[HN Gopher] American Academy of Sleep Medicine calls for elimina...
___________________________________________________________________
American Academy of Sleep Medicine calls for elimination of
daylight saving time
Author : oftenwrong
Score : 1316 points
Date : 2020-08-29 01:43 UTC (21 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (aasm.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (aasm.org)
| projektfu wrote:
| We should also renormalize time zones or use modern technology to
| eliminate them. It's obnoxious having the sun rise so late in the
| western edge of time zones or so early in places (like the
| Eastern seaboard) that should be one zone ahead.
| minusSeven wrote:
| Well getting rid of daylight saving time will be one step to
| that.
| austincheney wrote:
| I don't even think we need time zones. India and China do not
| observes DST or time zones and they aren't having any problems
| waking up, going to work, or living due to the hour on their
| clocks.
| danans wrote:
| The majority of the population of those countries is
| distributed on a north-south axis.
|
| China's population is primarily on its eastern plains, not the
| western mountainous regions.
|
| India has one time zone, but it's still covers more degrees of
| latitude than longitude, so the difference in sunrise time
| between Kolkata in the east and Bombay in the west is about an
| hour. This is about the same as the difference in sunrise time
| between Boston and Kalamazoo, also both in the same timezone.
| dathinab wrote:
| Given that today most people do:
|
| - Use smartphones as a primary (or major) clock
|
| - Have clocks at home which automatically sync the clock.
|
| I wonder if we can just split the one large change of 1h to 6
| smaller changes of each 10 minutes spaced apart by a week or two.
|
| I guess people with traditional wristband clocks or similar would
| be really annoyed by it.
|
| But then if you forget you are only 10min late/early ;) (which
| yes might be fatal if you miss a train or so).
|
| Anyway research shows that permanent summer time would have bad
| biological consequences especially for people with a social jet
| lack, i.e. people which need to stand up before their inner clock
| likes it.
|
| Ironically this tend to also be the people which often favor
| permanent summer time as it allows them to better use the reduced
| sunlight time in winter. Except that this has a very good chance
| of making their social yet lack worse. Which can have all kind of
| negative health effect from reduced mental capacity over mode
| swings to overweight (or at least correlates with such negative
| effect, and I know correlation is not causation).
| efreak wrote:
| > Have clocks at home which automatically sync the clock.
|
| I'd say not. Your computer has a clock in it, yes, but it's
| unlikely to be your main method of telling time. Same for any
| smart devices you have. There's several analog wall clocks and
| several digital alarm clocks with battery backups in my house;
| none of these sync the time. In comparison, there's only 4
| rooms with computers in them, and these are usually off or on
| screensaver. The time on a computer is small and only shown in
| the status/menu bar, making it hardly convenient to check from
| the doorway. Smart speakers only respond to their owners, and
| require stopping what you're doing to hear a response.
|
| The average user on HN is far more likely to have such devices
| than the average person in general; most of my friends have at
| most one such devices in either their living room or bedroom,
| and that's it. Half the people I work with wear and use a
| wristwatch at work (_not_ a smartwatch).
| beefman wrote:
| The natural change in daylight hours is pretty sudden, actually.
| Either sunrise or noon (or both) have to move. DST is a
| compromise to keep them from moving too much. But sunrise is a
| more important time than noon.
|
| So I've proposed something I call Sunrise Standard Time. It
| abolishes DST and splits the 24 primary longitudinal time zones
| into as many as 120 zones by cutting at the tropics and polar
| circles. Clocks adjust gradually each day to keep sunrise near
| 6am. The tropics would follow sunrise at the equator, and the
| temperate zones (between the tropics and polar circles) would
| follow sunrise at ~ 30deg N or S. That adjustment is about 1
| minute per day.
|
| To refine things slightly, sunrise can be fixed at the latitude
| which divides the population in half in each zone (with the
| constraint that the N and S zones are mirrored). Those latitudes
| are approximately: 13.5deg for the tropical zone, 34.5deg for the
| temperate zones, and 68.5deg for all 2 million people living in
| the polar zones.
|
| A further refinement is to split the per-capita sunrise
| aberration instead. This pushes the boundaries to slightly higher
| latitudes. For the temperate zones, the minimum per-capita offset
| of sunrise from 6am on the solstice is achieved by following
| sunrise at 37.5deg. That's pretty close to Washington DC (39deg),
| Beijing (40deg), and Tokyo (36deg).
|
| I suggest the tropics use the equator for simplicity.
|
| SST will improve sun tracking for the vast majority of the
| world's population with no sudden changes. It will also be easier
| to understand than DST. There are no dates to remember and,
| because the N and S zones are mirrors, it's easy for someone in
| e.g. New York to understand what's going on in Sydney.
|
| Supporting links:
|
| https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Hours_of...
|
| http://world.andersen.im/
| jhardy54 wrote:
| Obligatory: https://qntm.org/calendar
| jhardy54 wrote:
| Oops, I meant: https://qntm.org/continuous
| thdrdt wrote:
| _" Clocks adjust gradually each day to keep sunrise near 6am"_
|
| While your idea might be very good, this is the reason why it
| won't be used. Nobody is going to be happy to adjust their
| analog clock every day.
| jere wrote:
| Who still uses analog clocks though? If you don't care for
| modern tech, just wake up with the sun and you're on time
| anyway.
|
| The idea of keeping track of this system in software sounds
| terrifying though. Getting rid of DST would simplify things,
| but this would ramp up the complexity a lot.
| enedil wrote:
| Well, have you heard of hand watches?
| masklinn wrote:
| You can replace "analog clock" by "clock" in general. My
| computers update on their own, but none of my bedside
| clock, oven clock, HVAC clock, ... do, and all of them are
| electronic.
|
| Also many people do, in fact, enjoy wristwatches or analog
| wall-clocks.
| beezle wrote:
| Many (most?) people can remember a few time zone offsets (ie,
| EST -> PST = 3). From a practical and business standpoint, I
| don't see the current system changing, at least not by more
| than a small amount.
| wjsetzer wrote:
| I would rather just not use clocks than do this. Yes, it would
| be "better" if we shifted clocks every day, but that's not
| practical for mechanical clocks.
|
| You may could get away with monthly realignment, but even with
| that I hate setting my watch even twice a year and I imagine
| others would too.
| valuearb wrote:
| Just move to Arizona, we never had it!
| whereistimbo wrote:
| Luckily I don't have to put myself into all of this nonsense
| since I'm living in the equator area.
| m0zg wrote:
| The problem is more complicated than that IMO. For any of this
| stuff to make sense at all, our life and work patterns need to be
| able to adjust to the fluctuation in circadian rhythm throughout
| the year. I do not see how this could be done if we insist on 9-5
| workday (and rigid scheduling for schools, childcare, etc).
| warabe wrote:
| My point is kind of off-topic, but as a financial analyst, I
| really want every country to stop using DST.
|
| It is such a hustle to cope with financial tick data taking DST
| into consideration... If you focus on only one country, it is not
| a major problem. However, when you start looking at various
| markets (e.g. London, U.S., Japan etc) at the same time, things
| get crazy...
| dade_ wrote:
| It adds to the confusion for meetings as some places don't
| change time, others at different times of the year. I am happy
| to take Russia's lead on this one.
| audiodude wrote:
| Just came here to give props to the title of the article, using
| the proper Daylight Saving Time (A system of Time for Saving
| Daylight) and not the commonly heard Daylight Savings And Loan
| Time.
| itsmanantomar wrote:
| https://typelocation.com/how-to-plan-your-first-trip/
| vyrotek wrote:
| No DST is definitely something I love about living in Phoenix.
| robbiemitchell wrote:
| I'm generally in favor of keeping DST permanent, as others have
| said.
|
| But if you wanted to make it more consistent and strike a
| balance, would it make more sense to flip the adjustments? Pull
| back on the nighttime daylight during summer, and add to it
| during winter.
|
| In NYC during summer it would get dark around 7pm, and in winter
| around 5:30pm... instead of 8pm and 4:30pm like we have now.
| semerda wrote:
| I read that "every year on the Monday after the springtime
| switch, hospitals report a 24% spike in heart-attack visits
| around the US.". Source:
| https://www.businessinsider.com/daylight-saving-time-is-dead...
|
| If this is true then daylight saving is a bigger killer than
| covid-19.
|
| Why is this even up for a debate when we killed every country's
| economy for Covid but here we are debating how our lifestyles
| will need to change if we remove daylight savings. [?]
| semerda wrote:
| Daylight saving is not observed in few Australian states like
| Queensland, the Northern Territory, Western Australia, Christmas
| Island or the Cocos (Keeling) Islands. They seem to be doing
| well.
| jlos wrote:
| This thread is exactly why it will never change - you'll never
| get consensus which time to choose.
|
| I don't care which we pick, I just don't want to flip my (and my
| kids) schedule every 6 months
| taeric wrote:
| This is something everyone wants, but I suspect many would hate
| in the middle of winter.
|
| Folks seem to think that the day is static and we shift it. It is
| a bit more complicated than that.
| Cd00d wrote:
| I'm confused. Standard time is already the time in winter, so
| abandoning ST won't change anything about the middle of
| winter....
|
| That said, I agree with an above comment to just be DT year
| round. I _do_ hate afternoons/evenings in the middle of winter.
| taeric wrote:
| Apologies, I had to cut my comment short. You are right that
| the folks getting rid of it would be fine for winter. But
| summer would have issues.
|
| I was anticipating the folks that want it permanent. Who
| would then complain on winter.
|
| You could probably go for _more_ divisions in the year
| nowadays. Almost like it would be if you were doing true sun
| clocks. But there really are no panaceas here.
| Cd00d wrote:
| I like more divisions. I'm sure it fails large subsets of
| the population, but for many of us time is told to us by an
| always internet-connected device. NOBODY claims to be 3
| minutes late because their watch was off anymore - we all
| see the same time to the second.
|
| So, why can't we just have our devices just gradually shift
| the time by a few seconds each day? So that in our time
| zone noon stays roughly when the sun is overhead. We have
| (supposed?) benefits of switching our time, without the
| dangerous and disruptive discrete 1-hour events!
|
| Not realistic, implementable, but fun and preferable to the
| current rough transitions.
| taeric wrote:
| Agreed. As someone that have used an alarm clock ever in
| my life, I can most relate to folks that want the day to
| be with natural light.
|
| And now that I have kids convincing them that it is bed
| time when the sun is out, is not easy. My sympathies to
| folks way way off the equator.
| kevsim wrote:
| Can we get rid of timezones next?
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| Call me entitled, but Why not just get up with the sun and go to
| bed with the sun. If the time of year makes "8" on a ticking
| device too early, maybe wake up a 8:22? Core hours make sense for
| businesses, but at the fringes we should just let it float.
| ginko wrote:
| >Why not just get up with the sun and go to bed with the sun.
|
| Where I live that would give me about 2 hours of sleep in
| Summer.
| aaron695 wrote:
| Because we are a society and most of the good comes from
| working together with some cohesion in all parts.
|
| That's not to say as a good hacker you can't just live on the
| fringes and both reap the rewards of society and be
| individualistic when you want.
|
| But it's hard, when I tried to go on daylight savings when it
| wasn't locally implemented I couldn't pull it off, hit to many
| roadblocks.
| CamelCaseName wrote:
| This is what I used to do. It was glorious.
|
| Unfortunately with a partner, and being a light sleeper, it's
| simply not possible anymore. My bedtime is up to me, but my
| wake up time now has a hard ceiling.
| mmhsieh wrote:
| imagine the opposite: suppose we do not have the clock switching,
| killer (literally) chaos twice a year.
|
| someone proposes it, with predictable deaths to ensue every year,
| forever.
|
| who would support it?
|
| i would not!
| imoverclocked wrote:
| I would love to see a new standard of time that talks about
| sunrise+1hr instead of artificially moving our antiquated wall
| clocks around. We have enough technology to make it happen and
| what we really care about is when the Sun comes up on a
| particular part of the globe anyway.
|
| The whole time zone + offset is such an antique way of looking at
| things.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| https://qntm.org/continuous
| crazygringo wrote:
| No... make daylight savings time _permanent_ instead.
|
| As the paper states, the biggest problem is with the
| _transition_.
|
| The paper also argues that standard time aligns more naturally
| with our circadian rhythm... but doesn't bother to compare that
| with the psychological benefit we get from hanging out with
| friends in daylight after work in the summer, or the
| psychological benefit of it not being dark when you go home and
| have dinner with your family.
|
| I totally get that people who wake up early in the winter prefer
| standard time... but it really seems that for the population as a
| whole, permanent DST is the better option. And implementing it is
| so easy: once we're already in DST in the summer... you just
| never "fall back" to standard in the fall.
| prerok wrote:
| I find it really funny that a lot of people are supporting
| keeping DST. Basically, we wanted to sleep in so we started to
| shift our work time from 6 to 7, then to 8 and now we start
| work at 9. Then we realized that we have no time in the evening
| so let's shift the clock so that 7 o'clock is actually earlier.
|
| At normal time, on an equinox the night is from 6 in the
| evening to 6 in the morning and midnight is actually in the
| middle of the night. With DST it's from 7 to 7 and midnight is
| at 1. So keeping DST basically means you are shifting to a
| different "non-natural" time zone.
|
| Let's just stop the DST keeping the natural local time and get
| up earlier anyway.
| tdeck wrote:
| "Natural local time " hasn't been the status quo for over 100
| years. Just look at this map:
|
| https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2014/02/how-wrong-is-
| you...
| aidenn0 wrote:
| Blog slate linked to isn't live any more; here's a direct
| link to the larger map via archive.org:
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20150304212105/http://blog.poor
| m...
| waterhouse wrote:
| I'll grant that hour-granularity time zones are
| pragmatically useful. But why make the difference from
| "noon = solar noon" any worse than it needs to be?
| goodcanadian wrote:
| Indeed. Your comment reminds me of Hawaii where there is no
| daylight saving time. A lot of people (though certainly not
| all) worked 7am-3pm, and therefore got 3 hours of sunshine
| after work to go surfing or whatever.
| cmurf wrote:
| Or cut out an hour from work. And leave it up to the worker
| to decide whether to start early or end late.
|
| What? Work 5 hours less per week _and_ let workers decide
| what to do with that extra hour per day? This must be labeled
| insanity to stop people from even considering it! It 's
| madness!
|
| Imagine the chaos! Combined classrooms. 1st and 2nd graders
| together, with two teachers offset by one hour. One teacher
| 8am to 2pm, another 11am to 5pm. The overlap, two teachers at
| the same time for combined class.
|
| Nothing involving compromise and common sense should be
| allowed. Force workers to conform with arbitrary b.s.
| PixelOfDeath wrote:
| > keeping the natural local time
|
| Fuck that! I want a single unified global time!
| bamboozled wrote:
| I don't think it's useful for everyone but the military and
| people who grok log files.
|
| Knowing that 6am is early is good, imagine how confused
| you'd be if you travel overseas but the timezone is always
| the same, you'd have to re-learn what time the morning is
| etc and constantly try adapt if to your situation.
|
| The current local systems we use have function we take for
| granted..
|
| I just have a UTC clock on all my devices (along side my
| local time) and I find that's the most useful. Local time
| is what I use primarily, UTC for international calls.
| rapind wrote:
| Would it really take that long for people to forget local
| time and meridians was even a thing? I'm not generally
| interested in big or frivolous changes, but my god,
| having the entire world on one clock would save so much
| grief (mostly internalized so we don't even notice the
| annoyance anymore). I saw we suck it up, and do it for
| future generations.
| dade_ wrote:
| Except culturally, in some places 8 am is basically 6 am
| in North America.
| dheera wrote:
| Considering Spain and Hungary are in the same timezone,
| and eastern and western China are in the same timezone,
| this kind of thing happens a lot.
| 4gotunameagain wrote:
| I think you have been bamboozled by the poster above my
| friend
| hombre_fatal wrote:
| The more charitable interpretation of their comment is
| that it was earnest, not that they thought some
| elementary sarcasm would make for a great, funny HN
| comment.
| johnchristopher wrote:
| > Knowing that 6am is early is good, imagine how confused
| you'd be if you travel overseas but the timezone is
| always the same, you'd have to re-learn what time the
| morning is etc and constantly try adapt if to your
| situation.
|
| Few people travel overseas in their lifetime anyway. If
| you happen to do it a lot then I am sure you'd get used
| to shifting the numbers.
| dheera wrote:
| I use UTC on all my devices as well and I think in UTC
| for my personal life. I think the entire world using a
| single time zone is a great idea.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| Don't be surprised then if people stop actually using
| wall clock time and start saying things like "3 hours
| after sunrise" or "2 hours before dinner" or something,
| as both of those are _much_ more comprehensible absent
| any other context than just saying 17:30Z. There is a
| large demand for the concept of a local time, and people
| are always going to use it.
| rapind wrote:
| I disagree.
|
| We're inundated with time displays. Right now I have 5
| time displays within 20 feet (computer, stove, microwave,
| phone, watch). I could imagine some people would continue
| to reference sundown / sunup for relevant situations
| (kids, get home by dark) the same as they already do, but
| not for anything time sensitive (like say a meeting).
| There's just no way I would schedule a call for "3 hours
| past sunset" even if I was forced to tell time in binary.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| You're incorrectly generalizing from yourself to most
| people. Most people think in local time and would
| continue to do so regardless of whatever you attempt to
| do to impose something else on them.
|
| Also, think of how deleterious the abolition of local
| time would have on communication. Right now I can say
| something like "I received an urgent call at 3am" and you
| know immediately what that means. But if I said "I
| received an urgent call at 17:00Z", a lot of the meaning
| is lost. You'd have to know where I live, i.e. what my
| local time zone is, and then do some quick mental math to
| determine what actual time of day 17:00Z means for me.
| With local time, that calculation is already done for
| you! Local time is just too damn useful of a concept. It
| really truly is better than global time for most uses.
| Global time is really only useful for scheduling global
| meetings and computer stuff. Even within the US, all of
| our scheduling is done by US timezones.
