Slashdot Mirror


A Plan To Fix Daylight Savings Time By Creating Two National Time Zones

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Allison Schrager writes in the Atlantic that losing another hour of evening daylight isn't just annoying. It's an economically harmful policy with minimal energy savings. "The actual energy savings are minimal, if they exist at all. Frequent and uncoordinated time changes cause confusion, undermining economic efficiency. There's evidence that regularly changing sleep cycles, associated with daylight saving, lowers productivity and increases heart attacks." So here's Schrager's proposal. This year, Americans on Eastern Standard Time should set their clocks back one hour (like normal), Americans on Central and Rocky Mountain time do nothing, and Americans on Pacific time should set their clocks forward one hour. This will result in just two time zones for the continental United States and the east and west coasts will only be one hour apart. "America already functions on fewer than four time zones," says Schrager. "I spent the last three years commuting between New York and Austin, living on both Eastern and Central time. I found that in Austin, everyone did things at the same times they do them in New York, despite the difference in time zone. People got to work at 8 am instead of 9 am, restaurants were packed at 6 pm instead of 7 pm, and even the TV schedule was an hour earlier. " Research based on time use surveys found American's schedules are already determined more by television than daylight suggesting, in effect, that Americans already live on two time zones. Schrager says that this strategy has already been proven to work in other parts of the world. China has been on one time zone since 1949, despite naturally spanning five time zones and in 1983, Alaska, which naturally spans four time zones, moved most of the state to a single time zone. "It sounds radical, but it really isn't. The purpose of uniform time measures is coordination. How we measure time has always evolved with the needs of commerce.," concludes Schrager. "Time is already arbitrary, why not make it work in our favor?""

545 comments

  1. Daylight Saving Time by Speare · · Score: 4, Informative

    The title contains a pet peeve of mine: it's Daylight Saving Time, not 'savings.' It's not a bank where you deposit an hour and get it back in a 'savings account.'

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:Daylight Saving Time by zoomshorts · · Score: 0

      Just leave the time alone. Arizona ignores it and they work fine.

    2. Re:Daylight Saving Time by SJHillman · · Score: 5, Funny

      But we do deposit an hour in the spring and withdraw it in the fall. The 0% interest rate just really sucks.

    3. Re:Daylight Saving Time by LordNimon · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, we borrow an hour in the fall and pay it back in the spring, at 0% interest. So it's really free time!

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    4. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it is just called Summer Time. Daylight Saving Time is American dialect.

    5. Re:Daylight Saving Time by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I call it "Savings". Ain't changing language grand?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    6. Re:Daylight Saving Time by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1
      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    7. Re:Daylight Saving Time by smittyoneeach · · Score: 5, Funny

      Would "Affordable Timecare Act" excite you more?

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    8. Re:Daylight Saving Time by memnock · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I hate that bloody time change. If we just get rid of it, we don't have to worry about what it's called at all.

    9. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Entropius · · Score: 4, Funny

      When I lived in Arizona (beautiful place!), I explained this to folks as "We have enough daylight here already, why would we want to save any?"

    10. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I call it "Savings". Ain't changing language grand?

      Yes, failing to get a simple thing right and regarding yourself as the better man for it is just wonderful.

    11. Re:Daylight Saving Time by radiumsoup · · Score: 1

      Actually, it was originally "seasonal time", but the British now call it "Summer Time" and the Americans (along with Australians, most Russians, Canadians, Israelis, etc.) call it something equivalent to "Daylight Saving Time". The French call it "Advanced Time".

      http://rsnz.natlib.govt.nz/volume/rsnz_31/rsnz_31_00_008570.html
      http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/

      Team Amerophobia loses the point.

    12. Re:Daylight Saving Time by radiumsoup · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As a native Arizonan now living in Texas for the past 8 years, I still am not accustomed to the time changes, and am quite annoyed at the completely unnecessary practice.

    13. Re:Daylight Saving Time by UltraZelda64 · · Score: 1

      But when you add a saving today, a saving tomorrow and a saving the next day, you do in fact get "savings" in daylight time. Or at least, that's what they want you to believe--I think they need to ditch the garbage completely. It causes more harm than good and is not worth fixing. We need reliable time, and you can't have that when you're forced to waste time fucking with your damn clocks every year. Just fucking give us standard time year round already, enough of this DST bullshit.

    14. Re:Daylight Saving Time by temcat · · Score: 1

      ...most Russians...

      As a Russian, nope. Most Russians call the thing "Summer Time" and "Winter Time" (depending on the season).

    15. Re:Daylight Saving Time by kjell79 · · Score: 1

      I liked the old plan better. In my state, I need to move the clock back 1:23:42.

    16. Re: Daylight Saving Time by bondsbw · · Score: 5, Funny

      It would certainly help those who have preexisting daylight saving time. But I would rather have a single-time system.

      Obamatime doesn't let you use choose time from across state boundaries, most people lose more time than they gain, and nobody can find out the time because of the http://timecare.gov/ fiasco. Besides, the President doesnt even participate in it; he gets to keep his own time zone.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    17. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This begs the question of whether you'd stand up for eliminating the use of the mistranslation of the latin phrase petitio principii (seeking the principles) for the logical fallacy which has nothing to do with begging or questions, and returning it to the plain English meaning of begging and questions.

    18. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just don't call it Obamatime, or they'll shut down the government again.

    19. Re:Daylight Saving Time by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      Actually, it is just called Summer Time. Daylight Saving Time is American dialect.

      That depends. In the British Isles, it is known as "Summer Time" but in Australia as "daylight saving" (or a variety of more colourful epithets).

      For the record: in the Australian context, the business community has made several attempts to force daylight saving[s] time on Western Australia over the years when I was resident there, but it was (and is) hugely unpopular, largely because for political reasons the "normal" datum is already ahead of the natural time for the longitude. Stepping out into 40-degree Celsius heat and blazing sunshine at 7.00pm gets old very quickly. However, now that I live in Tasmania, at a much lower latitude, changing the clocks makes slightly more sense, except that the dawn and dusk twilight periods make fiddling with the clocks more or less redundant.

    20. Re:Daylight Saving Time by sribe · · Score: 1

      It's not a bank where you deposit an hour and get it back in a 'savings account.'

      But you do. You put an hour in, in the spring, and take it back out, in the fall ;-)

    21. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      I still am not accustomed to the time changes, and am quite annoyed at the completely unnecessary practice.

      That's your opinion. I on the other hand, much enjoy an extra hour of daylight during the summer. The nuisance of changing clocks is nothing compared to the benefit of longer barbecues and football games. The energy savings are debatable, the welfare effects are substantial.

      "It's a deception !" I hear you say, why don't we stick to Summer Time so that we have an "extra hour" in the evening year-round? Because unlike summer when sun rises before most people wake up, during the winter a dark morning would affect allot of people.

      Think of Summer Time as a way to reallocate an hour of "unused" light from the early morning to the evening. We can't do it all year long (because in winter there's no unused light), but that does not mean we shouldn't do it when we can and make the best of an imperfect situation.

    22. Re: Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, in a bank?

    23. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see that you are a glass-half-full kind of guy, but since winter time is the normal time (i.e. the sun is over the center meridian of the timezone at noon), the deviation is when we move the clock forward in the spring, and we return to normal time in the fall. It's a deposit, not a loan.

    24. Re:Daylight Saving Time by cruff · · Score: 4, Funny

      Mod the parent up! Just stop switching the time around at all, if people want more daylight time during the summer, just get up earlier!

    25. Re:Daylight Saving Time by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Would "Affordable Timecare Act" excite you more?

      We don't need no socialist Obamatime around here!

    26. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can see MC Hammer suing the GOP for their slogan that comes with a song and dance "Stop. Obamatime. Oh oh oh oh...."

    27. Re: Daylight Saving Time by Deadstick · · Score: 2

      All the above names are wrong. The logical name is Daylight Shifting Time.

