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