buses? I could imagine it might be hard/unsafe in dense
| urban areas like SF, but otherwise, why?
| aidenn0 wrote:
| I don't know the full reasons, but after some reading:
| The really short answer is that it's not required by law,
| but it costs money.
|
| Note that in California the overwhelming majority of
| schools have a budget that is essentially dictated by the
| state (the state makes up any shortfall in local taxes up
| to a certain amount adjusted per-student-day, and most
| schools are in districts that have such a shortfall).
| This means that there are only two ways to provide buses:
| charge students who ride buses (done in some districts)
| or take money out of the classrooms (not popular with
| parents nor teachers' unions).
|
| Where I grew up there was a time when they needed to
| upgrade the bus fleet, so they passed a bond specifically
| for that purpose. If I understand the law correctly, this
| wouldn't be feasible in California outside of basic-aid
| districts (basic-aid districts are those that do not have
| a shortfall in their general funds, so they only get the
| "basic aid" for that is earmarked for special-ed &c.).
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > Where I grew up there was a time when they needed to
| upgrade the bus fleet, so they passed a bond specifically
| for that purpose. If I understand the law correctly, this
| wouldn't be feasible in California outside of basic-aid
| districts
|
| You misunderstand the law, all school districts in
| California can submit bonds to the voters of the
| district, and this is a routine method of addressing
| capital needs.
| Talanes wrote:
| Could also be more of an urban/rural divide? I grew up in
| part of California without a "city bus" for hundreds of
| miles, and school bus usage was pretty widespread.
| Parents who dropped their kids off usually just did so
| because it happened to line up with their schedule.
|
| Also your post was a weird reminder of how laisse-faire
| my own upbringing was, because I was biking to school
| across and along a state highway in fifth grade.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| Every other state has figured out how to have school
| buses. maybe California should figure out how to rise to
| the standard of everywhere else instead of insisting that
| the whole country manipulate their clocks so you can take
| the extreme inefficiency of driving your kids to school.
| collegeburner wrote:
| That's one of the things we get right because so many
| people around the state live in rural areas where school
| is a very long way from where they live. Many of them
| live on farms or ranches where their parents need those
| early hours to work and can't take their kids to school
| that far away easily.
| WillDaSilva wrote:
| > Parents need to drop kids off [...]
|
| This is far from universal, and is a problem we should
| address wherever it is the case. It's bad for plenty of
| reasons, with one of the largest being that it prevents us
| from having schools operate during times that work well for
| children and teens.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| I'm not sure how you plan to solve this. Even if a school
| bus came to every kids front door the parent would still
| need to be there to ensure the kid gets on. If both
| parents need to be somewhere for work the bus needs to
| show up early enough to give them time to commute.
| bradlys wrote:
| Uh - no. You don't have to be there to ensure the kid
| gets on. You teach your kid how to be responsible and a
| good person so that they get on without you having to
| helicopter over them for everything.
|
| What the F is wrong with Americans. Srsly.
| Goronmon wrote:
| _Uh - no. You don't have to be there to ensure the kid
| gets on. You teach your kid how to be responsible and a
| good person so that they get on without you having to
| helicopter over them for everything._
|
| Maybe I'm just a terrible parent, but I wouldn't trust my
| 5 year old to walk to her stop and get on the bus at a
| specific time every morning without a parent around to
| push her to do it.
| bradlys wrote:
| Yet it's normal in Japan by 6-7.
| https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-28/in-
| japan-...
| Goronmon wrote:
| That doesn't say its "normal" by 6-7. It just says that
| some kids are able to do it as young as that age. And the
| specific child in the article didn't start until 9.
|
| Plus, I would argue that there is a difference between
| sending a kid off to school at a given time and leaving
| them home alone with a specific schedule of "At 8:45 you
| need to walk to the bus stop and wait for the bus". Which
| again, I'm not sure I would trust to my 5 year old to do
| on her own every morning. Not because she can't walk
| alone, but because I don't think punctuality is something
| she's mastered yet.
|
| And even the article admits that young kids can do that
| more because of "social trust than self-reliance". And I
| don't know how many parents are willing to rely on other
| adults to help out their kid if something goes wrong.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| You do that when they are 5-6 and let them go when they
| are 7-8. We should not dictate everyone's lives by what
| happens at 1-2 years of life.
| [deleted]
| collegeburner wrote:
| That's how my parents did it... it's changed in the past
| 20 years. Stupid suburban wine moms raised this past
| generation to be coddled at every opportunity. I hear
| about parents getting in trouble for letting their
| children walk a mile or 2 to a park and back... or bike a
| few miles to a friend... ridiculous. Lots of parts of
| America (outside big cities) we still don't care.
| [deleted]
| colinmhayes wrote:
| The reality is that enough Americans won't accept this to
| make it a viable solution.
| seangrogg wrote:
| What in the what?
|
| I would wake up after my dad was gone for work, grab a
| pop-tart or cereal, take a ~1/4 mile walk outside to the
| bus stop, no longer able to see my house from the
| suburban sprawl, and hang out with the rest of the kids
| at my stop for 5-15 minutes before the bus showed up.
| Then I eventually got a car.
|
| Don't get me wrong, if I was offered a ride (my parents,
| friends parents, friends with cars) I'd often take it.
| But ensuring I got on the bus? When the alternative was
| that my parents would get a phone call about me being
| missing? Trust that the lessons I'd get at school were
| far preferable to the lectures I'd get at home if I
| skipped class.
| jazzkingrt wrote:
| Every school I've attended opened its doors before classes
| started. This has other benefits like making sure kids have
| access to breakfast.
| [deleted]
| Jtype wrote:
| If we started work an hour later then we would lose the
| extra hour in the evening that we gained by changing to
| DST.
| tomohawk wrote:
| Surprised they didn't compromise and go to 4, half hour
| adjustments per year.
| n_plus_1 wrote:
| https://www.c-span.org/video/?518686-2/senate-session-part-2... I
| love hearing from who I assume to be the Speaker of the Senate
| (am from Westminster system country) say "oh I love it".
| stevenyoung wrote:
| This is the right thing done the wrong way. Make Standard Time
| permanent. Let's Make Noon Noon Again!!!
| oppositelock wrote:
| Bah! Those of us who are morning people would prefer to ban
| daylight savings time and stay on standard time.
|
| Pretty soon, we'll have the war of the big-endians and little-
| endians like in Gulliver's Travels.
| bombcar wrote:
| If _dawn_ is more important than _noon_ , we could redraw the
| timezones so they slant as they go north, keeping dawn at roughly
| the same time.
| consumer451 wrote:
| Wow, now that's coloring outside the lines. I had never
| considered this idea before. Interesting.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| This is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. There's a reason why
| "Standard Time" is called that. Now the words "Midday" and
| "Midnight" are meaningless.
|
| The measurement of time is a science, and science should not be
| decided by politicians.
|
| This seems trivial, but if this, then what next?
|
| Edit: I'm getting a lot of replies saying that "midday" isn't
| _precisely_ the middle of the day, and therefore I am wrong, but
| even since the invention of timezones, midday is supposed to be
| "the middle of the day, _to the nearest hour_ ". Now it is
| _intentionally_ skewed, and keeping this forever seems like a
| huge mistake.
|
| If you are willing to accept that the numbers on the clock don't
| actually mean anything, we should all just use UTC all the time,
| with all the pain that that will bring. This is just the first
| step along the way.
| sophacles wrote:
| Midday and Midnight are not meaningless and have never been
| based on the numbers of the clock. Those are terms for "about
| halfway between sunrise and sunset" and "about half way between
| sunset and sunrise" respectively.
|
| The measurement of elapsed time is a science. The time of day
| however is a number that represents how far along you are in
| one rotation of the planet, relative to an arbitrary 0 position
| +/- an offset.
|
| The arbitrary 0 position has always been political.
| nfw2 wrote:
| I would say time of day is not completely arbitrary, but it
| also does not require exact alignment with physical phenomena
| to have meaning.
|
| For example, if one were to say it is 12pm, people would
| understand roughly where we are in the diurnal cycle. People
| will understand it is not night time. People will know
| roughly where the sun is in the sky.
|
| Rough information is still information. Information doesn't
| need exact boundaries and discrete rules to carry meaning.
| defgeneric wrote:
| It's not a big deal. The phrase "solar noon will occur at
| 12:59pm" is perfectly intelligible. The scheduling of human
| affairs is political. The time shift is completely rational and
| even points to the fact that we as humans take up nature and
| put it to work _for us_. We give it meaning, we _humanize_
| nature. There is nothing wrong with this. Nobody is trying to
| legislate the position of the sun relative to the earth. The
| terms will retain a perfectly clear meaning in their respective
| contexts.
| nullc wrote:
| Noon isn't solar noon except at three lines through the
| continental US, everywhere else it's off specifically as a
| result of using standard time instead of solar time.
|
| Saying on DST vs 'Standard time' is a much smaller additional
| error than that created by the non-zero width (and political
| boundary alignment) of the timezones.
| horsawlarway wrote:
| Hate to break it to ya - but midday and midnight are already
| meaningless ever since we adopted standard timezones.
|
| So basically - since 1883.
| upofadown wrote:
| Everyone will not be happy no matter what happens here. A
| compromise might be to switch to regular time all the time and
| then encourage businesses to allow employees to optionally come
| in an hour earlier. A really mild form of flex time...
| chapium wrote:
| I know this is hardly a radical take, but I don't care what time
| it is. I can adjust my schedule appropriately. What I _hate_ is
| changing the time. It makes us all sicker, causes accidents, and
| workers in certain professions have to work weird hours to keep
| up with the changes. It 's such a drag on the economy and only
| seems to serve a small fragment of society.
| stadium wrote:
| Not radical at all, I'll happily take either too.
| tromp wrote:
| It also makes the timezone differences vary as different zones
| switch on different dates. Hopefully the whole world will come
| to their senses and we get rid of the changes globally so that
| timezone differences will be fixed.
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| Which fragment of society are you thinking time changing
| benefits? The common one I hear is farmers. Which is complete
| BS. Farmers work by the sun because the plants and animals they
| care for don't use clocks.
|
| https://agamerica.com/blog/myth-vs-fact-daylight-saving-time...
| notatoad wrote:
| the idea that DST happens for the farmers has always been
| pretty funny to me, because the one province in canada that
| doesn't observe DST is the province that has nothing but
| farmland.
| falcolas wrote:
| Farmers used to care, when they made broad use of their spawn
| to assist with harvests and chores. If the spawn gets out of
| school an hour earlier, that's an hour more labor they can do
| before the sun sets.
| caleb-allen wrote:
| Wow, this is the first time I've actually understood the
| practical use of DST. Not that it's needed anymore, but
| that makes a lot of sense.
| bena wrote:
| It's also kind of bullshit. Children can do some farm
| work, but the majority of farm work is going to be done
| by adults and teenagers.
|
| Farmers have been mostly against DST since the beginning.
| It was golfers, bug catchers, and 7-11 that wanted it.
|
| And permanent DST has failed when it was tried here in
| the 70s, in the UK a few years before that, and in Russia
| as recent as the 2010s. Why do we want to do it again?
| soheil wrote:
| It's my damn oven's time that I neglect to correct for about 3
| months every single time.
| tantalor wrote:
| > drag on the economy
|
| Do we know if this is true?
|
| Does the proposal have an estimate of the financial impact?
|
| What are we talking about here, $10M? $100B? I have no sense
| for it.
| chapium wrote:
| Absolutely. Tons of labor goes into patching systems for DST
| and supporting and testing switchover. My experience is in
| the healthcare sector.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Yes. Permanent. Until the next time change.
| sbahr001 wrote:
| Am I not mistaken, but isn't this change going to make datetime
| calculation hell now; especially with legacy systems or am I
| missing something.
| mrorbitman wrote:
| it's already hell, who cares.
| burtonator wrote:
| It might if the function is broken but 'time' as you think
| about it is usually stored referenced at UTC timezone and then
| converted.
|
| Timezones then are stored in a database with the specific zone
| name and offset.
|
| You have to convert to get time in the right timezone.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Great idea, hope we will follow suit in Europe.
|
| I hope we will go for the "Summer" time too because it will give
| more light at night. It's ridiculous to have it dark so early.
| lamontcg wrote:
| Get in!
| phendrenad2 wrote:
| Next step: get rid of timezones. But society isn't ready for that
| one.
| cbhl wrote:
| Friendly pointer to this piece from a few months ago about the
| folks behind the time zone database (also known as tz or
| zoneinfo):
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28904252
| [deleted]
| hinkley wrote:
| I think I can say this on behalf of most developers who have ever
| had to fix DST errors in their code: Thank fucking god.
|
| I am shocked that none of our unit tests failed on Monday. One of
| the first code reviews I did here I pointed out that his tests
| were going to break in a few months when DST kicked in because
| his tests asserted that there was a 24 hour gap between two
| calculations. He responded this code was temporary and it would
| be gone by then.
|
| There was another PR on a certain Monday a few months later. Told
| ya so.
| travisjungroth wrote:
| Fixed one of these yesterday!
| hinkley wrote:
| My favorite is when they fix 23 hours in the spring and then
| have to fix 25 hours in the fall, although the reverse is
| easier to do.
| jakemal wrote:
| There has to be a law about the permanence of "temporary" code.
| noveltyaccount wrote:
| Hah - I always "joke" that when you write code that deals with
| time zones, plan to write it twice. Same with DST boundaries.
| It's a real mind-bender!
| treve wrote:
| > I think I can say this on behalf of most developers who have
| ever had to fix DST errors in their code: Thank fucking god.
|
| I think it just means for all American developers it's _more_
| likely they'll introduce bugs if they cater to an international
| audience and there's still countries with DST.
|
| DST has always been a good way to get Devs to think about the
| timezone database. If people start relying on offsets more
| that's not a net good thing, until the entire world is done
| with DST.
| rory wrote:
| Yes, but those bugs won't be caught since the test suite has
| an implicit dependency on the current US time, so they don't
| count.
| hinkley wrote:
| Or GMT.
|
| GMT is great for client/server interactions. But users have
| a habit of wanting things to happen at "8 am on Saturday"
| and GMT is lousy for things like that.
| burtonator wrote:
| If the timezone database is updated locally that resolves
| this issue.
| talaketu wrote:
| Except when update schedule on the client differs from the
| server.
| sebazzz wrote:
| Or that DST support is not even built or an afterthought.
|
| You should know in how many frameworks and libraries i18n is
| an afterthought and much more cumbersome than necessary.
| hinkley wrote:
| Major programming languages think it's perfectly sufficient
| to let everyone sound like Yoda.
|
| To be fair, I snoozed through sentence structure in English
| class. It wasn't until I was trying to conjugate verbs in
| another language that it became concrete for me and I had
| to understand it.
|
| If you have a DSL that retains order of the arguments,
| you're gonna have a bad time. Full Yoda mode engaged. If
| you have one that allows named interpolation, you'll sound
| less dumb. If you have one that allows conjugation, better
| yet. But at the end of the day there are languages that use
| different adjectives or number systems[1] based on the
| object or direct object of a sentence, and so you might not
| be able to substitute "apples" "people" and "files"
| interchangeably into the same template, even if you can do
| things like differentiate "There is 1 file in this
| directory." from "There are 3 files in this directory."
| without having to build a Cartesian product of all
| combinations.
|
| 1) In Japanese there are different words for counting
| different things, but Arabic numerals are acceptable, so
| you can leave it to the reader to determine which word to
| use. I don't know that this is true in all other languages
| with discrete counting systems.
| watwut wrote:
| It just became more complicated.
| waqf wrote:
| If this law will solve your problems then I ... guess your code
| doesn't have to work outside the US?
| eldenbishop wrote:
| LOL - this is good timing. A bunch of my unit tests just
| started failing due to the recent DST transition. Luckily our
| CI build servers are all GMT so it only failed on local runs.
| But even better if this problem went away altogether.
| huehehue wrote:
| I support the change, but it means we'll have yet another edge
| case in time handling.
| hinkley wrote:
| You're not wrong. I know people in finance and insurance have
| to deal with these things in perpetuity because they're
| always looking backward and forward in time. Banks first
| starting running into the Y2K problem in 1970, because of 30
| year mortgages. Which means they've been dealing with 2038
| problems for almost 15 years already.
|
| Moving DST is my pettiest reason for disliking George W Bush.
| Flashbacks to the last few times I had to fix time offsets
| for some country or state that opted out.
| dathinab wrote:
| Sometimes the ignorance of lawmakers is just baffling.
|
| I mean there is pretty much a scientific consensus as far as I
| know that switching to permanent DST is a quite unhealthy choice
| for the larger part of the population, which happen to already be
| negative affected by other effects also balanced against them.
|
| Just to be clear I don't know if it's worse then DST switching.
|
| But it's worse then permanent "normal" (i.e. winter) time.
|
| I mean there is a reason this was the normal time, before DST was
| introduced.
|
| I also want to note here that for some areas in some time zones
| the negative effects of permanent DST might be less then for
| other areas (potentially) in other time zone, idk. how this
| applies to the US.
| SubiculumCode wrote:
| Your claim that DST is worse for health than standard time IN
| THE ABSENCE of seasonal switching seems doubtful. Got a source?
| dathinab wrote:
| Yes in absence, because the seasonal switches are rather
| unhealthy.