    28. Re:Daylight Saving Time by RicktheBrick · · Score: 2

      Schools have a lot to do with it. Here in Michigan if they did not go on daylight saving time school aged children would just sleep through an hour of daylight. It is easier than trying to make everyone start up an hour earlier. In the fall we have the opposite problem since if we did not fall back children would have to go to school in the dark. This would lead to more accidents and some deaths. I try to take a walk after my evening meal but tomorrow it will be dark around 17:30 so I will have to adjust the time when I eat that meal. The worst is around December 21st when there is only around 9 hours of daylight so it is either children getting hurt in the morning going to school or in the afternoon going home or playing outside.

    29. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I just want the sun to be at it's zenith at noon, is that so hard?

    30. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They would "have to go to school in the dark"? Why is that? Shift the time school starts instead of changing the clock.

      I don't have children, why am I forced to reset all my clocks twice a year to cater to your need to have a consistent clock time when school starts?

    31. Re:Daylight Saving Time by hey! · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the word "data" is plural and "impact" is not a synonym for "affect".

      When you insist that the vast majority of a language's speakers are speaking wrongly, you're just spitting into the wind. I've even given up on "begging the question". I used it "correctly" myself, but it's far past the point where only morons use it to mean "brings up the question".

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    32. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      How do you think Australia managed to get their seasons opposite to us? For 6 months each year they banked one hour a day, 24 years later they cashed in.

    33. Re:Daylight Saving Time by pjbgravely · · Score: 1

      I call it Daylight wasting time. I believe it should be reversed. Having a little daylight when home in the winter would be great rather than getting to and coming home in the dark.

      I think of it only for the rich. If someone has energy after work to use the extra daylight they are probably rich. I for one need to rest after work and have to block out the annoying sun.

      --
      Star Trek, there maybe hope.
    34. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still better than the No Hour Left Behind act {NHLB)

    35. Re:Daylight Saving Time by mrbester · · Score: 3, Informative

      The simplest thing is to leave it alone. All this hand wringing "oh they'll go to school / come home in the dark" bullshit doesn't go away unless you have really dumb ideas like double "savings" time. Every bloody year there are the same bullshit reasons for having gone forward in the first place and how we should stay there.

      Lest it be forgotten the whole thing started as a crap solution to "farmers have to work in the dark" in fields where lighting wasn't available. This no longer applies. It was dumb then and to conflate with "think of the children" makes it worse.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    36. Re:Daylight Saving Time by mrbester · · Score: 3, Informative

      It already is dark on winter mornings *after* the clocks go back to normal so your argument is based in fallacy. You get about 17 days grace (assuming a high 40s to low 50s latitude) after the change before it is just as dark as it was before.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    37. Re:Daylight Saving Time by MightyYar · · Score: 2

      Yes, I should join your struggle against changing societal norms! Can I fight against gay marriage, too?

      "daylight savings time" 23,700,000 results
      "daylight saving time" 74,400,000 results

      It looks like we only have to educate 1/3 of all English speakers!

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    38. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, is that a luggage combination joke with a typo in it?

    39. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 2

      This. Exactly this. I live in south west texas, and kids have been going to school in the dark for over a month now. And after the change, the will be going to school in the dark again before thanksgiving. (I know this, because I see them standing on the street corners with their backpacks on the days I go in to work at 7 instead of 6. In the dark. The whole 'its for the kids!' thing is a complete joke. The whole reason it was created was to help a more agrarian society, (and i'm personally doubtful how helpful it was back then. Having grown up on a ranch, we spent plenty of time outside, working, in the dark before sunrise, year round, DST be damned) We keep struggling to invent new reasons to keep using it as a modern society, and they are all dumb.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    40. Re: Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Could use some math lessons too.

    41. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's a natural language designed to communicate with humans who should have some degree of flexibility, not a programming language designed to communicate with a soul-less computer.

      The better man would ignore the tiny little error and go with the flow.

    42. Re:Daylight Saving Time by msauve · · Score: 2

      "I on the other hand, much enjoy an extra hour of daylight during the summer."

      Are you really so daft to believe that DST increase the length of the daylight hours? There's no extra daylight. Just get up earlier (at "the break of dawn," as they say) if you want more daylight while you're awake.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    43. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah, people with your logic keep the DST madness...
      Stores have winter/summer schedules already. We simply stop DST and have all businesses have winder/summer schedules. You wake up an hour earlier during the summer to enjoy your sun more.
      Think about a world where there is no DST. So, one guy says:
      - hm.. in the summer we lose an extra hour of sun because we don't get up early enough, perhaps we should do something about that, I' m thinking perhaps....
      - I KNOW! someone interrupts, LET'S MAKE EVERYONE MOVE THEIR CLOCKS BY 1 HOUR! (mad scientist laugh)
      - ... actually, I was thinking more like changing the work schedule go in and get out one hour earlier...
      - LAAME!
      Meanwhile in another universe
      - hmm.. you know, it would be interesting if we could work 6 days/week during the winter so we can enjoy our summers more by working 4 days/week then...
      - THAT'S A GREAT IDEA! LET'S CONVINCE EVERYONE TO REMOVE SATURDAYS FROM WINTER MONTHS AND ADD THEM AFTER SUNDAYS (not before, because 2 Saturdays in a row would be stupid) ON SUMMER MONTHS!
      - ... eh, I was thinking more like establishing working-saturdays on winter and non-working fridays during summer. No need to change our calendar system.
      - LAAME!

    44. Re:Daylight Saving Time by jalet · · Score: 1

      The french call it "heure d'été", which exactly means "summer time".

      --
      Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
    45. Re:Daylight Saving Time by mrbester · · Score: 1

      What were the skies like? Did they have little fluffy clouds?

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    46. Re:Daylight Saving Time by sjames · · Score: 1

      And because unemployment is in the negative double digits, all employers will happily shift work time so the parents can get their kids off to school on the shifted schedule.

    47. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other countries (and I do not have a citation sadly) I believe sweden and others looked into this and found there was about a 65% energy increase in the US, and for themselves as well. Now, having read this one asks the question, is this set up for the power companies to make more money. I know in the state of Pennsylvania they passed rate caps on the companies but the republicans want to remove them. And all this after people or consumers complained for years over finally capping rates so they could afford to keep there power on.

    48. Re:Daylight Saving Time by mspohr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How does it help farmers?
      I mean, do the vegetables have a clock?
      Wouldn't the farmers just get up and get to work whenever it was light?... or would they stupidly get to the fields in the dark just because the clock told them it was time.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    49. Re:Daylight Saving Time by rjstanford · · Score: 2

      And at least here in Austin kids have been going to school in the dark for a while now, so its not as if the current "solution" is solving anything much.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    50. Re:Daylight Saving Time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Enlighten us about the meaning of "begging the question"!
      Since the 35 years which I'm capable to read and understand english, it always meant "brings up the question".
      What else should it mean anyway?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    51. Re:Daylight Saving Time by LMariachi · · Score: 2

      The farmer thing was always bullshit (so to speak.) First off, farmers get up well before dawn anyway, and second, their schedule is not dictated by a clock. Animals that need attending to don't know or care what time NIST says it is, all they know is the sun's coming up and they're awake and hungry and their udders are full or whatever.

    52. Re:Daylight Saving Time by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Yes, individual businesses must have the ability to set their own timezone, and be able to force their employee's to use that timezone, otherwise they might not...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    53. Re:Daylight Saving Time by ApplePy · · Score: 1

      It is mind-boggling to me that people can't figure this out! But sadly, yes, they are that daft.

      Could we start school or work earlier in the summer, later in the winter? No! Everyone must change their clocks so we can pretend everything stays the same time!

      I don't even care what time zone we settle on, or whether it's standard or DST... just pick one and stick to it. Put the whole planet on UTC for all I care.