| rapind wrote:
| If you said you received an urgent call at 17:00 I would
| know exactly what time that is... 17:00. No meaning is
| lost because there is no time zone (local time) and
| therefore no disconnect / mental mapping / conversion
| required.
|
| Given your example we must be talking about different
| things. I'm saying ONE time globally.
| MockObject wrote:
| I think he's trying to find a case where the absolute
| hour (1700Z) is less relevant than the subjective hour
| (0300 local means he was dead asleep)
| CydeWeys wrote:
| Exactly. The point is that it's happening in the middle
| of the night. That context is entirely lost without local
| time.
| marksc wrote:
| >Also, think of how deleterious the abolition of local
| time would have on communication. Right now I can say
| something like "I received an urgent call at 3am" and you
| know immediately what that means. But if I said "I
| received an urgent call at 17:00Z", a lot of the meaning
| is lost. You'd have to know where I live, i.e. what my
| local time zone is, and then do some quick mental math to
| determine what actual time of day 17:00Z means for me.
| With local time, that calculation is already done for
| you! Local time is just too damn useful of a concept. It
| really truly is better than global time for most uses.
| Global time is really only useful for scheduling global
| meetings and computer stuff.
|
| [Well], think of how deleterious the abolition of
| [global] time would have on communication. Right now I
| can say something like "I received an urgent call at
| [17:00Z]" and you know immediately what that means [in
| reference to everything else happening in the world]. But
| if I said "I received an urgent call at [3am]", a lot of
| the meaning is lost. You'd have to know where I live,
| i.e. what my local time zone is, [where the caller is]
| and then do some [potentially complicated] math to
| determine what actual time 3am means. With [global] time,
| that calculation is already done for you! [Global] time
| is just too damn useful of a concept. It really truly is
| better than [local] time for most uses. [Local] time is
| really only useful for scheduling [local] meetings and
| [in-person] stuff.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| It's almost like both are useful for different things,
| and you're not gonna have any luck forcing people into
| one or the other for everything.
|
| Also, I don't understand what point you're making. The
| square bracket stuff you've added doesn't work. You
| haven't managed to correctly communicate the fact that
| the person was _woken up in the middle of the night_.
| Which is what local time is extremely good at and global
| time cannot do -- putting a specific time in context with
| the rhythms of the day. Which, you know, is very
| important for most normal communication. I can 't even
| schedule a worldwide meeting using global time; I have to
| use the local time of each participant individually to
| figure out what the best time is that maximizes the # of
| people calling in during the workday and minimizes the #
| of people that need to be up in the middle of their local
| night.
| scbrg wrote:
| > You haven't managed to correctly communicate the fact
| that the person was woken up in the middle of the night.
|
| If somebody wanted to communicate that they were woken up
| in the middle of the night, they could use this perfectly
| fine sentence:
|
| "I was woken up in the middle of the night."
|
| Communication wouldn't break down just because everybody
| didn't have an identical reference point w/r/t timestamps
| in relation to daylight cycle. Something we don't have
| today anyway, by the way. When is dinner, for example?
| (conservative answer: 16:00 to 23:00).
| CydeWeys wrote:
| Yeah, and if only there were a way to more precisely say
| things like "in the middle of then night" or "around
| solar noon", or "halfway between lunch and dinner". We
| might even put numbers on these things so that everyone
| knows exactly what we're talking about!
|
| Local time is incredibly useful. It's never going away.
| It's utter fantasy to think that everyone is ever going
| to just give up local time and only speak in vague terms
| like "an hour after noon".
| dheera wrote:
| This is true, although I find it much easier to "avoid
| night" than it is to look up individual timezones of each
| city and +1/-1 daylight differences and timezones that
| use 30-minute offsets and other schengens. Did you know
| that Nepal is UTC+5:45 and that daylight savings in USA
| and Mexico start on different dates?
|
| Is Tokyo in the some timezone as Beijing? Is London in
| the same timezone as Reykjavik? Did Mexico start daylight
| savings last week or now? I have to look up stuff to
| answer these things, as well as the local timezone
| designation (is it ET or EDT? Is it CT stand for
| "california time" or CT for "central time"? Is there a CT
| in another part of the world that could be misunderstood
| by another participant?), so that I can publish the
| meeting time correctly without people misunderstanding
| it. Roughly avoiding unreasonable times is much easier to
| do than this. The sleep times of Reykjavik and the sleep
| times of London don't really differ by much, so as long
| as the proposed time steers clear of that, it will be
| fine.
|
| In fact all I need is a world map that shows me the
| day/night part of the Earth as I slide the (UTC) time --
| there are many apps that do this already. Then schedule
| the meeting such that the greatest number of participants
| fall under the daylight. Then publish the meeting as a
| single UTC time. That's it.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| You're making it sound harder than it is. I'm literally
| just looking at a list of all the local times for the
| meeting's participants, so not even worrying about time
| zones at all. The calendar app itself already knows what
| everyone's time zone is and does all the time zone
| arithmetic for you. So it sounds pretty similar to what
| you're describing with the global view.
| skrause wrote:
| So You Want To Abolish Time Zones: https://qntm.org/abolish
| [deleted]
| anoonmoose wrote:
| you can come up with a huge list of bad reasons for
| anything if you assume the thing you like/currently have
| has a good and easy answer already like in this article.
| dkersten wrote:
| I don't find that argument at all compelling. I didn't
| reread it all again now so am replying somewhat from
| memory, so won't address all the points, just the main
| ones I remember: that it boils down to "but then I won't
| know if it's the middle of the high/the business is open
| in other country!", except this is already true:
|
| Countries have weird time zones like how China has a
| single time zone even though the country spans the area
| of three. Apparently Palestine and Israel have different
| time zones despite being the same physical location. It
| gets dark at different times depending on how close to
| the equator you are. If you want to know if it's night or
| day somewhere, you already have to look it up, so nothing
| would change if time zones were abolished.
|
| Similarly, businesses already have varied opening hours
| so again you have to look it up. Hell, without time zones
| it would be easier because if the website says "you can
| call us between 0900 and 1700" you know that you can call
| them when your clock is between those times, no need to
| mentally time zone adjust.
|
| My point is that the arguments against laid out in that
| post, by and large, are already the case so things don't
| really get any harder, certainly not after we adjust to
| the idea, but without time zones we have a single
| consistent time, we just adjust our schedules based on
| our local day/night. Hell, if more people work from home
| and more companies hire foreign remote workers, a shift
| from local to global time would benefit everyone.
| corin_ wrote:
| For communicating internationally, it's much easier to
| think "it's 10am there, what does that mean in terms of
| whether this person I know is likely to be
| asleep/working/etc" than to think "it's 10pm here" then try
| to remember what's going on at the same-named 10pm on the
| other side of the world.
| ridaj wrote:
| "Let's get up earlier anyway" won't work, because society
| operates as a whole.
|
| You can already see the problems just with families. As a
| parent, I can't change my operating schedule until the school
| that my kids go to changes its schedule as well, and my
| school can't change its own schedule until the majority of
| the parents are also able to cope with the new one. Every
| institution providing essential services to the rest of the
| population introduces coordination friction to a widespread
| schedule change.
|
| Moving clocks is a much more effective way to realize a
| nationwide change. It solves the coordination problem, making
| sure that the whole society is doing the change in lockstep.
| In a way, getting good at coordinated clock changes is maybe
| the one benefit we've gotten out of decades of DST, so we
| might as well take advantage of it one last time...
|
| Also, you may over-estimate the "natural-ness" of standard
| time. In most places, standard time is already way off of
| solar time, and as far as I can tell that's not really
| bothering anyone.
| anoncake wrote:
| > my school can't change its own schedule until the
| majority of the parents are also able to cope with the new
| one.
|
| Sure it can. Announce the change in advance and tell people
| they better be able to switch by then. Being able to
| coordinate changes like that is part of the point of having
| a state.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| That's not just a simple announcement, though. It will
| require additional budget to pay for the before-school
| supervision required for students whose parents don't
| have the luxury of telling their employer that their
| hours must change.
| salawat wrote:
| Not if it comes paired with legislation forcing employers
| to get on board on penalty of punitive damages being
| assessed against them.
|
| Been done before, can be done again. The trick is
| coordinating from the bottom, then up. The Dog wags the
| tail. Not the other way around.
| ridaj wrote:
| Yes. And how does the state exert such coordination in
| the most efficient way possible? Changing clock time is
| how.
| anoncake wrote:
| Leaving things broken is not an efficient way of fixing
| them.
| mapgrep wrote:
| We have doctors telling us this mode of living is
| unhealthy. As parents, is our response going to be to try
| to veto that because it is a headache? I can handle getting
| sleepy an hour earlier. My kids are asleep by 9. Is it so
| much better for me to stay up until 11 watching tv or
| reading recreationally than sleep at 10?
|
| This really isn't much to do with school schedules, school
| is out hours before bedtime. Yes, it can be tight getting
| kids to bed after work/daycare but I've never adjusted that
| target bedtime based on DST. If I did I'd then have to get
| them in bed earlier when it ends.
|
| As parents why can't we just do in summer what we usually
| do in winter? Somehow we handle two changes to daylight a
| year but we cannot handle zero? I don't buy it.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| This makes me wonder if a school district can choose to
| swap its hours during DST accordingly and back without
| DST and letting parents not miss out on sleep. Of course
| if their jobs are still on DST then you will have those
| problems but if parents say their schools opening up
| slightly different it might force employers hands
| especially when chances are your bossman also has kids.
| cortesoft wrote:
| So you want the entire community to agree to change hours
| to cancel the effect of DST instead of just agreeing to
| not do DST? That seems way harder!
| [deleted]
| Pxtl wrote:
| Working from 9 to 5 is so culturally ingrained that it is in
| song lyrics.
|
| Perma DST is the easier change.
| dathinab wrote:
| Also the more healthy change from a scientific point of
| view.
|
| Ironically the parent post _seem_ to be a person with a
| social yet lack (i.e. forced to stand up earlier then their
| inner clock, i.e. often stands up late). But especially
| people like that are _biologically_ negatively affected by
| permanent summer time.
| thescriptkiddie wrote:
| Off topic, but what is your native language? Your use of
| "stand up" suggests German, but "yet lack" sounds
| vaguely... Scandinavian?
| dathinab wrote:
| It's German and it's a Typo, maybe autocorrect.
|
| I meant Jet Lag, which is also used in German as Jetlag.
|
| But I somehow thought it's written Jet Lack and typoed it
| as yet lack. No idea why I thought it's Lack, maybe
| because you lack sleep after taking a jet ?
| cnst wrote:
| Another problem is places like Nevada that uses PST/PDT (to
| align better with California), even though the states to the
| North and South use MST/MDT, or even a permanent MST with
| most of Arizona.
|
| If Nevada now has to use permanent PST, then their time will
| be 2h off in the summer, instead of just 1h off as with
| PST/PDT. So, basically, they should be allowed to keep PDT
| (-0700) year-round, or, to put it simply, switch from
| permanent PDT (-0700) to permanent MST (-0700), which they
| are not allowed to do without a US DOT approval.
|
| Likewise, if you look at the map, Indiana, Michigan and some
| other states, might also want to switch from Eastern to
| Central, once DST is no more.
| laumars wrote:
| While I agree with your sentiment, in practice that's a
| harder goal because it means changing millions of people's
| daily rituals and businesses schedules. Everything from daily
| meetings, times of worship, business opening hours, class
| schedules, shared spaces (eg conference rooms, hired gym
| spaces for yoga, karate etc)...everything would have to
| change and everyone would be required to make that change
| themselves for it to work.
|
| There is no "just" in "just stop the DST keeping the natural
| local time".
| kupopuffs wrote:
| We do it every year anyway. We can just decide to 'not' do
| it.
| laumars wrote:
| No we don't. We change timezone, not the time within that
| timezone.
|
| The former is government mandated and our clocks are
| changed. The latter is governed by ourselves and we have
| to change all schedules to reflect a new time 7am (etc)
| instead of 8am while the clocks remain the same.
|
| The devil is in the detail.
| nulbyte wrote:
| Whether you change timezone or change time is largely
| inconsequential. The effect is nearly the same, and it's
| not like it hasn't happened several times in the past.
| Society progresses. In an increasingly 24-hour world, it
| isn't going to matter. And in a society that has
| increasing concern about the health of its citizens, what
| the clock says won't matter as much as what our bodies
| say.
| laumars wrote:
| While that's true it's also tangential to what was being
| discussed
| mapgrep wrote:
| > it means changing millions of people's daily rituals and
| businesses schedules.
|
| Last I checked that's already well under way!
| anoncake wrote:
| You don't change any schedules, you stop changing them
| twice a year. What you change is merely what each our is
| called.
| minusSeven wrote:
| Just because you are doing something for hundreds of years
| doesn't mean its not stupid.
| laumars wrote:
| Just because a something is stupid it doesn't mean every
| solution to the problem isn't equally stupid.
|
| For example I've not even gotten into the financial cost
| of expecting everyone to change their documentation,
| advertisements, etc to reflect an earlier hour.
|
| Sometimes the "worse is better" and in this case the
| "stupid" solution is actually the better one.
| minusSeven wrote:
| Can you give me one good reason why you need to change
| time at all? Because you have been doing it for hundreds
| of years isn't a good reason. You can always wake up
| early if you need to do so. In today's day and age it
| makes no sense to change the time to suit your needs.
|
| You may have had a valid reason to do so long ago.
| [deleted]
| anoncake wrote:
| The switching cost is a one-time cost. The benefits are
| permanent. It hardly matters how much switching will
| cost, eventually it will be worth it.
| laumars wrote:
| Are they going to be permanent though? You're assuming
| that people's routines don't organically change again
| over time.
|
| But cost was just one part of my point. The feasibility
| of getting everyone to change, by their own momentum, was
| another issue I raised.
| Natanael_L wrote:
| Intentionally making time be permanently stupid is a bit
| stupid, IMHO. Lots of existing scientific standards that
| are stuck with old cruft that makes things annoying (like
| the definition of electrical minus/plus poles), why add
| more cruft?
| simias wrote:
| It's all just conventions anyway. Why does it matter if
| solar noon doesn't match with wallclock noon? The
| perception of the solar time varies wildly with season,
| latitude and even weather (how 6pm feels like nighttime
| in January but the end of the afternoon in July for
| instance). Sundials are not exactly in widespread uses
| these days.
|
| There's also plenty of precedent for countries and blocks
| of countries using "unnatural" time zones for
| convenience. Warsaw is currently in the same timezone as
| Berlin, Paris, and Madrid. I mean look at this map, many
| countries are already offset by one hour from their
| natural time zone, DST or not:
| http://www.trbimg.com/img-56c3a997/turbine/la-fi-mh-your-
| tim...
|
| That's true for a big chunk of the USA too.
|
| I'm also in favor of keeping DST full time, I think it's
| the pragmatic choice. That being said it's been pointed
| out to me that part of the reason I like DST is because I
| don't have kids since when you have children going to
| school you typically need to get up earlier to prepare
| them and bring them there. Having DST year-round would
| mean that it would probably still be night time when the
| kids arrive to school.
| mapgrep wrote:
| > It's all just conventions anyway. Why does it matter if
| solar noon doesn't match with wallclock noon?
|
| Why does this thread exist? Because some
| scientists/doctors studied this very question and
| concluded that there are negative health and safety
| implications to continuing to do what we are doing.
| Conventions have consequences.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| It's not stupid though. Solar noon is already only noon
| noon only twice per year, so we already don't have a
| noon-based time system anyway. What does it really matter
| if solar noon is now at 13:00 twice per year instead? The
| times are all arbitrary. If you want to know when
| sunrise/solar noon/sunset are, you already always have to
| look them up anyway since they're different every single
| day. Personally, what matters most to me is sunset, not
| sunrise or noon, as sunset affects whether I'm biking
| home in the dark or not. And yes, I like daylight saving
| time because it makes sunset later, so it can be at 20:00
| instead of 19:00 in the summer (neither of which is a
| more or less natural time than the other to have the sun
| set).
| jcynix wrote:
| Solar noon is only that in the middle of a timezone,
| isn't it? And if you live on the east or west border of a
| timezone its not. So arguments for some "natural" time
| would need some kind of dynamic time zones, which the
| world had before trains where invented and needed
| timezones for their timetables, IIRC.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| The variation throughout the year is not caused by your
| relative longitude within the time zone. It's caused by
| the rotation of the Earth and Earth's orbit.
|
| You're talking about a separate issue which does also
| exist, but that global time makes worse. Right now solar
| noon is always roughly somewhat close to local time noon,
| rather than noon being, say, 02:00Z.
| laumars wrote:
| I'd already answered why. Because the "stupid" solution
| is achievable whereas the "smart" solution is not.
|
| As mentioned elsewhere, we drifted into this over decades
| of laziness so it's unreasonable to expect a swift (or
| even any) change if it's left to those same people to
| rollback that lost hour.
| arghwhat wrote:
| The smart solution is just as easily achievable. One hour
| to and from affects nothing, as people already work half
| the year at this schedule, so no change is needed
| regardless.
|
| Should one then wish to place work hours more optimally,
| which is just a general improvement unrelated to DST,
| then such one-off change is still much less work than
| biannual clock adjustments, and can be done at any time.
| No "swift" action is needed.
|
| So, no reason to pick a stupid standard.
|
| (Also do remember that different employments and
| businesses already have wildly different work hours, with
| many starting and ending outside the time of sunlight
| anyway. Being one hour off is already a luxury.)
| laumars wrote:
| Your description of the smart solution is that nothing
| changes at all, and that isn't what is being proposed as
| the "smart" solution. Instead that's a 3rd option where
| people moan that things need to change but nobody
| actually makes any effort to change it.
|
| I'm not meaning to be argumentative when I say that. I'm
| just being pragmatic based on the fact that we're in this
| "time-shifted" state because of people's laziness so
| expecting people to make a conscious effort to change for
| an idealistic goal (as sensible as that seems on paper)
| simply isn't going to happen.
|
| Not to mention that people's personal timetable is often
| dictated by multiple parties (as I examples earlier: gym
| classes, sprint stand up, times of worship, school hours,
| etc). A change like that couldn't easily be drip fed to
| the masses as everyone's schedules have already been
| designed around the current "time-shift" and a persons
| schedule isn't generally a solo calendar without
| dependencies.