|
| Wrt. sources I don't have any english ones at hand without
| looking them up. But it shouldn't be to hard to find. I mean
| like I said it's pretty much consensus as far as I know
| between sleep scientist.
|
| Through like always it's a bit more nounced, like it's not
| worse for all people, but the larger group of people and it
| makes effects of social jetlack and similar worse (as it
| overlaps with them, maybe also because of people will change
| their action but that's hard to include in a prediction).
|
| EDIT: I'm currently wondering if less healthy working
| conditions in the US might affect what is worse/better. Also
| the consensus is wrt. Germany not necessary the US, I was a
| bit oversimplifying things.
| [deleted]
| shmerl wrote:
| Good, now also complete the metrication as a next step instead of
| dragging it forever in some half baked limbo.
| dirtyid wrote:
| Well I guess the dream is dead in Canada now.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Background information for all the people talking about what is
| early and what isn't. (Not that this settles the definition but
| does show when people need to be starting the work day, and thus
| the number affected)
|
| https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/overflow-data-finds-th...
| D13Fd wrote:
| I really don't like that they picked permanent DST.
|
| Does no one realize that this means that we all have to get up
| one hour earlier year round? That kids will have to travel to
| school in the dark for the majority of the year, including in
| most cases standing around in the freezing cold at unlit bus
| stops?
|
| It's still better than resetting the clocks. But I really they
| should have chosen standard time.
|
| Also, this means nothing unless passed by congress as well.
| jjav wrote:
| > Does no one realize that this means that we all have to get
| up one hour earlier year round?
|
| What does that even mean?
|
| When the clock changes, it feels one hour early because you
| were used to something different.
|
| By eliminating clock time changes, it's just the time it is. No
| concept of "one hour early" anymore.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| I live in Southern California which means no freezing cold and
| no school buses. Not sure what the rest of the country is
| thinking.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Is it any better for them to leave school in the dark? Isn't it
| just the same thing?
| D13Fd wrote:
| It's not, because they aren't standing around waiting for a
| bus on the way home, they can just head inside.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Then perhaps school buses can change their protocol so that
| children don't have to be waiting outside for the pickup.
| Or maybe there can be some sort of notification system
| installed. Or some other solution to fix this specific use
| case without upending everything else with a massive clock
| shift. This is a technology forum.
| D13Fd wrote:
| The massive shift is moving to DST year round instead of
| standard time. Our work and school schedules are not
| adjusted for standard time in the winter, when it
| actually makes a difference.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| What work and school schedules are dependent upon the
| sun?
| sigstoat wrote:
| > Is it any better for them to leave school in the dark?
|
| yes, it is. you're already awake and unlikely to fall asleep
| at that point.
|
| waking up for school is hard enough without the sun being up.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Sounds like this is a good case to shift class starting
| times to earlier in the morning, at least during the darker
| months. It would be a health benefit to allow children to
| sleep in longer anyway. And changing school start times is
| a lot less disruptive than changing the clock itself.
|
| https://www.sleepfoundation.org/school-and-sleep/later-
| schoo...
|
| https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/evidence-based-
| livin...
|
| https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/teenage-sleep-
| remote-l...
| auntienomen wrote:
| It also means that they'll get out of school early enough to
| exercise and play in the sunlight. I'd take that any day.
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| _Does no one realize that this means that we all have to get up
| one hour earlier year round?_
|
| 9 months after the final change, it'll just be regular time and
| it'll no longer be early.
|
| _That kids will have to travel to school in the dark for the
| majority of the year, including in most cases standing around
| in the freezing cold at unlit bus stops?_
|
| Why are your stops unlit? I mean, that isn't due to the time,
| but a basic infrastructure failure. In some areas, though, a
| neighborhood will communally pay for a streetlight - you might
| be able to get some installed in your neighborhood.
|
| I'll mention that kids here (Norway) walk to school in the dark
| and freezing weather. They stand at bus stops, too. Not a big
| deal.
| rdtwo wrote:
| It affects folks up north more where we leave in the dark and
| come home in by the dark and it totally sucks. This way us
| north folks will see an extra hour of light in the winter
| maybe do more outside stuff after work.
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| I'm the person you replied to - and I'm in Norway. I'm
| north. In July, the sun technically goes down but I can
| read outside at night. In December, there is only about 4.5
| hours of sunlight - 10:00 to 14:30. Folks here are not
| doing anything outside after work because of daylight
| because most folks work during the daylight hours.
|
| It isn't so bad and you get used to it.
|
| If I go much further north, I'm above the arctic circle and
| it gets even more extreme.
|
| Daylight savings time, up here, doesn't help with light at
| all. It merely makes it easier to coordinate time with
| other European countries.
| chapium wrote:
| > That kids will have to travel to school in the dark for the
| majority of the year, including in most cases standing around
| in the freezing cold at unlit bus stops?
|
| In my experience kids have superior night vision and rarely
| care about what temperature it is outside.
| ebiester wrote:
| So, why not just have schools start one hour later starting in
| the fall in the areas where that is an issue?
| bachmeier wrote:
| > That kids will have to travel to school in the dark for the
| majority of the year, including in most cases standing around
| in the freezing cold at unlit bus stops?
|
| If we cared at all about the children, schools wouldn't start
| so early. Let's make this change and then mandate a later start
| time for all schools that get federal funding. That's what we'd
| do if we cared about the children.
| D13Fd wrote:
| But the reality is that school is also daycare, and parents
| have to be involved in dropoff or even in riding the bus in
| many cases.
| bachmeier wrote:
| Precisely. "It's about the kids" is never genuine. It's
| always about everyone other than the kids.
| D13Fd wrote:
| "It's about the kids" is really "it's about the hassle
| for adults of dealing with kids' schedules when they are
| 1 hour earlier." But there is nothing wrong with that in
| my view.
| af16090 wrote:
| I've seen people suggesting this and it doesn't make sense.
| So we're going to switch to DST permanently which means we
| all permanently get up an hour earlier and change schools so
| they all start (presumably) an hour later? You're effectively
| doing the same thing as if we just stayed on standard time
| only with the added inconvenience for parents who now have to
| figure out what to do with their kids if they have jobs that
| start early.
| hnov wrote:
| Flipside to that is the sun setting at 4:30 in the winter. I
| think this also makes solar ever slightly more viable sans
| storage.
| glwtta wrote:
| I would've fucking rioted if they picked permanent "standard"
| time.
|
| I don't care about kids or their bus stops. Also, just put some
| lights on them, then (the bus stops, or the kids, doesn't
| really matter).
| ultra_nick wrote:
| That's terrible news. It'll be extremely hard to wake up and do
| anything before day jobs now.
|
| We should move the standard work day to 10-6 to compensate.
| pathartl wrote:
| How about we just make it 10-5?
| ultra_nick wrote:
| Even better!
| wolverine876 wrote:
| It feels like we live in such a post-truth world, even the clock
| will now be an untruth. Couldn't we just use standard time, and
| let people wake and sleep when they choose, instead of creating
| an illusion for them?
| atombum wrote:
| We've opted for colloquial transference (e.g. I had breakfast
| at 7 => always AM, no matter what timezone) over a standardized
| measure.
|
| It makes sense honestly, noon "feels like" noon no matter where
| you are in the world. But the ease of use of e.g. Unix time
| shows the cost of using timezoned times.
| p1mrx wrote:
| Making solar noon match the numerical rollover from 12->1
| doesn't seem like the worst idea in the world, though it would
| probably make more sense to have 11am -> 12am -> 1pm (noon).
| wolverine876 wrote:
| I agree that makes more sense (though I'd take a 24 hour
| clock over that), but let me know how you are going to get
| everyone to go along ...
| burke wrote:
| This was already the case: almost nowhere really uses Local
| Meridian Time. Greenwich maybe. Everywhere else, even when
| located in the most appropriate timezone to line up solar and
| clock noon, is _already_ off by anywhere from zero to thirty
| minutes.
| joshstrange wrote:
| All of time is an illusion. I mean yes, time is constant but
| our units of measurement are 100% made up. TZs are just as much
| of an illusion as picking DST/Standard year round, clocks are
| only "true" because we say they are. If you want to live in a
| world where time is not an illusion then drop all measurements
| except seconds, measure things in mega-seconds/kilo-
| seconds/etc, and remove TZ/Hours/Days/Weeks/Months/Years. All
| of those measurements only make sense on Earth. Once/if we
| become a starfaring species then this will get even more
| complicated. Maybe "day" will still make sense if only because
| we are used to that circadian rhythm but week/month/year? Not
| worth much in space.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| All of reality is an illusion, but I live in it, on Earth,
| and I am biologically tied to the sun and culturally
| indoctrinated and tied to conceiving of the day as starting
| in the middle of the night. Instead of trying to discard the
| legacy tech debt of billions of years of evolution and
| thousands of years (maybe more!) of culture that I need to
| sync with other humans, I think I'll find a solution that
| integrates with them.
|
| The philosophy is interesting and valuable, truly, but it's
| not a solution today.
| dannyw wrote:
| How is permanent DST an untruth? It's more of a standard time.
| [deleted]
| ginko wrote:
| Permanent DST means it'll be off by an hour forever.
| kompatible wrote:
| Time doesn't have an "off"-ness when it is solely the way
| people measure the time between sunrise and sunset. If the
| methods used to measure time is changed, it is changed, but
| not in the consequence of it being "wrong" forevermore.
| stormbrew wrote:
| Unless you're extremely lucky (in the sense that you exist
| in a very particular line of place in each time zone), it
| is off by an arbitrary and varying amount for everyone
| everywhere all the time regardless of DST or not.
|
| Clock time is an abstract construction over imperfect
| measurements and compromises with practicality and it
| always has been.
|
| [edit to remove under-researched claim about some effects
| of shifting]
| ginko wrote:
| The average difference from solar time would still be
| larger with DST.
|
| You can find a pretty good visualization here:
|
| http://blog.poormansmath.net/images/SolarTimeVsStandardTi
| me....
|
| This shows the difference between solar time and standard
| time. By switching to DST you essentially shift the
| gradient to the east by an hour.
|
| Other than Greenland I can't see a timezone where that
| wouldn't mean that the longitude at which the difference
| is 0 is outside of the actual timezone.
| saltcured wrote:
| This is a good visualization and gives a qualitative
| awareness I lacked before. I didn't realize how many
| timezones in the world are severely "off center" and
| counter to my own experience. I've lived my whole life in
| areas that are "barely green" to "slightly pink" in this
| map. Oddly, most of my travel destinations have also had
| similar solar alignment, whether in North America,
| Europe, or Asia. The biggest deviation I have experienced
| is that of South Korea, which I didn't really notice as
| unusual during a short visit with jet lag.
|
| It is striking how many timezones are all red instead of
| being split red and green. In my childhood, people always
| talked about how different the evening/night culture was
| in Spain with meals at late hours. This map tells me the
| difference is less significant than I imagined as far as
| solar life, and more due to the time standard.
|
| While this topic is beat to death already, I remain torn.
| On the one hand, centering on solar time is the only
| logical criteria I can see for adjusting and revising
| standards. To revise it even further away seems illogical
| to me. But, the map clearly many cultures already have
| gone that route. I can imagine many of these deviations
| came from some legacy desire to synchronize with an
| adjacent center of power or commerce. I can also
| appreciate that if we set it far enough out of whack, it
| illuminates how any standard is inherently arbitrary.
| ginko wrote:
| >It is striking how many timezones are all red instead of
| being split red and green
|
| FWIW, I think that map is from the time when Russia tried
| permanent DST from 2011 to 2014[1]. They changed to
| permanent standard time after it proved unpopular.
|
| [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29773559
| stormbrew wrote:
| I took the part a lot of this reply was about out because
| it was probably wrong.
|
| Regardless, there's no purity to be had here. No matter
| what, time zones themselves are a compromise for the sake
| of practicality -- there's no inherent virtue in "the sun
| is at precisely peak at 12pm +/- a geographic offset."
| rdudek wrote:
| As opposed to 4 months of the year as it is currently?
| ginko wrote:
| What do you mean? Arguably January 1st is off from the
| actual winter solstice by about 10 days, but that's not 4
| months.
| radicality wrote:
| What does 'off by an hour' even mean here? I don't
| understand why this whole thing seems to be such a heated
| topic. Time on a clock is just a concept we all agree on.
| If we all agree "_now_ it's 9am and we shall not change
| clocks from this point on", then that's that, _now_ is
| "9am", there's no "off by an hour".
| ginko wrote:
| Time on a clock has a relation to the position of the
| sun. By ancient definition 12PM would be when the Sun is
| at the highest point in the sky.
|
| Standardized time zones made this sort of squishy, but if
| you'd average the errors over the area of the timezone it
| would still be mostly right. At least to the point where
| you don't feel like lying to a child when you tell them
| that noon is the middle of the day.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| It's about sun-time, which is how we naturally, I
| suppose, conceive of time. Midnight and noon, for
| example, won't be on the twelves.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| Midnight and noon won't be on the twelves anyways except
| for one day out of the whole year no matter which system
| you choose.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| That seems a bit binary - i.e., as if it's perfect or
| it's meaningless. They would be much closer using
| Standard Time.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Because the daycare you are sending your 5 year old to
| doesn't agree that time is just a concept.
| xboxnolifes wrote:
| Yes they do. They take you child at X:00, when the clock
| says X:00, they do not care if Earth is at 90 degrees
| rotation or 105 degrees rotation.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| Forget this, time zones always add a margin of untruth to
| our clock systems. Some people end up being a full hour off
| of nominal time (look at what time sunrise is in eastern
| Maine)! Let's go back to time calculated per-municipality.
| That way nobody will ever feel like their time is
| inaccurate again. \s.
| yupper32 wrote:
| You want truth? The truth is that having every employer who has
| been using the 9-5 or 8-5 schedule change to some flexible
| system is never, ever happening.
| panick21_ wrote:
| This 10 year old classic video is still relevant:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84aWtseb2-4
| thebiss wrote:
| The sunrise & sunset calculator at
| https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/ will plot how this affects your
| location.
| mdturnerphys wrote:
| More info here: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-senate-
| approves-bill-tha...
|
| Important note: "Senator Marco Rubio said after input from
| airlines and broadcasters that supporters agreed that the change
| would not take place until November 2023."
| goerz wrote:
| Even more important note from that article: "The House of
| Representatives, which has held a committee hearing on the
| matter, still must pass the bill"
|
| I don't think there's any guarantee that they will even take up
| the bill, much less vote for it. (Hopefully, I'm wrong, because
| I would _love_ permanent DST)
| withzombies wrote:
| The Hill article[1] says it won't go into effect until November
| 20, 2023.
|
| > The proposal would not take effect until Nov. 20, 2023, to
| give airlines and other transportation industries more time to
| adjust to the change.
|
| But we switch back to standard time on November 5, 2023. Just
| to get two weeks of that until we switch back to summer time
| permanently?
|
| [1] https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/598314-senate-
| unanimousl...
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _The Hill article[1] says it won 't go into effect until
| November 20, 2023._
|
| Way too soon. Stupidly so IMHO.
|
| I went through the last DST law change, and it took quite a
| lot of work in many IT areas. Unixes weren't too bad, but
| there was all the JREs, databases, etc.
|
| And that's not getting into all the embedded and industrial
| gadgets.
| stuff4ben wrote:
| Repeat after me, "job security". I just hope we still have
| some 32-bit machines running in 2038 so that after I've
| conveniently retired, I can be called back in to consult.
| throw0101a wrote:
| No thanks. My job security is being competent. The less
| drama I have the better I'm doing my job.
| _greim_ wrote:
| > I went through the last DST law change
|
| I'd be curious to know, to what extent did that change
| prepare the world for this change? Was it more common to
| adapt IT systems to be more flexible, or to do minimal work
| to change hard-coded values? I imagine it was a mix but the
| pessimist in me thinks overwhelmingly the latter.
| throw0101a wrote:
| Yes, there were a lot of changes, especially given the
| concentration of software development in the US.
|
| At the time I was dealing with Solaris a lot, and
| previously you had to reboot the system for things to
| become permanent, but there was a tweak made where the
| system started to _stat()_ the file _/ etc/localtime_ to
| see if it changed, and reload it if it did. So new
| process would get the new tzdata bits.
|
| The JRE/JDK has a separate tzdata updater:
|
| * https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase/tzupdat
| er-re...
|
| So it may not as bad as it was in the past.
|
| Previous the US tzdata bits hadn't change in several
| decades, over the course of the 1980s and 1990s, when
| basically the entire computer industry mainstreamed. So
| things may not be as bad as last time--but I'd still
| prefer a little extra time.
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| One reboot during a seven month window doesn't sound too
| bad either.
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _One reboot during a seven month window doesn 't sound
| too bad either._
|
| It is on 24/7 systems that had no budget for HA,
| especially if you had several hundred/thousand systems
| and things like Ansible and Chef weren't invented yet.
| CFEngine was the big boy in town and Puppet was an up-
| and-comer. (Remember this was the 2000s).