      --
      That I'm right, and you don't like it, doesn't mean I'm a troll.
    54. Re:Daylight Saving Time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      We don't want more daylight while being awake. We want more daylight in the EVENING.
      I spent last years often in Paris. Which is geographically nearly one hour to the west where I live.
      But they are in the same timezone. It is amazing how nice it is to have still daylight (dawn after sunset) at 23:00 "in the night". This comes from shifting the time, not from staying up one hour more early.
      If I stay up more early MY feeling for the time might change, but not for the rest of the people. A late night dinner at 23:00 withe a red horizon is something different than a 22:00 ordinary dinner with a red horizon.
      If you don't believe that I suggest you follow your own suggestion, and keep the clock as it it and just get up an hour more early.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    55. Re:Daylight Saving Time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      It was never ment to help an agrarian society. Especially as such a thing no longer exists in the western world since at least 70 years, long efore the concept of DST got introduced. Farmers always where adapting to daylight and farming as they pleased.
      The idea of DST is and always was that we sace electric power in the evenings of the summer. As we switch the lights on later and shopping malls e.g. illuminate their windows later.
      However that failed as most shops have the lights automated and don't change the times when the clock is changing. On top of that, if one shop keeps switching on the lights early all others feel oblieged to do the same. Otherwise they look cheap. And even more important: many shops keep their windows illuminated the whole day anyway and NEVER switch off the lights.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    56. Re:Daylight Saving Time by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Think of the difference between latitude 25 and 40, that "extra hour" concept works a lot better in the northern U.S. than it does in Florida, Texas and Southern California.

    57. Re:Daylight Saving Time by dhaen · · Score: 1

      This whole clock switching thing is utter bollocks: First it was: "Our farmers need more daylight" - well just let them change THEIR hours! Next it was: "Our kids mustn't go to school in the dark" (but it's ok for them to come home in darkness) - - well just let them change THEIR hours! Next it was: "We'll save energy" - which is doubtful and unproven, but if you want to try - just change YOUR hours! There are only a given number of daylight hours in a day - you just can't have more! Since we all have biological clocks, it's difficult argue with the article that shifting hours screws with people's well being and efficiency.

    58. Re:Daylight Saving Time by msauve · · Score: 1

      "A late night dinner at 23:00 withe a red horizon is something different than a 22:00 ordinary dinner with a red horizon."

      You're either trolling, or a fool.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    59. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Kingofearth · · Score: 4, Informative

      Goodbye timezones then. It'll be noon where you are, and 12:05 in the next city over. That'll be fun.

    60. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      being a native midwesterner and having lived with this my entire life, i can also say i am quite annoyed at the completely unnecessary practice

    61. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am from the northern US and i absolutely despise DST. honestly i don't care if we are on DST or regular time, just pick one and stick with it.

    62. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its easier to shift the clock than to shift the schools schedule which has a ripple effect, because then parents go to work an hour later, and if the business doesn't shift there hours with the school problems ensue, etc etc etc. Shifting the clock for everyone is a cleaner solution.

    63. Re: Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I prefer to call it "Off-By-One Time".

    64. Re:Daylight Saving Time by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      A statement which is "begging the question" improperly assumes a premise that entails the conclusion.

      For example, "opium induces sleep because it is soporific" or "same-sex marriage is wrong because marriage is between a man and a woman."

      Although the colloquial use is fairly entrenched, the original / correct sense is still commonly used in professional circles, and is highly useful.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    65. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shift it 30 minutes and leave it there. A lasting compromise.

    66. Re:Daylight Saving Time by hey! · · Score: 1

      "Begging the question" refers to a logical fallacy in which you pose a question that can't be answered without assuming something that really ought to be proved first. The common example is "Have you stopped beating your wife?" It seems to call for a yes or no answer, but such an answer is only possible until we all agree that you've been beating your wife.

      "Begging the question" is sometimes a result of sloppy thinking, but it can sometimes be an "intentional fallacy" -- a dirty trick, as when a prosecutor asks you, "How long have you been stealing from your employer?"

      The term "begging the question" has never been clear in English; it's a literal translation of the Latin term "petitio principii"; it might better be called "assuming the conclusion". "Begging the question" in the logical-fallacy sense was always jargon, and thus not a first class member of the English lexicon in my opinion.

      Anyhow, your reaction proves my point. The majority of even reasonably educated people now think "begging the question" mens "raising the question"; and so we have to accept that's one of it's meanings. It's more practical to reform the dictionary than it is to reform the language. If it helps, this is a case of what linguists call metonymy. The fallacy of petitio principii does indeed involve raising a question -- the question of the implicit premise's truth. Over time that meaning has been broadened to include *all* instances of raising questions.

      Initially those who used "begging the question" to mean "raising the question" were just ignorant people trying to ape the writing of their more educated betters. But that's gone on so long there's no practical alternative but to grant that sense of phrase naturalized citizenship. But there are some who will never accept it, so it's best to accept the use of that sense by others but not to use it oneself.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    67. Re:Daylight Saving Time by mrbester · · Score: 1

      That's the thing, it didn't help farmers. It was a crap solution to a problem only perceived by ignorant townies (and people who wanted to play fucking *golf* in the late afternoon) that didn't exist that was dressed up to hoodwink.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    68. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Richy_T · · Score: 2

      The simple truth is that Ben Franklin had a hard-on for people getting up early ("Early to bed, early to rise...") and this was his way of making people get up an hour earlier in the summer without their consent. Anyone who is a night owl should curse him each spring.

    69. Re:Daylight Saving Time by kumanopuusan · · Score: 1

      There is at least an interesting question here: after conceding the faults of linguistic presciptivism, what meaningful ways remain of discussing and reasoning about common sense ideas of correct language?

      --
      Use of the words "good", "bad" or "evil" is almost invariably the result of oversimplification.
    70. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's your opinion. I on the other hand, much enjoy an extra hour of daylight during the summer.

      You do realize that the hour of daylight in question is there because of the position of the sun relative to the tilt of the Earth and *not* because we changed our clocks. The clocks do not change the amount of daylight we get, they just shift your perception of it.

    71. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it has little to do with the topic - just trying to upset some people by throwing it in.

      Fewer time zones sounds like a good idea. Europe did the same: most countries are on MET, and only Portugal, the UK and Ireland are trying to be different, mostly for historical reasons. Countries far in the East naturally have a different time zone, of course.

      One of the problems with time is that with electric light, there is no strong incentive to stick to a reasonable schedule. The UK had pubs closing at 11, which did a lot to keep people on a reasonable rhythm. Nowadays students seem to sleep longer and longer...

    72. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arizona is both 1) south of most of the US, so the difference in the length of the solstice days is smaller and 2) in the western part of their timezone, so they would naturally fall somewhere between the mountain time zone and pacific time zone.

      It works for Arizona, but other places have other concerns.

    73. Re:Daylight Saving Time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Neither, because you would not have the dinner at 22:00 with a red horizon but at 23:00 when it is utterly dark.

      There are plenty of reasons why you (personal reasons ofc) have no time at 22:00, so it is quite nice to have a red horizin dinner or cocktail or simply a beer at 23:00.

      You are free to disagree ... but the fool is you obviously as you simply can not accept that other people are DIFFERENT and feel DIFFERENT.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    74. Re:Daylight Saving Time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Erm, could you add to any of your examples the phrase "begging the question" so that we see what you actually want to point out? And could you point out an (in your eyes correct) exa,ple and a wrong one?

      Sorry but your post makes mo sense to me, what question whould your two examples beg for?

      In my eyes, with an in my eyes correct usage of the phrase, both examples of yours "beg the question" whether the author of those statements is either nuts or lacks completley the understanding of logic ;)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    75. Re:Daylight Saving Time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Ok, got it now, "begging the question" was once a _term_ for a logical fallacy (or suggestive question in court) now it is a simple phrase actuall used in talking and writing (and that sets up old school people???) Well, by using the phrase activly in my eyes the old meaning is not lost.

      On the other hand I understand that people who obseverve the change of meaning are upset.

      I also hate it that ever stupid library (code library, as in programming) is now called a framework when it clearly is none. Or the change that methodology is now meaning the same as method (at least in the eye of many writers).