|
| For example I could start work an hour earlier but my
| sons childminder and daughters nursery isn't opening an
| hour earlier. So I can't change my behaviour. Everyone
| needs to make the change together if it's going to work.
| Hence why changing timezones "works" for time-shifting.
| (I say "works" because it accomplishes it's goal of time-
| shifting a populous but obviously different people might
| disagree it's a solution to the larger problem of natural
| day light hours).
| arghwhat wrote:
| No, my suggestion is that there are no blockers for doing
| things right.
|
| I suspect you are under the impression that work hours
| are standardized.
|
| Nurseries don't open aligned with people's work hours,
| and people have to show up late and leave early as a
| result already. People have commutes and might also need
| to drive far to reach nurseries. Night shifts exist, and
| bakery employees show up at 5:30 AM to prepare for
| opening at 6AM, as the bakers go home after having baked
| during the night. The world isn't 9-5.
|
| Indeed, maybe you'll be pushed out of the lucky zone
| temporarily by such a change, where others get pushed in.
| Work hours are organic, and nurseries follow suit. This
| is true regardless of the choice of hours, so pick the
| one without hacks.
| marcosdumay wrote:
| > For example I could start work an hour earlier but my
| sons childminder and daughters nursery isn't opening an
| hour earlier.
|
| Have you tried asking the other parents if they want it
| to open sooner too? If most of them want, I'm sure they
| will, and if they don't it's you that is wrong (but you
| can always go looking for another place that will open
| sooner).
| laumars wrote:
| You're focusing too much at the micro level and missing
| the wider problem I'm describing. The change being
| discussed requires everyone in the country to agree to
| the change in unison. Having a few parents pick different
| daycare isn't going to instigate the change that is being
| recommended at the start of this tangent. Hence why I
| keep saying it is an idealistic but ultimately
| unrealistic premise. If this kind of change were to
| happen organically like you described then it already
| would have and thus this conversation would be moot.
| arghwhat wrote:
| On the contrary, it would appear that the "wider" problem
| is an entirely constructed case of change aversion.
|
| It would indeed happen organically should DST be removed.
| It has not yet been abolished, so it has not yet
| happened.
| ridaj wrote:
| Most of the world already uses a standard time that is
| generally late relative to the solar time. See this map being
| colored mostly red, which means that the sun sets later than
| it "should" if we were just using solar time.
|
| http://blog.poormansmath.net/the-time-it-takes-to-change-
| the...
|
| By contrast, standard time in the "contiguous states" is much
| closer to solar time. Keeping DST would bring the US closer
| to the rest of the world.
| Amygaz wrote:
| I am the US Northeast and the proposal is to move to join
| the Atlantic standard time and not have DST. Season-wise
| and Lifestyle-wise, a study concluded that this would be a
| better fit than the current condition. I'd personally love
| that.
| ghaff wrote:
| Seems unlikely to happen. While there are negatives to
| either changing the time or New England being in Eastern,
| there are also very big negatives to being in a different
| time zone from the rest of the East Coast, especially NY
| and being another hour removed from the West Coast. Large
| companies will keep de facto operating on ET.
| smeyer wrote:
| I work for a large company and am in New England. I
| already regularly meet with colleagues in Europe or Asia,
| and it can be inconvenient but it's fine. If we were in a
| different timezone than New York I think people would
| mostly work around it rather than de facto falling back
| to New York time.
| bostonpete wrote:
| Given the choice between EST all the time or AST all the
| time I'd choose the latter, but it's still not ideal b/c
| it require school-kids to go to school in the dark, which
| is potentially more dangerous than the problem we're
| trying to fix. The counter-argument is something like
| "kids in Alaska do it" but I don't find that super
| convincing -- they do it b/c they don't really have a
| choice, doesn't mean it's the right choice for us.
|
| There are certain latitudes where DST makes sense and for
| the rest of the country it's just an annoyance. It seems
| like people in the rest of the country don't really
| understand the benefits or why some people embrace it.
| ghaff wrote:
| New England is probably one of the extreme cases in the
| US where you're trying to balance:
|
| - Being in the same time zone as locations, like NYC,
| that you communicate with and travel back and forth to a
| lot.
|
| - Not "wasting" (from the perspective of most) summer
| sunlight at insanely early hours.
|
| - Doing the best balancing act possible with less than
| ten hours of sunlight in the winter for necessary morning
| and late afternoon activities.
|
| Go further north and you're pretty much screwed in the
| winter anyway--it doesn't really make sense for
| Newfoundland to try to eek out some winter morning
| sunlight--but in the Boston area you sort of can.
| Retric wrote:
| That map is somewhat deceptive as the east coast has such
| high population density vs the mid west. Further, the
| bluest areas are in the far north with low population
| density, less land than it looks like, and extremely long
| days in the summer and short days in the winter.
| power78 wrote:
| >and get up earlier anyway.
|
| Yeah, no thanks. This isn't an easy task for many people.
| Some people just naturally find it easier to wake up and get
| going in the morning. But there is a significant portion of
| people where that just doesn't happen for them. I've tried
| many different methods to try to be a "morning person" but
| it's as if my body naturally doesn't. My SO is the exact same
| way, and was before I knew them.
| dahart wrote:
| Why is optimizing for the middle of the day & night more
| "natural" than optimizing for the sunrise? What daylight
| savings does is flatten the sunrise time, which is arguably
| just as natural - if we didn't have clocks or a work day we'd
| be waking up with the sun and going to sleep ~16 hours later,
| so mid-wake and mid-sleep wouldn't be lined up with the sun's
| daily equinox anyway.
| oxymoron wrote:
| It's a good point, except that I have kids in daycare, and I
| can't change that schedule. We have to adjust our lives to
| that. The most depressing time of year is that Monday when
| it's all of a sudden dark at 4PM whereas it was daytime on
| the Friday.
| mapgrep wrote:
| The doctors are saying that "depressing time of year" is
| better for our health and that staying up late in the
| summer hurts our sleep and safety. You could keep the same
| work and daycare hours and just get more sleep. Might
| actually be less depressing in the long run. (I actually
| tend to feel quite refreshed after I accidentally fall
| asleep at the same time as my kids...)
| Jolter wrote:
| You don't think daycare would change their schedule if DST
| was abolished?
| pishpash wrote:
| There is no difference. It's a relabeling of hours.
| sings wrote:
| If the transition is the biggest problem what about doing it
| gradually between the two extremes. Now that most devices
| adjust their time automatically it seems like non-standard day
| lengths wouldn't be a huge problem.
| JMTQp8lwXL wrote:
| Concur, because we spend most of the year in DST anyways. It's
| March through October. That's 8/12ths the year.
| throw0101a wrote:
| March- _November_ is actually a 'recent' change (2005/7):
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Policy_Act_of_2005#Cha
| n...
|
| Previously it was April-October: 6/12.
|
| Some of us IT folks lived through updating all the various TZ
| files, which was quite an experience since a lot of things
| were not designed to be updated dynamically at the time.
| audiodude wrote:
| I lived through the DST change and it was hell. Some
| servers got the Java update, some didn't....ugh.
| throw0101a wrote:
| Java tzdata is now a separate thing probably because of
| this:
|
| * https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase/tzupdat
| er-re...
|
| Keep the JRE/JDK the same to reduce the risk of code
| behaviour changes, but allow updates of the 'dynamic'
| data.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| So what? It _is_ 8 /12 months of the year in DST now, and
| has been for well over a decade. That's the current
| baseline and all current daily schedules are definitely
| adjusted to it by now. Moving to permanent standard time
| would thus have a distortionary effect on 8/12 months of
| the year, vs only 4/12 months of the year for moving to
| permanent daylight saving time.
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _distortionary effect_
|
| The distortions come from the time jump.
|
| If we got rid of that, then the changes in the sun's key
| position, sunrises/sets, and shadows through-out the day
| would simply shift as the seasons do: gradually.
|
| After the "final jump" people won't notice things IMHO.
| stoolpigeon wrote:
| I had an Oracle RAC cluster and a number of PeopleSoft
| servers that were incredibly difficult to get successfully
| patched for that change.
|
| The other super annoying thing about it is it created a
| window at the beginning and end of DST where the US is out
| of sync with most of Europe.
| realityking wrote:
| I never understood how it came to be that the two biggest
| economic blocks with a ton of business between them
| didn't manage to align on this. Thank you for finally
| giving me the context.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Fine. Set it all to UTC for all I care.
|
| Maybe it's the delusion of grandeur of pretending to rule over
| time itself that annoys me more than the practical
| inconvenience.
| echelon wrote:
| If we want to win this fight and keep DST year round, we need
| to get rid of the confusing "DST" moniker. Most people are
| entirely unaware of which is which, and they are focused on the
| time change aspect.
|
| We should phrase the battle as "Keep summer daylight" and
| "abolish winter early sunset".
|
| It's imperative that we spin it this way.
| [deleted]
| xyhopguy wrote:
| in seattle that means sunrise at 9 and sunset at 515 in a
| place that's already hella dark. No thank you.
| echelon wrote:
| Sunset at 4:15 would kill my will to live. That's so
| depressing.
| GlennS wrote:
| One of the reasons why I left the UK to move to
| Australia: an escape from months of cloudy gloom.
|
| It really makes the winter a lot less tiresome when you
| can walk to and from work under bright blue skies and
| feel the warmth of the Sun.
| xyhopguy wrote:
| waking up 2 hours before sunrise is painful
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| If you're waking up before sunrise, it's going to feel
| about the same no matter when sunrise is.
|
| And you'll have sun at lunch time except in extreme
| cases.
|
| So when days are short, mid-morning and afternoon are
| where the difference is really made. And I'd much rather
| have sunlight when I go home than have more mid-morning
| already-at-work/school sunlight.
| xyhopguy wrote:
| Sun in winter sounds nice
| smabie wrote:
| Waking up is always painful
| CydeWeys wrote:
| Why the hell are you waking up so early then? The last
| time I intentionally woke up before sunrise was years ago
| at 4:30am at the bottom of the Grand Canyon to start the
| hike back up before it got too hot.
| xyhopguy wrote:
| Because sunrise is already at like 8 in the dead of
| winter. Pretty hard to wake up after that if you work at
| 9
| CydeWeys wrote:
| People in those latitudes are just screwed either way
| then. There's literally not enough daylight to go around
| in winter. If you're not waking up in the dark then the
| Sun is setting when you're only halfway through your work
| day.
| outtatime wrote:
| One could always move further south.
| xyhopguy wrote:
| It's a marvelous solution. But summers are better up
| north :)
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| "but doesn't bother to compare that with the psychological
| benefit we get from hanging out with friends in daylight after
| work in the summer, or the psychological benefit of it not
| being dark when you go home and have dinner with your family."
|
| We have lights. We use them on warm autumn days with friends
| and family and when folks are sitting around outside playing
| cards late into the evening. I'm not convinced daylight is
| needed to enjoy time with friends and family. Sure, you might
| enjoy it, but it isn't exactly a deal-breaker.
|
| And no, I don't get that "not being dark when I go home". I'm
| in Noway, and if you work first shift - or heck, even business
| hours - you'll only see sun in December on your lunch break.
| Again, though, we have lights, and they are a pretty wonderful
| thing. Outdoor heating and blankets extend outside time too.
|
| Not just that, but folks with a later rhythm are going to
| suffer more. I'm going to guess especially teenagers (in
| general) will suffer, as doctors already complain that school
| is too early: Permanent summer time pushes it an hour earlier.
| Amygaz wrote:
| I don't disagree that the transition part is the worst, but
| more people are supporting standard time because it fits better
| with the schedule of most people.
|
| I used to be on the DST camp, but a few years with a family and
| house of my own, and suddenly ST makes more sense. Then playing
| the game of placing oneself into somebody else's shoes, and I
| realized that only young adults in rich countries really
| benefit from DST.
| [deleted]
| amunir wrote:
| People here must think of time very differently than I do,
| because this sounds like a strange idea to me. Consider if
| daylight saving time did not exist and you wanted to do things
| earlier or later. Wouldn't you suggest they be done earlier or
| later? You would not suggest moving the hours of the day ...
| right?
| koobz wrote:
| It seems like you're fixated on one definition being
| "standard" and the other being "savings" - as are so many in
| this debate. When the time shifts, society as a whole moves
| with in. In general, I find my weekday mornings less social,
| less sun-demanding than my afternoons. I wouldn't care if I
| woke up at 7am to darkness and didn't see light until 10:30
| if I had those extra hours of sunlight in the evening when I
| might cut loose and recreate.
|
| The label for 8 am might as well be the TAFNAP era prince
| logo. The point is everyone goes to work at TAFNAP,
| businesses are open until TAFNAP + 8. In case you need to run
| an errand and talk to the guy that repairs HVAC systems. None
| of these sorts of errands is pleasurable or light-dependent
| and might as well be done in the misery of the dark that I
| lend to my employer for my work hours.
|
| I don't know about you, but in the short winter months I'd
| rather get to work at night, run my lunch errands when the
| sun is 3/4 up in the sky, and end my work day with a couple
| of hours of sunlight to spare in the afternoon when my time
| is my own than burn sunlight driving in a cubicle.
|
| There are some that manage to make use of early morning light
| to go surf (when the wind is favorable), or do some farm
| stuff (when the animals are cooperative??). I'd wager that
| surfers and farmers are a small portion the population and a
| lot of workers don't have some intrinsic benefit of spending
| their workday in daylight vs. night.
|
| One detail -
| Olreich wrote:
| If we're going to assume that inertia is hard to fight, and
| that everyone is going to work 9-5 (not even a majority of
| people work these hours in the US): Set it up so that
| winter equinox has sunset at 7pm. This has the sun coming
| up at ~9am during winter at the 40th parallel. During the
| longest days of summer, daylight would be from about 6am to
| 10pm.
|
| That timing is standard time + 1 all year round.
|
| Looks like 2017-2018 57% percent of workers had flexible
| schedules: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/flex2.t04.htm
| dahart wrote:
| The work day is a barrier to most people's ability to do
| things earlier or later during the week. The reason daylight
| savings exists is so that we collectively agree to start the
| work day earlier, so that we collectively can enjoy longer
| evenings in the summer. If daylight saving time doesn't
| exist, the default workday still starts at 9am and in North
| America the sun rises at 5 am on the solstice, with twilight
| from 4am to 5am. The sun is up for a couple hours before most
| people even wake up. If daylight saving time doesn't exist
| then the sun sets in the summer at 7:30... if I work 9-5 and
| commute, that doesn't leave a lot to time to enjoy the sun
| after work.
|
| I used to think I didn't want daylight savings time until I
| looked at the sunrise & sunset chart and saw what happens
| when it's not there. I realized I like what happens in the
| summer relative to my work day. This site's sunrise & sunset
| charts are amazing, btw:
| https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/usa/san-
| francisco?month=6&ye...
| thatcodingdude wrote:
| The AASM should focus on the 4 hour workday instead.
| TheSpiceIsLife wrote:
| How am I going to get out or work earlier?
|
| We run Just In Time manufacturing, there's no possibility
| going to work earlier than I already do: 05:30 for a 10 or 12
| hour day.
|
| Never under estimate the ability of people to complain about
| the status quo.
| selestify wrote:
| That wouldn't be a problem if work also shifted when it
| operates. Which is the point.
| jonS90 wrote:
| Sometimes I wonder if we need a new metric for time of day.
| The 24 system is very inconsistent throughout the year with
| respect to daylight.
| tikhonj wrote:
| That's great to the extent it works--but a lot of
| institutions are tied to specific hours far more than
| physical times of day. School is going to start at 7:30; 9-5
| jobs will be 9-5; lunch is at 12. When we transition between
| standard and DST, the numbers stay the same _and the physical
| times during the day move_. And there 's enough fixed-time
| institutional pressure that other things have to evolve
| around that too; even if you want your fitness class to be
| during the same time of day rather than the same hour, it'll
| have to shift along with people's work and school routines
| anyway.
|
| So if you wanted to push these hour-bound institutions one
| direction or another, how would you do it?
| [deleted]
| waterhouse wrote:
| Wouldn't the announcement "we are hereby canceling DST
| forever, everyone adjust your schedules accordingly" be the
| best possible impetus for all these institutions to do the
| shift? Perhaps they could even perform their final switch
| on the same day--perhaps the day that the next DST period
| would have begun.
| jzwinck wrote:
| Making DST permanent can be done from a single point of
| control with a big cost to people who don't get on board.
|
| Expecting every institution to change will never happen.
| Else the US would be using the metric system by now.
|
| Permanent DST is a good idea but either way would be
| better than the status quo.
| waterhouse wrote:
| > Expecting every institution to change will never
| happen.
|
| People keep asserting this. It's not changing my mind.
|
| > Else the US would be using the metric system by now.
|
| The metric system has a barrier that shifting work
| schedules does not. If an institution does business with
| another institution, or multiple other institutions, it's
| probably very inconvenient if one is using a different
| measurement system than another: contracts, designs, etc.
| would have been drawn up with one set of units;
| translating things like error margins (expressed as
| significant figures) may not be trivial.
|
| But if an institution decides to shift its work hours, it
| can do that unilaterally, unless it was doing critical
| business with another one during the first (or last) hour
| of the day--but even if that's so, that probably only
| means a small fraction of the employees need to have
| slightly different hours.
|
| Shifting the schedules can be done piecemeal, as
| gradually as is convenient for everyone.
| jerzyt wrote:
| You're making a very good point. Switching to metric
| system is much more difficult. On the other hand we go
| through the drill of moving the clock one hour twice a
| year, sometimes even more if an international travel
| catches up with you.
| kelnos wrote:
| > > Expecting every institution to change will never
| happen.
|
| > People keep asserting this. It's not changing my mind.
|
| That's ironic. You're arguing against the idea that
| people don't want to change by refusing to change.
| waterhouse wrote:
| If you say so. I might point out that the idea I'm
| arguing against is "these institutions will keep sticking
| with inappropriate schedules forever, despite being
| constantly faced with the fact of their
| inappropriateness", whereas I am complaining about _not_
| being faced with new facts or arguments. But, look at it
| how you wish.
| asdff wrote:
| The U.S. does use the metric system, though. The general
| public doesn't really use the metric system nor needs to.
| This is also true of the general public in other
| countries, like in the UK where they also use provincial
| units like 'stone.' Science, technology, and engineering
| in the U.S. are metric just like the rest of the world.
| geofft wrote:
| Yes, but that's the very idea behind daylight savings time
| too - it's easier to change the clock than to establish a
| norm that every organization opens and closes an hour earlier
| during the summer (or rather, the easiest way of establishing
| that norm is changing the clock). "Permanent DST," for
| similar reasons, is easier than having everyone do a one-time
| change of their schedules.
| asdff wrote:
| I think time zones should be dropped entirely. It might be
| weird at first, but people would learn to adapt around the
| new numbers for the hours. dayshift hours in a country could
| revolve around whatever their stock exchange decides upon.
|
| personally, I would love to shift sunset to like 5-6 hours
| after work ends to maximize daylight after working hours.
| Sometimes in the winter its dark when you wake up, and dark
| when you get off work, which can't be great for mental
| health.
| fiblye wrote:
| It's literally easier to shift time than it is to convince
| management at (insert corporation) to do anything at a more
| reasonable time.
| LanceH wrote:
| But...this one goes to 11.
| [deleted]
| sgdpk wrote:
| My thoughts exactly. Keep 12pm at the time the sun is in its
| maximum and just do things earlier/later.
| outtatime wrote:
| We used to have that, and it was dreadful. Every
| municipality had its own local time. Railroads made that
| untenable, and led to the creation of timezones.
| baddox wrote:
| Is it possible that such a system would be more tenable
| now with cheaper and more ubiquitous devices that can
| measure or calculate local solar time?
| amptorn wrote:
| Well, railroads still exist.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| https://qntm.org/continuous
| cgriswald wrote:
| Two people viewing the sun at its zenith at the same time
| can disagree as to what time that occurred by _hours_ using
| standard time. You're advocating the abolition of time
| zones...