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrastructure_as_code
| _greim_ wrote:
| Thanks for this answer.
|
| > Solaris
|
| Haha, I worked at Sun at the time and definitely remember
| some of my coworkers grumbling about it.
| MontagFTB wrote:
| This made me laugh out loud.
| mdturnerphys wrote:
| The bill doesn't appear to have an effective date:
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-
| bill/623...
| singlow wrote:
| After that date we would no longer transition away from
| daylight saving time. It would not cause an immediate
| transition. There would be one more transition in the
| following year to get back onto daylight saving time. So the
| effective effective date is really march of 2024.
| metadat wrote:
| It's so stupid to delay for years, this should take effect
| immediately. There is no real sense in pussy footing about,
| people need to just do the work either way.
| bootlooped wrote:
| Think of all the code that needs changed. I can wait
| another year or two, just as long as we actually commit
| and follow through.
| parineum wrote:
| If you're rolling your own datetime object for some
| reason, sure. But to the VAST majority of applications,
| this is an "update your referenced packages" change.
| gkoberger wrote:
| If you're a SaaS app, sure. You can't easily "npm update"
| an airplane, though.
|
| Like, if nothing else, think about all the plane tickets
| already sold for an hour that doesn't exist anymore.
| jaywalk wrote:
| Airplanes receive software updates all the time.
| sly010 wrote:
| Hopefully not via npm
| mlyle wrote:
| What about all the embedded systems out there, which do
| very important things with timekeeping?
|
| What about all the existing appointments, etc.
|
| IMO 2024 -- 2 years-- is just the perfect amount of time.
| It's slightly aggressive but doable.
|
| If people frequently make appointments, buy tickets, etc,
| for a year out, that leaves a year to get most of the
| software world cut over.
| michaelt wrote:
| Daylight savings rules change, somewhere around the
| world, several times a year.
|
| For example, between 2011 and 2016 Istanbul changed their
| DST rules 7 times [1]. So I think you'll find a great
| many systems already have a way of distributing DST rule
| updates.
|
| [1] https://github.com/eggert/tz/blob/main/europe#L4014
| mlyle wrote:
| Sure, I know all about the joy of adjusting tz databases,
| etc.
|
| There are a whole lot of things here in the US that have
| basically never required these updates.
|
| And, well, there's all the problems where people have
| assumed timezones won't change, and e.g. have stored
| timestamps of future events in UTC in databases that
| really semantically are supposed to be at 9AM in a given
| timezone.
| munch117 wrote:
| > What about all the embedded systems out there, which do
| very important things with timekeeping?
|
| I've written a few of those. Supporting not-DST basically
| comes down to unchecking the bit in the configuration
| where it says: [ ] Confuse the hell out
| of the users twice a year.
|
| Even if the customer themselves specified precisely how
| to handle the changeover once upon a time, they still get
| confused when it happens and the daily report has 23/25
| hour entries, or the daily totaliser takes a mysterious
| 4% dip, or the date changes an hour earlier/later than
| expected etc.
|
| I've never seen an embedded device with automatic
| changeover that didn't have some kind of configuration
| option to switch it off.
| mlyle wrote:
| > I've never seen an embedded device with automatic
| changeover that didn't have some kind of configuration
| option to switch it off.
|
| "Always in Daylight savings time" tends not to be the
| option that's offered-- either always in the standard
| zone or always changing.
|
| And, the point isn't that devices can be reprogrammed or
| reconfigured: it's that there's a lot of them, with
| uneven levels of support, and difficult to go reach them
| all.
| jedberg wrote:
| The day that the time shift changes is constantly in
| flux, since the 1960s, before most embedded software was
| written. If you were writing embedded software that
| changes time zones automatically, unless you were very
| dumb, you made the date of the change configurable, given
| that we were on DST for a few years in a row in the early
| 70s.
|
| So yes it's a lot of work to find them all, but they
| should all be configurable to just set the next Standard
| Time shift to be the max(datetime).
| ars wrote:
| A lot of systems only do major updates every two years. I
| guess you could push DST as a security update.
| awb wrote:
| This might also affect northern non-tech businesses like
| ski resorts. They'll either have to open an hour later
| (and possibly stay open an hour later), or install
| lighting.
|
| It might also affect things like outdoor after-school
| activities that will now have enough light to be held
| during winter, which in Northern California potentially
| means extending or shifting the soccer season.
| pishpash wrote:
| That's badly written code. Timezones (globally) changed
| over time. Even Bush Jr. changed DST.
| fy20 wrote:
| Yeah that's not gonna happen until October 2024. See GDPR
| as an example.
|
| The regulations were adopted in April 2016, but they
| didn't become enforceable until May 2018. Most companies
| didn't even start thinking about it until March 2018 or
| later. The first fine was handed out in May 2019.
| r00fus wrote:
| Are you serious? The code would be to simply not _change
| time zones_ 2 times a year. Sure needs testing but should
| be an elegant simple change.
| tempestn wrote:
| It's more complicated than that. Everything that
| calculates differences between two points in time for
| example would need to be updated to know about when the
| switch occurred. And more generally, this is an example
| of why it's complicated - because it's easy to overlook
| things that could be affected, so there's a great deal of
| investigation and testing that would need to be done.
| dudus wrote:
| Most people don't that though. They use databases, system
| and apps that implement their own logic for time changes.
| Maybe you need an OS update. Maybe it's code that is
| controlled by a third party. There's plenty of logistics
| necessary to make sure things don't break when the DST
| rules change.
| kube-system wrote:
| Many systems that are in production have no regular
| release schedule, may go decades without any changes to
| code, and they have no maintainers.
|
| The delay is for those cases -- where someone may need to
| be hired to fix it, or an entire system may need to be
| replaced if it is no longer maintainable.
| gen3 wrote:
| Sure the actual change might not sound super complicated,
| but hunting down all the little machines, services, and
| ancient code isn't easy for all organizations.
| cbhl wrote:
| A few years' delay would be comparable to the DST changes
| made in 2005 (which went into effect in 2007 -- they
| extended DST in the US by a month on each end; moving it
| from Apr-Oct to Mar-Nov).
| hathawsh wrote:
| That also means existing software/firmware will continue to
| use correct TZ offsets until November 2024, so that's the
| deadline for updates.
| withzombies wrote:
| Hah, thanks for pointing that out. The articles on it
| really should say when permanent daylight time would start,
| not when the bill would take effect.
| azinman2 wrote:
| Dunning-Kruger effect is very real. There so many systems
| affected by this on all kinds of timelines and life support
| that such a change would be catastrophic. Just because it
| may seem simple to you doesn't mean it actually is.
| nulbyte wrote:
| Other countries have made these changes on shorter time
| frames in recent memory. I don't recall hearing about any
| catastrophes.
|
| In 2011, Samoa changed time zones to land on the other
| side of the international date line. I don't believe that
| was years in the making. Even last year, they announced
| they would no longer observe daylight saving time; they
| decided that 11 days before they were scheduled to switch
| their clocks.
|
| In January of 2015, Chile announced they would keep
| daylight saving time year-round when they rolled forward
| in April. Then in 2016, they scrapped that. In 2019, they
| even changed the dates on which daylight saving started
| and ended. While this was over the course of several
| years, they didn't go into this thinking about how to
| make it complicated for the next four years.
|
| Many of the states don't seem to think this is a serious
| concern, either. Several, including my own (Kentucky)
| passed legislation to permanently observe daylight saving
| as soon as Congress would allow it. I don't think the
| folks considering these measures are underestimating our
| ability to deal with these types of changes.
| xmprt wrote:
| I understand that there are a lot of systems that will be
| impacted but I don't think we should limit progress based
| on dependencies. It's the same excuse that's used
| whenever we try to ween off of fossil fuels.
|
| I've worked on tzdata changes in the past and whether
| it's announced a month or a year in advance, progress is
| slow until the very last minute when teams can't put it
| off any longer. In other words, programmers are serial
| procrastinators and if you give them 2 years to prepare,
| they'll spend 1.9 doing nothing and scramble to fix
| everything in a month.
|
| This might be the first big timestamp change in the US,
| but there have been a lot of changes like this in the
| rest of the world so any globally operating company has
| probably had to do this at least once already and should
| be well equipped to make this change on a faster
| timeline.
| Tenoke wrote:
| This is not even what the common wrong Dunning-Kruger
| interpretation means, even if we don't consider that the
| whole thing seems to mostly be a statistical artefact.
|
| https://arelbundock.com/posts/dunning_kruger/
| thehappypm wrote:
| That's pretty soon. It makes sense to take some time to prep.
| notriddle wrote:
| They're handling it better than Samoa did, anyway [1].
|
| [1]:
| https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2021-September/030397.html
| imoverclocked wrote:
| I see what you did there.
|
| I wonder how many bugs will pop out because of this. Time is
| already pretty complex... and it might force some old systems
| to need updates.
| mrfusion wrote:
| You could really think of it starting in March 2023.
| Bilal_io wrote:
| ~~I assume they'll be doing the November switch and staying
| on it permanently. So, it wouldn't be starting in March
| 2023.~~
|
| Seems like I misread what was stated in the article.
| kmote00 wrote:
| Unfortunately, that is NOT what the article states. DST
| (Daylight savings time) ENDS on November 5th (when we
| change back to what is called "Standard Time"). 2 weeks
| later, DST (not ST) becomes the law of the land. Which
| means, as the OP stated, unless they change the
| implementation date, there will indeed be a 2 week flip-
| flop.
| davis_m wrote:
| There is no "implementation date" in the current text of
| the bill. As written, it would take effect immediately.
| nulbyte wrote:
| I suspect it is in the amendment[1], which does not yet
| appear to be on Congress' website, as it was just passed
| earlier today.
|
| [1] https://youtu.be/_WS64Q3-emk?t=37
| froh wrote:
| > They will *not* make the November switch...
|
| Ftfy
| [deleted]
| rhexs wrote:
| anchpop wrote:
| Presumably your state chose to elect some of the senators who
| voted unanimously to pass the bill because the electorate
| trusted their judgement. Sometimes making the best judgement
| that means consulting with interest groups like airlines, who
| offer an important service millions of Americans depend on.
| I'm not sure what you're unhappy about here
| nr2x wrote:
| Because public polling regularly shows legislators do what
| donors want, not voters.
| camel_Snake wrote:
| to be fair a public poll is not exactly representative of
| the subset of the population that consistently votes.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Where is that research? How could polling show that they
| do what donors want? Do they poll donors?
| anchpop wrote:
| Pollings actually shows legislators are exactly in
| lockstep with voters. For instance, a strong majority of
| Americans say they would not pay an additional $10 per
| month in electricity to combat climate change. So
| legislators faithfully do nothing to combat climate
| change that would cost voters in any way. You may not
| like it, and neither do I, but the problem is with the
| voters rather than the politicians
| mmcgaha wrote:
| And yet we vote them back into office. What is the
| solution to this problem?
| bregma wrote:
| Donate more. Be the biggest donor and you will be able to
| buy the most votes.
| nr2x wrote:
| Yes, you've correctly identified the problem.
| paxys wrote:
| The solution has been obvious for a long time -
| politicians must campaign with a fixed budget and no
| outside special interest financing.
| robocat wrote:
| That requires Restrictions on free speech, which would be
| difficult to do (1A).
|
| New Zealand has political campaign budgets, and limits on
| airtime. However restricting private citizens is
| difficult.
|
| There was a significant controversy in the 2005 New
| Zealand elections regarding budgets. It is alleged US
| fundamentalists significantly (for NZ lol) funded the
| Exclusive Brethren Church to produce pamphlets in support
| of the National Party, by smearing both the Labour Party
| and the Green Party. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_N
| ew_Zealand_election_fund...
| vmception wrote:
| I went to the ballot and saw someone running for Senator
| who I had never heard of, against other people who I had
| never heard of
|
| And the other Senator ran unopposed for a party different
| from my Presidential ticket pick, but not like that matters
| because my state is too populated for my vote to have the
| same weight, or any weight, in the outcome
|
| Tell me again why my state chose anything?
| mrguyorama wrote:
| If you've never heard of your states senators, that's
| pretty sad. I knew who my state's senators were when I
| was like 6, or at least the senator for my district.
|
| There's only two of them, you can definitely learn about
| them.
|
| This does not make the rest of your comment untrue.
| vmception wrote:
| I knew at least one of them at least one at one point in
| time, and I didn't even live in that state then. I would
| say its pretty sad you're in the same place you were
| since you were 6.
|
| I guess the point is that we don't know anything about
| each other and can't make any conclusion really, except
| that states don't choose anything with any coherent
| rationale because the individuals are on just as wide of
| a spectrum of awareness and lack of choice.
| jspaetzel wrote:
| It takes time (investment) to change time... this bit of
| consultation will likely save a lot of stress for the people
| implementing this change.
| OrwellianChild wrote:
| For context, BC, Washington, Oregon, and California have all
| passed state bills to move to permanent DST but need Federal
| approval per U.S. law. In short, they did get approval from
| the time zone who will be first to make the change, and the
| support is pretty overwhelmingly in favor. The North American
| west coast will change as one to full time DST if this passes
| the House and is signed by the President.
| kevinmgranger wrote:
| From some of the industries that would be most impacted by
| it, and those impacts being ones that would cascade to the
| people who fly or consume broadcasted media?
|
| Yeah, they should be talking to them.
| rexpop wrote:
| It's not about permission, it's about Schelling points.
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| This is a great idea! Instead of just working from 8 to 4 to
| leave an hour of daylight after work, let's instead tilt all the
| clocks so that noon is at 11am.
|
| Why stop with the clocks?
|
| Today I announce my genius proposal Wallet Saving Prices.
|
| Everyone wants more money left over after they buy something, so
| the obvious way to achieve that is just slide all the numbering
| systems left by one.
|
| Henceforth all prices shall be written on a scale that starts at
| -1 instead of 0. If a thing cost $4 yesterday, it now costs the
| same 4 dollars, but the price is written as $3. This will give
| everyone more money!
| tlbsofware wrote:
| So you are saying it's better to alternate Wallet Saving Prices
| twice a year?
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| Where did I say that?
|
| I said rulers should all start at +1 foot because people want
| bigger houses.
| ragnese wrote:
| Who cares what time the clock says? I don't care if they do
| permanent DST or permanent not-DST; just stop with the twice a
| year changing!
|
| So, I'm super happy about this.
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| The consistency is fine, the alignment is stupid.
|
| If the numbers don't matter, then why do the numbers 9 and 5
| matter so much that we center the new clock on those rather
| than noon/midnight?
|
| It's probably not going to be a harmful stupid, it's only a
| small stupid, but it's still stupid.
|
| There will be no explaining this to kids a generation from
| now.
|
| "Well you see way back, they had this even goofier system
| where everyone changed all their clocks twice a year...that
| was ultimately just silly so finally they eventually decided
| to clean that mess up and treat the clocks rationally. Except
| they still didn't. They had that DST system for some hundreds
| of years so we can look forward to the current slightly less
| dumb system for another 100 or so. It's dumb but it doesn't
| matter that much, it just annoys programmers and data
| graphers because the numbers are all off-center by 1 for no
| justifiable reason, and a little bit more annoying for anyone
| who knows they actually did go through the bother of making a
| sweeping disruptive change across the land explicitly to
| finally clean up this minor stpidity, and did _this_ with it.
| "
| greyhair wrote:
| I hate daylight savings time.
|
| I get up everyday at 6:00 AM, with a large segment of the
| population whose workday starts at 7:00 AM every day. They have
| no choice. And just as it was getting to be light a little at
| 6:00 AM, we just 'leaped ahead' back into darkness.
|
| I would prefer that we just run on standard time all the time.
| You want more light in your evening? Get up earlier. Go to work
| earlier, so you get home earlier.
|
| Daylight Savings Time sucks.
| phailhaus wrote:
| > Go to work earlier, so you get home earlier
|
| Must be nice having a job where you can choose when to leave.
| Most people don't have that option.
| toothpicked wrote:
| > You want more light in your evening? Get up earlier.
|
| It works both says... just agree on one time.
| linsomniac wrote:
| Next up: The metric system? One can dream...
| dlp211 wrote:
| The US has officially been transitioning to the metric system
| since the 1970's and the metric system is widely used in
| official capacities throughout the US and the US government.
| mdaniel wrote:
| Apparently the dupe detector is case sensitive:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30689221 currently has 388
| comments to this thread's 92
| dang wrote:
| We'll merge them. Thanks!
| 11thEarlOfMar wrote:
| You mean..... I'm never going to get this hour back??
| sam0x17 wrote:
| This is the most impactful, positive piece of legislation that
| affects my life that has been enacted since marriage equality in
| 2015. How sad is that?
| capital_guy wrote:
| That was a Supreme Court ruling, not a piece of legislation -
| so it might be even longer!
| [deleted]
| dddddaviddddd wrote:
| Currently working its way through the legislative process, first
| introduced in 2018:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunshine_Protection_Act
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| So how long do I have to wait until this goes to the House?
|
| And why will it fail when it gets there, or be stuck in committee
| forever before reaching the floor, or have some nonsensical pork
| attached to it? I have no faith in my government to do something
| as nice as give me a little sunshine in the evening...
| coryfklein wrote:
| Personally, this makes me so happy. I have wanted this for so
| long now.
|
| Professionally I'm already groaning inside; it looks like 2023
| will be the year of "DST-related bugs being exposed in our
| product".
| macintux wrote:
| 2024 apparently.