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    76. Re:Daylight Saving Time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I'm a night owl, and I like "summer time" because it is one hour LONGER dark in the morning.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    77. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's your opinion. I on the other hand, much enjoy an extra hour of daylight during the summer.

      "Only a white man would believe that you could cut a foot off the top of a blanket and sew it to the bottom of a blanket and have a longer blanket."

    78. Re:Daylight Saving Time by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 2

      I mean, do the vegetables have a clock?

      No, libertarians each have their own time zone, and tea party members get the time directly from god.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    79. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To anyone with mod points, this guy was funny today.

    80. Re:Daylight Saving Time by cashman73 · · Score: 1

      I mean, do the vegetables have a clock?

      Umm, actually, yes, they do.

    81. Re:Daylight Saving Time by antdude · · Score: 1

      I prefer daylight saving time for the extra sunlight at evening and night times. I dislike having darker evenings during standard time. :( Let keep DST for ever!

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    82. Re:Daylight Saving Time by flyneye · · Score: 3, Funny

      The spirit of Nixon compels you, you cannot resist his Quaker charm, "spring forward, fall back", he chants and will continue to chant until you acquiesce.
      You are helpless, his fangs glisten in the November moonlight, your hand touches the alarm clock and it is done. The spirit of Nixon can rest for another 6 months.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    83. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why change time at all? 01:23:45 is a perfectly good time to use for what ever.

    84. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, daylight saving is 'on' during the summer so the former post is correct. We give up one hour in the spring, and gain it back in the fall. It's pretty easy to Google it.

      Daylight Saving Time (United States) 2013 began at 2:00 AM on Sunday, March 10 and ends at 2:00 AM on Sunday, November 3

    85. Re:Daylight Saving Time by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      God forbid some people actually like to do things in the afternoon which require sunlight.

      I'm fortunate my boss lets me start whenever I want, so I go to work at sunrise to maximise the amount of useful day I have left after work. Everyone else I know bitches about wanting daylight savings time.

      Yes there is ignorance, also arrogance, but not where you think.

    86. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still trying to figure out why people inhabit Michigan....

    87. Re:Daylight Saving Time by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

      Basically, saying something "begs the question" is just another way of saying it uses circular logic. For example, the statement "opium induces sleep because it's a soporific drug" is begging the question.

      I only learned about this a few years ago in my mid-30s as well, and Iran into the same problem with most people's explanations being too convoluted to make sense.

      --
      Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
    88. Re:Daylight Saving Time by lazybeam · · Score: 1

      Australians call it summer time too. Which means AEST is both "Australian Eastern Standard Time" and "Australian Eastern Summer Time" which is really confusing. (Slightly confusing also to the Americans because we are going into summer now; the southern states have just switched to summer time). I'm in Queensland and have scheduled interstate online meetings in "AEST" which means people showing up an hour early or late... Now we make sure we say "Brisbane time" or even "+1000" vs "+1100".

      --
      --
      no sig for you. come back one year.
    89. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.timeanddate.com/time/dst/

    90. Re:Daylight Saving Time by AvderTheTerrible · · Score: 1

      And I do so every spring. I am naturally noctournal, so my opinion on Daylight Saving Time is why the hell do I want to save daylight? More like Moonlight Wasting Time for me.

    91. Re:Daylight Saving Time by philip.paradis · · Score: 1

      I believe you just mixed up MC Hammer and Vanilla Ice in the same lyric joke, which transcends bad to reach the realm of the unforgivable.

      --
      Write failed: Broken pipe
    92. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or we could just change all our clocks to UTC.

    93. Re:Daylight Saving Time by mspohr · · Score: 1

      Yes, they have their own clock... but it's not the same as ours and doesn't follow daylight saving time.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    94. Re:Daylight Saving Time by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      In the opium example, "soporific" means "sleep inducing," so the premise (induces sleep) implies the conclusion (is a soporific). The marriage example is the same - if marriage is "between a man and a woman" then it is already implicit that it isn't between a man and a man, etc.

      The problem isn't that there are two uses of the idiom, it's that they are actually contradictory. For example if I say that the issue of expanding the subsidy program begs the question of the program's efficacy, do I mean that the expansion idea assumes that the subsidy was effective (old sense), or do I mean that the efficacy must now be evaluated (new sense)?

      In other words, the old sense suggests the fundamental question is being avoided or assumed, while the new sense suggests it is being called up.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    95. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck your faggot bbq and retard football. This clock changing shit has been cumshitter retarded since its fucking inception. It's cuntchunks fucking idiots like you that keep this fucking dunce ass shit going. Learn to fucking cope shit dick. Cook your fucking meat earlier. Fuck.

    96. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what if you were born in summer? You weren't around to give up the hour that you'd be "getting back". You'd have to borrow that hour when DST ends and pay it back when it starts again.

      There's a problem here. Who are you going to borrow from? Everyone else has drawn their hour out too.

      The solution, for once, is fractional reserve banking. Those who have an hour, deposit it at the end of DST. Each hour deposited can be loaned out ten fold to any project manager or university student facing a deadline. Those borrowed hours will be deposited into the lendee's account to be used as needed. Those re-deposited hours will also be lent out ten times over, and ten times again and again.

      Pretty soon there'll be enough imaginary hours that we can have something like two days each year.

      It doesn't end there. People die. Somebody will inherit the unneeded hours - unless the selfish bastards die in winter. Hopefully more old farts will die of heatstroke than hypothermia.

      If we play our cards right, there's no limit to how much time we can potentially withdraw. Imagine if we could draw out exactly one day. We wouldn't even need to change the clocks. How about a year? Just dig out last year's calendar. Ooo ooo, how about four millennia? We could go and watch the great pyramids being built!

    97. Re:Daylight Saving Time by swalve · · Score: 1

      No we don't. Winter time is standard time. We give up an hour in the spring and it gets paid back in the fall. In return, we get an "extra" hour of usable daylight time every evening for half the year.

    98. Re:Daylight Saving Time by swalve · · Score: 1

      There are none. There are no wrong answers in descriptivism, except the right answers.

    99. Re:Daylight Saving Time by swalve · · Score: 1

      Begging the question (allegedly) means taking a point of contention and assuming it is fact. Or making a conclusion before defining the problem. You are asking (or forcing or begging) the listener to agree with your premise if they want to engage you on the conclusion.

      If I understand it correctly, it is like asking someone a question like "when did you stop beating your wife?" To ask that is to beg the question of whether someone is married and whether they ever started beating their wife. The responder cannot formally answer that question, because there is no "when did you stop" if you never started.

    100. Re:Daylight Saving Time by swalve · · Score: 1

      A methodology is a collection of methods.

    101. Re:Daylight Saving Time by swalve · · Score: 1

      The further South one goes, the less meaningful DST is. In Phoenix, the day is 10 hours long in the winter and 15 hours long in the summer. The sun rises at 5:18am in the summer and 7:29 in the winter. In London, the sun comes up at 4:43am in summer and 8:06 in winter. The day is 16:30 long in the summer and an appalling 7:50 in the winter. It makes no sense at all to sleep through all that delicious sunlight on summer mornings, and then be awake for many hours of darkness, when a minor shift in the clock makes our lifestyles fit into the whims of the sunrise and sunset. It is far easier to change what the clock says than to try and tell everyone they need to get up at 5am.

    102. Re:Daylight Saving Time by swalve · · Score: 1

      Who still has clocks that don't change themselves automatically? If the time change upsets you so much, just live on UTC all the time and do the math on the fly to adjust to the rest of us provincial morons.

    103. Re:Daylight Saving Time by swalve · · Score: 1

      I have never heard the farmer reasoning used by anyone in favor of DST. The only time I hear it used is by people trying to show how foolish it is to use farmers as an excuse. Farmers are probably the least affected by the daylight hours; they can fire up the tractors whenever they want. They have to get up at sunrise regardless of what the clock says to feed the hay and milk the horses and choke the chickens.