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| They didn't say not to round it!
|
| For non-distorted time zones, when the clock strikes 12
| everyone can look up and say that the sun is roughly
| closest to 12.
| sgdpk wrote:
| Yes, that's the point. Of course it should be sensible
| and rounded.
|
| If we were too literal with this definition, 12 would
| even change everyday because of the analemma [1].
|
| [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analemma
| lgessler wrote:
| It would be much easier to adopt daylight/standard time
| permanently than to battle all the inertial forces which
| maintain our cultural structures around times of the day (5pm
| is when work ends, 12 is when you eat lunch, ...)
| pmontra wrote:
| Adding to this social inertia concept, there are countries
| where work ends at 6pm, lunch is at 1pm or later and dinner
| at 8pm or later. I live in one of them. If somebody
| occasionally have dinner at 7pm s/he's laughed at. If it's
| a regular thing, well, that's so weird. I don't expect that
| those habits passed on by generations can be changed in one
| day.
| thatcodingdude wrote:
| I think these kind of habits will disappear with boomers.
|
| I don't know which country you live in but I'm sure young
| people wouldn't raise an eyebrow if you ate dinner before
| 8PM.
|
| The general consensus here among young people is that the
| world is burning so go ahead and eat cereal in your
| pajamas at 3PM it doesn't really matter.
| asdff wrote:
| young people work 9-5 too you know. everything else
| follows that. not to mention when these young people
| eventually have kids and their lives revolve around
| school hours.
| balfirevic wrote:
| I don't know if you meant it hyperbolically, but who the
| hell laughs at other people's meal schedule?
| masklinn wrote:
| > I don't know if you meant it hyperbolically, but who
| the hell laughs at other people's meal schedule?
|
| Having a shared meal schedule across society means it's
| relatively easy to plan social or otherwise shared
| events. You certainly don't have to care, but given how
| large a part of people's lives groups and group
| activities are, it's hardly surprising such a deviation
| would lead to jesting at least.
| tonfa wrote:
| At least in western Europe, before WW2 many countries
| were not on CET/CEST, so that's fairly recent.
| masklinn wrote:
| There's also the opposite tack where some countries
| culturally have dinner around 6PM.
| jacobwilliamroy wrote:
| "Hmm. It's dark out. Clocks must be busted."
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _No... make daylight savings time_ permanent _instead._
|
| There's been plenty of research on this and Standard ("Winter")
| Time is best for humans. A peer-reviewed paper with plenty of
| footnotes if you want to dig into the details / weeds:
|
| > _Conclusion_
|
| > _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._
|
| [...]
|
| > _Summary_
|
| > _Discrepancies and misalignments between social (local) clock
| time, sun clock time, and body clock time can be caused by
| political decisions: DST is one example. There are multiple
| health and safety consequences of these misalignments. Our goal
| is that this article's facts and reasoning will be used to make
| clock choices that improve human lives._
|
| *
| https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.0094...
|
| They explicitly state that always-DST is _worse_ than the
| current switching regime.
|
| Various societies of chronobiologists recommend getting rid of
| DST completely:
|
| > _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._
|
| * http://www.chronobiology.ch/wp-
| content/uploads/2019/08/JBR-D...
|
| * https://srbr.org/advocacy/daylight-saving-time-presskit/
|
| * https://esrs.eu/wp-
| content/uploads/2019/03/To_the_EU_Commiss...
|
| *
| https://old.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/dq2nv3/askscien...
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronobiology
|
| If we're going to go through the drama of making this change
| (and some of us had to live through the 'Bush' DST change),
| then biologically speaking, the best current research says
| Standard Time is the way to go.
| dahart wrote:
| I read through the material you linked -- all of it relating
| to this group "SRBR" -- and I find the degree of certainty in
| your message and in SRBR's position paper to be curious,
| because the research cited here doesn't actually seem to
| support strong claims about the difference between standard
| time and daylight savings time, and the position paper seems
| to be making some rather exaggerated claims.
|
| For example, I followed several of the citations that the
| position paper claims to show that daylight savings time
| changes cause measurable negative health effects. Koopman et
| al showed that social jet lag is associated with higher
| diabetes rates. This is people who change sleep patterns by
| more than 2 hours every week. It's pure unsupported
| assumption to imply that the switch to daylight savings time
| twice a year shares these effects. Same goes for Haraszti.
| Hafner et al studied problems of lack of enough sleep in
| general, there is no connection to the twice yearly time
| change.
|
| It only takes a few of these to start smelling agenda, and
| see clearly that the "plenty of footnotes" pile of evidence
| is being made to appear larger than it really is. I don't
| really get why though. I'd be happy not switching times, but
| I have good reason now to be skeptical of this research's
| claims that there are large measurable differences between
| settling on standard vs daylight time. Why are you sure that
| standard time is somehow better, and what does it mean to
| you?
| TheSpiceIsLife wrote:
| Screw science.
|
| Pretty much no one is sleeping properly anyway and we're all
| dying early from lifestyle related illness.
|
| More daylight ours to get fuck-eyed I say.
| austincheney wrote:
| Or, get to work an hour earlier and leave an hour earlier. I
| doubt most of the people who read on HN are hourly employees on
| a fixed hourly schedule.
| TheSpiceIsLife wrote:
| > No... make daylight savings time permanent instead.
|
| I so want this, and doubly so in winter.
|
| Living at 41 degrees south, I spend too many weeks in a row
| going to work in the dark and leaving work in the dark.
|
| Maybe the trick is to spend the middle two weeks much further
| north.
| cnst wrote:
| It's a little more nuanced than that.
|
| In Russia, they got rid of the DST a few years ago, but then
| the folks in Moscow (+0300/+0400) were really upset during the
| winter still living in DST's +0400 from the summer -- they'd
| never see the sunlight the whole day -- go to work in the dark,
| come back home in the dark as well. Moscow being quite North
| (with less sun in the winter) helped exaggerate the issue.
|
| So, after a few years, they've had to change the time in Russia
| once again -- now to permanent Winter (standard time), with
| +0300 in Moscow.
|
| What happened in Saratov, which would normally have had
| +0400/+0500 if sunset/sunrise alone were to determine the
| timezone? Because having Moscow Time is very convenient, it
| always used to follow Moscow Time, because there was only a 1h
| difference from the natural sunlight-based timezone. However,
| now the difference would be as high as 2h during the summer
| (+0300 from Moscow instead of +0500 from DST from +0400). So,
| after a few years of living with permanent +0300 from Moscow,
| they've finally had enough, and decided to finally abandon
| Moscow time, and switch to the permanent standard time more
| appropriate for the geography -- year-round +0400.
|
| There's been similar issues elsewhere in Russia, which,
| basically, had quite a bit of the timezone map completely re-
| drawn during all these switchovers of the 2010s when the
| summer/winter time change has been abandoned.
|
| tl;dr: in the US, we can't simply abandon DST but keep the
| timezones the same otherwise; we'd probably have to re-draw
| some parts of the whole map so that each place gets the option
| to align the permanent time either with the Winter or the
| Summer. It'll be a bit of a mess. The law in the US only lets
| the local folk to decide whether or not they want DST (e.g.,
| Arizona has permanent winter time); you cannot decide to keep
| DST permanently (which is what the parent poster wants, or
| which is what the folks in Nevada want), or switch to a
| different timezone easily. I do hope we end up abolishing the
| time change; but it won't be easy; especially if we simply
| assume that everyone wants permanent non-DST or DST of their
| existing timezone.
|
| another tl;dr: basically, in Nevada, a 1h difference from their
| proper sunset/sunrise timezone is fine to align themselves
| better with California, but if we abandon DST, then their time
| will be 2h off in the summer from sunset/sunrise; so, they
| should be allowed to keep PDT permanently, or, in other words,
| switch from PST/PDT to a permanent MST like Arizona, which
| requires US DOT approval.
|
| Of course, because so many steps are involved, it becomes
| complicated to even say what you actually want.
| captainmuon wrote:
| Won't our activities just move forward in the day to compensate
| after a while? The soviet union tried this, supposedly because
| Stalin liked summer time more (decree time).
|
| I think since the numbers we ascribe to points in time are
| arbitrary, it doesn't make much sense to change them. Short
| term it will work to fool people. But long term, we should just
| mandate the concrete things we want to achive, for example:
|
| * School should not start too early
|
| * Evening events, Prime-time TV should not start too late
|
| * Allow flexible working hours
|
| Unfortunately I think we are as a society ill-equiped to make
| such coordinated changes across government, businesses,
| entertainment industry, schools and so on. Maybe the government
| could provide financial incentives for businesses and
| institutions that follow along. Large unions could push
| something in the next rounds of collective agreements. And
| maybe the idea gets enough momentum that others will follow.
| guitarbill wrote:
| > we want to achive, for example [...] School should not
| start too early
|
| If only it were that easy. Of course, you might think it's
| obvious, study after study shows kids and teenagers would
| benefit.
|
| But you could argue another or maybe even the main function
| of school is to be able to offload children while the parents
| are at work. And flexible working hours don't work in
| customer-facing roles, so...
| adrianmonk wrote:
| > _As the paper states, the biggest problem is with the
| transition._
|
| It does? I only read the abstract because trying to download
| the PDF says it's embargoed.
|
| The abstract says that (1) the transition creates "significant"
| risks and (2) "remaining in daylight saving time year-round ...
| could result in circadian misalignment ... [and] increased
| cardiovascular disease risk, metabolic syndrome and other
| health risks".
|
| I don't see anything in there that says 1 or 2 is a bigger or
| smaller problem.
| nickt wrote:
| It's only embargoed because you're an hour behind!
| minusSeven wrote:
| >The paper also argues that standard time aligns more naturally
| with our circadian rhythm... but doesn't bother to compare that
| with the psychological benefit we get from hanging out with
| friends in daylight after work in the summer, or the
| psychological benefit of it not being dark when you go home and
| have dinner with your family.
|
| Why can't most people wake up early instead. That's precisely
| what will happen once dst goes away. I still don't understand
| why you need to change time at all. Countries that don't have
| dst will never understand why you will have dst in today's day
| and age. It feels like a tradition you won't let go of.
| briffle wrote:
| Oregon and Washington have passed bills to just that, but both
| bills require all 3 states in time zone to do it, so waiting on
| CA.
| desert_boi wrote:
| I think Washington must be including Northern Idaho (Pacific
| Time) as part of its territory. Also Nevada is in Pacific
| Time as well.
| buzzy_hacker wrote:
| I came here to make this exact comment. In New York, it gets
| dark around 4:30pm in the winter. It's depressing. Keep the
| sunlight around longer!
| totaldude87 wrote:
| exactly this, often, when I look out from office window, it
| feels like the night is already on us, yet the watch says 5pm
| :(
| taf2 wrote:
| I'd argue it doesn't matter nearly as much as just keeping time
| constant. If we can eliminate the change in our lifetime I
| think it's good enough and we can leave future tweaks like
| optimizing what hour makes the best sense for optimal living to
| the next generation... at least we will have fixed the
| transition problem which IMO is the biggest issue right now
| AtHeartEngineer wrote:
| Yes, summer time forever!
| pmontra wrote:
| I guess this depends on the country. I have experience of
| European countries. As a general rule (lots of exceptions,
| probably) it seems that the workday in the countries in the
| north is centered around the 8-17 cycle, with lunch at 12.
| Countries in the south are more like 9-18 with lunch at 13 or
| later and dinner at 20 or even 22-23 (hi Spain!) It makes sense
| for them to have light in the evening at the cost of some dark
| early mornings in winter. Not so much for countries getting up
| early.
| cerved wrote:
| It's dark up here all the time in winter so it doesn't
| matter. In the summer it's nicer when the sun rises at 3
| instead of 2.
| fullstop wrote:
| Besides the headaches of updating timezone information, I want
| to move it 30 minutes and be done with it.
| mjevans wrote:
| I prefer 'winter time', but would settle for just eliminating
| the shift.
|
| Shifting IS the worst. Heck even the orbital tilt changing the
| length of daylight in semi-northern latitudes is icky.
| petre wrote:
| At least that daylight change is gradual, it doesn't skip.
| wlesieutre wrote:
| Eliminate the orbital tilt!
| TheSpiceIsLife wrote:
| Pretty much how it seems at the equator.
|
| The whole year round: daylight then three minutes later
| BAM! night with bugger all twilight.
| BeetleB wrote:
| You want to look at Indiana. Until recently they were on
| standard permanent time. Parts of the state were on central
| time and parts on Eastern.
|
| If you want to compare the effect of permanent daylight vs
| permanent standard then just look at cities near the boundary.
| Drive a few miles away and voila you're 1 hour ahead or behind
| - throughout the year.
|
| If one is better than the other, it will show up there.
| Cyphase wrote:
| Couldn't this comparison be made at any timezone border? Two
| places, a clock-hour apart (usually), with basically the same
| sun schedule.
| TylerE wrote:
| No, the point is the time _didn 't_ change for people
| living in the same place.
| Cyphase wrote:
| Ah, I did miss that point, and that does slightly raise
| the value of data from areas like that.
|
| I still think there's a wealth of useful data of the same
| type that can be found at timezone borders. Many will
| have the transitions as a slight confounding factor, but
| it doesn't completely invalidate the applicability of the
| data.
|
| Comparing no-transition borders with transition borders
| might also yield some interesting findings.
| waterhouse wrote:
| The first results I find talk about this specific study,
| which measured electricity usage. It found that DST increased
| energy consumption by about 1%.
| https://www.nber.org/papers/w14429
| petre wrote:
| Wasn't it supposed to decrease electricity usage? If I
| remember correctly it was one of the arguments for DST.
|
| I really dislike it. We do time based reporting and it
| messes up all the calculations at DST change. All kinds if
| weird bugs that trigger once per year, especially when time
| skips backwards. It's also dumb how trains have to stop and
| wait for an hour at the winter DST change in order to
| maintain the schedule. It would be a breath of fresh air
| when it's finally dropped in the EU.
| vonmoltke wrote:
| > Wasn't it supposed to decrease electricity usage? If I
| remember correctly it was one of the arguments for DST.
|
| It was, and did, but that was based on a time when
| lighting drove total electrical load. That's no longer
| the case due to increasing energy efficiency in lighting
| and the growth of other common electrical loads.
| riffic wrote:
| making daylight saving time permanent is effectively the same
| thing as making standard time permanent.
|
| Which, if you're going to do, you might as well make standard
| time the standard. Because it's the standard.
| m463 wrote:
| We could go the other way. Make our clocks start at sunrise.
| _ph_ wrote:
| That is not a very practical thing as the time of sunrise
| changes every day. However, there used to be a very practical
| solution, to center the clock at noon, which drifts only a
| few minutes over the year. The daytime then will be
| symmetrically around the noon point, 6am sunrise means 6pm
| sunset. Isn't that neat?
| m463 wrote:
| I think time is fundamentally analog, and our bodies are
| analog too in the sense that we adapt and adjust to the
| rising sun and bright sunlight. Clocks are wondeful, but I
| kind of wonder if it fits our analog round-peg bodies into
| square holes.
|
| I think it would be interesting to embrace the analog.
|
| instead of an hour for a meeting, have a amount of time to
| talk about something, while people have attention with
| biological support.
|
| Instead of going to bed at the same time, sort of predict
| when your body will get tired and have a tapering of the
| awake portion of your time.
|
| And matching thinking to alertness, and relaxing to its
| waning might be productive and pleasurable.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| > However, there used to be a very practical solution, to
| center the clock at noon, which drifts only a few minutes
| over the year.
|
| Noon drifts by just over 30 minutes throughout the year,
| not just a few minutes.
| beezle wrote:
| "The position statement also cites evidence of increased risks
| of motor vehicle accidents, cardiovascular events, and mood
| disturbances following the annual "spring forward" to daylight
| saving time."
|
| I really would like to see stats of those same events for
| people who have just traveled one, two or three time zones.
| Spooky23 wrote:
| This.
|
| Circadian rhythms are based on local noon, not standard time.