| patwolf wrote:
| Back in '08 when the US dates of DST changed, I was working on a
| Java-based enterprise software product with a relatively large
| install base. It suddenly became known to a lot of customers that
| timezone tables are part of the JRE, and simply updating the OS
| wasn't enough to get proper time calculations in Java. It was a
| very stressful time getting customers with many different
| versions of Java across dozens of platforms properly updated. A
| lot of customers were running ancient versions of Java that were
| well past EOL, but we still helped them out.
|
| Needless to say, I'm very happy this might finally happen. I do
| not, however, envy whoever is now supporting that software. I'm
| sure there are folks that haven't touched their systems since the
| last DST change.
| jonah-archive wrote:
| Ooof, I remember that. At the time I was writing shipping
| logistics optimization software for LTL shipping, and many
| clients were using ancient warehouse inventory systems (lots of
| data uploads over ftp, etc) that couldn't easily be modified to
| account for the time change, uh, change. Very painful.
| dekhn wrote:
| Huh. These days most systems I work with just use a shim into
| the system timezone tables (I just checked the Qt docs, as
| that's my preferred way to develop cross-platform apps).
| adrianmonk wrote:
| It's probably because Java promises "write once, run
| anywhere". If you rely on the system timezone tables, you
| might have a different set of timezones available from one
| system to another or the rules for the same timezone might
| differ. And then code would behave differently on different
| operating systems.
|
| If instead you ship timezone tables with the Java Runtime
| Environment, then you can promise that (by default) the code
| will behave the same.
|
| It sucks that it creates extra maintenance burden (and
| lurking problems people may not be aware of), but that's the
| price you pay for decoupling.
| dekhn wrote:
| Yeah, when I read about the Java behavior I figured it was
| to get cross-platform consistency. All that I can say is
| that I concluded that the opposite approach (applications
| should be written to handle what the system tables provide
| through a shim API like Qt provides) makes more sense. I
| noticed this recently when I had to install some CA certs
| into my JRE when a java app didn't use the system ones.
| hermitdev wrote:
| I think the landscape has shifted since the US rules were
| last changed in 2007. It was awful for pretty much everything
| that needed to be timezone aware and not just show some local
| time to a user.
|
| Dates & times were not yet even part of standard C++ (some
| support started in C++11). Boost got your part of the way
| there, but it's IANA timezone db support was thin. (It could
| handle current timezones, but not historical or future). I
| think MS even support IANA timezone db support on Windows
| somewhere. Windows' ability to handle historical timezone
| changes was also pretty limited, and the actually history
| provided was pretty slim.
|
| While I have no doubt should the DST change be made permanent
| will cause all sorts of issues with software (I mean, there's
| plenty of software, especially in embedded that _still_ doesn
| 't take into account the 2007 change), I personally welcome
| the end of a twice yearly switch. Which direction, I don't
| really care. I just want the switching to end.
| paxys wrote:
| Considering how frequently time zones around the world change,
| any OS or software that doesn't auto update them from a
| standard list at this point deserves to break.
| snemvalts wrote:
| Even digital watches that would last tens of years without
| battery changes? (and where BT would consume too much energy)
| paxys wrote:
| Why would such watches rely on time zone data at all to
| function correctly?
| snemvalts wrote:
| A lot have auto DST that switches DST automatically.
| And/or programmed timezones
| paxys wrote:
| If they switch automatically then they should also
| account for timezone changes. Otherwise they should offer
| a manual update option for the user. If a watch doesn't
| do either of those then I'd call it broken.
| ericpauley wrote:
| WWVB appears to support permannent disablement of DST [1].
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWVB#DST_and_leap_second_
| warni...
| lostcolony wrote:
| "Auto update from a standard list" - please point me to this
| standard list. Note - I need to know for a given user at a
| given location what a millis from epoch equates to in local
| time, for times that could be before or after this change, so
| I need timezone conversions AND what dates they were in
| effect for. I also need some SLAs, and ideally someone I can
| pay; not much, but enough to feel confident I can get support
| and/or that it'll be around a decade from now.
| paxys wrote:
| You don't need to pay anyone for this -
| https://www.iana.org/time-zones
|
| The tz database is public domain, and they have
| HTTP/FTP/rsync APIs. You probably don't even need to
| implement this yourself, since every modern OS pulls from
| this already.
| lostcolony wrote:
| Thanks; that is what I was looking for. Last time I had
| to work in detail with timezones (with the above reqs,
| plus some others), that didn't exist (based on the date
| for the RFC).
|
| As to having to/not having to implement this (and rely on
| the OS) - probably! I just know at the time I last dealt
| with this, every library I could find packaged their own
| TZ DB, and they were definitely not standard.
| Macha wrote:
| Which RFC? The RFC moving it to IANA in 2012? It's been
| in development in some way since the 80s [1], the current
| timezone names in it are from the 90s[2], and it was
| definitely already the standard timezone definitions when
| I started using Linux in the 00s.
|
| [1]: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/1986-November/00894
| 6.html
|
| [2]: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/1993-October/00923
| 3.html
| lostcolony wrote:
| Yes, moving it to IANA. Maybe the packaged DBs were
| 'standard', in a sense, but you couldn't just take a file
| from one and drop it into another; they were configured
| or serialized in various ways. Regardless, it meant
| updating a dependency when things changed; I don't know
| the state of historical timezone information at the OS
| level at that time, but I do know none of the libraries I
| looked at made OS calls.
| mark-r wrote:
| According to Wikipedia the database was started in 1986
| or earlier; it was known as the Olson database.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tz_database#History
| [deleted]
| dharmab wrote:
| This is shipped with the OS. On linux usually as a package
| named tzdata. So you can pay an OS vendor.
| [deleted]
| lastofthemojito wrote:
| Sure, but I'd imagine on lots of threads discussing exploits,
| there are a lot of experts commenting, "Considering how
| frequently systems are exploited, any system that doesn't
| require Internet functionality shouldn't be on the Internet".
| [deleted]
| paxys wrote:
| A system with correctly configured firewalls and other
| access controls which receives regular updates and zero day
| patches is still more secure than an offline one.
| humanistbot wrote:
| You've obviously never worked with clients.
| daenz wrote:
| What will the impact be for software engineering?
| londons_explore wrote:
| Since the USA designs most of the software in the world,
| support for changing time zones will gradually disappear.
|
| There will no longer be a constant force making people
| correctly convert UTC to localtime. People will go storing
| dates as strings. People will just have "+8 hours" hardcoded
| for their application.
|
| That will lead to people in the rest of the world having
| constant bugs and trouble every time daylight savings time
| happens.
|
| That may be part of the push for other countries to drop it
| too, when lawmakers see that every spring and autumn their
| computer deletes an hours worth of emails or their fancy web
| 4.0 microwave cooks their breakfast for _1 hour_ and 30
| seconds.
| emodendroket wrote:
| Well, do you work on a time library? If not you probably just
| need to update your dependencies.
| armandososa wrote:
| This is so going to screw with my remote working situation. I'll
| have to do everything one hour early for half the year.
| technothrasher wrote:
| Does this mean that I will no longer be able to smugly remind
| people that there is only one 's' in "daylight saving time"? It
| was really the only reason I could see for keeping the biannual
| time change around.
| dexterdog wrote:
| Don't worry. You still have hot water heaters.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Could affect people with direct solar hot water heaters.
| dheera wrote:
| "making daylight savings time permanent"
|
| Isn't that just changing the time zone and abolishing daylight
| savings?
|
| "Senate votes"
|
| What does this mean? Does it take effect forever starting from
| today? Does Senate have authority to actually enact the change
| or is that some other dude that actually flips the lever?
| exegete wrote:
| >Isn't that just changing the time zone and abolishing
| daylight savings?
|
| Yes but the clocks will now say EDT instead of EST (in the
| Eastern time zone for example). We will forever know that we
| have saved the daylight.
| cmurf wrote:
| I don't think so...
|
| Original text for the zones: http://uscode.house.gov/view.x
| html?req=(title:15%20section:2...
|
| Bill amending that law:
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-
| bill/69/t...
|
| It's redefining the offsets from UTC for the zones, for
| standard time. And also repeals all of 15 USC 260a http://u
| scode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:15%20section:2...
| a.k.a. Section 3 of the Uniform Time Act of 1966. Ergo, the
| 'D' in all the time zones goes away.
| exegete wrote:
| Oh wow it really is just redefining standard time as DST
| AdamH12113 wrote:
| The U.S. has a bicameral legislature and a presidential veto,
| so the House of Representatives would also have to vote for
| the same bill, then the president would have to sign it.
| According to the text of the bill[1], it would take effect
| immediately, but there would be no practical effect until
| November 6, when DST is scheduled to end.
|
| [1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-
| bill/623...
| jrapdx3 wrote:
| True, that's the normal process but if the President vetoes
| the bill Congress can override the veto by 2/3 majority in
| both chambers.
|
| IIRC the Senate passed the bill unanimously. If the House
| passes the bill by a large majority it predicts a veto
| would be overridden. In such cases even if inclined to
| veto, the President typically acknowledges defeat and signs
| the bill into law.
| boffinism wrote:
| "just"
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| Senate is only half of the legislature. Nothing becomes law
| until it has passed both houses of Congress and is signed by
| the president.
|
| Schoolhouse Rock - Bill https://youtu.be/OgVKvqTItto
| mbg721 wrote:
| This is all well and good until executive orders become
| involved.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Executive orders are only the use of powers given the the
| President previously by Congress or, through the
| Constitution, the people. The President has no other
| powers.
| ss108 wrote:
| House has to vote on it and POTUS has to sign.
| johnwalkr wrote:
| day light's saving's time
| munk-a wrote:
| Stop dreaming - we didn't allow that level of pedantry even
| when DST was a thing. "Daylight savings time" might be an
| eggcorn - but it's more accepted in conversation than "daylight
| saving time" at this point.
| CoastalCoder wrote:
| I have an armchair-theory that different pronunciations
| require different amounts of work, and that the less-effort
| versions win over time. Particularly certain transitions from
| one syllable to the next.
|
| Maybe not a great example, but "savings-time" seems to
| require _slightly_ less work than "saving-time". At least
| for me.
| munk-a wrote:
| As uh bahn an bread Bahstunian I'd ahgue dat reginal
| dieuhlecks ken cause ovahuhl drifs in prahnunciashen ohvah
| time. Baht thas jus me. Diffrin fraysus will folluh da
| culltrull kahntexts dey ehmehged frahm.
|
| I think you're mostly right though.
| ryanmcbride wrote:
| Don't worry I'm sure you can find something else to be
| pendantic about
| thehappypm wrote:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time
|
| I mean, "Daylight savings time" is a commonly used term. At
| some point it just becomes accepted as a valid alternative.
| clessg wrote:
| > I mean, "Daylight savings time" is a commonly used term. At
| some point it just becomes accepted as a valid alternative.
|
| Irregardless, "daylight saving time" is the only cromulent
| term, we must stop embiggening peoples' vocabularies with
| alot of fake words!
| Clubber wrote:
| > Irregardless
|
| I see what you did there.
| maxk42 wrote:
| Shouldn't that be "daylight saving's time"? As in "the time
| of daylight saving".
| ant6n wrote:
| It depends on whether you have a prescriptive or descriptive
| view of the language. Usually, smug people who enjoy
| correcting other's speech lean prescriptive.
| rgrieselhuber wrote:
| Very true. Although there still is no 'x' in espresso.
| newaccount74 wrote:
| My kids call a short coffee a nespresso, not sure if
| that's better than expresso.
| tedunangst wrote:
| Of course there is. Expresso, from the Latin expressus,
| meaning squeezed.
| mwcremer wrote:
| Its definately a loosing battle.
| nr2x wrote:
| Somebody once said to me "you can't just make up your own
| words!"
|
| I asked where, exactly, the words we have came from?
| ant6n wrote:
| From other people who perhaps were allowed to make up
| words!
| biztos wrote:
| I just grit my teeth and remind myself how exclusive is the
| club of believers in English Logic.
| yreg wrote:
| There are objectively prescriptive (codified) languages.
|
| In Slovakia we have laws giving a certain public
| institution the responsibility to define what are the
| proper rules to use the language, including maintaining the
| dictionary of all the allowed words and their meanings.
|
| Anything beyond that (with the exception of e.g. scientific
| terms) is objectively incorrect slovak.
| fuzzer37 wrote:
| And yet that's still not how languages actually work.
| yreg wrote:
| Why not?
| fuzzer37 wrote:
| Have you never made up a new word or colloquialism among
| friends?
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| I will take those smug corrections over letting "literally"
| happen.
| newaccount74 wrote:
| It kinda makes sense that literally means figuratively,
| an alliteration to literature, where things often aren't
| meant literally either.
| SllX wrote:
| Already happened:
| https://greenwald.substack.com/p/a-court-ruled-rachel-
| maddow...
| jhedwards wrote:
| I'll take the bait here and be the one to point out that
| the usage of literally to mean "figuratively" is recorded
| in dictionaries at least 100 years old, and there are
| probably even older examples of that usage.
| mark-r wrote:
| Is that literally true?
| tsimionescu wrote:
| Literally doesn't mean "figuratively". It either means
| "literally", or it is used for emphasis, like "really" or
| "deeply" etc. But it is never used with the express
| purpose of meaning "figuratively", i.e. "not literally".
|
| That is, no one is saying "I am literally dying to know"
| to try to communicate the fact that they are not, in
| fact, dying to know. Instead, the difference between "I
| am dying to know" and "I am literally dying to know" is
| one of emphasis. The second is almost perfectly
| equivalent to "I am really dying to know" or "I am very
| much dying to know".
|
| By contrast, "I am figuratively dying to know" would
| imply that you are specifically not _dying_ to know,
| which everyone understands perfectly well.
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| "That is literally insane."
|
| What have I just said?
|
| If only we had a word whose express purpose was to avoid
| ambiguity for those times when it matters to communicate
| without ambiguity...
| dllthomas wrote:
| "You left me waiting for days."
|
| What have I just said?
|
| If the context is that it's been a handful of minutes, we
| don't say my usage is _wrong_ ; we _definitely_ don 't
| say that "sometimes days means minutes" and fret about
| how anyone will communicated time. We say that sometimes
| people exaggerate.
|
| You can still object, if you wish, on stylistic grounds.
| You can object that you'd prefer we keep "literally"
| apart from some standard uses of words lest we allow
| inappropriate ambiguity. But none of that means anyone is
| _using_ "literally" _to mean_ "figuratively".
| tsimionescu wrote:
| There's no such thing as communication without ambiguity
| while using natural language. In your particular example,
| any interpretation depends crucially on what "that" might
| be referring to. It could refer to an animal, in which
| case you may mean that it seems to be suffering from a
| mental illness (maybe it has rabies) OR that it is unable
| to think clearly (it is insane with hunger, or
| excitement). It could be referring to an action, which
| may mean that it is either the action of someone
| suffering from a mental illness, or the action of someone
| being temporarily unable to think clearly, or it is an
| absurd action.
|
| These are all literal meanings of insane. Of course, if
| we add figurative meanings we can increase the ambiguity
| further.
|
| However, your criticism applies similarly to words like
| "truly" - if I say "that is truly insane", do I mean that
| it is insane in one of the literal senses of the word? Or
| the figurative uses? Am I just emphasizing either of
| these meanings, or do I feel a need to confirm that I am
| not lying?
|
| Either way we take it, though, "literally" can never be
| replaced with "figuratively" without altering the meaning
| of a phrase. In it's use as an intensifier, it does NOT
| mean "figuratively", it means "very".
|
| Also, looking on Merriam-Webster, they clearly discuss
| this and reach the same conclusion. They also mention
| that this meaning for emphasis appears as early as the
| 18th century, in the works of Charlotte Bronte, James
| Joyce, Mark Twain.
| biztos wrote:
| Like for reals? Because culture.
|
| (I'm also wishing the horde off my lawn but they may have
| already won.)
| tsimionescu wrote:
| That is a silly position. "Literally" has become an
| intensifier, like so many other words in the English
| language. It is no different from "truly" or "verily" or
| "really", and the path it took from its literal meaning
| to its intensifier status is identical.
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| is being ironic not permissiable in this prescriptivist
| future of yours?
| singingboyo wrote:
| That's just like, literally your opinion, man.
|
| I get it, sort of. In that case I just tell myself "it's
| hyperbole for lazy people" and move on. "Could care
| less", though, that one I cannot reconcile.