    104. Re: Daylight Saving Time by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      No, but my grammar sucks. I meant to say there are 1/3 as many, but it doesn't really change my point.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    105. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and then fix the calendar. Compared to the wreck the calendar represents, the timezones are practically perfect.

      I found this:

      http://fyngyrz.com/?p=26

    106. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's Obamanation. . .

    107. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was always told that Indiana didn't follow daylight saving time because the farmers refused on the grounds that cows wouldn't give as much milk if you suddenly started milking them an hour earlier.

      Then Indiana caved :o(

    108. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      I'm sure most employers would be very annoyed at having to change times on all their schedules, rather than just changing the time clock.

      Personally, I think we have so much artificial light in the 21st century, we don't need to still live by rules conceived in the times of candles and moonlight.

    109. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Australians may colloquially call it 'summer time' (I have myself on occasion) but of course AEST is only Australian Eastern Standard Time (observed in QLD year-round and NSW/ACT/VIC/TAS in the winter months). The +11 time zone is AEDT ('daylight' time), even if you don't hear people actually say it out loud often. ABC gets it right - if you listen to NewsRadio or News24, they'll say "it's X O'Clock Eastern Daylight Time..."

    110. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 1
      you misunderstand my comment.

      Nobody said it's for the kids

      look elsewhere in this discussion, it has been stated dozens of times by now. it usually reads something like "Its so kids do not have to go to school in the dark".
      I was pointing out that this is a fallacy, because, from personal experience, I know that DST does not prevent them from going to school in the dark. I have no complaints about having an extra hour of daylight in the summer, what I do dislike however, is people justifying changing their clocks in the WINTER and saying it is for the kids, when in reality, they gain nothing from the change. I say we stick to summer time setting, and forget about it.
      I was most certainly not

      crying that DST makes kids wake up in the dark during WINTER

      I think kids should get up before its light out all the time. Builds Character.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    111. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 1

      I was mainly referencing Benjamin Franklin's early to rise proposal, at which point, America was pretty close to an agrarian society. Obviously, you are correct about its implementation in the US, which, while partially related to the energy crisis of the 70's, probably also stems from a patriotic hard on for the founding fathers (Franklin again). I still think the whole thing should be scrapped and use the adjusted summer time year round.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    112. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Megane · · Score: 1

      The title contains a pet peeve of mine: it's Daylight Saving Time, not 'savings.' It's not a bank where you deposit an hour and get it back in a 'savings account.'

      It's also Daylight Saving Time, not Energy Saving Time. The purpose is to normalize sunrise so that you won't get awakened by sunrise at 5AM in the summer and go to work in the dark at 7AM in the winter. IT DOES NOT SAVE ENERGY ONLY DAYLIGHT, by moving that extra-early sunrise to the end of the day. The last time someone brought that up, Dubya said "Oh yeah we gots to save us some energy!" and he happily went for changing the DST dates.

      (I've heard that some of the push was from candy companies wanting sunset later, apparently on the mistaken assumption that people everywhere in the US do their Halloween kiddie stuff before sunset. Here in fly-over country, aka Texas, I've only ever known it to start at sunset. Which means that we now actually have an hour less for the kids to go door-to-door before they have to get to bed. The only real evidence I've ever seen that other places do it before sunset is a Parks and Recreation episode from last year. Yes, seriously.)

      But the idea that U.S. television schedules already use two time zones three hours apart is, however, interesting. The time of sunrise would be different in each half, with each half starting work at the same local time as well as UTC time, but DST would still fulfill its function of normalizing sunrise time. (Fortunately we don't have to worry about Canada's Atlantic and Newfoundland time zones. And Alaska could even fit in because Eastern and Pacific are be the centers of the TV time zones.)

      (Do they really honestly work 9-to-5 on the east coast, you know, like in that song, including lunchtime? The standard work day is 8-to-5 over here because of lunch.)

      And we'll have more at ten... or is it eleven?

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    113. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Megane · · Score: 1

      You can thank whoever convinced Dubya that moving the transition date to make the "summer" portion larger would somehow save energy. Not only does it not save energy, it makes things real fun for people writing code for embedded devices that need to work on schedules and automatically adjust DST (without nice comfy NTP sync because the device isn't networked) when you fuck around with DST dates.

      I even put a hidden menu in the product I work on to allow changing the DST dates without having to scramble to deploy firmware for a non-networked (as in someone needs to physically do the firmware update) device all over the U.S. on short notice. Punching a few buttons to change a number is much easier to explain and harder to fuck up.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    114. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's your opinion. I on the other hand, much enjoy an extra hour of daylight during the summer.

      The Earth's rotation slows where you live? How do you manage that?

    115. Re:Daylight Saving Time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      More precise: a methodology is the studying of a collection of methods.
      However in our days people use both as synonyms.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    116. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Megane · · Score: 1

      This. Exactly this. I live in south west texas, and kids have been going to school in the dark for over a month now.

      You can thank Dubya (along with most of the US Congress and Senate) for that. It was working just fine since 1966, then someone had to go mess with it.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    117. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Megane · · Score: 1

      One more thing... I lived in Louisiana for one year. It's on the eastern side of CST. Holy crap did the sun ever come up early. Other than that, I've lived in the middle of CST (around US-281's longitude) since I was a kid in 1973.

      My point is that even one-hour increments for time zones can be pretty rough if you live near the extreme ends of them.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    118. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Megane · · Score: 1

      Nixon? What did he have to do with this? It remained unchanged from 1966 until 2005 when Washington DC couldn't resist fixing what wasn't broke.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    119. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Megane · · Score: 1

      It makes enough of a difference in Austin that I'm sure it is even more important in Minneapolis and Seattle. Of course anyone near or above the Arctic Circle (like Alaska) is completely hosed anyhow.

      What really sends a chill down my spine are the words "Double Daylight Saving Time". I work on an embedded device's code base that has to deal with DST without the benefit of an operating system, or even a human adjusting it every day. It's bad enough as a boolean option with date ranges that change based on what borders you are inside of. So far, nobody has done double DST since the UK did it in WWI, when we didn't have mass-produced consumer electronics and compuers that care what the time of day is.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    120. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Who still has clocks that don't change themselves automatically?

      I don't, you fucking douchebag. I don't have the option of oversleeping... ever. Oversleeping is not an option.

      I use a standard clock radio, followed by two (count 'em TWO) analog travel alarms (you know, the ones with a twisty knob to change the time, a twisty knob to change the alarm time, and a switch to turn the alarm on-off... what could be simpler?) Both powered by one AA battery.

      I never have, and never will, oversleep, because I keep it simple. My back-ups are simple analogs that don't dick around with the time, and which don't need dicking around with.

    121. Re:Daylight Saving Time by bkcallahan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, no reason we shouldn't start verbing nouns and nouning verbs.

    122. Re:Daylight Saving Time by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure he meant within a reasonable tolerance. An hour seems like a reasonable tolerance. More than that, not so sure.

      I am, however, all for getting rid of the stupid DST nonsense. I don't know why anyone would feel that getting up in the morning in the pitch dark is better than going home in the dark. My brain/body tells me to stay in bed until the sun starts to rise. Well actually that's a lie, my brain tells me to get up after the sun's been up for several hours.. :) but the point remains.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    123. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Brit, it is titled BST on paper in many places (British Summer Time) but we usually call it daylight saving time like the rest of the world. Would make sense seeing as we were responsible for the term.

    124. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is "daft" is that you can't seem to realize that isn't what people are saying.

      They aren't saying that it magically gives us an extra hour of daylight. They are saying that there is more "after work" daylight. Maybe you have the freedom to set your own hours, but I can't just tell my boss "hey boss, I'm going to come in an hour earlier for the next 6 months, and also leave an hour earlier". It just doesn't work that way. So instead, the government says "ok, for the next 6 months, everyone goes in an hour earlier and leaves an hour later. And to simplify things, we'll do it by changing the clocks by an hour."