|
| West coast people don't get it, because they are mostly in the
| western half of the pacific time zone. There's a big difference
| in daylight between Boston and Ohio... it's really dark in
| Boston (Or any other place in the eastern frontier of their
| time zone) in the morning during standard time.
| geofft wrote:
| Solar noon in Boston is somewhere between 11:27 and 11:58 EST
| (so an hour later EDT), but solar noon in San Francisco is
| somewhere between 11:53 and 12:23 PST. The earliest twilight
| in Boston is 4:11 PM; the earliest twilight in San Francisco
| is 4:50 PM (both in early December).
|
| That is, solar noon in San Francisco is pretty well lined up
| with civil noon or a bit later, and so DST makes it
| noticeably late, and our circadian rhythms prefer ending DST
| there. But solar noon in Boston is usually about half an hour
| earlier than civil time, which means that DST puts it just
| half an hour later instead. You have to pick one - either
| you're waking up half an hour earlier than your body wants,
| or you're staying at work half an hour later. Neither is
| really great.
|
| (The best solution might be to convince businesses in Boston
| to shift their schedules half an hour earlier - not a full
| hour earlier, as permanent DST does.)
| dathinab wrote:
| Summery from what I posted in a long top level comment:
|
| - Permanent summer time would have negative biological
| consequences for everyone having social yet lack, i.e. everyone
| who frequently stands up earlier then their inner clock
| indicated. I.e. people who tend to stand up late.
|
| - This is soundly researched.
|
| - The exact degree of how bad the consequences of permanent
| summer time are unknown and hard to say as they are long term
| effect, BUT only <2% of people (in Germany) have a negative yet
| lack while much more have a positive yet lack because of this
| it's generally better to opt for permanent winter time then
| summer time
| spideymans wrote:
| The only thing worse than eliminating the time shift, would be
| moving to permanent standard time (winter time). Make summer
| time (DST) permanent
| recursive wrote:
| Strong disagree. Permanent winter time would be a huge
| improvement to currently. I'm not sure why people care which
| way it goes so much. Obviously, you're not losing total
| daylight either way. It's the shifting of schedules that
| causes problems. What difference does it make if the wall
| clock calls the time 7:00, 8:00, or purple:00?
| CydeWeys wrote:
| I'm with you here. My preference in order is: 1. Permanent
| daylight saving time. 2. Permanent standard time. 3.
| Changing between the two as we have now.
|
| It's the shift itself that I hate the most. Although
| without the shift, a lot of places are going to need to be
| more adjustable in their schedules, because some fixed
| times for doing things in the summer don't make sense in
| the winter, and vice-versa.
| ponker wrote:
| Because people have to be at work which is coordinated to a
| "9-5" office workday and that will be harder to change than
| a clock.
| recursive wrote:
| This is probably the root of the disagreement. I'm pretty
| confident 9-5 is easier to change than the existence of
| DST.
| _ph_ wrote:
| Isn't 9-5 already a reaction to DST? At least here in
| Germany, office and school hours used to start at 8 or
| even before that. Stores also used to open at 8.
| Nowadays, most of that has slipped to later times, many
| stores only open at 10 now. And people work longer. There
| is also discussion, to shift school times to later.
|
| If we just to back to standard time, it is easy to go
| back to the "old" times once and stay there forever.
| wnoise wrote:
| > work which is coordinated to a "9-5" office workday and
| that will be harder to change than a clock.
|
| [citation needed]
| jb775 wrote:
| Because most people roll out of bed and go to work for 8-9
| hours and would like to see some sunlight before they roll
| back into bed.
| toast0 wrote:
| When there's less than 8 hours of sunlight, you're not
| getting any outside of work hours. Sunlight is too
| valuable to be used for personal time.
| benrbray wrote:
| Most jobs don't depend on the sun, which is why most
| office workers don't get to enjoy windows.
|
| The jobs that do already have seasonally shifting hours.
|
| Permanent daylight time means that by default, everyone
| gets to enjoy more sun. Permanent winter time means that
| by default, everyone gets to enjoy one less hour of
| daylight by default, unless their company is charitable
| enough to shift their hours.
| bloak wrote:
| I don't want children to have to travel to or from school in
| the dark. It's dangerous by bicycle (a lot of children cycle),
| and unpleasant in any case. If you're at a reasonably high
| latitude that means you need the middle of the school day to be
| around local noon in the winter. Round here, in the UK, school
| days typically run from a bit before 09:00 to a bit after
| 15:00. So something close to astronomical local time would be a
| good choice of time zone.
|
| You could move the time zone three hours and at the same time
| change school hours by three hours, but what would be the point
| of that?
|
| School hours is the main thing that isn't flexible. Office
| hours vary. Shops can easily be flexible. There's the stock
| exchange, I suppose, but most people don't interact with that.
|
| So the obvious thing to do is to abolish summer time and leave
| winter time as it is.
| mynameishere wrote:
| Yeah, and stereos shouldn't even have "1". The dial should go
| from 2 to 11. Geez. Numbers.
| mumblemumble wrote:
| I'm torn on this one. At the latitude where I live (northern
| Illinois), I both appreciate it staying light past 5pm in the
| winter, and would appreciate it staying dark past 5am in the
| summer.
|
| But I also spend some time further north, in northern Michigan,
| and there I'd sure be annoyed if the sun were still up at 10pm
| in the summer. And might be willing to accept a 4pm winter
| sunset in order to have the sun up before 8am - that far north,
| you won't be out much in the evening in the middle of winter,
| anyway, and shoveling the sidewalk before sunrise is just
| depressing.
|
| Then I realize that this is all kind of beating around the
| bush, and what I'd really like is an end to the USA's
| ridiculous culture of 9 hour work days and eating at one's
| desk, so that I could take a long lunch and use that to get my
| sunlight in winter.
|
| So, meh, I think that I really don't care between permanent
| standard and permanent daylight time, I just want to get rid of
| the changing.
| joe-collins wrote:
| Let the federal government dictate a default time per state
| corresponding to longitude, as we have now. Each state can
| choose to operate at {-1, +0, +1} hours from baseline.
| labster wrote:
| Three hour changes at the state line sounds like fun. I
| approve this plan.
| TheSpiceIsLife wrote:
| > sure be annoyed if the sun were still up at 10pm in the
| summer.
|
| It actually does that here in Launceston Tasmanian..
|
| Not full sun, but definitely still twilight at 21:50.
|
| And your right: it's fucking irritating for a good three or
| four weeks.
|
| I need a sleep mask.
| arethuza wrote:
| "I'd sure be annoyed if the sun were still up at 10pm in the
| summer"
|
| Out of interest why would you be annoyed - here in Scotland
| it's still light at that time in summer and it is glorious -
| best time of the year.
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| I'm in Norway. While the sun technically goes down, it just
| goes barely below the horizon so we just have a few hours
| of civil twilight and if there are a few clouds, a sunset
| that lasts for hours until the sun comes back up. I can
| read outside so long as it isn't too cloudy - and barely
| need light to do so if it is.
|
| It is pretty glorious, though some folks do need to darken
| their bedroom to sleep well - especially immigrants.
| kevsim wrote:
| Immigrant in Norway. Can confirm. First few years were
| tough, but now I don't even bother with curtains. Summers
| here are the best (provided the weather isn't awful).
| csydas wrote:
| Similarly, I am in St Petersburg Russia, and white nights,
| while taking a little to get used to, are very pretty. You
| have to make a major adjustment though in the form of heavy
| window drapes ).
|
| But since I moved to Russia, I have thoroughly enjoyed no
| DST, it really is a headache for a lot of things and it's
| more annoying to work with our colleagues in the US and EU
| who do respect DST as we have to add just that much more
| planning. DST is an artifact we don't need anymore.
| GordonS wrote:
| Another Scot here (NE Scotland). While it never gets
| properly dark during summer, it comes with the caveat of
| feeling like it's _permanently_ dark during winter. I
| always hated driving to work in the morning in the dark,
| then driving home in the evening in the dark. Winter here
| feels kind of depressing because it 's dark so much.
|
| Also, IMO, unless you've got proper black-out blinds, never
| getting dark during summer is a PITA!
| [deleted]
| pkphilip wrote:
| Can't the federal govt leave the the time the way it is and
| just change the work time alone?
|
| Example: 8am-3pm during winters. 9am to 4pm during summers
| etc?
| tzs wrote:
| If you change the hours instead of the clocks, you either
| need to have two sets of everything with a time printed on
| it that you swap between, or you need to print both times
| on everything and people have to remember which is which.
|
| _If_ you are going to have standard /daylight time it is a
| lot easier to just change the clocks since clocks are
| designed to be easy to change.
|
| For a while this was not true. When digital electronics
| became cheap and common, designers started putting clocks
| in everything and so a DST change might involve going
| through your house having to change dozens of clocks.
|
| Before this, we'd typically only have a couple wall clocks
| in a house, an alarm clock in each bedroom, and our
| watches, most of which we had to regularly set anyway to
| keep them on time so DST wasn't much of a hassle.
|
| Now we still do have clocks everywhere--I think I counted
| something like 20 clocks in my house recently--but now most
| of them are self-setting. I've only got 3 that I actually
| have to manually change for DST.
| pkphilip wrote:
| Why would you want to print two times of everything
| merely because someone changes the work timings? It is
| similar to changing over to a different shift during a
| season - the only difference is that this shift is an
| hour earlier or later than the previous one. All you have
| to do is set your alarm for a different time.
|
| That apart, there are so many countries in the world with
| vary different day light timings based on season and very
| few of them have daylight savings time.
| wnoise wrote:
| > If you are going to have standard/daylight time it is a
| lot easier to just change the clocks since clocks are
| designed to be easy to change.
|
| Hahaha
|
| There have been immeasurable amounts of engineering put
| into this, and it still doesn't reliably work.
| ByteJockey wrote:
| The government doesn't regulate work time (as in time that
| shifts start/stop, there are rules around number of hours
| worked).
| anticensor wrote:
| I think he meant the timespan that government servants
| work, because those hours set an example to follow for
| others.
| arp242 wrote:
| Wouldn't this have the same effect as DST in upsetting
| people's cycles and sleep?
| tzs wrote:
| In the winter, though, in more northern latitudes that would
| mean going to work or school while it is still very dark out.
|
| If you can only have one of morning and evening in light,
| morning is probably more important for a couple reasons even
| ignoring the circadian rhythm considerations.
|
| 1. We are more synchronized in morning. In morning you have
| adults going to work and kids going to school. We are much less
| synchronized in the evening--young kids come home earliest,
| then middle and high school kids, then adults. Furthermore,
| more people stay late at work than go in early to work, so you
| get further spreading out of the commute home.
|
| With the morning getting heavier, more concentrated traffic, it
| makes sense to prioritize giving it the light.
|
| 2. The morning before the sun comes up tends to be the coldest
| time of the day. You are much more likely to have icy roads
| during a predawn commute than during a postdusk commute,
| further bolstering the case for prioritizing standard time over
| daylight savings time during winter.
| watwut wrote:
| Noooo, afternoon is more important. That us when people do
| activities and would have reasonable chance to go outside on
| sun to get d. You wont take kids on pkayground or take walk
| before school and work.
| jen20 wrote:
| [citation needed].
|
| In Austin (where I live) the summers are so hot that you go
| out before 10am, and then it's too hot to go out again
| until the sun starts to set. I _absolutely_ go walking
| before work. My schedule does not seem uncommon either - at
| least 50% of the people in the high rise I live in do the
| same.
| nickt wrote:
| I think you're right, and being downvoted by folks who've
| never lived in the North.
| cgriswald wrote:
| I certainly didn't downvote him, but I lived in the north
| and I think it's nonsense. The reality is you end up going
| to school or work in the dark anyway because the sun rises
| later than your schedule. And then, since all the light is
| in the morning, you go home in the dark too; or at least
| it's dark shortly after your commute ends. You basically
| get zero hours of daylight for several months. This is the
| entire reason I'm pro-DST-all-the-time.
| grey-area wrote:
| Why can't localities just shift the time work and school
| starts. Some jobs suit different hours, not everyone works
| 9-5 anyway, many people work shifts and manage to deal with a
| varied timetable. This is not rocket science. You do not have
| to work the same hours as everyone else.
|
| Adjusting clocks by an hour is an absurd workaround that
| doesn't even suit everyone and causes no end of problems and
| confusion, it's well past time it was abolished worldwide,
| 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote:
| Having people adjust their schedules is absolutely the
| saner option, but it's likely an infeasible coordination
| problem. Daycare depends on work, work depends on daycare,
| and a zillion other interdependencies. The friction against
| change is really high. Compare that to the coordination
| problem of having everyone (essentially) keep doing what
| they're doing, but adjusting the clock. You can impose a
| clock change, but you can't impose a schedule change.
|
| It's the difference between
|
| - Your office deciding to ignore daylight savings (starting
| November 1st, ending March 8, we expect employees to
| reschedule all recurring meetings/work hours/events to an
| hour earlier, changing 9-5 to 8-4). I can just imagine the
| shitshow of complaining and bikeshedding.
|
| - Your state asking or requiring offices to change
| schedules like above. I can't see asking working, and I
| can't see requiring being a feasible law.
|
| - Your state just saying that 2am is now 1am for a few
| months.
|
| It's all the same thing from one perspective, but very
| different from a coordination perspective :(
| beached_whale wrote:
| I get paid to go to work, dark or light. I would rather my
| time be more pleasant. Plus, come December it's dark at both
| ends anyways.
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| On this matter, I do trust the Russians:
| https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-28423647
|
| I used to be pro "permanent summer time". But beyond the
| practical arguments above, there is a another reason.
|
| First of all, let's be clear that the the number is arbitrary
| if there are no transitions.
|
| It is stupid (as far as I can tell) that we waste the sunlight
| in the morning, getting more darkness at night. Switching to
| permanent summer time without tackling the underlying causes
| why are schedule shift backwards would seem to beget the same
| problem over again. Switching to winter time however might
| force us to confront the issue head on.
|
| e.g. Maybe we need to drastically curtail light pollution and
| require that consumer devises have opt-out red shift (if there
| is more evidence for it) and curfew modes.
| benrbray wrote:
| In my opinion this just hurts everyone, and requires us to
| make drastic changes to our work culture. Permanent DST is a
| simple band-aid fix that does a lot of good while we think
| carefully about solving the hard problems.
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| I do admit it could be a situation like how monetary policy
| is easier to do gracefully than across-the-board price
| controls.
|
| Keynesian time here we come!
| shados wrote:
| > but it really seems that for the population as a whole
|
| Our society is calibrated with the assumption that you will
| wake up early. Early bird gets the worm and all that, but
| everything is essentially rigged toward it. From the
| time/daylight, to school start time, going by quiet hours (hope
| you enjoy jack hammers starting at 7am stats, because by most
| city's ordinance, that's not only allowed, it's NORMAL. And to
| start at 7, the trucks and crew have to start getting ready
| long before that).
|
| I assume a large part of it is the emphasis on family and kids,
| and generally for people with young children, early morning
| isn't really early.
|
| But for a lot of people...ouch.
|
| Considering all the literature around the issues related to
| sleep deprivation, and how so many people are sleep deprived
| (likely related to a lot of mental issues, stress, and various
| other health problems), we really need to work and optimize
| around making it possible for people to sleep enough. As things
| are, if you can, it's just dumb luck.
| lmm wrote:
| > Our society is calibrated with the assumption that you will
| wake up early. Early bird gets the worm and all that, but
| everything is essentially rigged toward it. From the
| time/daylight, to school start time, going by quiet hours
| (hope you enjoy jack hammers starting at 7am stats, because
| by most city's ordinance, that's not only allowed, it's
| NORMAL. And to start at 7, the trucks and crew have to start
| getting ready long before that).
|
| By what logic is 7 early? Dawn is well before 7 (at least
| most of the year) so many people sleep in past dawn, but stay
| up long after sunset, which is absurdly wasteful.
| shados wrote:
| As another commenter pointed out, people don't really pick
| their circadian rhythms.
|
| With that said, even if we forget about that, what's early
| is defined by what we consider late.
|
| If you have a teenager who needs 9+ hours of sleep, and
| they cannot go to sleep before 11pm (because we allow
| people to be noisy until at least that late), then 7 is
| quite early, yes.
| mtc010170 wrote:
| Wasteful of what? Sunlight?
|
| Early and late are relative concepts. As others have
| pointed out, there's a variety in natural circadian
| rhythms, as well as preferences.
|
| So to claim an approach other than your own is "absurdly
| wasteful" strikes me as just shallow and arrogant, and the
| reason we wound up with DST in the first place.
| Emma_Goldman wrote:
| There's a wide distribution of circadian rhythms in the
| human population between the poles of what are commonly
| called 'early birds' and 'night owls'. Those rhythms mean
| that there is an optimal wake for each person that is not
| infinitely flexible. We cannot all sleep and rise with the
| sun and do our best work.
|
| In my case, I struggle to do serious work outside of
| 10am-10pm. I wake at 7am because of my partner, but for the
| first three hours of every day, my brain hardly works. I
| have to fill my time with other things - exercise, reading,
| chores, and so on. If left to myself, I naturally go to
| sleep at midnight and wake at nine, and feel better for it.
| konschubert wrote:
| Only if you prefer sunlight over the young night's darkness
| asdff wrote:
| I think the emphasis is on getting the most labor done during
| daylight hours more than anything. Easier to start
| jackhammering at dawn than to risk having to cut the job
| short by dusk. tough to harvest crops at night too.
| shados wrote:
| If that was true, it would be different in winter, but it
| isn't (at least for big projects). I've had a lot of
| renovation projects done, and all the trade folks I dealt
| with just like having most of their afternoon free, by
| starting super early. The jack hammers across the street
| will start in pitch darkness, they'll just use powerful
| lights.
| vidanay wrote:
| Crops are harvested at night all the time.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > I assume a large part of it is the emphasis on family and
| kids, and generally for people with young children, early
| morning isn't really early.
|
| I have two young children, and IME what you say is true of
| _infants_ , but not other young children.
| shados wrote:
| I don't have kids so I'll have to take your word for it,
| but I would assume doing the daily routine and getting kids
| ready for school, when it starts at 8am, probably doesn't
| give you much choice.