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| I reckon there's an implied sarcasm of "As If", that is:
| "as if I could care any less"
| sundarurfriend wrote:
| This is going to be my headcanon for why people do this
| (though it's more likely laziness/carelessness). This
| usage seems to be becoming more and more common, so this
| will help me pretend it makes sense and move on.
| dllthomas wrote:
| I like "I could care less. [In theory.]"
| [deleted]
| BoiledCabbage wrote:
| Even though the prescriptive view is wrong people still
| have it? ;)
|
| I'd love for one of them to show the original centuries old
| definition of English that they are prescribing from.
|
| Or put another way, if the prescriptive view is nothing but
| a descriptive view of language from a few decades back then
| essentially you have a descriptive view that tries to
| ignore that time isn't constant.
| thereddaikon wrote:
| I'm not a fan of a prescriptive view of language. But at
| the same time I'm also not a fan of letting morons decide
| the course of things. Just because people use phrases
| wrong, or can't be bothered to learn how to spell doesn't
| mean the "correct" spelling should just change to
| accommodate them. Why doesn't everyone else get a vote?
| Otherwise what's the point of spell checkers, or
| dictionaries, or English class at all?
|
| Having a standard to hold our selves to is not having a
| prescriptive approach to language. Prescriptive language
| is what the French do. They have a government office that
| decides the official rules of French and official
| documents have to follow them. For example, even though
| everyone calls a Computer a Computer pretty much
| everywhere in the world with variation on spelling, the
| French government has to call it an ordinateur.
|
| The point of language is to facilitate communication. To
| do so there needs to be a standard. You don't have to
| legally enforce it, it should be voluntary. Freedom of
| speech and all that. But I reject the copout that
| "language evolves, deal with it".
| omgwtf1000 wrote:
| Haha, one of my favorites too. Another one is Driver License.
| melling wrote:
| Anyway, now you can help stop people from sayings "anyways"
| [deleted]
| exegete wrote:
| Now when people write the time in the format 9:00 EST you can
| smugly correct them that it should always be EDT (for Eastern
| time zone).
| thereddaikon wrote:
| Ah yes, Eastern Dtime Tzone.
| schoen wrote:
| Maybe the legislators will make things even more confusing by
| defining daylight time as "standard time"! (Because it will
| be the, well, standard time.)
| exegete wrote:
| Someone linked to the bill and it actually does that
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30689043&p=4#30690481
| mark-r wrote:
| If the bill is already passed it would be too late, unless
| it goes to committee to reconcile with the house. Or maybe
| they've already done it!
| johnboiles wrote:
| This is HN, plenty of ways to be smug around here
| Razengan wrote:
| You forgot a full stop 8^)
| fingerlocks wrote:
| Also "Orders of Magnitude" especially when it's not
|
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&q
| u...
| jcadam wrote:
| Don't tease me, is this real?
|
| I honestly don't care whether they go with ST or DST permanently,
| just pick one and stop screwing with my circadian rhythm twice a
| year.
| goldtownjac wrote:
| It seems like everyone I know has a strong reaction to this news.
| It's clear that sunlight is both precious and scarce for the
| modern office worker. Why do most employers still require butts
| in seats for almost 100% of the sunlit day in winter?
|
| It makes me really sad to see people fight over a ubiquitous
| resource like sunlight. It's neither natural nor healthy to spend
| all day every day inside, let alone against your will.
| Thristle wrote:
| Oh dear, poor datetime/timezone library maintainers
| MaxMoney wrote:
| thehappypm wrote:
| One thing I like to point out is that DST is longer than Standard
| Time. DST is March to November (~8 months), Standard Time is
| about 4 months.
| andrewstuart wrote:
| I wonder why the USA is so supportive of this, but so against
| metric?
| seltzered_ wrote:
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/623 .
|
| The tweet doesn't provide much context if it just passed the
| senate, republican senate cloakroom, house, or is fully passed up
| through the President.
| Veuxdo wrote:
| RIP companies that stored future events as timestamps.
| salawat wrote:
| So who is going to update all the non networked electronic clocks
| that automatically adjust for standard/DST changes?
|
| This is the problem with Congress... No connection feedbackwise
| to the ungodly hell made by the legislation they pass. It's
| always someone else's problem.
| [deleted]
| 51Cards wrote:
| And then some cities in Canada are going to have the sun rise at
| 10am in the winter. There is no win on this one, shift it one
| way, Group A gets screwed, shift it the other way and Group B
| gets screwed, flip it back and forth and everyone complains.
| pleb_nz wrote:
| I propose
|
| Seconds should be made to have a different duration depending on
| the time of day and year the second is ticked. This would happen
| in a way to facilitate a sunrise and sunset to occur at the same
| time every day of the year.
|
| I name this plebian time.
| nunez wrote:
| Absolutely fantastic news. I love later, brighter afternoons.
| This will also make lives for people in the North a little more
| tolerable; sunset at 4pm was a killer when I was there.
| grammers wrote:
| Good, it was about time. All research suggest that the switching
| back and forth is harmful so why keep it?
| u2077 wrote:
| Now let's all move to the metric system.
| hindsightbias wrote:
| I'm 100% for this as long as the FAANGs enforce work schedules
| tied to public education schedules.
|
| You will all know what it's like to have a morning newspaper
| route.
| RKearney wrote:
| I've never come across a device that supports permanent summer
| time. You can typically opt out of daylight saving time and stay
| in standard time, but you can't stay in summer time.
|
| These devices will either need to pick the standard timezone of
| the timezone to the east and disable daylight saving time, or we
| will have to change the offset of every timezone in the US, or
| devices will need to add an explicit summer timezone.
|
| I don't see how any of this is easier than staying on standard
| time and disabling daylight saving time, which every device that
| tells time that I've come across seems to support.
| JamesBarney wrote:
| It's not easier, it's better because more people prefer having
| an extra hour of light in the evening to an extra hour of light
| in the morning.
| kmote00 wrote:
| Our grandchildren will never know what "High Noon" meant.
| morpheos137 wrote:
| Has anybody studied the number of premature deaths attributable
| to daylight savings time?
| jeffalbertson wrote:
| Being from CA, Daylight savings is the closest thing I have to
| seasons. I find the clock changing to be festive and fun :(
| xivzgrev wrote:
| this is the best news i've read on hacker news for some time.
|
| it's time to standardize our time.
| [deleted]
| shadowofneptune wrote:
| This is excellent. With the rise of air conditioning, daylight
| savings has considerably less electricity savings than it used
| to. It will also make timekeeping more consistent. I have lived
| in Arizona for the past few years and it is pleasant to know that
| you will always be at UTC-7:00.
| mtoner23 wrote:
| True, but this keeps daylight savings permanent not standard
| time.
| dijit wrote:
| I don't care what we choose, personally, as long as we
| choose. This madness has to end. I'm not going to bicker
| about which one is kept.
| ciphol wrote:
| If your state doesn't like that, they can switch time zones.
| FL410 wrote:
| It actually sets "standard time" to what is currently
| daylight saving time, and deletes DST.
| elwell wrote:
| RIP code parsing human-readable datetime strings to
| determine timezone
| kevinpet wrote:
| Wow. Lawmakers continue to amaze me with their stupidity.
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _It actually sets "standard time" to what is currently
| daylight saving time, and deletes DST._
|
| As the current maintainer of the timezone database
| observed: A *lot* of computer software
| assumes that timezone abbreviations like "PST"
| have their longstanding meanings. This software was
| obviously misguided, but it's out there and
| changing it will be quite a hassle. I don't envy
| people who will have the responsibility for cleaning up the
| resulting mess where "PST" has one meaning for older
| timestamps and a different meaning for newer ones
| and existing standards like Internet RFC 5322
| continue to say things like "PST is semantically equivalent
| to -0800".
|
| * https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2022-March/031239.html
| tshaddox wrote:
| I find it hard to imagine that systems which store "PST"
| and rely on a hard-coded assumption that it is -0800
| would be robust to normal changes in time zone rules,
| which already happen regularly. Like surely those systems
| would have already broken in 2007 when the rules of
| America/Los_Angeles changed such that the date of the
| yearly transition between PST and PDT changed.
| IncRnd wrote:
| Similarly, people thought the world would burn in flames
| due to Y2K, when dates were going to overflow their bits,
| kill everyone, and lose banking information. As things
| happened, the date passed with nary a blip for me or
| anyone I knew. I suspect this will be similar.
| [deleted]
| HideousKojima wrote:
| Y2K required hundreds of billions of dollars worth of
| effort to keep it from being a disaster, and it still
| actually resulted in some significant issues:
|
| "In Sheffield, United Kingdom, a Y2K bug caused
| miscalculation of the mothers' age and sent incorrect
| risk assessments for Down syndrome to 154 pregnant women.
| As a direct result two abortions were carried out, and
| four babies with Down syndrome were also born to mothers
| who had been told they were in the low-risk group."
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2000_problem
| throw0101a wrote:
| Nobody notices when things go right. :)
| shadowofneptune wrote:
| It will change how the morning feels in winter, but I'm OK
| with settling on savings time. The bill allows states like
| Arizona or Hawaii to stay on savings time if they'd prefer
| it.
| flanbiscuit wrote:
| Arizona only goes by Mountain Standard time (UTC -7:00). If
| Daylight savings time becomes permanent will Arizona always be
| an hour off from the rest of Mountain time zone?
| bin_bash wrote:
| Arizona would likely just move to Pacific time in that case
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| Arizona is rough because even though the state is officially
| MST, some (not all) of the Native American tribes do DST. In
| some areas it's kind of mess if you let your phone choose its
| timezone based off of the strongest cell tower.
|
| Arizona the state is in MST, there's Navajo reservations in
| MDT, and there's even a Hopi reservation that's totally
| encircled by a Navajo reservation that _doesn 't_ do DST.
| caleb-allen wrote:
| Yes, but at least it is consistent.
|
| I live right by the border, on the Utah side, and driving
| through Arizona and Nevada is always so confusing!
| ZetaZero wrote:
| We were on vacation, driving on 89 from Page to Kanab,
| which crosses AZ/UT state line. Several times our phones
| switched to different TZs. It was annoying
| [deleted]
| rurp wrote:
| I spent a week camping near the California/Arizona border
| and my phone was absolutely flummoxed by the time zones. It
| was constantly jumping back and forth an hour.
|
| The weirdest part is that I wasn't even _that_ close to the
| border, it was 30-40 miles away. I know there is some room
| for error with phone location tracking but I've never had a
| maps app consistenly confuse my location with a spot 40
| miles away.
| bombcar wrote:
| I wonder if it has to do with which towers it is
| connecting to rather than where it thinks you are. I know
| time sync is important so perhaps your phone just shows
| you the timezone of the nearest tower and that _almost
| always_ works well enough?
| robotnikman wrote:
| I have Family that lives in Lake Havasu right by the
| border. When driving there my phone will often get
| confused and switch between the 2 time zones.
| jp57 wrote:
| I mentioned something similar in a comment last year, but I think
| there's going to be a lot of moaning about late sunrises in US in
| December. Roughly 8:15-8:20 am around the solstice in New York,
| DC, Chicago, and even Austin. Not til nearly 9am in Seattle. The
| sun won't rise before 8am in NYC for basically all of December
| and January.
|
| I'd even be willing to guess that the amount of moaning might be
| equal to what we get now around the clock change.
| jrumbut wrote:
| This is the first time I've heard someone express the idea that
| there is a silent majority of people who would prefer earlier
| sunrises to later sunsets, very interesting! Intuitively I
| disagree but I have no evidence and I'm sure at least one
| person will dislike the change.
|
| For me though, the real pain wasn't any particular time zone,
| it was the abrupt change from getting out of work with some
| daylight left to walking out in darkness. Gradual changes are
| almost always easier to deal with.
| scotuswroteus wrote:
| Enough from these self centered early risers. They go to bed at
| 7 PM. They live in homes full of "live, laugh, love"
| decorations. They tuck in their shirts. Enough.
| o4b wrote:
| Beautifully put, scotuswroteus.
|
| "The tyranny of the minority is infinitely more odious and
| intolerable and more to be feared than that of the majority"
|
| - William McKinley
| slaymaker1907 wrote:
| There really isn't a way to make things nice in Seattle as far
| as time zone manipulation goes. Overall, I think permanent DST
| is the best option since it means avoiding biannual clock
| changes while avoiding it being light at 4am during the summer
| (as would be the case for permanent standard time).
|
| However, my opinion on this bill is that states should be able
| to decide what is best for them. Currently, they can only use
| DST switching clocks biannually or go to permanent standard
| time. They should also have the option to go to permanent DST.
| Honestly, they should just give states full control over their
| timezone. Let them go to UTC if they really want to. The only
| stipulation I would make is that having more than one timezone
| per state should require approval from the federal government
| (to avoid making things too complicated) and to put limits on
| how often it can be changed.
| somenewaccount1 wrote:
| This is why the suicide rates will continue to climb.
|
| They voted to keep the clock still, but used the wrong time.
|
| I just wish the movie Idiocracy would stop turning into a
| f*&cking documentary. Is that so much to ask?!?!?!
| bryananderson wrote:
| I don't agree at all, and I think many people don't agree.
| What has always depressed me the most in the winter is the
| lack of sunlight in the evening, after work/school. In the
| morning I don't really get to enjoy the sunlight anyway. What
| I really hate is getting off work and finding it already
| dark.
|
| There is no "right" time, and this fight for pedantic
| correctness is already lost. That ship sailed when we started
| using time zones instead of true local time. Many localities
| are far from their true noon already. We should make policy
| on the basis of what is actually good for people.
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| I do wonder if some communities on the border of a time
| zone will end up shifting from one side or the other due to
| this, especially if they're in an area where it makes more
| of a difference in the winter than the summer.
| gnulinux wrote:
| This is exactly right for me too (American here). I much
| prefer having daylight after work instead when I wake up. I
| don't care how outside looks like when I'm taking a shower
| and waking up. I really like this change.
| aaomidi wrote:
| The other thing is, since there is no right time we should
| fight for
|
| 1. Shorter working hours.
|
| 2. More flexible working hours.
| ghaff wrote:
| You do realize that Detroit and Boston are already
| effectively in different timezones as far as the sun is
| concerned?
| bena wrote:
| Detroit should be -6UTC. Most of Texas should be -7. Fix
| these issues and you'd have less contention.
| jgwil2 wrote:
| Since apparently no one likes changing the time but no one can
| agree whether we should go with standard or daylight time, why
| don't we just split it right down the middle and have an extra 30
| minutes added to our UTC offset like in India?
| sllabres wrote:
| The country of Elbonia passes the bill for the "moon bashing act"
| and permanently forward the clock by _12_ hours (and not just a
| laughable one hour), after Elbonien scientists discovered that
| the cost savings for street lighting alone is equivalent to half
| of their gross domestic product.
|
| ... and i will adjust my clock dynamically, so i'm never too late
| again.
| ddlatham wrote:
| We did this before, about 50 years ago. Going in, close to 80% of
| people supported permanent Daylight Saving Time. After
| experiencing a single winter, that dropped to close to 40%, and
| it was repealed. Looks like we may be doomed to repeat the
| experience.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_time_observation_in_...
| drekipus wrote:
| Well you know what they say..
| bonniemuffin wrote:
| "Those who study history are doomed to stand by helplessly
| while everyone else repeats it"?
| thrill wrote:
| "Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member
| of Congress; but I repeat myself."?
| ishjoh wrote:
| Thank you for this link. I guess we really are doomed to repeat
| history.
| paxys wrote:
| You conveniently skipped the last line of that paragraph
|
| > However, critics argue that anecdotes of deaths in the dark
| could be equally applied to darker evenings, and that the
| elimination of Permanent DST was politically motivated.
| aiisjustanif wrote:
| Children deaths tend to be more significant in the eyes of
| the voting population, tbf.
| paxys wrote:
| The point is that there may have been an equal number of
| children saved from death due to more light in the
| evenings, but you can't really prove that.
| ultimoo wrote:
| No, 50 years ago people had different lifestyles, jobs, and
| hobbies. Technology as we know it today did not exist. It's a
| very different world today and the chances of a different
| outcome are large enough to warrant repeating this.
| thehappypm wrote:
| I don't get this at all. Why would people want the sun to go
| down in the afternoon? In my time zone it sets at 4:30 part of
| the year! That's awful, and sunrise is at around 7:00am. We
| have way more sun in the morning.
| eli wrote:
| I don't particularly care whether the sun rises or sets +/- 1
| hour. I do care about having my routine and sleep schedule
| disrupted.
| wittjeff wrote:
| Morning vs Evening Light Treatment of Patients With Winter
| Depression
|
| "These results should help establish the importance of
| circadian (morning or evening) time of light exposure in the
| treatment of winter depression. We recommend that bright-
| light exposure be scheduled immediately on awakening in the
| treatment of most patients with seasonal affective disorder."
|
| https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/.
| ..
| stickfigure wrote:
| Those people can get up later?
|
| It really doesn't matter whether we're on daylight time or
| standard time, schedules will adjust to whatever makes
| sense for that particular locale. Just stop changing the
| damn clocks back and forth.
| lacrosse_tannin wrote:
| You could get up earlier??
| greyhair wrote:
| Says the person that has never punched a clock on a blue
| collar job.
|
| 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM.
| davis_m wrote:
| The time most people wake up is dictated by when they
| need to be at work. They can't simply "get up later".
| tshaddox wrote:
| But isn't it the case that the jobs that are directly
| concerned with whether the sun is up would also just do
| the job based on solar time with no regard for standard
| time? There's obviously some need for accommodating those
| people so they can get their kids to school or have some
| time to go to the bank or whatever, but I find it hard to
| believe that applying standard time offsets twice a year
| is the most efficient way to make these accommodations.
| danShumway wrote:
| Could work hours shift for those people?
|
| What I can't get past is that we are literally changing
| the numbers on our clocks. That can't be a less invasive
| or easier to coordinate solution than a schedule shift
| for a business would be. If we can pass a law mandating
| daylight savings time, is that less invasive than passing
| a law saying that some businesses should shift their
| hours in the winter?