      Is it right or is it wrong? I don't know and I don't care. Well, maybe I care a little, but my feelings on the rightness/wrongness of it is irrelevant to this post.

    125. Re:Daylight Saving Time by vandamme · · Score: 1

      Literally!

    126. Re: Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DST is really only meaningful to those in the northern climes where it gets dark much earlier, and light later in the morning. It's more an issue of safety for school kids and drivers than for energy savings.

    127. Re:Daylight Saving Time by vandamme · · Score: 1

      Move to Greenwich, UK, then. We don't want to go back on railroad time.

    128. Re:Daylight Saving Time by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      The further north you live, the more the daylight hours vary with the seasons. In December, darkness arrives just after 4pm and daylight at 7am. If we kept DST, then at 8am, kids are going to school in the dawn, and then they have at least 1.5 hours of play after school, before darkness sets in.

      I would like that as mothers do not like the kids to be outside in the dark. (11 and younger). And a majority of kids are bussed or car-pooled to school every day, so playtime before homework is important.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    129. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just be hatin on Obama because he be blat. You rayciss!!!!

    130. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      agree. most annoying, like the illiterate morons who say 'maths'.

    131. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what does Franklin have to do with the imposition of DST?

    132. Re:Daylight Saving Time by swalve · · Score: 1
    133. Re:Daylight Saving Time by brunnegd · · Score: 1

      I agree with radiumsoup. DST is stupid. Go live in AZ, not having DST never interfeared with any of our evening activities.

    134. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might get a little bit of interest due to leap seconds. It's about equivalent to the interest rate to most savings accounts in the USA these days.

    135. Re:Daylight Saving Time by glitch23 · · Score: 1

      My pet peeve is that many people don't know that timezone names change when DST kicks off and on. So EST turns into EDT and so on. So using EST throughout the entire year is wrong. Lack of education I guess?

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    136. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its just an algorithm, its what your're paid to do... on the other hand, if they want that in a 4K PIC with _any_ other functionality... good luck.

    137. Re: Daylight Saving Time by Meski · · Score: 1

      Of course the majority can't be wrong. :^)

    138. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Meski · · Score: 1

      Not sure why this got modded funny.

    139. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I walked to school in the dark most of my education career, and, well, people do say I'm a character. ;)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    140. Re:Daylight Saving Time by flyneye · · Score: 1

      Although we have had times that we utilized it since 1918. Nixon was the one who put the nail in the coffin.

                On January 4, 1974, President Nixon signed into law the Emergency Daylight Saving Time Energy Conservation Act of 1973. Then, beginning on January 6, 1974, implementing the Daylight Saving Time Energy Act, clocks were set ahead. On October 5, 1974, Congress amended the Act, and Standard Time returned on October 27, 1974. Daylight Saving Time resumed on February 23, 1975 and ended on October 26, 1975.

      Its been a pain in the ass since.....
      Blame Nixon and the Repubmocrats.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    141. Re: Daylight Saving Time by tolkienfan · · Score: 1

      Get them up earlier anyway.

    142. Re:Daylight Saving Time by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      And so we just hand our Republic to the "employers" and "corporations"...

    143. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone should just use UTC and get it over with.

    144. Re:Daylight Saving Time by xorsyst · · Score: 1

      In the UK it's "spring forward, autumn back"

      --
      Get free bitcoins: http://freebitco.in
    145. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      Farmers produce more than vegetables. Think cows, sheep, goats, chickens, turkeys, etc - you know, things with eyes that wake up and start moving around at dawn.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    146. Re:Daylight Saving Time by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      If Tom DeLay was president would we call it Hammertime?

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    147. Re:Daylight Saving Time by mspohr · · Score: 1

      But none of these things change with daylight saving time.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    148. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Schools pretty much are the limiting factor. Most people have kids to deal with at some point. (And if you don't: what are you complaining about? Arrange your schedule however you want. Sleep in. Work late. Go to the store at midnight.) School and work have to line up in such a way that it's possible for at least one parent to be home with any small children. Daycare costs as much as food for some families, and would cost more than food for others. At the same time, the school district is not buying more buses. It will stagger start times so that the same bus can be used for elementary, middle, and high schools. This is pretty much the main constraint on timing.

      Personally, I would love a unified time zone (even better: universal time). It would make cross-regional and international planning so much easier. At least then you wouldn't have to do a conversion to figure out when your meeting starts. (Yes, you would lose the ability to say "that's a 5 PM meeting here", but you would retain the ability to say "that's 3 hours before we're in the office". Also, the meeting organizer's answer to both those comments is generally, "I don't care: dial in or you're fired," so it's not like you really lost anything.) But the problem with getting support for this is the same as getting support for different school schedules: no one cares about my piddly, edge-case problems. The current system works for most people, so everyone else can deal with it.

    149. Re:Daylight Saving Time by logyro · · Score: 1

      it's not the problem of vegetables having clocks or not, but more the cows. the farmer must wake up to milk the cows because the dairy truck stops by one hour later (or earlier). for the last 6 months, the cows have been accustomed to being milked at 4 AM, but as of today, it's actually 5 AM, and damn is it painful, and apparently even a health issue for our cattle. http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Daylight-saving-not-good-for-cows-3225026.php

    150. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      First off, farmers get up well before dawn anyway, and second, their schedule is not dictated by a clock. Animals that need attending to don't know or care what time NIST says it is, all they know is the sun's coming up and they're awake and hungry and their udders are full or whatever.

      I had thought the point was that children would be able to get out of school "earlier" compared to the sun, leaving more daylight hours for them to do farm chores in the afternoon.

    151. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      Never said they did, or that they livestock care about the clock, just that farmers raise more than things that real food eat. I've never understood the 'farmer justification' either. The wikipedia article gives lots of reasons farmers should hate DST.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    152. Re:Daylight Saving Time by phoenix_rizzen · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'd prefer it if we started with "daylight saving time" as the baseline, and then went *ahead* an hour in the fall, and *back* an hour in the spring.

      That way, it would actually be light outside in the evenings in the winter, and it would actually be dark outside in the evenings in the summer.

      Who cares whether or not its light out in the morning, we're all going to be indoors with the lights on anyway (getting ready for work/school, at work/school). Let's get light when it's needed (evenings in winter) and darkness when it's needed (evenings in the summer).

      It's annoying as hell to have "midnight" be when sunset occurs in the summer. And even worse that sunset occurs before 6pm in the winter.

    153. Re:Daylight Saving Time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Funnily they use a wrong example in their explanation :D
      Fixing the crossword by the method they describe is no 'methodology' ;D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    154. Re:Daylight Saving Time by flyneye · · Score: 1

      I guess I crapped and autumned back in it.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    155. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you also have a problem with paying taxes to educate other people's children just b/c you don't have any yourself?

    156. Re:Daylight Saving Time by Megane · · Score: 1

      It's not just an algorithm, that's the easy part. It's also a user interface to control that algorithm, and the configuration storage goes from being one bit to more than one bit. And it's also users for whom the very concept of double DST will be strange to begin with, so you also have to deal with not breaking their brains. It gets worse if it's only enacted in a limited area, and the concept remains strange for most of your customers.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    157. Re: Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you mean maths lessons?

    158. Re: Daylight Saving Time by corychristison · · Score: 1

      I have lived in Saskatchewan, Canada my entire life. We do not have Daylight Saving Time.

      I don't believe any of the 'problems' you pointed out have any validity and you are simply making stuff up.

  2. Sunrise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Time may be arbitrary, but not when the sun rises and sets.

    I volunteer Allison to live in the areas of the country where the sun rises at 3:00 in the morning.

    1. Re:Sunrise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No amount of daylight saving will make the daytime there last less than 18 hours, dear.

    2. Re:Sunrise by SJHillman · · Score: 1

      As mentioned in the summary, schedules are already poorly coordinated with sunrise and sunset. Electric lights got that ball rolling and television continued it. Unless you're one of those people who still use sundials instead of mechanical or electric clocks?