|
| So 7am would feel pretty normal.
| masklinn wrote:
| > Our society is calibrated with the assumption that you will
| wake up early.
|
| Noise ordinances are generally 2200 to 0700 or so, going by
| "solar time" and keeping the same length of calm would make
| it 1930 to 0430 instead.
| nbsanders wrote:
| I think sleep deprivation is regarded as a feature by those
| in power rather than a bug.
|
| You drill children and teenagers to get up early, so that
| later they are obedient, tired work horses who won't get any
| ideas.
|
| Then the upper classes sagely quote that general who said
| that only "smart" and lazy people are leaders of the highest
| order.
| shados wrote:
| > I think sleep deprivation is regarded as a feature
|
| Yup. Needing sleep is considered a luxury. If you complain
| about not having enough, you're "weak". If you can't sleep
| because of your neighbors, it's considered a mild
| inconvenience.
|
| Really, we need sleep like we need food, water or air.
| gverrilla wrote:
| You forget they practice the same bullshit, in so many
| levels. So they shouldn't be getting any ideas by your
| logic. So to have this idea would be a contradiction.
| bjo590 wrote:
| > As things are, if you can, it's just dumb luck.
|
| Funny, I've gotten 8+ hours of sleep over 95% of nights in
| the past 5 years. I must have a string of very good luck. It
| probably isn't due to lifestyle choices.
| itisit wrote:
| You must have this controversial "free will" I hear so much
| about..
| dmix wrote:
| As in "free-will" not to live in any (western?) city
| where 7am is noise go-time, regardless of real life
| statistics and local cultural differences?
|
| I personally think these society-wide policies should
| reflect the realities of the population. Which often
| means reviewing them every once in a while to see if it
| still makes sense.
|
| Far too much gov policy is fire-and-forget and obsessed
| with forever adding new things.
|
| In my perfect world _at least_ 50% of time should be
| spent reviewing and tweaking existing policy.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| > any (western?) city where 7am is noise go-time,
| regardless of real life statistics and local cultural
| differences?
|
| This is an interesting comment to me. San Francisco is
| really, really loud -- the biggest offender, when I was
| there, was near-daily sirens from (I believe) fire
| trucks.
|
| But this is not a necessary aspect of living in a city. I
| often did wake up early in Shanghai, but that was because
| the sun came up at 4 am. Noise wasn't much of an issue
| during the ambiguous times. (Before
| firecrackers/fireworks were outlawed, they were common,
| but they were more of an afternoon thing.)
| shados wrote:
| > But this is not a necessary aspect of living in a city
|
| Ding ding, we have a winner.
|
| Around here, if you complain about noise, you'll just be
| told "It's a city, it's noisy, deal with it! If you don't
| like it, move to the suburbs!". Which is kind of a silly
| suggestion: I've lived in the suburbs and kids having
| pool parties were a lot noisier than anything I've seen
| in a city. You'd have to be in the middle of a forest or
| something to not have to worry about human noise. In
| cities, suburbs, whatever, noise is a lot more cultural,
| and what people consider okay or not.
|
| Sure, some level of cars/traffic will just happen. Other
| things like construction can be done in a lot of ways
| (some cities require plans on how they will minimize
| inconvenience to neighbors. Others are free for all).
| Backup alarms seem like a necessary evil, but I'm told in
| London they're not really a thing. People screaming at
| 2am is just about enforcement and cultural norms.
|
| Some cities are loud. Other, bigger cities aren't.
| seszett wrote:
| > _As in "free-will" not to live in any (western?) city
| where 7am is noise go-time, regardless of real life
| statistics and local cultural differences?_
|
| You must live in a different west than I do, because
| although there are sometimes noisy works in my cities
| (I've mostly lived in France and Belgium, but my year in
| Montreal wasn't different on this aspect actually) these
| are only punctual occurrences, and even in my latest
| house, where there have been buildings being built in my
| street for two years, it's only been noisy in the morning
| a couple weeks at most over this time.
|
| I'm more inconvenienced by regular automobile traffic,
| which isn't limited to special hours, motorcycles can
| speed down the street and wake us up at any time of the
| night.
| [deleted]
| shados wrote:
| This is where it's all about "dumb luck". Unless you live
| in the middle nowhere with no neighbors for miles around,
| it's all about pure luck. I've stayed in midtown
| Manhattan for long stretches with little to no issue.
| I've stayed in the suburbs with only a single neighbor
| and it was hell.
|
| There's been construction around me for the last decade.
| Most of the projects have been fine. The current one is
| managed by the devil himself and making everyone
| miserable. It's just luck. That's the problem.
| jameshush wrote:
| What's helped me A LOT is sleeping ear plugs (I use macks
| silicon) and a face mask. Absolute game changers. My room
| mates can be watching TV in the living room beside me and
| I fall right asleep
| jamiek88 wrote:
| Me too! Done it for years now and my watch vibrates as an
| alarm clock so that problem was solved.
|
| People need showing how to wear them properly, really
| just read the instructions on the packet but _so many_
| people insert them haphazardly then say they don't work
| or they fall out.
| nallic wrote:
| same here! - such a simple solution made my sleep A LOT
| better. Spend some time trying out earplugs that really
| fits comfortably, but then it's bliss.
| jonS90 wrote:
| Lifestyle choices only get you so far if you have to figbt
| against your circadian rhythm to wake up before the sun.
| Your body wants to stay up late and wake up late, so you
| just end up sleeping less.
| gpanders wrote:
| Nurses, doctors, firefighters, parents, and a number of
| other professions around the world are well versed in
| adjusting their sleep schedules as needed. I don't think
| your circadian rhythm is as fixed as you think it is
| shados wrote:
| Some do, and they can work those jobs because their
| biology allows it. A big chunk of it are just in constant
| state of sleep deprivation though and are miserable. That
| will catch up to them eventually.
| zeta0134 wrote:
| I pulled this off too, but the main criteria (and this is
| NOT a given) was finally landing a job with a consistent
| schedule. It was not even remotely possible working retail
| before that, with shifts that varied by day, by week, by
| whomever called in sick and required last minute
| shuffling... that was a mess. This is the unfortunate
| practical reality for large segments of the population.
|
| Once you have a consistent schedule, barring medical
| issues, sleeping is easy. Simply pick a time 8+ hours
| before your routine for the day needs to begin, and get
| into bed at that time every day. Actually in bed! Not on
| your phone, not watching TV, lights off and eyes closed.
| Helps if your evening routine winds down in intensity, but
| won't matter much if you're already exhausted. You can't do
| anything about your mind racing some nights, but for the
| most part after a week of this schedule your body _takes
| the hint_ and adjusts your rhythm accordingly. I 've worked
| tons of odd night shifts this way; the consistency of
| routine seems to be far more important than the specific
| time.
|
| Which block of time works for you is a matter of job,
| lifestyle, and a bunch of other factors that a lot of folks
| may not be in full control of. I think the real dumb luck
| here is having enough controllable factors that carving out
| the same 8+ hour block each night is possible. In my mind
| though, it is _worth the effort._ Good, consistent sleep
| quality has an absolutely massive impact on your willpower
| and general ability to focus.
| kungato wrote:
| People used to wake up at 5 to be at the factory at 6 am.
| Now you have the gp complaining the construction work
| starts at 7. Can't please everyone
| shados wrote:
| I complain construction starts at 7 because quiet hours
| start at 11 (and in practice no one enforces them that
| early). Let's forget circadian rhythm for a sec and my
| issue isn't how early or late it is. My issue is that its
| a strict 8 hours window when we know:
|
| - people need between 7-10 hours of sleep depending on
| age - most people don't fall asleep instantly - sleep
| deprivation is a pervasive problem with significant
| health implication.
|
| If we (again, forgetting circadian rythm as it makes
| things more nuanced) move things to start at 5am that's
| fine, but then things have to stop much, MUCH earlier
| (they wouldn't).
| varjag wrote:
| It appears you assume that since people had to be at work
| 6am they liked it back in the day.
| kungato wrote:
| My grandparents all say the liked it and they still wake
| up at that time after 20 years in retirement
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Yes, with dim warm lights a while before bed. And some
| excercise during the day.
| dota_fanatic wrote:
| A better system is to only get in bed when you feel
| sleepy, like you could fall asleep in the next 10
| minutes, and wake up at the same time every day. If you
| get in bed and don't fall asleep in the next ten minutes,
| get up and don't come back to bed until you feel sleepy
| again. Strongly associate the environment of a bedroom
| with sleeping.
|
| Forcing yourself to get in bed even when you're not
| sleepy can potentially lead to just lying there thinking,
| conditioning yourself negatively, especially if the
| character of those thoughts is "argh I should be asleep
| why am I not sleepy I'm going to be so tired in the
| morning what's wrong with me..."
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Perhaps you're giving yourself pressure unnecessarily. I
| for one enjoy and look forward to no-distraction time
| alone with my thoughts in the late evening.
| perl4ever wrote:
| >Once you have a consistent schedule, barring medical
| issues, sleeping is easy
|
| I respect your personal experience, but you are coming on
| a little strong in terms of assuming everyone is just
| like yourself.
|
| Something I've seen other people mention, and may have
| myself (although not formally diagnosed):
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_sleep_phase_disorde
| r
|
| I have worked 8-5, 2-11, and 11-8, and no matter what my
| schedule was, I had the urge to stay up a little later,
| but needed at least 8 hours to feel adequately rested. So
| typically I would get 7 hours or so and feel exhausted
| every morning. Without work or appointments, I would
| rotate my schedule around the clock, day by day. It's as
| if I was tuned to a planet with a slightly longer day.
|
| After many, many years, I found by accident that
| bupropion (aka Zyban aka Wellbutrin) fixed it, just like
| that. It was amazing. But I wasn't able to tolerate a
| full dosage, so that didn't last. It does point to some
| dysfunction of nicotinic receptors.
| bobf wrote:
| I'm the same way, naturally preferring something like a
| 26-27 hour day with 17+ hours awake and 9+ hours of
| sleep. I'd be very interested to hear more about your
| experience, especially of bupropion helping - could you
| email me (in my profile)? I've found melatonin,
| doxylamine succinate, zolpidem, and alprazolam to each be
| somewhat helpful at times although they all have
| diminishing returns over time and seem to affect sleep
| quality.
| cik2e wrote:
| My sleep history has been all over the map and at times
| I've also gone for the sleep aids. I've tried all of the
| meds you've listed and none have been particularly
| effective when I've really needed them.
|
| You may want to look into Suvorexant
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suvorexant). It's the one
| drug that I've found to be extremely effective without
| causing any sort of hangover in the morning. It really
| felt like a miracle drug as compared to things like
| zolpidem and antihistamines. YMMV but I'd say it's worth
| looking into if you're really struggling.
|
| I should also mention that I've found a combination of
| exercise, time in the sun, and proper sleep hygiene to be
| the only viable long-term solution. But I do believe that
| sleep aids can be a useful bridge towards developing a
| consistent sleep schedule.
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| Assuming it's is legal where you are, have you tried
| cannabis? No hangover like alcohol, small doses won't
| make you feel intoxicated, sleep is easier to achieve and
| the quality is great. It doesn't help everyone, but it's
| worth a shot if you haven't tried it. Depending on where
| you live, you may be able to order it online and have it
| delivered like anything else. I like edible gummies. Take
| 30-60 minutes before you want to sleep, easy to take,
| easy to divide into smaller doses, no smell.
| shados wrote:
| My understanding with weed is that it reduces the amount
| of REM sleep you get. You may come up ahead over all with
| this tradeoff, but not ahead of someone who sleeps
| "normally".
| jdabney wrote:
| I was diagnosed with Delayed sleep phase disorder and
| have the same issue where sleep aids only work a few days
| at a time before stopping with diminishing returns
| everyday. Nothing but just letting myself sleep when my
| body wants to sleep has worked.
| perl4ever wrote:
| Based on my experience and people I know, everyone seems
| to react to every drug differently, and if you read
| studies, you will find assertions about what it does that
| contradict individual experience.
|
| I found that 75 mg twice a day made me feel ready to wake
| in the morning like I basically never have been, but it
| also had intolerable side effects. Going back to 75
| mg/day, halving it, is bearable, but also reverted my
| sleep pattern.
|
| I am taking melatonin at the moment, because why not, but
| I don't notice much effect except an increase in dreaming
| (or remembering it).
| remar wrote:
| I suffer from this too (only formally diagnosed with
| sleep apnea though) and found that 0.5mg of melatonin
| about 20-40mins before I want to go to sleep has helped
| me align my sleep cycle to a 24hr schedule. I also get a
| consistent 8hrs registered on my CPAP so it doesn't seem
| to interfere with my sleep quality/duration either.
|
| I buy melatonin that comes in 1mg pressed/powder pill
| form and just bite it to split it in half and toss the
| other half back in the bottle.
|
| I've been doing this for 2 years now and have never had
| to change the dose. At one point I even considered seeing
| if .25mg would be sufficient but depending on the brand
| sometimes the pill crumbles up too much so I stick with
| .5mg. I've used Nature's Bounty and Webber Naturals and
| both brands seem to work the same for me.
|
| I really wish I had figured this trick out a lot earlier
| in life as it would've saved me from missing out on a lot
| of opportunities in my career.
|
| (more detail about my experimentation below)
|
| Before I discovered this I tried everything from reducing
| screen time before bed, cranking up night mode in
| flux/redshift, abandoning coffee/caffeine entirely,
| working out earlier in the day instead of evenings, etc.
| _Nothing_ worked for me - my brain would remain wide
| awake and I would have to stay up until 5-7am before I
| even began to feel tired (where I would have to wake up
| between 10-11am for work).
|
| I had even tried melatonin before too but it was a 3mg
| pill and it would produce very erratic results in my
| sleep quality. I'd sometimes wake up drenched in sweat or
| wake up feeling very groggy for hours so I figured
| melatonin just wasn't for me. It wasn't until I came
| across some advice on /r/n24 or /r/dspd to try .5-1mg of
| melatonin that I decided to try again (IIRC it was a post
| about how doses >=2mg can actually result in melatonin
| overdose and result in the types of symptoms I was
| observing - TBH I didn't really bother verifying that
| info and just figured I'd try .5mg and see what happened
| as I was desperate for a solution).
|
| And for the record, with this approach I haven't had to
| make any other modifications to my daily routine. I
| continue to lift heavy in the evenings and drink 1-2 cups
| of drip/espresso every day.
|
| The only situations I've noticed where this trick falls
| apart for me are:
|
| 1) if I ever try to push past that 20-40min period where
| I start to get drowsy, it results in me being awake
| again. This rarely ever happens and I usually just end up
| sleeping about an hour later. I make sure to take the
| melatonin just before I begin flossing+brushing and get
| in bed right after
|
| 2) for some reason drinking a can of coke/pepsi in the
| evening will keep me wired awake all night. I've had cups
| of coffee in the evening rarely which never had the same
| effect, but coke/pepsi will...
|
| Anyway, just thought I'd share since this made a huge
| difference in my life - maybe worth trying/experimenting.
| DanBC wrote:
| Low doses of melatonin can be really helpful, especially
| if people have tried all the "sleep hygiene" steps and
| that's not working and they don't need a z drug yet.
|
| One of the problems of melatonin is that in some
| countries it's sold as a supplement not a medication, so
| the regulation is much less strict.
|
| The dosing varies so much, even in product labelled as 1
| mg.
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5263069/
|
| > In this issue of the Journal of Clinical Sleep
| Medicine, Erland and Saxena systematically analyzed the
| actual melatonin content (and presence of contaminants)
| in 31 melatonin supplements purchased from groceries and
| pharmacies in one city in Canada (before countrywide OTC
| use of it in Canada was banned). Their findings herald
| what may also be true in OTC melatonin supplements
| marketed in the United States. Melatonin content varied
| from an egregious -83% to +478% of labeled melatonin and
| 70% had melatonin concentration <= 10% of what was
| claimed. Worse yet, the content of melatonin between lots
| of the same product varied by as much as 465%.3
|
| > The most variable sample was a chewable tablet (and
| most likely to be used by children). It contained almost
| 9 mg of melatonin when it was supposed to contain 1.5 mg
| and also exhibited the greatest variability between lots
| (465% difference). The lowest melatonin content was -83%
| compared to its labeled value in a capsule that also
| contained lavender, chamomile, and lemon balm. Capsules
| showed the greatest variability between lots. Liquid
| supplements surprisingly showed generally high to median
| stability with low lot-to-lot stability. The least
| variable products were those that contained the simplest
| mix of ingredients, generally oral or sublingual tablets
| with melatonin added to a filler of silica or cellulose
| derivatives and were the most reproducible. The last
| disturbing finding was more than a quarter of melatonin
| products contained serotonin, some at potentially
| significant doses. Serotonin is a breakdown product of
| melatonin metabolism but could have medicinal effects and
| should be taken without oversight. In short, there was no
| guarantee of the strength or purity of OTC melatonin.
| remar wrote:
| Very interesting, thanks for sharing!
| Twisol wrote:
| > I respect your personal experience, but you are coming
| on a little strong in terms of assuming everyone is just
| like yourself.
|
| This was actually a significant point of contention
| between myself and my advisor, who interpreted my working
| late at the lab as though I was trying to cram extra time
| to make up for not being there otherwise, or something.
| Those are just my most productive hours -\\_(tsu)_/- but
| to him I was lazy and irresponsible.
|
| My natural sleep period seems to be around 9 hours. I can
| make myself do 7 (I currently keep a ~1:30am-9am
| schedule, with some effort), but anything less has
| noticeable effects on my cognitive state, and I still
| start getting tired again around 5pm. If I do sleep at
| 5pm, I'll wake somewhere between 11pm and 2am, which is
| bad but in the other direction. So I have to fight
| through the late-afternoon slump. It's very easy to knock
| me off of this schedule, and I've been keeping it for two
| years since I left grad school.
|
| Sleep disorders are real, and they are not simply
| symptoms of a poor work ethic.
| visarga wrote:
| Could be even the magnesium content of your drinking water.
| I noticed much better sleep when I take Mg supplements.