|
| Even without a law -- businesses can voluntarily have
| summer hours and winter hours, because _they already do_
| , we just change the clocks to pretend that's not what
| we're doing. Businesses can already ignore or set their
| own hours voluntarily regardless of DST, and the majority
| have completely voluntarily decided that in the winter
| they'll shift their opening and closing times by an hour.
|
| I just feel like -- couldn't they do literally the exact
| same thing they're doing right now, except without us all
| having to pretend that time itself has changed? Is it a
| mental thing, are we just relying on CEOs not
| understanding how DST works, so we have to trick them
| into having seasonal hours?
| creeble wrote:
| Aren't the health detriments the same whether you shift
| your working hours / schedule or shift the clock?
|
| Aren't they effectively exactly the same thing,
| especially if they're coordinated? And if they're not
| coordinated, isn't it a bigger mess in terms of knowing
| when things are supposed to change?
| danShumway wrote:
| > Aren't the health detriments the same whether you shift
| your working hours / schedule or shift the clock?
|
| Yes. I don't personally advise that we do shift working
| hours, I think that breaking people's internal clocks and
| wakeup time is harmful. But, if for some reason people
| really want to do that, we don't need daylight/standard
| time changes to do it.
|
| > Aren't they effectively exactly the same thing,
| especially if they're coordinated?
|
| Yes, and that's actually a really good summation of my
| point. We aren't doing anything magical with time shifts,
| we are just coordinating business/school times. But we
| are doing it in a way that is a lot more complicated than
| it needs to be, and that is in some ways a lot less
| granular and useful than it could be.
|
| Not every part of the US needs time shifts in order to
| make sure it's bright in the evenings/mornings. There
| could be some municipalities/states where having seasonal
| work times might make sense (again, I don't think that's
| the case, but I can see the argument for it). Other parts
| of the US might not need that at all. The time shifts are
| a really clumsy system for handling winter sunrise times
| given just how large the US is and how much daytime
| variety there is across the country.
|
| > And if they're not coordinated, isn't it a bigger mess
| in terms of knowing when things are supposed to change?
|
| Personally, I don't think we need that much coordination
| and I don't think the current system really requires that
| much coordination or that it's desirable for everything
| to be synced up that way. I don't think anything would
| fall apart if we all stuck with DST permanently but in
| one state there was a local regulation that made retail
| shops open an hour later in the winter, or where school
| hours were different in the winter than in a few Northern
| states. I think that would probably be fine? I already
| have to check local store hours if I get up early and I'm
| visiting an unfamiliar neighborhood.
|
| To go a step further, I also kind of feel like even that
| would be a mistake for many businesses (at least non-
| retail ones), I think forcing people to suddenly get up
| an hour earlier probably does more damage than seasonal
| depression for most people, and I would rather buy the
| remaining people with really bad seasonal depression sun
| lamps.
|
| However, my point is -- the system is just obfuscating
| what we're really doing, which is shifting
| business/school hours. Even if you disagree with me about
| everything in the previous two paragraphs, even if you
| think this does need to be perfectly coordinated, and we
| do need to keep shifting business hours -- even in that
| scenario, we don't need DST/standard shifts to do that.
|
| The time shift is just an illusion, what's really
| happening is the government is saying everyone should get
| up an hour earlier/later. Well, if we're OK with the
| government saying that, and if (for some reason) we want
| the government to say that -- then the government can
| just say that, it doesn't have to also force everyone to
| pretend that clocks are different. I don't necessarily
| think we should shift business hours at all, I'm just
| saying that we don't need to pretend that we have altered
| the timestream if we do want to shift business hours.
| ghaff wrote:
| It's a mass coordination problem. Businesses have
| customers. OK, segments of the business that don't
| interact with customers could choose to switch working
| hours. But if I'm retail say, my customers probably
| expect that I'll be open at 10am for a random store.
| tshaddox wrote:
| > Businesses have customers.
|
| This seems like a laughable reason given that traditional
| business hours are literally the exact same as
| traditional work hours, so by this argument all the
| supposed customers are at work anyway and thus not at
| your store.
| ghaff wrote:
| No. They're really not. They're later than most people go
| into an office and they go into the (early) evening.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Well, then when they go shopping after work in the early
| evening they will be blessed with additional sunlight
| instead of the dismal dark.
| danShumway wrote:
| Even if we take the perspective that we need complete
| coordination across the board, it still seems weird to me
| that our solution to that isn't to regulate that business
| hours should shift in the winter, it's to regulate that
| time itself bend to our whims.
|
| It seems like a solution where retail businesses were
| required to shift hours in the winter would still be
| preferable to what we have. Because what we have is kind
| of that already, except also it makes a lot of date math
| harder and affects non-retail workers too.
|
| If the problem is that we need businesses to shift hours,
| we can do that through either regulation or social
| behavior or through other incentives -- we don't have to
| on top of that also change clocks, do we? Even just
| shifting public school hours and public transportation
| schedules alone would probably be a large incentive for
| many businesses to follow along.
| sicromoft wrote:
| How exactly would this business hours regulation work?
| danShumway wrote:
| Take your pick:
|
| - We could pass regulations at at a federal level, state
| level, or even at a municipal level. Lower down would be
| my preference, federal changes to the clock are both too
| much of an intervention and also too clumsy of a brush,
| not every state needs this. But, whatever floats your
| boat.
|
| - States/municipalities could regulate businesses
| directly, or they could regulate time shifts for public
| services, since a lot of businesses already set their
| hours based on those public services like
| schools/transportation/etc. Shifting local public school
| times in the winter/spring would probably cause a shift
| in local business hours for some segments of the market.
|
| - Or, maybe you don't even need regulation at all, after
| all many private businesses today could choose not to
| respect DST/standard time in regards to worker hours. You
| could already have a business that says that when DST
| happens we're all going to come in 10-6 instead of 9-5.
| Most businesses either don't do that or they have
| flexible hours, which indicates that local pressures and
| worker preference might be enough to influence business
| hours even without government intervention. Businesses in
| this regard tend to make group decisions; I am doubtful
| that if office businesses all shifted their hours to
| accommodate worker availability with
| schools/transportation that retail shops would not shift
| their hours as well to accommodate shopper availability.
|
| ----
|
| The trick here is to realize that federally mandated time
| shifts _are_ effectively a regulation on business hours;
| they affect public services, they affect any local
| regulations that already exist around business hours. If
| you 're opposed to federal regulations on business hours
| or incentives for seasonal business hours, you are
| opposed to DST/standard time, even if you don't realize
| it yet. If you're not opposed to federal regulations on
| business hours, then there's no real issue with
| regulating this stuff directly rather than indirectly.
|
| We have a system right now where the federal government
| shifts clocks by an hour twice a year. That has a
| profound impact on business hours and on people's
| schedules. If you're OK with the government having that
| power, then we can get rid of DST/standard switching and
| just have the government exercise that power directly. If
| you're not OK with the government having that power, then
| you probably shouldn't be OK with it changing everyone's
| clocks twice a year.
|
| Personally, I think that to the degree that we should be
| regulating something like this, it probably makes more
| sense on a local level than on a federal level. I also
| kind of think we probably shouldn't be shifting hours so
| much in the first place. However, regardless of whether
| or not we keep shifting hours, and regardless of whether
| it gets regulated federally, or locally, or not at all,
| we don't need to change clocks. If we're OK with the
| government shifting public services and hour regulations
| by an hour twice a year, then they can keep doing that.
| But we don't need to all collectively pretend that
| they're not doing that and that actually time changed.
| paulmd wrote:
| > Even if we take the perspective that we need complete
| coordination across the board, it still seems weird to me
| that our solution to that isn't to regulate that business
| hours should shift in the winter, it's to regulate that
| time itself bend to our whims.
|
| that's how it works, though. We have a calendar with 365
| days, turns out that's not quite how reality works. We
| could reallocate our calendar to fit reality, but it's
| easier to make reality fit our calendar.
| danShumway wrote:
| My counterpoint to that comparison is that people don't
| have increased heart attacks and crash their cars on leap
| days.
|
| Our measurement of time is fuzzy, you're right, and we
| have fuzzy systems to deal with it. But not all fuzzy
| logic and corrections are equally severe; adding an extra
| day every 4 years is a much smaller intervention than
| making a day last 23/25 hours twice a year, and that
| twice-a-year intervention comes with much larger effects
| than an extra day in February.
|
| Our calendar/hour system for days/time is a map, and the
| map is not the territory. However, some maps are still
| more accurate than other maps.
|
| It's also worth asking whether these interventions are
| making time easier or harder to reason about: 24 hours a
| day, 365 days a year is a nice set of numbers to work
| with, and it's a system that is standardized across most
| of the entire world if not the entire world at this
| point. The alternative would be very difficult to reason
| about or to do math with (if we were even capable of
| changing it at all), so we introduce some fuzzy
| corrections so that most of the time the math is easier,
| and that comes with almost no cost to society.
|
| In contrast, DST/standard shifts make calendar math in
| the US _harder_ , not easier, and they aren't
| standardized across the majority of the world, which
| makes it even harder to coordinate with people in other
| countries. And the intervention not only doesn't make the
| math easier, it also comes with large costs to society in
| the form of sleep-deprived people killing themselves and
| others every single March.
| yakak wrote:
| Shifts, etc, are all basically negotiated business by
| business, school system by school system, etc. The night
| shift, restaurant workers, school kids, etc, are really
| pushed around by logistics to match rush hours for office
| workers.
|
| A split between organizations changing their winter and
| summer hours and ones choosing an hour earlier or later
| permanently is not necessarily harmful because it ends up
| spreading the traffic across more time. Everyone moving
| in sync causes a very precise traffic jam.
| nerdponx wrote:
| Most people can't get up at 8 and get to work by 9.
| xyhopguy wrote:
| this proposal will set sunrise at 9am during december in
| Oregon and washington. 'Wake up later' doesnt really work
| for most people.
| stickfigure wrote:
| How is 8am so much better? If you start work at 8am, you
| need to be up 1-2 hours earlier to get ready, commute,
| etc. The only people who wake up with the sun in the
| winter are folks that roll into work at 10am.
| xyhopguy wrote:
| Currently we deal with >= 8am sunrise for 2 months of the
| year. With this proposal, you get it for November and
| February too. yay!
| joncp wrote:
| Uh huh.
|
| "Hey boss, sickfigure over on HN says I can get up later
| so I'll be coming in at 10. k thx"
| greyhair wrote:
| Lol! Oh yeah.
| ddlatham wrote:
| Because the hours of sunlight are limited, and many people
| prefer having the sun set in the afternoon over having it
| rise after the day's routine is well under way. Many people
| prefer it the other way around. There are some inconveniences
| both ways, but we'll make it work one way or the other.
| tshaddox wrote:
| Every poll I've seen shows yearly daylight saving time
| adjustments to be rather unpopular.
| ghaff wrote:
| "adjustments"
|
| Even those of us who prefer DST in general don't like the
| change in general. (OK, I remember in college extending
| the party by one hour was pretty cool but the other end
| wasn't so great.)
| Talanes wrote:
| >OK, I remember in college extending the party by one
| hour was pretty cool but the other end wasn't so great.
|
| The magic really goes away when you hit bar-going age and
| realize that even though the time-change lines up with
| last-call perfectly, they don't stay open an extra hour.
| sampo wrote:
| There is a whole body of research, comparing the areas on
| both sides of time zone boundaries. The results unanimously
| show that living too far west of your time zone's center
| line, has negative effects on health and economy. In light of
| this research, permanent winter time would be good for health
| and economy. Permanent summer time will be worse.
|
| Linkdump:
|
| https://www.econ.pitt.edu/sites/default/files/WP%2017-009.up.
| ..
|
| http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/cebp/26/8/1306.full.pdf
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21231877
|
| https://jcsm.aasm.org/doi/10.5664/jcsm.8780
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29636342
|
| https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276058441_The_incid.
| ..
| audunw wrote:
| Would this be due to lack of light in the morning when
| waking up?
|
| If so, that's a solved problem these days. There's hundreds
| of ways to have lights that turn on in the morning. Having
| some kind of wakeup-light (simply two bright Philips Hue
| bulbs in the bedroom ceiling lamps these days) and taking
| vitamin D has solved the issues I've had with living far
| north, where it's dark most hours in the morning in mid-
| winter.
| laurent92 wrote:
| Most of us solve it by flooding our face with phone light
| in the middle of the night ;)
| pdonis wrote:
| _> In light of this research, permanent winter time would
| be good for health and economy. Permanent summer time will
| be worse._
|
| Only one of these papers (the researchgate one) actually
| asserts a hypothesis for the root cause of the correlation
| observed that might (but see below) make this true--later
| time of sunrise. The others all assert the hypothesis that
| being further out of sync with the rest of your time zone
| (which determines what one paper calls "social time") is
| the root cause. The way to fix that is not permanent winter
| time but narrower time zones--for example, a good chunk of
| what is now the Eastern time zone in the US is closer to
| the Central time zone meridian and should really be in that
| time zone. But that fix is orthogonal to the permanent
| summer time question.
|
| Unfortunately for your argument, the one remaining paper
| (the researchgate one) is looking at variation with
| _latitude_ , not variation with _longitude_. Latitude
| variation is going to be there regardless of what we do
| with daylight savings time. The fix for anyone bothered by
| the researchgate paper 's findings is to move further
| south.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Permanent winter time would suck here, I like taking my kid
| to the playground after school, I can't do that in the
| winter because it is long dark by the time I pick him up.
| Who cares if the sun is up and bright at 6AM in the morning
| while I'm still sleeping.
|
| When I lived in Beijing, they are on standard time year
| round , and it was really horrible having the sun rise at
| 4AM in the morning during summer. Like really? How can that
| be healthy?
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _Who cares if the sun is up and bright at 6AM in the
| morning while I 'm still sleeping._
|
| Good for you that you're still sleeping at 6AM. But some
| of us wake up at 6AM (or earlier) and would like to have
| it be brighter to help kick start our circadian rhythm.
| stouset wrote:
| And people who work night shifts would be delighted if
| every locale instantly adopted a +12 hour time offset.
|
| Any change whatsoever to a status quo will delight some
| and upset others on an individual basis. I assume your
| point isn't that we should all adopt your preferences. So
| if not, what is it?
| sampo wrote:
| > Who cares if the sun is up and bright at 6AM in the
| morning while I'm still sleeping.
|
| According to the research results, public health and
| economy would care.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Public health also cares about not switching up
| schedules.
| throw0101a wrote:
| They care even more about Year-round Standard Time:
|
| > _We therefore strongly support removing DST changes or
| removing permanent DST and having governing organizations
| choose permanent Standard Time for the health and safety
| of their citizens._
|
| * https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/074873041
| 98541...
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Because we are still farmers who need to wake up at 6AM
| in the morning?
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| Farmers don't care about the clock, neither do the cows.
| Work traditionally started when the sun came up, and cows
| got fed then too... since cows still can't read the
| clock, they still get up and want food at sunrise, DST or
| not.
| justrudd wrote:
| Haha! I worked on a dairy farm in my youth. Cows also
| don't care about what days off your government says you
| should have. Kids have a recital in the afternoon? Better
| have someone there to milk the cows. Woke up with a tooth
| ache? better have someone there to milk the cows.
|
| Cows also don't care about property lines :)
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _Because we are still farmers who need to wake up at
| 6AM in the morning?_
|
| I start work at an office starting around 8:30-9:00 and I
| wake up at 6AM. Not quite sure what that time has to do
| with farmers.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Sounds like you work in an all indoor environment where
| the sun matters not to your livelihood, unlike farmers.
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _Sounds like you work in an all indoor environment
| where the sun matters not to your livelihood, unlike
| farmers._
|
| My (late) grandparent were farmers: they only cared about
| the time on Sundays to make sure they weren't late for
| Church services. Otherwise the the cows needed milking
| when they needed milking (which I helped with when I
| visited them).
| macintux wrote:
| Do you think farmers will orient their working hours
| around a clock or the sun?