    3. Re:Sunrise by trout007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who gives a crap what the clock says? We could all just use Coordinated Universal Time. On the east coast I'd wake up at 1000 UTC have lunch at 1700 eat dinner at 2200 and go to bed at 0300.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    4. Re:Sunrise by rasmusbr · · Score: 4, Funny

      I've we're going to be ridiculously nerdy and arbitrary we could all just just use seconds since the start of 1970.

      "When will you arrive?
      "I'll be there at 1383.408 megaseconds. I'll call you in case I'm more than a kilosecond late."

    5. Re:Sunrise by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2

      I've[sic] we're going to be ridiculously nerdy and arbitrary we could all just just use seconds since the start of 1970.

      Which might be fine for you, but those of us who would thus have been born long before the beginning of time might be justified in being a little miffed.

    6. Re:Sunrise by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      Depending on relative velocity, you may still have to adjust for EST (Einstein Saving Time).

    7. Re:Sunrise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Logan's Run had a point.

    8. Re:Sunrise by anagama · · Score: 2

      Why? It puts a maximum on how old we can get. I wouldn't mind being younger.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    9. Re:Sunrise by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      Decimal values of seconds and absolute time both sound intriguing, but they're useless without some kind of daily periodicity. Going to work at 1000 UTC is one thing, but at least you'll be going to work at the same time tomorrow. Trying to work out the time of day by counting off increments of 86.4ks is going to get old fast if you're not a computer.

    10. Re:Sunrise by SerpentMage · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That is bs! The reason why California wakes up with New York is because those who have to do. Those that don't, don't wake up. For example, what are the store hours or a best buy in California and in New York? http://stores.bestbuy.com/428/ and http://stores.bestbuy.com/187/. See that? Same hours! So in other words the best buy in California does not give a rats arse on when stores open in New York. They open according to the local timezone. Switch that into two timezones and things become confusing because those on either end of the zone will not appreciate the lack of sun.

      The idea of two time zones is absolutely insane. I lived in Vienna while my wife lived in Zurich and there was an hour difference in sunrise and sunset. It was not nice to have to live and work in Vienna as it meant very early to rise and early to bed. I like the notion of time zones, and like the notion of switching because it really does make a difference. If it were up to me I would add a few more time zones because some cities at either side of a zone have really odd sunrise and sunset.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    11. Re:Sunrise by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Who gives a crap what the clock says?

      If you don't give a crap what the clock says, why do you care about time zones and daylight savings time?

    12. Re:Sunrise by ebno-10db · · Score: 2

      schedules are already poorly coordinated with sunrise and sunset

      Not that poorly. Sunrise is rarely at midnight, and noon corresponds roughly w/ the middle of the daylight period. Roughly is much better than not at all. As for electric lights and TV, there are still plenty of things that are affected by daylight. I've often been tempted to mow my lawn at night, but I find it easier if I can see what I'm doing. This is all the more important for people who work outdoors, and for outdoor recreation. Even as an acyclic night owl I realize that our lives are still affected by that big bright thing in the sky.

    13. Re:Sunrise by pla · · Score: 2

      If you don't give a crap what the clock says, why do you care about time zones and daylight savings time?

      Primarily because my employer doesn't like me to start showing up an hour late all summer long.

      I really don't care what the clock says - I care that we need to disrupt our sleep schedules twice a year. And why? We don't just lack a good reason for this nonsense; every year, a new crop of studies show that DST has the exact opposite of the intended effect.

      Make it 2am at solar noon, for all it matters to me. Just leave it there year round. :)

    14. Re:Sunrise by hawguy · · Score: 1

      That is bs! The reason why California wakes up with New York is because those who have to do. Those that don't, don't wake up. For example, what are the store hours or a best buy in California and in New York? http://stores.bestbuy.com/428/ and http://stores.bestbuy.com/187/. See that? Same hours! So in other words the best buy in California does not give a rats arse on when stores open in New York. They open according to the local timezone. Switch that into two timezones and things become confusing because those on either end of the zone will not appreciate the lack of sun.

      But, as the summary said:


      "I spent the last three years commuting between New York and Austin, living on both Eastern and Central time. I found that in Austin, everyone did things at the same times they do them in New York, despite the difference in time zone. People got to work at 8 am instead of 9 am, restaurants were packed at 6 pm instead of 7 pm, and even the TV schedule was an hour earlier. "

      And indeed, this best buy in Austin opens an hour earlier than your Albany, NY store.

      You may refute that people in the Central time zone do things an hour earlier (and comparing 2 stores is hardly proof), but arguing that California and NY use different times is not the way to do that since under a 2 time zone system, NY and California would continue to be on different time zones.

      The idea of two time zones is absolutely insane. I lived in Vienna while my wife lived in Zurich and there was an hour difference in sunrise and sunset. It was not nice to have to live and work in Vienna as it meant very early to rise and early to bed. I like the notion of time zones, and like the notion of switching because it really does make a difference. If it were up to me I would add a few more time zones because some cities at either side of a zone have really odd sunrise and sunset.

      Some would say that the idea of DST is absolutely insane, yet we still have it. Personally, I'd just keep the timezones and shift the clocks by 30 minutes once and end DST.

    15. Re:Sunrise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you just use negative time and call it Before.Epoch. the same way the we already do with years (Before.Christ.)

    16. Re:Sunrise by jareth-0205 · · Score: 2

      I've[sic] we're going to be ridiculously nerdy and arbitrary we could all just just use seconds since the start of 1970.

      Which might be fine for you, but those of us who would thus have been born long before the beginning of time might be justified in being a little miffed.

      I believe numbers go negative, so you'd be ok...

    17. Re:Sunrise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The stores have the same hours of operation BECAUSE of time zones. Get rid of time zones and they wouldn't.

    18. Re:Sunrise by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I think the idea of only two time zones in a 3000 mile wide area is insane. Time zones are useful, DST is not. You don't want the kids going to school in the dark? Start classes later, duh. Seven to three is a retarded shift for school children, anyway. Kids (especially teens) are not good at being early birds; that's been studied. Make DST the standard time and keep it all year around; I don't want the sun waking me up at 5:00 AM in the summer and I hate that it's dark when I leave work in late December.

      But remember the real reason for DST, folks: it's so those who don't fly can still experience the joys of jet lag.

    19. Re:Sunrise by swillden · · Score: 1

      I've[sic] we're going to be ridiculously nerdy and arbitrary we could all just just use seconds since the start of 1970.

      Which might be fine for you, but those of us who would thus have been born long before the beginning of time might be justified in being a little miffed.

      I don't see a problem with negative dates. And my birthdate would be negative.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    20. Re:Sunrise by PTBarnum · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Of course if we start schools later, parents will want their work schedules later too. And if we do that, stores will need to adjust their hours to accomodate both employees and customers, and evening entertainment will probably want to start later. Coordinating all of that sounds tricky, so what if we just get together and chose an arbitrary date on which we will all start things an hour later?

    21. Re:Sunrise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That date was picked because it is when Unix time starts. If you run Linux or OSX (not sure about Windows) it is the time your OS uses internally.

    22. Re:Sunrise by trout007 · · Score: 1

      I guess I should have been clearer. I would like a clock that serves the purpose of coordinating events. Changing it all the time defeats that purpose.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    23. Re:Sunrise by trout007 · · Score: 1

      Luckily I'm on a flexible schedule and adjust it based on sunrise. I drive east in the morning and west in the afternoon so I like to drive in before sunrise and leave while the sun is still relativly high in the sky.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    24. Re:Sunrise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I propose we store such values as an unsigned short integer. 64k seconds should be enough for anybody.

    25. Re:Sunrise by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      Well then why not subdivide all time zones in 1/4 so people at the end of a current timezone can get an extra 45 minutes? Why is 1 hr granularity "correct" but two hour granularity "incorrect" despite all the simplification in offers? The hour listed on the clock is arbitrary. Don't want to get up in dark? Fine, schedule your work day however you want. I've worked real jobs where I went into the office at 1:00 pm or 10:00 pm.