| shados wrote:
| Yes, it's just luck, unless your lifestyle choice was to
| pitch a tent away from civilization. You're lucky the city
| didn't permit a 5 years construction project next to your
| house. You're lucky your neighbors aren't assholes. You're
| lucky people aren't throwing a 2am BBQ in the street.
| You're lucky noise ordinance is being enforced. You're
| lucky you don't get ear infection from earplugs. You're
| lucky the person who built your apartment didn't cut
| corners and sealed the windows and joists correctly. You're
| lucky you're not a light sleeper. You're lucky you don't
| have sleep disorders. You're lucky your circadian rhythm
| matches what society expects.
|
| I don't know you, where you live, what you do for work. I
| don't know which ones of these apply to you. Maybe none d,
| but then something else does. Yes, you're lucky.
|
| I had to move 3 times in 2 years because I wasn't so lucky,
| and I'm still not lucky so I'm throwing enormous amounts of
| money at the problem (money most people wouldn't have,
| because they're not as lucky as I am). And no amount of
| money will fix my biology.
| Hydraulix989 wrote:
| You do realize that biological circadian rhythms are
| distributed across the population as a bell curve and so as
| a natural early riser, you were born compatible with
| society's schedule -- 50% of the population has a naturally
| delayed cycle that is incompatible, and I, for one,
| consider my genes to be a product of "dumb luck."
| dheera wrote:
| Well sure, that's equivalent to just changing the timezone.
| There are places in the world that don't use DST where the
| timezone is such that it's not dark when you go home.
|
| But yes, we agree, it's good for it to not be dark when you go
| home. Not only for psychological benefit, but I would bet it
| would prevent a lot of accidents and crime on the way home as
| well.
|
| Personally I solve this mess by just using UTC for everything.
| All of my schedules, computers, clocks are set to UTC.
| coding123 wrote:
| Usually when this kind of article comes up there are 3 things
| that pop up and are just unresolved by the next day and after
| enough time that no action will be had.
|
| 1. Make it so that we're all on ST.
|
| 2. Make it so that we're on permanent DST.
|
| 3. Make it so that we're all on GMT.
|
| So can we cut the crap with these yearly things and just live
| with the fact that because we invented the internet nothing in
| this area is going to change?
| elihu wrote:
| I wonder what the logistical challenges would be to adding an
| hour of actual daylight to a medium-sized U.S. city around dusk
| by means of orbital mirrors?
|
| Sunlight irradiance is about 1000 watts per square meter if the
| sun is straight up. We'll say that a city center is about 10
| square km, and that 300 watts per square meter is an acceptable
| afternoon-evening light level. So, if I did the math right,
| that's 3 billion watts if we wanted to illuminate electrically
| with 100% efficient bulbs, or 3 million kwhs to provide one
| evening of light, which would be $300,000 per night at 10 cents
| per kwh.
|
| On the other hand, a giant sheet of mylar in space, correctly
| positioned, might have a similar effect with no recurring energy
| cost. I imagine the orbital mechanics and optics situation would
| be challenging, but could at least be fun and interesting to talk
| about.
| matsemann wrote:
| Sounds like the Norwegian town Rjukan that doesn't get any
| sunlight during winter, so they put a huge mirror on a mountain
| top.
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/06/rjukan-sun-nor...
| elihu wrote:
| I like that kind of problem solving.
| _Microft wrote:
| What environmental impacts would you expect?
| elihu wrote:
| Confused animals.
|
| Also, the mirror would cause shading on whatever part of the
| Earth they passed over, which all things considered is
| probably a good thing. (If the mirror is big enough and close
| enough, some people might get to see a full eclipse.)
|
| There'd be local heating in the target city though, which
| could be good or bad. If the mirror is only used in the
| winter, it could be a net positive and reduce icy road
| conditions and heating bills somewhat.
| xellisx wrote:
| Down with timeshifting. Add more timezones, and possibly move
| some boundaries around.
| ponker wrote:
| A lot of the people here clamoring for permanent Daylight Time
| get to set their own hours and often wake up at 10am. But is a
| less powerful socioeconomic class that has to wake up at 3am to
| take two hours of public transit to open a coffeeshop at 6 before
| we get there. They don't have much political power but they need
| to be considered in this decision.
| wittyusername wrote:
| Another reason to love Puerto Rico and move here - our time zone,
| Atlantic Standard Time, has no daylight savings. All my fist
| shaking at the clouds in EST/EDT, welp, I solved it!
| idoh wrote:
| Either eliminate it (preference) or make it permanent. Either
| choice is better than this fall back / spring forward nonsense.
|
| A - with kids it was super annoying having to deal with this
|
| B - noon is defined as when the sun is at the highest point in
| the sky (with allowance for timezones), simple
|
| C - just let people figure out sleep patterns that work the best
| for them, do we really need a national law around this?
| shados wrote:
| > just let people figure out sleep patterns that work the best
| for them, do we really need a national law around this?
|
| We do. It's already essentially dictated (at the city level)
|
| Every city I've lived in have quiet hours of 11pm to 7am. If
| your neighbors are assholes, unless they're REALLY pushing it,
| there's fuck all you can do until 11 (and even by 11, good luck
| having anyone to anything about it). If there's construction in
| your area, it will start at 7 on the dot (and often earlier,
| because again, good luck getting someone to enforce this
| strictly).
|
| If you need 8 hours of sleep (and that's in the middle. Teens
| can need even more), you have to be in bed precisely at 11
| (when the loud music stops) and be ready to go at precisely 7am
| (when the jack hammers start). Hope your cycle matches that,
| you fall asleep instantly, and you're not on the upper bound of
| sleep requirements. Else move in the wood or get fucked.
|
| If that's not an issue for you, you're quite lucky and
| privileged to either have great neighbors, or have been blessed
| by mother nature. Alternatively you're in sleep withdrawal and
| running at a fraction of your full potential and think its
| normal.
| wil421 wrote:
| Not sure where you live but a quick call to the police or
| code enforcement would solve the problem. Most construction
| is permitted.
| ArmandGrillet wrote:
| In France after lockdown, bars and people can be noisy up
| until 4am with no code enforcement whatsoever. In Paris
| intra muros: https://youtu.be/GaYPLv6diXA
| CydeWeys wrote:
| The police don't do shit here. And the construction is
| permitted and starts at 7am as the other poster says.
| shados wrote:
| Only in extreme circumstances. If they start 30 minutes
| early, enforcement will just tell you it's no big deal. But
| you lost a significant part of your sleep time. And there's
| the whole deal about police brutality in the US making that
| a potentially problematic solution.
|
| With that said, often it's not even an option. See: NYC
| where overnight construction variances are approved left
| and right. In our case, a construction project that is
| breaking all the rules and even got brought up in court is
| still going. The city won't (and even the court) won't do
| anything because "need more housing, at all costs!"
|
| All in all it doesn't matter though: even if everything is
| done by the book, it gives you a strict 8 hours window to
| sleep. Not one minute after, not one minute before. That's
| my point. The rules already give you zero options unless
| you're straight up lucky.
| tkzed49 wrote:
| with respect to C, probably, because many people don't choose
| the clock time at which they have to be at work, at school,
| etc.
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| Winter time, 8-4 work week. Do what we can so that sleep
| schedule is closer to centered around the darkest point.
| umvi wrote:
| But surely they have the agency to choose the clock time at
| which they go to bed, no?
| shados wrote:
| Neighbors and city noise ordinance dictates when you can go
| to bed. Neighbors, city noise ordinance, work and school
| hours dictate when you have to wake up.
| nitrogen wrote:
| One of the reasons I had to leave SF was because the
| sleepable window was just too squeezed. Between people
| making noise in the evening, cars and motorcycles racing
| at night, and sunlight, cars, and construction in the
| morning, there just wasn't enough time to wind down (this
| can take a long time depending on chronotype) _and_ get
| enough sleep.
| fnenrjfkdke wrote:
| Not really.
| jader201 wrote:
| The obvious solution is to just surround the earth in a giant
| spherical LED source that is on for the entire globe for 16
| hours, then off for 8.
|
| Repeat for all 365 days.
| Buttons840 wrote:
| Ok. But let's use really cheap bluish LEDs to save some money.
| topher515 wrote:
| Instead of evenly distributing the lights on the inner surface
| we could distribute them at random. That way at "night" we
| could turn the LEDs to very low and still have "stars". Then
| during the day we would turn them up and it would be pretty
| cool to have thousands and thousands of micro suns.
| dathinab wrote:
| (German, sorry) Since communication yt channel which sums up the
| facts quite good:
|
| - Sleep: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LprmzAzarRU - DST:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwmQ6RhWk7g
|
| But here is a view things (Sleep):
|
| - we don't have a fixed inner clock, but a cyclic one which can
| be adjusted "early birds" have a cycle <24h and "late owls" a
| cycle >24h (this means that _only_ the abrupt change is
| fundamentally bad)
|
| - society is biased to benefit "early birds"
|
| - but in current society more then half of all people are "late
| owls"
|
| - using a alarm to forcefully wake you up has negative effects
| even if you got enough sleep
|
| - the amount of sleep you need is independent of weather you are
| an early bird or late owl
|
| - forcing owls to stand up early causes sleep deprivation
|
| - you can manipulate your inner clock through light exposure,
| food and sport.
|
| - the best light to affect you is the natural sun, going out
| (Added by me from context:in the morning) can be especially
| useful
|
| - How your long your inner cycle is depends on your age, this
| effect seems to be biologically based and appear in all people
| around the world
|
| - Sleep scientist try to convince (middle) schools to start at
| 9am instead of 8am because of the previous point.
|
| And for DST:
|
| - 80% of people in a EU questionnaires "voted" in favor of the
| removal of DST
|
| - more people wanted to keep summer time then winter time
|
| - But this should be decided based on since as this has major
| biological effects on the body
|
| - In Germany "common time" is winter time, summer time was set as
| sun rises earlier in summer. (Me: No idea if that's the case in
| the US to or if it's the other way around, people in Germany also
| use the terms summer and winter time so "common time" isn't
| really a thing anymore)
|
| - Recap of previous points ("early birds"/"late owls"), (btw. the
| terms where freely translated by me, in Germany they use Lark and
| Owl as terms, Lark is known as the "early bird")
|
| - Explanation of Yet Lack and why it can a bit of time to fix it.
| (The inner clock is a "strong oscillator")
|
| - More details of how the clock self calibrates itself.
|
| - The differences in the inner clock are often just a view
| minutes but due to how it synchronizes with the day the actual
| differences are larger
|
| - Just the sunlight rising difference in the same time zone can
| lead to noticeable differences in when people "naturally" stand
| up.
|
| - There is a social yet lag (your inner clock being out of sync
| with society)
|
| - Having sleep deprivation (e.g. because of social yet lack) is
| correlating with all kind of problems from reduced mental
| capacity/abilities over mode swings to overweight.
|
| - Permanent summer time would make it worse for people already
| being affected by social yet lack (i.e. late owls).
|
| - _Because of this the scientific consensus is that (most?)
| scientist in that field warn that permanent summer time would be
| a very bad idea for health reason._
|
| - Me: Interestingly I did observe that late owls tend to more
| likely to have strong opinions about permanent summer time even
| through this would be biologically bad for them.
|
| - Most people are neither "early birds" nor "late owls" but
| somewhere in between, there are more people edging in the
| direction of late owls.
|
| - Hardly anyone (<2%) has a negative social yet lack (most likely
| through indirect effects). While much more have a positive social
| yet lack, i.e. stand up earlier then they should. Which is way to
| reason why permanent summer time would be generally bad for
| society due to negative biological effects on many people.
|
| - _How_ bad permanent summer time is for people in general isn 't
| clear, but we know it is bad.
|
| - The negative effects are tricky to measure as they appear long
| time.
|
| - We should get away from ideas like "the early bird catches the
| worm" or starting schools at 8am.
|
| - Due to the _potential_ serve (accumulated) consequences of
| choosing the wrong time (i.e. permanent summer time) the decision
| should be based on scientific analysis not of opinions about how
| people feel about it.
| marcrosoft wrote:
| Let's switch to the metric system too!
|
| In today's political climate I could totally see this becoming
| political. " it's unamerican" to want to the metric system!"
| wjsetzer wrote:
| I have to constantly look up US imperial amounts. I like that
| the imperial system is sometimes based on twelves, the problem
| is where it isn't (volume is based on doubling, inches are
| successive halving). It's really easy to divide things into
| halves, quarters, and thirds in imperial, where in the metric
| system you have to round.
|
| Honestly, a system completely standardized around twelves or
| sixties would be near optimal.
| zeveb wrote:
| I forget where I first saw the idea, but I have adopted it as
| my own: the really sane thing for the French revolutionaries
| to have done would have been to switch to a duodecimal
| ('dozenal') counting system, not to base things on ten (which
| is a really terrible number).
| ReptileMan wrote:
| Depends on the latitude. DST makes amazing sense in the latitudes
| between Sicily and Moscow.
|
| And I never had problem with switching. Takes a night sleep or
| two at most.
|
| I think the issue just moves into culture war territory.
| wott wrote:
| > And I never had problem with switching. Takes a night sleep
| or two at most.
|
| Don't bother to try arguing that here or on Reddit.
|
| Apparently 99% of people in those conversations go to sleep,
| fall asleep and wake up at the exact same time every single day
| of the year. No week-end, no trip, no dinner, no special thing
| to care about, no sport, no entertainment, nothing. Nothing
| ever changes their habit. And in that parallel world, they must
| also all leave under the equator, since the sun does also rise
| at the exact same time all year long, rising time doesn't shift
| much more than a one-hour change (heck, actually even under the
| equator, you get a similar span of variation).
|
| Also, energy savings are usually dismissed as being tiny.
| Except that we spend years investing billions and billions in
| order to save energy / reduce CO2 emissions and barely reach
| this "tiny" level of savings which is obtained by simply
| shifting the needle of a clock twice a year, in a simplistic
| process which has been working for decades.
| Guthur wrote:
| I don't care which we pick but I personally find a centrally
| managed shift in everyone's daily rhythm twice a year highly
| draconian, i have the somewhat luxury that I don't really need to
| shift my sleeping pattern immediately but it's highly disruptive
| to have to shift my daily routines.
|
| So yes please let's all stop this archaic ritual.
| sunkenvicar wrote:
| A no-brainer. Permanent DST is pushed by people without a clue.
| mark_l_watson wrote:
| Right on. We live in Arizona where daylight savings time is not
| implemented. Much nicer and there is not time transition twice a
| year.
|
| Off topic, but monitoring your sleep can serve as a training
| resource for improving sleep. My wife and I allow our
| AppleWatches to share sleep data with our iPhones (data never
| leaves the watch/phone, never goes to the cloud). My sleep is so
| much better now because I have learned habits that improve my
| sleep metrics. Recommended.
| mrg2k8 wrote:
| Just wanted to say that here in the EU we have voted to abolish
| time changing, with the countries deciding if they want to stick
| with the summer time or winter time.
| https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/summertime_en
| corty wrote:
| I'm not holding my breath for the implementation of this
| decision. After the public poll, politicians quickly claimed to
| want to implement this right away. Just to descend into the
| usual inability to decide upon anything (who wants which time
| zone, how do we align neighbouring timezones, do we want a
| timezone-difference between France and Germany (that
| geographically should be there, etc) that is characteristic for
| the EU.
|
| My prediction is that the abolition will be delayed for another
| 7 or 8 years, after which they will just decide to drop the
| matter since "it's already a decade old".
| TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
| EU laws have fixed implementation deadlines and financial
| penalties for failing to implement them. If it completes the
| legislative process, it will happen. But indeed said process
| could be slow.
| ginko wrote:
| There is no winter time, only standard time.
| tobyhinloopen wrote:
| Still waiting for it to happen.
|
| Also most votes were from a small set of countries. I was never
| given notice of a vote.
| wott wrote:
| > here in the EU we have voted
|
| No we didn't.
|
| It was a crappy Internet poll (brigaded like all Internet
| polls), with extremely closed and loaded questions on top of
| that.
|
| Cherry on the cake, the EU server crashed when I tried to
| validate my answers and comment, so they never got my
| opinion... Not like they cared anyway, since they had put the
| answer they wanted to get, in the question.
| dgellow wrote:
| > On 26 March 2019, the European Parliament adopted its
| position on the Commission proposal, supporting a stop to the
| seasonal clock changes by 2021. The Council has not yet
| finalised its position.
|
| It's not done yet. The process was handled a bit amateurishly
| unfortunately, which resulted in delays and push back.
| Vinnl wrote:
| I don't think we did. The European Commission held a non-
| representative (e.g. Germans were overrepresented) poll that
| said people prefer abolishing it.
|
| Which is fine: not every decision needs to be voted on. But we
| shouldn't fool ourselves that it was a democratic process
| either.
| fiatjaf wrote:
| There was never any proof or big evidence that DST has any
| advantage in any aspect. It was implemented using pure ignorance.
|
| In Brazil it was suspended last year and I hope this year too. No
| one was upset by the change, much to the contrary, and as far as
| I know no one said anything about noticeable changes in energy
| consumption or anything.
| basicplus2 wrote:
| How about split the difference and keep that permanently..
| jb775 wrote:
| > _63 percent support the elimination of seasonal time changes in
| favor of a national, fixed, year-round time, and only 11 percent
| oppose it_
|
| This is some early-bird conspiracy BS. Those stats obviously
| don't mean people want to eliminate daylight savings time, it
| means they want to eliminate the change itself. I think a much
| higher % would prefer making daylight savings time permanent
| (staying light out later).
|
| Also, their justification for earlier darkness is sleep related
| health issues. But what about the health issues related to hearth
| disease: the #1 cause of death in the USA?[1]....think about the
| amount of exercise done between the hours of 5pm-9pm (after work
| jogs/walks/gym, youth sports, etc). There's no doubt in my mind
| there would be less overall exercise if it were constantly dark
| out earlier.
|
| [1] - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/leading-causes-of-
| death.htm
| xyhopguy wrote:
| waking up two hours befor sunrise is miserable no matter how
| dark it stays. In anycase, for anyone in the northern US the
| sun would still set before or at 5:30.