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Not in the modern era, no:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30691457
| greyhair wrote:
| Almost all 'blue collar' work starts at 7:00 AM. It isn't
| about farmers. I was a farmer once, my day started at
| 4:30 AM.
|
| But I worked blue collar after that, my job 7:30 to 5:00,
| or 7:30 to 8:00 on long days.
|
| Even in my current white collar job, that habit has
| stuck, and I have been working 7:30 AM to 4:30 AM for the
| last thirty five years, mostly to avoid the bulk of the
| commute.
|
| So yes, there are millions of jobs across this country
| where people arrive at work, and punch in on a clock, at
| 7:00 AM every morning.
| joshstrange wrote:
| > According to the research results, public health and
| economy would care.
|
| Well, good thing we've never let that stand in the way of
| a decision. /s
|
| Personally I'd prefer more light later in the day so that
| I don't feel like the day is over as soon as I get off
| work but that's just me.
| sampo wrote:
| It's an interesting situation. Research shows one thing,
| but a lot of people seem to have a gut feeling that says
| the opposite thing.
| stouset wrote:
| This is literally what permanent DST accomplishes.
| joshstrange wrote:
| I know, I mistakenly thought the comment I was referring
| to was saying that the research says that "Standard Time"
| is better for us than DST.
| d4mi3n wrote:
| That's what the research supports. People go out more and
| spend money more when the sun is up after the working
| day. Kids play more. People exercise more.
| joshstrange wrote:
| Ahh, I think I read the comment I was replying to
| backwards (which is par for the course when it comes to
| TZ/DST-type things with me, "is it an hour earlier? or
| later").
| runarberg wrote:
| No, you read it correctly the first time around. E.g.
| from the first link in the dump above:
|
| > we find that an extra hour of natural light in the
| evening reduces sleep duration by an average of 19
| minutes and increases the likelihood of reporting
| insufficient sleep.
|
| The health benefits of people staying out longer and
| spending more money (?) are disputed I believe. The
| reduced sleep of day starting before sun-up are pretty
| universally recognized as bad for public health
| (particularly among teenagers).
|
| Also note that if staying out longer was a goal to strive
| for, there are number of alternatives to encourage that.
| Including shorter worker ours, more public spaces, public
| events, etc. Conversely getting people to sleep longer is
| much harder with the clock set 1+ hour after the sun
| clock.
| [deleted]
| riffic wrote:
| China has one time zone for the whole country if I'm not
| mistaken. the country spans 5 geographic time zones:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_in_China
|
| Permanent standard / solar time proponent here: I'm
| reminded of that quote about people believing you could
| get a longer blanket if you were to cut a foot off top
| and sew it onto the bottom.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| That's definitely true for Urumuqi where stores open
| later (11AM instead of 9:30 or 10AM in the rest of the
| country). But Beijing is pretty far east where the time
| zone is mainly meant for.
| billiam wrote:
| Try Kashgar. It's dark until 10 or later every day in the
| winter.
| riffic wrote:
| the variability of solar time depends a great deal on
| latitude, if I'm not mistaken.
|
| perhaps lawmakers can try voting to change the tilt of
| the earth, lol.
| vaughnegut wrote:
| While true, it doesn't really disprove what the poster
| above is saying, since they lived in Beijing, the place
| that China's timezone is roughly centered on.
| [deleted]
| stouset wrote:
| You two are in violent agreement. Permanent DST gives you
| an extra hour of sunlight in the afternoon.
| paulmd wrote:
| grandparent is advocating permanent _standard time
| /winter time,_ not permanent _DST_.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| stouset wrote:
| You're correct, my apologies.
| Moru wrote:
| Why can't you take your kid to the playground after dark?
| In December we get sunrise at 8 but it's not light until
| 9 or so. Sunset is at 15 but it's quite dark at 14
| already. Kids are happily playing with their parents in
| the snow no matter how dark it is, you can't stay indoors
| just because you have 5-6 hours of daylight. You just get
| a flashlight for your head and can play or go skiing in
| the forest.
| busyant wrote:
| All I can say is that I find "losing" the hour to be
| _brutal_ for several weeks. I 've never been good with jet-
| lag either.
|
| I like to joke that I never fully recover until they give
| me back the hour come November.
|
| I'd rather they just pick one and be done with it.
| throw0101a wrote:
| To add to the pile-on, the position papers of various sleep
| and chronobiology societies:
|
| * https://srbr.org/advocacy/daylight-saving-time-presskit/
|
| * https://old.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/dq2nv3/
|
| * http://www.chronobiology.ch/wp-
| content/uploads/2019/08/JBR-D...
|
| * https://www.chronobiology.com/impact-daylight-saving-
| time-ci...
|
| * https://esrs.eu/wp-
| content/uploads/2019/03/To_the_EU_Commiss...
|
| > _The authors take the position that, based on comparisons
| of large populations living in DST or ST or on western
| versus eastern edges of time zones, the advantages of
| permanent ST outweigh switching to DST annually or
| permanently. Four peer reviewers provided expert critiques
| of the initial submission, and the SRBR Executive Board
| approved the revised manuscript as a Position Paper to help
| educate the public in their evaluation of current
| legislative actions to end DST._ [...] _The choice of DST
| is political and therefore can be changed. If we want to
| improve human health, we should not fight against our body
| clock, and therefore, we should abandon DST and return to
| Standard Time (which is when the sun clock time most
| closely matches the social clock time) throughout the year.
| This solution would fix both the acute and the chronic
| problems of DST. We therefore strongly support removing DST
| changes or removing permanent DST and having governing
| organizations choose permanent Standard Time for the health
| and safety of their citizens._
|
| * https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07487304198
| 541...
| phkahler wrote:
| >> the advantages of permanent ST outweigh switching to
| DST annually or permanently.
|
| So they picked the wrong one.
| throw0101a wrote:
| According to the folks that study this, that is correct.
| armagon wrote:
| So frustrating. Why would they pick this one?
|
| I live in Alberta, Canada, and enough people want to get
| rid of the time zone switching that it came to a vote
| last fall. I couldn't believe the question on the ballot
| was do you want to go to permanent DST, instead of asking
| if we wanted to go to permanent standard time. It was
| snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
|
| The people voted against the change, but I really think
| they would've voted for permanent standard time if it had
| been an option.
| ghaff wrote:
| The big cities in Alberta look to be fairly far west in a
| timezone so that may have something to do with it. The
| further east you are the better DST looks on average. And
| that far north, I can see getting at least somewhat light
| mornings earlier in the year being a plus.
| tenuousemphasis wrote:
| >Why would they pick this one?
|
| Money. [1]
|
| On the upside, local or state governments might be able
| to alter their time zone to essentially observe permanent
| Standard Time.
|
| >Seasonal observation of DST was first enacted in the US
| during World Wars I and II, as an attempt to conserve
| fuel. The practice was unpopular and promptly repealed
| after each war; however, lobbyists from the petroleum
| industry lobbied to restore DST, as they had noticed it
| actually increased fuel consumption. Petroleum lobbyists
| joined with lobbyists from golf and candy corporations in
| the 1980s to form the National Daylight Saving Time
| Coalition, and they have twice since succeeded in
| extending the length of DST's observation from six months
| to seven in 1986, and again to eight months in 2005. The
| observation of DST has also been found to increase
| residential energy costs and pollution costs by several
| million dollars per year.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_time_observat
| ion_in_...
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _So frustrating. Why would they pick this one?_
|
| Just look at all the other threads in this discussion: "I
| want it brighter when I leave the office".
|
| It's like the lightbulb was never invented or something.
| We haven't had "dark" for decades:
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution
| Apocryphon wrote:
| So we don't have dark pre-sunrise mornings either, thanks
| to the lightbulb?
|
| Never mind light pollution doesn't apply if you're trying
| to get into outdoor activities after work.
| jader201 wrote:
| I admit I haven't read all of these links, but just
| thinking this through logically, whether we are on DST or
| ST permanently shouldn't matter one way or another. I can
| get how shifting back and forth twice a year can have an
| impact, but just not following the logic on why ST > DST.
|
| The delta is only which number shows on the clock each
| hour. Whether we choose to start school/work/whatever
| commitment at 7am, 8am, 9am, etc. shouldn't be coupled to
| ST or DST.
|
| That is, if we want to start work when the sun rises (on
| average), there's nothing stopping us from doing that,
| particularly if it's proven to be more healthy.
|
| That alone makes me question, a bit, the validity of
| these studies.
|
| But again, maybe there's more context that I'm missing --
| which is why I'm posting here, in case there's context
| that would explain this.
| Tenoke wrote:
| Presumably because opening/working hours remain the same
| by the clock when we switch (or when you are on the edge
| of a zone as in some of the studies) rather than adjust,
| and they are currently more optimal for one of those.
|
| At any rate, I also strongly suspect it doesn't matter
| which one is picked but only as long as everything else
| is adjusted around it.
| sampo wrote:
| > just thinking this through logically, whether we are on
| DST or ST permanently shouldn't matter one way or another
|
| It's observational, empirical research. The results are
| valid whether you understand them or not.
| 20after4 wrote:
| Seeking to understand the research is still a valid
| endeavor. We shouldn't blindly accept research without
| understanding it's implications and trying to suss out
| the reason for the observed results.
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _We shouldn 't blindly accept research without
| understanding it's implications and trying to suss out
| the reason for the observed results._
|
| You're not wrong, but (e.g.) this paper has several dozen
| references, stating at the end:
|
| > _In summary, the scientific literature strongly argues
| against the switching between DST and Standard Time and
| even more so against adopting DST permanently. The latter
| would exaggerate all the effects described above beyond
| the simple extension of DST from approximately 8 months
| /year to 12 months/year (depending on country) since body
| clocks are generally even later during winter than during
| the long photoperiods of summer (with DST) (Kantermann et
| al., 2007; Hadlow et al., 2014, 2018; Hashizaki et al.,
| 2018). Perennial DST increases SJL prevalence even more,
| as described above._
|
| * https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019
| .0094...
|
| If you want to fact check the folks who have this as
| their careers, you're welcome to pick up studying
| circadian rhythms as a hobby. But most of us ain't got
| time for that, so I'm willing to trust the experts and
| move on with my life.
|
| We just spent two years having to put up with folks being
| arm chair epidemiologist with COVID, do we have to do it
| all over again with chronobiologists?
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronobiology
| Asooka wrote:
| Because we don't want to get up too early. If you want more
| sun, you're free to get up early yourself.
| D13Fd wrote:
| Because it make zero sense for everyone to have to get up an
| hour earlier. And it makes no sense for kids to stand around
| in the dark at freezing cold bus stops every morning.
| Tempest1981 wrote:
| There is also a movement to start school later:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Start_school_later_movement
|
| For example, in California, starting this Fall, high school
| can't start before 8:30 AM.
| iso1210 wrote:
| I get the feeling that it's fairly common in US schools
| to have kids in before 8am, possibly even before 7am!
|
| Is this because of the widespread school transport and
| the need to stagger the bus usage? In the UK it's quite
| rare to have school transport, with most kids at high
| school taking public transport, and at primary school
| either walking or being driven
|
| I got the feeling from German textbooks at school that
| early starts were common in Europe too.
| kube-system wrote:
| Yes, it is commonplace for bussing to be staggered --
| they often pick up a route for one school (maybe a high
| school), then run another route for another school (maybe
| an elementary school).
| nickff wrote:
| Early school hours are often a result of teachers'
| desires to get out of work early. Many teachers' unions
| include school hours in their bargaining/contracts.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| Yeah, and that is because being a teacher is not just an
| incredibly mentally taxing job (made worse by the fact
| that class sizes are way too large) but also involves _an
| awful lot_ of invisible after-school work: preparing and
| correcting exams, preparing class material, dealing with
| IEPs, following up with parents (particularly in
| financially or otherwise challenged families), organizing
| after-school and extra-curricular activities, dealing
| with other bureaucratic bullshit because the
| administration is understaffed...
| Jtype wrote:
| I'm sure parents with jobs are going to love this.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| They will if it makes their kids healthier and puts
| pressure on industries to shift job schedules later.
| deagle50 wrote:
| Kids shouldn't be forced to start that early anyway. It's
| borderline child abuse imo. Maybe permanent DST will lead
| to school schedules that benefit children not adults.
| sigspec wrote:
| YES! I work from 9-5. My kid is at school from 7:15 to
| 2:30. We're lucky my wife teaches so we don't have to
| worry about after school care.
| LastMuel wrote:
| But, we do that anyway. Mid winter, even in the south part
| of the U.S. I was standing in the dark and cold waiting for
| a bus to arrive.
| D13Fd wrote:
| There is a big difference between doing it for a few
| weeks and doing it for most or all of the school year
| (depending on location and schedule).
| sophacles wrote:
| Stop letting facts get in the way of a good "i dislike
| change" argument.
| gifnamething wrote:
| This isn't a constructive way of arguing, it's an
| irrefutable strawman
| dham wrote:
| Same here when I was in middle school. I never understood
| the standing for bus in the dark argument. I thought that
| was just normal.
| belltaco wrote:
| Change school start timings in winter, then?
| D13Fd wrote:
| We'd have to change work timing too, then, to facilitate
| dropoffs and parents who want to watch their kids at the
| bus stops. And at that point, we are back where we
| started. Better to just not mess with the time, and stick
| with standard time.
| rattray wrote:
| It's probably easier to change work timings now than it
| ever would have been before. Which is great.
| Jtype wrote:
| If you change what time people go to work from 8 am to 9
| am then you will also be changing when they get home from
| 5pm to 6pm. Then you have lost that extra daylight in the
| evening, which was the entire point of the time change!
| jalk wrote:
| Changing the start time for some activities twice a year
| seems likely to cause even more confusion that changing
| the clock
| tshaddox wrote:
| > And at that point, we are back where we started.
|
| Except only for people at latitudes where it's worth
| doing. Those people are precisely where they started, and
| everyone else has a much simpler year-round standard
| time.
| stickfigure wrote:
| What percentage of the population must start work at
| exactly 8am?
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| A pretty big chunk. I couldn't find the latest Census
| data, but in 2000 ~20% of people left for work before 630
| and 72% left for work before 830 am.
|
| https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/20
| 00/...
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| "And it makes no sense for kids to stand around in the dark
| at freezing cold bus stops every morning."
|
| I mean, coats exist. We could make sure everyone has winter
| wear appropriate for the weather, and then it just won't be
| an issue. Kids here are out in it and are from a young age
| here (Norway).
| D13Fd wrote:
| Easy to say from a low-crime, high-safety country like
| Norway.
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| Are we still pushing the myth of an epidemic of kids in
| the states getting abducted by random strangers?
| D13Fd wrote:
| It's easy to focus on abductions and forget all of the
| other relevant crime, which makes up the majority of it.
|
| Yes abductions are low, but in many many areas crime as a
| whole is high, and children are often involved or
| impacted, and likely more so when they are stuck standing
| around in the dark.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| After school crime involving children is much more
| prevalent. Imagine how darkness might currently aid that:
|
| https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/offenders/qa03301.asp
|
| https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/after-school-the-
| prime-t...
| [deleted]
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| I'm from the US - the midwest. It wasn't a big deal
| catching the bus when it was cold/dark there, either. We
| had lights at the bus stops, and half the time it was in
| front of the house. No big deal. We had coats, too. There
| are multiple programs to make sure kids have coats in the
| US, though they don't go far enough.
|
| Most places in the US are pretty safe, by the way, though
| folks will swear they aren't.
| rattray wrote:
| Also a country where a high percentage of families can
| afford clothing of adequate quality.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Winter coats aren't so expensive that the people of
| Detroit are seriously lacking for them.
|
| Sure they can't all stand at the bus stop wearing some
| status symbol of a jacket but they do just fine.
| kube-system wrote:
| When I was in school, there were absolutely kids who
| lacked basic necessities, including quality clothing.
| Clothing was also more expensive back then... but
| universal schooling means that we're also catering to the
| poorest of the poor.
| johannes1234321 wrote:
| These damn socialists ...
| seanalltogether wrote:
| Do you have kids? Do you have to wake those kids up for
| school in the dark and wrestle with your own ability to wake
| up in the dark? Have you been to school board meetings and
| listened to other parents who are extremely opinionated about
| every aspect of their children's schedules.
|
| The simple answer is that while lots of people "want" the sun
| in the evening, there is a sizable group of people that
| "need" the sun in the morning.
| dham wrote:
| School just starts way too damn early. I remember school at
| like 8:30 in elementary school. My son starts at 7:20. He
| has to get up at like 6:00 because it takes so long to get
| him up.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| They could also shift when school schedules start to later
| in the morning.
| seanalltogether wrote:
| But that shifts work schedules to later in the morning,
| which pushes lunch and dinner schedules, and bedtime
| schedules, and then you're right back where you started.
| gifnamething wrote:
| Then we lose the conceit that we're doing it for the
| kids' benefit.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| It wouldn't shift meal or bedtime schedules.
| m463 wrote:
| I think that is the answer.
|
| Keep kids away from traffic during darkness and let them
| have a little more darkness in the evening when they're
| inside and safe.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Because they don't do anything after work and would rather
| commute in the daylight at 7am so the late sun is of no
| benefit but the early sun is.
|
| Tons of people already work 7-3 so they already deal with the
| downside in the morning. Not like night is gonna get any
| darker.
| pavon wrote:
| Some people have a very difficult time waking up and driving
| to work before the sun rises.
| tzs wrote:
| > Why would people want the sun to go down in the afternoon?
|
| They don't. They want it to come up in the morning. In many
| places there isn't enough sunlight in the middle of winter to
| have it up both in the morning and the afternoon, so they
| need to pick one.
|
| From a safety point of view, probably sunlight in the morning
| in more useful because sunlight drives temperature. That
| means mornings tend to be colder than afternoons, and so are
| more likely to have hazards such as ice on the roads.
|
| When you go with dark mornings, you are combining the worst
| road conditions with the worst visibility. When you choose
| light mornings over light afternoons, then morning is
| combining the best visibility with the worst road conditions
| and afternoon is combining the best road conditions with the
| worst visibility.
|
| Another factor is that commutes tend to fall into a narrower
| time range in the mornings. The commutes back home after work
| tend to be more spread out. This tends to make the morning
| commute more dangerous, which further argues against placing
| the morning commute in darkness.
| thugthrasher wrote:
| You also have the issue with kids who take the bus to
| school. With dark mornings, kids sit by the road and wait
| for the bus. So they walk in the dark to the bus stop, then
| wait there for some indeterminate amount of time in the
| dark.
|
| Getting darker earlier at night, there are two advantages
| for schoolkids. One is that school tends to get out before
| the sun goes down even on the shortest days for most areas.