| dade_ wrote:
| No, it is glorious watching the sun rise each morning. I miss
| it.
| coucou wrote:
| For non-dst reader https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84aWtseb2-4
| coronadisaster wrote:
| the person who invented this must not like gradual changes like
| the sun provides naturally
| tzs wrote:
| I've wondered if at some point it would be feasible to add a
| second, sunrise based time system (SBT) for use within time
| zones in addition to the standard zone based time (ZBT).
|
| You'd use ZBT for things that need to by synced or coordinated
| across time zones, and SBT for things like school hours, work
| hours for businesses that only have to deal with things within
| the time zone, store hours, local concerts and shows and games,
| and similar.
|
| The key feature of SBT is that sunrise would occur at a fixed
| time, say 06:00, every day. Yes, this means that on an SBT
| clock, noon would not necessarily correspond to the point of
| highest sun, and even more radically the interval from 06:00
| one day to 06:00 would not necessarily be exactly 24 hours.
|
| This is essentially a continuous form of DST. In many places
| this would actually give you more sunlight after work than the
| current DST system does, and has no disruptive transitions.
| Another advantage is that it would let more people go on
| schedules that let them wake up naturally from sunrise instead
| of having to use an alarm.
|
| It would be computationally more complex than what clocks
| currently do, but we are at the point where it is cheap and
| easy to include sufficient computing power in clocks to handle
| it.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| https://qntm.org/continuous
| tzs wrote:
| Note that what that page is talking about is quite
| different from what I was wondering about.
|
| It's talking about replacing time zone based clock time
| with local noon based clock time. Each current time zone
| would go from having one time within it to having 3600
| times within it (assuming clocks only keep time to 1 second
| resolution).
|
| That has many drawbacks which your link ably covers.
|
| What I'm talking about is adding a second kind of clock
| time within each time zone. Each time zone would have two
| times within it, the current time, which I'll call zone
| based time (ZBT), and a time that keeps sunrise fixed,
| which I'll call sunrise based time (SBT).
|
| It's not meant as a _replacement_ for time zones like the
| thing in the link. It 's meant to address the same issue as
| daylight savings time--better utilization of daylight
| during the summer.
|
| Many proponents of eliminating the twice yearly DST time
| change acknowledge that we probably still should have some
| kind of seasonal schedule adjustment at latitudes where
| there is a big different between the amount of daylight in
| summer and winter, and usually suggest we do it by changing
| the hours of things like work and school.
|
| E.g., instead of working 8 to 5 year around, we'd work 8 to
| 5 part of the year and 7 to 4 part of the year.
|
| You can divide everything into two categories: (1) things
| whose times change between winter and summer, and (2)
| things whose times do not change.
|
| The idea then is to put these categories on separate
| clocks. Things in category #2 are on a clock that does not
| have any notion of standard or daylight time. It just ticks
| on, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Things in category #1
| are on a clock that does get adjusted.
|
| So instead of having to note the date, recall if that is in
| the range of dates during which we shift work an hour, so
| you know if you need to be in by 7 or by 8 that day, you'd
| just have to remember that your work schedule is on the SBT
| clock, not the ZBT clock, so you go to work the same time
| every time, year around, on your SBT clock.
|
| But why stop there? If the SBT clock just changes by an
| hour twice a year it has all the disruption that the
| daylight savings time has. If we are going to have a
| separate clock for those things we want to vary seasonally,
| and that clock is going to automatically adjust, why not go
| all the way and make it adjust daily?
|
| For each region, we can figure out the best way to make use
| of the available daylight for each day throughout the year,
| and have SBT time make it so 8 to 5 on the SBT clock each
| day fits in with that.
|
| Do this right and there are no more big schedule jumps, and
| most people will be able to have a sleep schedule that
| allows them to wake up naturally due to the brightening
| morning instead of having to regularly use an alarm clock.
|
| This might seem like it would be pretty inconvenient
| because you'd be constantly dealing with some things on SBT
| and some on ZBT...but would you? Most things you do locally
| that aren't directly tied to work or school are still going
| to be influenced by them, because we need to fit other
| things around them.
|
| So I think we'd end up using SBT for most of the stuff we
| deal with in our region. We'd most use ZBT for things
| outside the region. For instance, TV networks would be on
| ZBT. But most people do things like watch TV in the
| evening. I think what would happen is that you'd use SBT
| during the work/school day, and when doing other things in
| your city, then after dinner you'd stop looking at your SBT
| clock and start paying attention to your ZBT clock.
| sjburt wrote:
| Have they examined the effects of the sun rising at 4:30am in the
| summer (if we adopted permanent standard time) or 9am in the
| winter (permanent daylight time)?
|
| What our current system does is keep sunrise time more consistent
| at the expense of more variation in setting time. I think this is
| reasonable compromise: work and school schedules are fixed, most
| people like to awake near when the sun comes up, and most people
| have a fixed morning regime.
| noahtallen wrote:
| I feel that the current system makes it more difficult to have
| a fixed morning routine since it totally throws off my sleep
| rhythms. Plus, DST introduces a pretty abrupt change in when
| the sun rises and sets. If there were no DST, then it would be
| a very gradual shift in those times, which I think would be
| easier to handle.
| kylecordes wrote:
| Like many others, I agree with summer time year-round; but oppose
| staying on wintertime year-round. This is a trade-off between
| time at work/school versus free time, socialization time, outdoor
| leisure activities, etc., and how the two categories split the
| limited resource of daylight.
| bonzini wrote:
| Where I live, winter time year round means the sun has risen at
| 4.30 in the summer (and not being able to have dinner without
| artificial illumination). Summer time year round means total
| darkness until 8.30 in the winter. Either way it sucks. There
| are places where DST is indeed the best of both worlds.
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| What if we did winter time but switched to 8-4 workday? :O :O
| :O
|
| Once we stop switching, the numbers are arbitrary.
| geofft wrote:
| What if we did winter time but switched to a 1-5 workday? The
| 9-5 schedule came from an era when roughly half as many
| people (per capita) were in the workforce. :)
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| Hahaha, easy there, can't propose too many good idea at
| once or the argumentative experiment looses it's controls.
| :)
| fnenrjfkdke wrote:
| Who's "we"?
| coronadisaster wrote:
| Every one who agrees
| 01100011 wrote:
| So I keep seeing more and more support for getting rid of DST and
| a consensus seems to be building. Who are the holdouts? What's
| their reasoning?
| awl130 wrote:
| The whole genesis of DST was to save energy costs (particularly
| during 70s oil crisis). I don't see that mentioned anywhere
| dade_ wrote:
| It is a fallacy. The only real reason I ever found were people
| in positions of influence and power wanted another hour in the
| evening for a round of golf. Though we can make DST permanent,
| keep the hour and eliminate the horrible time changes.
| personlurking wrote:
| Lots of geographical locations in my time zone (AST), including
| Puerto Rico and USVI, don't observe DST [1]. It's nice to not
| have to care about it for a change, as opposed to when I was
| living stateside.
|
| 1 -
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Time_Zone#Areas_cover...
| coronadisaster wrote:
| There are different issues in PR... Like how long it takes to
| get power back after a hurricane
| usr1106 wrote:
| Here openening hours have been "liberalized" a lot during the
| last 5-10 years. Bars are open until 4 - 5 am, supermarkets even
| 24/7. And an increasing amount of people are using those,
| otherwise businesses wouldn't offer them. Many travel over
| timezones more than once year just for fun. All that disrupts
| sleep patterns. The one hour twice a year seems minor in
| comparison.
| Jolter wrote:
| I think if you look up the actual facts, less than 10% of the
| world's population travels internationally in any given year.
| Check your privilege please.
| pc2g4d wrote:
| Most people seem to have missed that this association of experts
| in _sleep_ are saying it is better for us to have solar noon and
| official noon more closely aligned. It's not a popular position,
| but overall I think it would be better for us to move to standard
| time permanently and shift our society to accommodate the _sun_
| rather than pretending it isn't there.
| TACIXAT wrote:
| At my previous job we were discussing this, I think because it
| was up for a vote in California. My friend's argument was that
| children would be walking to school in the dark and more would
| end up getting hit by cars. It was really funny to me that we
| won't consider that our school schedules are stupid, or that
| our driving requirements or vehicles are somehow inadequate,
| but no, in fact it is time that is wrong.
| cwhiz wrote:
| What's the difference between changing the time and changing
| our schedules?
| protonfish wrote:
| 2 things I can think of right off the bat are that changing
| schedules can be done per-person, per-industry, etc. and
| doesn't have to be forced upon everyone whether it's good
| for them or not. Another reason is the technical
| difficulties of readjusting all time keep devices,
| scheduled software, etc. is a nightmare that should be
| avoided if you can. It's hard not to see that adjusting
| individual schedules is the easier and more effective
| implementation.
| cwhiz wrote:
| This reminds me of the idea that we could cut traffic if
| we staggered office hours. In theory it would work but in
| reality businesses don't operate that way.
|
| I feel fairly confident that the end result of this would
| just be that everyone changes their schedules together.
| Too many industries are linked.
| bosie wrote:
| why are the school schedules stupid? aren't they inheriated
| by the work schedules of the parents?
| mcny wrote:
| > why are the school schedules stupid? aren't they
| inheriated by the work schedules of the parents?
|
| the whole idea that schools are places to dump your kids so
| you can go to work is stupid.
|
| we can't have it both ways. i've been saying this for a
| long time but unless people revolt and refuse to have
| children until we "pay" people to raise their children,
| things won't get better. lets see where they find more
| consumers to buy/pay for crap when everyone just refuses to
| bear children.
|
| i don't necessarily mean pay as in with money but with
| worker's rights which I guess does translate to money...
| formerly_proven wrote:
| Even in locales where workers have strong parental leave
| rights, school is just a place to dump the children.
|
| The distinction between countries where school is a place
| to dump children versus countries where school is seen as
| an institution to further the countrie's standing has
| been made very obvious in the COVID crisis. The former
| countries just closed their schools and made a figleaf
| attempt at covering that (e.g. weekly work assignments).
| The latter countries dumped resources into offsetting
| closed schools, e.g. turning public TV into school TV,
| significant eLearning investments etc.
|
| From this we can learn that school is a place to dump
| children even - especially - in rich, western countries
| with strong worker rights; meanwhile countries like
| Mexico fall into the latter category.
| bosie wrote:
| i don't think this follows. school is a kindergarten, as
| children require supervision. if the quality of the
| school is good too, great. if not, not great. mixing
| those two characteristics up doesn't help anybody
| freewilly1040 wrote:
| Isn't that already happening?
| bosie wrote:
| your entire argument seems to be based on parents wanting
| to stay home and raise their children. Some might, a lot
| of people don't want to do this. If both parents want to
| work and have a career and/or a job that isn't a fulltime
| nanny, I don't see how the pay component you are arguing
| about is at all relevant?
| dennis_jeeves wrote:
| >we won't consider that our school schedules are stupid,
|
| Or the fact that most schools itself are stupid.
| Pxtl wrote:
| Saskatchewan cities are very far north, so sunrise is very
| late. Sask does not do time changes, they're on permanent
| DST.
| tvelichkov wrote:
| For me the big issue with DST is the stress to the organism it's
| causing at every transition from winter to summer time. So I was
| wondering instead of picking between Winter and Summer time,
| can't we make the transition less stresfull? I.e. instead of
| shifting the time by 1 hour twice a year, shift it by 15 minutes
| 8 times in a year? Maybe this way the organism won't feel it so
| much?
| grugagag wrote:
| Everybody would be confused and late. It's much simpler to
| stick to one - DST - and not change it at all
| sumanthvepa wrote:
| What I love about living in the tropics, is that the time of
| sunrise varies very little. In my location in South India,
| sunrise is between 5:45 AM and 6:30 AM and sunset similarly
| between 5:45 PM and 6:30 PM. Twilight is short. So essentially, I
| don't need an alarm to wake up. Sunlight streams through my
| windows in the moringing, and when it's dark I know that its time
| to stop working. I love that. I used to live Seattle earlier, and
| never got used to the wide variations in when sunrise and sunset
| actually happened.
| dexterdog wrote:
| Can we just all go UTC and be done with this nonsense? Let
| organizations change their hours throughout the year. People
| would get used to the cycle fast enough, you know, after they're
| done killing people like me who think this is a good idea.
| tantalor wrote:
| _So You Want To Abolish Time Zones (2015)_
|
| https://qntm.org/abolish
| bnj wrote:
| Came here specifically to see if this had been added yet,
| glad to see it!
| recursive wrote:
| Reading about people trying to accomplish things in this
| article is like watching the black-and-white portion of an
| info-mercial where seemingly basic tasks are suddenly feats
| of intense expertise.
| flukus wrote:
| Then there would be a thousand timezones and no one would agree
| what normal business hours are.
| nitrogen wrote:
| What are the advantages of normal business hours, in an era
| when most office work can be done asynchronously, and most
| retail stores have extended or 24 hour schedules? "Normal
| business hours" meant that when I was living in SF, nearly
| everything in my neighborhood closed by 3PM.
| asdff wrote:
| business hours would just follow whatever the national stock
| exchange settles upon, like they do now. people in finance in
| SF keep eastern time.
| Jolter wrote:
| It would most certainly not. What does a fruit stall in
| Minnesota care about the NYSE's opening hours?
| tzs wrote:
| If you think that this would simplify things by getting rid of
| time zones, you are mistaken.
|
| The underlying reason we have time zones is that we are (1) in
| a solar system with only one sun, (2) on a spherical planet,
| (3) that is not tidal locked to the sun, (4) want to roughly
| sync our activities to the local day/night cycle, and (5) want
| to be able to figure out where people east or west or our
| location are in their local day/night cycle.
|
| If I'm in Seattle and you are in London, and I'm trying to
| figure out when to call you to catch you when you are likely to
| be awake and not at work, I need to know that your local
| day/night cycle is about 8 hours ahead of mine.
|
| With the current time zone system, I know that 19:00 in each
| time zone is probably a good time for someone in that time zone
| to receive a call, subtract 8 hours because of the time zone
| difference, and so 19:00 on your clock should be 11:00 on my
| clock, so that is when I call.
|
| With universal UTC, it is very similar. I'd know that 3:00 UTC
| is about an hour after dinner for me. But you are 8 hours
| ahead, so an hour after dinner for you would be 8 hours
| earlier, so I'd subtract 8 hours from 3:00, getting 19:00 UTC
| as when I should call you.
| asdff wrote:
| The solution would be to return missed calls when you are
| available. Or if you need to call someone regularly across
| the world, you would ask, "What hours are you available for
| contact?"
|
| Anticipating that someone is available at a certain time is a
| bit silly imo; you have no idea what life brings them that
| day to assume that they are free to take your call right then
| and now, so you might as well just try calling when you can,
| and crossing your fingers that they are free to pick up.
| Maybe I miss your call right after work because I'm taking a
| nap, for example. No timezone information could have helped
| you connect that call.
| function_seven wrote:
| Yup, the actual time zones still exist. Just because we all
| switch to UTC doesn't make the differences in time disappear.
| It's now just hidden.
|
| Meanwhile, days just got really confusing! All sorts of
| phrases would suddenly become ambiguous. "Dinner at my house
| on Wednesday?", "Want to see a movie on Saturday?".
|
| Both of those phrases would become confusing when dinnertime
| on a Wednesday could be 01:00 UTC or 23:00 UTC. Same with the
| movie: did you mean as Saturday is just ending, or just
| starting?
| 867-5309 wrote:
| I wonder if they name-drop themselves in every headline..
| ekianjo wrote:
| Next: make the actual time where you are located closer to the
| actual solar time instead of being several hours off (plus or
| minus) versus the actual solar time.
| the_other wrote:
| We could go further. We could use a nonn-based clock.
|
| Wake at -5, or -6; Lunch around 0; bed around +10. (Or whenever
| suits.
|
| I'm not too serious about this. I've not thought it through.
| vmurthy wrote:
| I don't see a mention of the spike in accidents directly
| attributable to DST anywhere in this post on HN. I recently read
| "Why we sleep"[0] and there's a fascinating section on the spike
| in accidents following the shift in timings. I can't quite find
| the exact article but this[1] study showed a 6.3% increase in
| number of _fatal_ accidents in the 6-day period after DST kicks
| in compared to (presumably) other days. And this was consistent
| over a 10-year period!
|
| So... given the pros and cons(especially around health and
| safety) .. what would be your answer? :) [0]
| https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34466963-why-we-sleep
|
| [1] https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/does-daylight-saving-
| tim...
| vosper wrote:
| I'm not saying that specific section of the book is wrong, but
| you should be aware that both the book and author have come in
| for some pretty serious criticism, including misrepresenting
| research
|
| https://guzey.com/books/why-we-sleep
| dudeinjapan wrote:
| Imagine there's no time zones. It's easy if you try. No AM or PM.
| And no Daylight Saving Time.
|
| Imagine all the people... using UTC.
|
| You--ooh--ooh-ooh-ooh
|
| You may say I'm dreamer. Because I set my alarm wrong. I hope
| someday you will join us. And the world will live as one.
| idbehold wrote:
| https://qntm.org/abolish
| dudeinjapan wrote:
| Just wait until we become a multi-planet species...!
| ifdefdebug wrote:
| Would be OK for me, I live in UTC anyway... Utc+1 actually now
| in the Summer
| 6510 wrote:
| It often happens during my night shifts. You cant imagine how
| many plannings can go wrong. Finishing work in 1 hour less is
| just about as funny as spending an extra hour at work without
| actual work to do.
|
| I wonder how much fun people who have to communicate plannings
| across borders get to have:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time_by_countr...
| 4WIW wrote:
| Would love for this pointless hack to be abolished. One less
| reason for confused aliens to declare our civilization an
| evolutionary dead end and vote for our recycling.
| lovetocode wrote:
| I have been rallying around this for a long time. I think we
| should eliminate time zones while we are at it.
| __MatrixMan__ wrote:
| Can we nix time zones while we're at it?
|
| If I want to eat breakfast when the sun comes up, what does it
| have to do with the numbers on the clock?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-08-29 23:00 UTC)