| So, many kids who'd have to wait in the dark in the morning
| don't have to deal with the dark at all in the afternoon.
| The other is that even when it's getting dark by the time
| the kid gets home, they don't have to wait next to the road
| for an indeterminate amount of time until the bus gets
| there.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| > When you go with dark mornings, you are combining the
| worst road conditions with the worst visibility.
|
| You're still passing the buck to commutes during dark
| evenings. Driving at night is always more dangerous:
|
| https://www.nsc.org/road-safety/safety-topics/night-driving
| mechanicalpulse wrote:
| I'd argue that evening darkness is somewhat safer than
| morning darkness when I'm considering winter weather. The
| temperature of the roads are higher after ten hours of
| daylight than they are after ten hours of darkness. The
| coldest and iciest conditions are often found right
| before dawn.
| jpindar wrote:
| Also, on average, people are in less of a hurry after
| work.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| But, more accidents happen at that time.
|
| https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-
| vehicle/overview/crashes-b...
| Talanes wrote:
| > You're still passing the buck
|
| Well, yeah. That's the key to their whole argument: the
| buck HAS to be passed somewhere.
| tzs wrote:
| My point is that given equal lighting morning is probably
| going to be worse for driving because of road conditions.
|
| If we then have to add darkness to one of those, adding
| it to evening will probably be less damaging because
| evening has a larger safety margin due to better road
| conditions.
|
| Adding darkness to morning is taking what is already the
| hardest case and making it even worse.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| But currently more accidents happen at night than they do
| in the early morning, even when morning darkness factored
| in.
|
| https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-
| vehicle/overview/crashes-b...
| seangrogg wrote:
| All I'm going to say is that - after experiencing about a
| decade of living in AZ and not worrying about toggling time -
| I'd still be in that camp that support permanently choosing a
| time.
| deanCommie wrote:
| This is key. We can adapt to anything. Just stop making me
| lose an hour of my sleep once a year. It takes me > 1 week to
| adjust.
| MrMetlHed wrote:
| I live in Arizona as well, and agree. I'd rather everyone
| else just pick a time and stick with it. Preferably DST so I
| can be 3 hours back of the East Coast and get 3 hours at the
| end of the work day there for solid working while no one else
| is around. And I like having sporting events on at the end of
| a work day.
| seangrogg wrote:
| Here's to hoping!
| subsubzero wrote:
| Its so strange how people on this thread are complaining about
| the issues you mentioned, but twice every year I see articles
| on hackernews/other areas about how bad the effects of changing
| time to DST and back and how detrimental it is for everyone's
| health. People can't have it both ways.
|
| My gut suspicion is why this passed is people are more angrier
| and stressed out/depressed than they have been in a very long
| time and its an appeasement so they don't take their anger out
| at the polls come November, that and it is an easy thing to
| change that requires next to no stimulus. I expect more of
| these appeasement bills to start passing as gas heads to the
| moon along with inflation.
| dillondoyle wrote:
| I see it too (work to elect Dems). Especially if gas is over
| $5 past august. Seeing signs it will cool down though?
|
| Subsidizing gas seems like obvious on paper but fraught with
| problems especially with inflation (and opposite of what's
| needed for climate change).
|
| Would love to see federal legalization, or at least
| decriminalization of marijuana. IDK if only decriminalization
| would hold up with reconciliation but I think regulating it
| legalized commerce would.
|
| And sad to say but assuming Roe is gutted/thrown to the
| states that could galvanize turnout on both sides, hopefully
| to our benefit. We'll see what games are played with
| Jackson's nomination too
| exolymph wrote:
| Lol at the idea that electing Democrats will help with gas
| prices. Come to Cali and see how that works in practice.
| alx__ wrote:
| Gas prices are higher in California due to multiple taxes
| being added to the base price
| subsubzero wrote:
| yup, these increases were voted into effect by California
| voters. In addition there are requirements from 1994
| onwards that California have a cleaner gasoline than
| other places and this also adds to the cost. Lastly there
| is a mystery surcharge that Newsom and other lawmakers
| knew about but nothing has been done in 2 1/2 years to
| find out whats causing it -
| https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/energy-
| green/s...
| Brybry wrote:
| Isn't California gasoline generally more expensive
| because it requires a more stringent formulation of
| gasoline and so only a handful of refineries produce
| that?[1][2]
|
| I imagine if the whole country used the California
| standard then gas prices in California would go down.
|
| I don't know how much it would go up in the rest of the
| country though.
|
| Really we should just ditch gas. The political drama from
| the last 50+ years over oil alone seems like a no-brainer
| for anything but gasoline, even if it costs more.
|
| [1] https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-
| work/programs/gasoline/about [2] https://www.sacbee.com/n
| ews/california/article259190893.html
| Robotbeat wrote:
| I am not sure gas will remain that high. I've noticed gas
| starting to reduce slightly already.
|
| I can see populist measures, such as prohibiting or
| limiting exports of gasoline or whatever, to potentially
| reduce the gas price in the near term.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| > Subsidizing gas seems like obvious on paper but fraught
| with problems especially with inflation (and opposite of
| what's needed for climate change).
|
| Gas (fossil fuels in general) is already extremely heavily
| subsidized.
| subsubzero wrote:
| Well the bills sponsor is Marco Rubio who is a republican.
| And it had bi-partisan support. I don't think any one party
| will think they can benefit from these bills, I think they
| are mainly pushed to calm a very angry populace where the
| wild spending of Trump and Biden the past two years has put
| the country in a tough spot.
|
| People are fed up with heavy handed lockdowns/restrictions
| from covid, and now are waking up to the fact that you
| cannot buy your way out of a problem by spending insane
| amounts of stimulus(look at inflation now). In addition any
| large stock market correction cannot be solved by lowering
| rates at the fed as its zero currently and is being raised.
| Hence you get bills like these to give the people something
| they want.
|
| As for Roe vs. Wade both of the newest justices have said
| that it is settled law so I do not see it being overturned.
| [deleted]
| graeme wrote:
| You lose an hour of sleep once, gain it the other time. I
| don't understand the fuss. Mostly balances out
| Daimanta wrote:
| To me it does matter as it messes up my biological clock.
| My body will tell me close to a week that I should or
| should not be sleeping, waking up, lunch or have dinner.
| The lost sleep and disorientation is real for me.
|
| Besides that, I hate people fidgeting with the clock. Stop
| DST permanently, please!
| nikolay wrote:
| Actually, you can't compensate for lack of sleep and
| oversleeping is not healthy either, so, you get dinged
| twice.
| 123jay7 wrote:
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| I wonder if our interconnected world will make this different.
| I'm guessing people are more adversely affected by DST than
| previously.
|
| Also from your link:
|
| > In the state of Florida alone, at least six school children
| were killed by motorists due to the dark mornings created by
| the new law.
|
| I wonder how in the world they attributed that to DST?
| ThatGeoGuy wrote:
| North America does seem to like their cars, and is quite
| hellbent on finding any explanation for deaths caused by
| automobiles that absolves the system from having to take any
| responsibility or do anything (e.g. build infrastructure,
| regulate cars, etc.).
|
| Of course, that's not to say that six school children being
| killed by motorists didn't happen after the time _didn't_
| switch, but to pretend that the preceding week or two were
| materially different in terms of light / dark levels to the
| degree that driving was significantly more dangerous would
| mean we have to accept that certain hours at certain times of
| year are always more dangerous (and we should then enforce
| more restrictions on when one may drive).
|
| If the idea that not switching to driving an hour later
| causes more dead children sounds preposterous, then DST seems
| to be a straw-man being propped up. More likely: there was
| general unhappiness about the change, and people were
| motivated to find a reason to repeal the law (and cars and
| bad car-centric planning came in to save the day). It's very
| easy to take the wind out of a political movement for change,
| but not necessarily to put them back in. I've been meaning to
| read Jessie Singer's new book [1], and this seems similar in
| that regard. Rather than acknowledge that our society has
| built things (e.g. bad infrastructure) that cause harm (six
| children died) we instead point at the problem and any
| attempt to make change anywhere in the system is looked down
| upon because that would be interacting with the problem,
| which makes you responsible for any effect of it down the
| line [2].
|
| Overall, I think my take-away is that we know that shifting
| the clocks twice a year causes some non-zero amount of
| suffering (and doesn't have a large justification for _why_).
| Rather than "Chesterton's fence" ourselves into inaction, we
| shouldn't let past reasons dictate our choices here. There's
| surely a lot of overhead with regard to making this change
| (my heart goes to anyone who has to work with international
| date / time APIs), but even with knowing that I still don't
| think it's a bad idea. A unanimous vote by the US Senate
| surely says that there's some will towards doing this, since
| it's rare for anything to be this bi-partisan nowadays...
|
| [1]: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/There-Are-No-
| Accident... [2]: https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-
| interpretation-of-eth...
| FastMonkey wrote:
| I had the same questions myself. I tried to follow the
| citation on wikipedia, but that links to a newspaper article
| that doesn't seem to mention it at all.
|
| Edit: on the other hand, the claim "meta-analysis by Rutgers
| researchers found that Permanent DST would eliminate 171
| pedestrian fatalities (a 13% reduction) per year.", does
| actually link to a paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien
| ce/article/abs/pii/S00014...
| stormbrew wrote:
| Probably by ignoring the 'background noise' of every single
| after school death that could be attributed to early sunsets.
| [deleted]
| bin_bash wrote:
| It wasn't repealed. That was a time-limited experiment.
| Brybry wrote:
| 50 years ago we didn't have the internet and everyone plugged
| into phones/TVs/inside all the time.
|
| There's no reason we have to follow the same pattern this time
| around.
| hereforphone wrote:
| Same thing is happening in Turkey now. Everyone gets depressed
| when it's dark outside when they wake up, every day of the
| year.
| Asooka wrote:
| I've always hated how DST makes me get up too early. Even after
| getting over the initial shock, it never felt right. Hope the
| USA will do the right thing eventually.
| jeffchien wrote:
| The UK tried it from 1968 to 1971 as well:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Summer_Time#Periods_...
|
| But as others have said, Arizona (sans some reservations and
| jurisdictions) have been fine so maybe history won't repeat
| itself. And of course there are plenty of countries worldwide
| that don't have DST anyways.
| whacim wrote:
| I think they should just make a one time half-hour adjustment
| and split the difference. Not sure how much of a technical
| challenge that would present to implement.
| SllX wrote:
| Well, as far as technical challenges go, we would all have to
| change our clocks (or the clocks would have to receive some
| kind of signal to adjust their time accordingly).
|
| Might be doable though.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Looks like we may be doomed to repeat the experience_
|
| Based on what? The fact that we're trying again?
|
| If we all walk into this assuming it's doomed because it didn't
| work 50 years ago, sure, it will be, but that's how one doesn't
| get nice things.
| rossjudson wrote:
| Ah! The difference is that in today's political climate,
| _nobody will admit they were wrong about anything_. So it will
| probably stick.
| IncRnd wrote:
| Exactly. There has been DST for over 100 years now. We don't
| use fuel the same way, so the original reason for DST is
| outdated.
|
| From https://www.almanac.com/states-object-changing-clocks-
| daylig... Historically, the changing of clocks
| was established by law in 1918 as a fuel saving
| measure during World War I. However, there is a
| common myth that DST was established to extend the
| daylight hours for farmers. This is not true. Farmers
| were extremely opposed to having to turn their
| clocks forward and back twice a year. Changing hours is
| actually a disruption for the farmer. Imagine telling a
| dairy cow accustomed to being milked at 5:00 a.m. that
| their milking time needs to be moved an hour because the
| truck is coming to pick up their milk at a different
| time! For the farmer, plants and animals, it is the sun
| and seasons which determines their activity.
| The 1918 law lasted only seven months. It proved
| unpopular with farmers and other folks. However, after
| repeal in 1919, some state and localities continued the
| observance. It took another war, World War II, to
| introduce a law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt,
| establishing year-round DST. This "War Time" law lasted
| from February 9, 1942 to September 30, 1945.
| From 1945 to 1966, observance of DST was quite
| inconsistent across the states. There were no uniform
| rules. This caused massive confusion in the
| transportation and broadcasting industry which pushed for
| standardization. Farmers continued to oppose it.
| To address this confusion, permanent DST was introduced
| by President Lyndon B. Johnson on April 12, 1966 and
| signed into law as the Uniform Time Act. This established
| a system of uniformity within each time zone.
| Daylight saving time was the law throughout the United
| States and its territories. However, states were allowed
| to opt out of the law, and some did.
| anchochilis wrote:
| Studies have shown that later sunsets lead to worse health and
| economic outcomes. People who live on the western edge of a
| timezone earn 3% less and have higher rates of lifestyle diseases
| than those on the eastern edge, because they go to bed later but
| wake at the same socially-prescribed time, and therefore get less
| sleep. [1]
|
| So why make DST instead of eliminating it entirely? It seems
| earlier sunset would be much more beneficial for society.
|
| [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/04/19/how-
| livin...
| canjobear wrote:
| Only a correlation, and a small one at that.
| runjake wrote:
| What does this mean in terms of short-term, real-world effect in
| the US?
| secabeen wrote:
| Nothing. The House has yet to act, and we don't know if Biden
| would sign it.
| barbazoo wrote:
| Would this impose any action on individual states or would
| this only give them the green light to implement it?
| darkstar999 wrote:
| Doubtful. Arizona already opts out of changing their
| clocks.
|
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-
| bill/623...
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Currently, states can only choose permanent standard
| time, not permanent daylight savings time.
|
| The west coast states' legislatures already voted to go
| permanent daylight savings, so presumably this bill would
| allow them to.
| BearOso wrote:
| I don't see anything specific about Arizona in the bill.
| I wonder if they'd just be permanently one hour
| different.
| forgot_old_user wrote:
| hmm why wouldnt Biden sign?
| readthenotes1 wrote:
| The House undoubtedly will opt to keep standard time
| permanent.
|
| The committee negotiating a unified bill will settle for a
| compromise of keeping standard time for 8 months of the year
| and daylight savings time for 4 months of the year on odd
| years and reversing the proportion during even years.
|
| There will be intense discussion about whether to do anything
| special for leap years. After several months of back and
| forth, someone will point out that there are also leap
| seconds and leap microseconds, leading to further debate.
|
| The bill will lapse.
| elmerfud wrote:
| It means software updates for all the things!
| cuteboy19 wrote:
| Does non OS software usually need to care about timezone?
| sbierwagen wrote:
| Nothing. The guy who runs tzdata will be busy. Various things
| that hardcoded DST will break in six months. Hundreds of
| millions of people won't have a sleep disruption in the fall.
| Other countries may follow suit. Etc.
| humanwhosits wrote:
| Please tell me there is more than one person
| foodstances wrote:
| You may be surprised to see how often that database is
| updated. Timezone changes in random places throughout the
| world are not that uncommon.
|
| http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz-announce/
|
| https://www.iana.org/time-zones
| itslennysfault wrote:
| Hopefully, that we never have to set our clocks back in the
| fall.... or EVER AGAIN.
|
| Please let this pass before "fall-back"
| sremani wrote:
| Daylight Savings has real effect on the northern states than
| southern states.
|
| One of the arguments for Day light savings change is that -- it
| would still be dark during the time kids go to school in
| winter, early spring and late fall, many places in US will not
| have Sun rise at 8:00am. No matter how much we may be removed
| from the nature -- our wakeful hours are directly impacted by
| Sun rise and Sun set. On the other side, there are discomforts
| in moving the clock twice a year across the board.
| bluGill wrote:
| Maybe the middle States, but in the northern states you go to
| school in the dark and get home in the dark.
| mbg721 wrote:
| What northern states, Sesquisaskatchewan?? In any case, you
| make up for that with the fifteen hours of daylight in the
| summer.
| dlp211 wrote:
| Seattle, Washington for sure. We are further north than a
| significant portion of the population of Canada.
| mbg721 wrote:
| That at least makes some sense.
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| Wait, it's not April 1. Suddenly I love this adminsitration [1]
|
| > Sunshine Protection Act of 2021
|
| Yes. Save the sun, save the lights, save everything.
|
| [1]: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recency_bias
| danso wrote:
| Mods: Maybe the tweet link could be replaced with this Reuters
| article: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-senate-approves-
| bill-tha...
|
| > _WASHINGTON, March 15 (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate voted
| unanimously on Tuesday to make Daylight Savings Time permanent, a
| move supporters say would make winter afternoons brighter and end
| the twice changing of clocks._
|
| > _The measure still needs approval from the U.S. House of
| Representatives and the backing of President Joe Biden. On
| Sunday, most of the United States resumed Daylight Savings Time,
| moving ahead one hour. The United States will resume standard
| time in November 2022._
|
| > _Senator Marco Rubio said after input from airlines and
| broadcasters that supporters agreed that the change would not
| take place until November 2023._
|
| (I searched around after seeing the @senatecloakroom tweet, but
| apparently the news was new enough that no articles had yet been
| written)
| bob1029 wrote:
| What do we think about the impact on our software? I have no clue
| about how my OS deals with TZ info changes over time or how older
| systems would behave absent a centralized management system.
| cwkoss wrote:
| Good software will just need to update their libraries after
| this change is implemented and everything will keep working
| fine.
|
| Bad software is going to have a mess, but was already a mess.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-15 23:00 UTC)