    26. Re:Sunrise by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 1

      That's not efficient with respect to the marginal utility of an extra hour of light. Imagine that following set of preferences from winter to summer solstices. At the marked point, we would "naturally" (if we left things as they were year round) get another hour of daylight in the morning -- since light gets longer symmetrically from noon.

      8H: 8AM-4PM
      9H: 8AM-5PM
      10H: 7AM-5PM
      11H: 7AM-6PM
      12H: 7AM-7PM =====
      13H: 7AM-8PM
      14H: 7AM-9PM

      The underlying issue of our asymmetric preferences cannot be wished away without adjusting where the solar zenith falls with respect to noon.

    27. Re:Sunrise by mhotchin · · Score: 1

      An excellent idea. Further, to avoid the cost of re-printing every schedule in the country, why don't we just change the easily changable clocks instead? We could call the period when this was in effect 'Clock Change Time' or somesuch.

    28. Re:Sunrise by Richy_T · · Score: 2

      People would be able to point at people and say "He's as old as time" and not be far wrong.

    29. Re:Sunrise by pla · · Score: 1

      That's not efficient with respect to the marginal utility of an extra hour of light.

      I don't really see how marginal utility has anything to do with this - Businesses simply wouldn't remain 9-to-5 if we decoupled 12pm from solar noon. They can open and close whenever they want.


      At the marked point, we would "naturally" (if we left things as they were year round) get another hour of daylight in the morning

      In the example you give, why not simply redefine 7am as local-dawn? Though personally, I feel that sunlight during the workday does me absolutely no good, and would much rather, if we really need a set point, that we redefine 9pm as "local sunset"? That would maximize the amount of useful sunset available to the most people, and as a safety perk, would mean that the evening commute wouldn't have the sun in anyone's eyes.

      But more to the point, we just need to move past our societal obsession with time as a function of the sun's apparent position in the sky. Whether my local area considers the "workday" as from 9-to-5, or from 3-to-11, makes very little difference overall.

    30. Re:Sunrise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they just wrap around to 2038.

    31. Re:Sunrise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a good point. Verner Vinge's "A Deepness in the Sky" used megaseconds and kiloseconds. It seems like a great way to ditch base-60, especially great for doing time calculations, but that was a culture that was no longer solar.

      Daily periodicity certain seems necessary, but that is completely different issue to base-60 which I still hate. UTC is logical in creating a global time standard, but there is NO reason to use base 60 other than pure tradition.

      I would prefer we just use seconds for time keeping, but reset the clock at UTC 0. Then people can schedule things at the same time every day, time calculations are vastly simplified, we keep the Gregorian calendar...We keep months (makes sense), and keep weeks (no harm). 4k seconds is rougly an hour and there are 22 of them in a day. Everyone in the world uses the same time.

    32. Re:Sunrise by Dialecticus · · Score: 1

      I've we're going to be ridiculously nerdy and arbitrary we could all just just use seconds since the start of 1970.

      Ah, but the start of 1970 in which timezone?

    33. Re:Sunrise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep it down before someone brings up internet beats.

    34. Re:Sunrise by crossmr · · Score: 1

      because instead of keeping track of time zones you'd have to keep track of whenever everyone got up. It's the same problem.
      Instead we'd have multiple "clocks" showing us what the business time was in each "zone" so that we could schedule stuff accordingly.

    35. Re:Sunrise by Megane · · Score: 1

      Except they wouldn't be later. You would just change the UTC offset for the same hours of the day in some parts of the country. All you would be doing is renaming 8AM as 9AM... which we already do every spring anyhow for DST changes, so it's not exactly rocket science. There's no reason why one place has to start the work day at 8AM just because some other place 1500 miles away starts at 8AM.

      Fuck it. Let's just go full-on UTC everywhere, then everyone will know what time it is. We can even finish converting to metric while we're at it.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    36. Re:Sunrise by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      We have the same issue with our current system. Though, it only affects those of us who are over 2013 years old.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    37. Re:Sunrise by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      They shouldn't have to, since school lets out at 3:00 and starts at 8. OTOH I had to adjust my work schedule when my daughters were in high school because band class was at 7:00 so I had to drive them. Start school at 9:00 and keep them until 4:00.

  3. whiny fucking new yorkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Wahh..its a different time than it is in New York. Wahh wahh, resetting my clock when flying to hipster douchebag towns like Austin is too fucking hard! WAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!

  4. How about GMT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Can't we just standardize with 1 time zone and shift our schedules to conform to that?

    Or, how about all of use move to the UK, Portugal or one of the W African nations that are on 'zulu' time? That would fix things.

    I just wish my car clock were correct more than 50% of the year.

    1. Re:How about GMT? by hurwak-feg · · Score: 1

      Agreed. A universal time is the way to go. Why should everyone change there schedule by an hour twice a year based on something arbitrary? What really sucks is working night shift and having to set the clock back an hour while at work...

    2. Re:How about GMT? by i_ate_god · · Score: 1

      What's really awesome though, is being at the pub and having to set the clock back an hour while drinkiing!

      --
      I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
    3. Re:How about GMT? by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      The UK isn't on Zulu time - they have daylight savings time (don't know about Portugal and W. Africa).

    4. Re:How about GMT? by mspohr · · Score: 2

      India has one time zone (since 1905). No daylight savings time. 2000 km East to West.
      Works fine for them.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    5. Re:How about GMT? by stderr_dk · · Score: 1

      The UK isn't on Zulu time - they have daylight savings time (don't know about Portugal and W. Africa).

      DST in the EU starts on the last Sunday of March and ends on the last Sunday of October, so for Portugal it's:

      $ TZ=Europe/Lisbon date -d "Oct 27 00:59:59 UTC 2013"
      Sun Oct 27 01:59:59 WEST 2013
      $ TZ=Europe/Lisbon date -d "Oct 27 01:00:00 UTC 2013"
      Sun Oct 27 01:00:00 WET 2013

      I don't know the DST rules for the various countries in West Africa, but (shameless plug) tzdata-javascript.org has a demo where you can compare the time in two different timezones.

      --
      alias sudo="echo make it yourself #" ; # https://pipedot.org/~stderr & http://soylentnews.org/~stderr
    6. Re:How about GMT? by rossdee · · Score: 1

      "Or, how about all of use move to the UK, Portugal or one of the W African nations that are on 'zulu' time?"

      Why is it called Zulu time? The Zulus are in eastern South Africa, not western -

    7. Re:How about GMT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Finland the law explicitly states that pubs (actually "night clubs" with extended opening times, because "pubs" close at 02:00) must close an hour earlier when switching from summertime to normal time.

      "No fun allowed."

  5. like that works by peragrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    time zones exist because the sun sets later in the west than it does in the east. It was a fact I knew but didn't fully grasp until I moved 400 miles east along roughly the same latitude in the same eastern time zone. We were sitting outside enjoying a camp fire on the summer solstice when some one asked when the sun would set. Having spent many a summer outside at my previous place I knew it would roughly be 9pm. however I didn't take into account the difference 400 miles makes. The sun really set 30 minutes earlier.

    Now in a corporate world time zones only matter in relation to when other people will be at their desks. However in the real world, where one has kids, and after school sports, hell even trick or treating, it makes all the difference in the world. Those on the eastern edge will always be screwed by things shutting down earlier. As so much just can't be done after dark, and it gets really expensive to light up every field, park, and body of water just to be able to live life after work.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    1. Re:like that works by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Time zones are an evil scheme intended to divide humanity and ensure some groups are always behind.

    2. Re:like that works by Kjella · · Score: 1

      As so much just can't be done after dark, and it gets really expensive to light up every field, park, and body of water just to be able to live life after work.

      But that's where our current time zones are totally off the mark. I just checked and today the sun rises at 8 AM and sets at 4 PM (yes, I'm quite far north) and guess what my working hours are? Basically I go to work at dawn, sit in an office until dusk then go home and enjoy the whole evening in darkness with artificial lights. I get it, some occupations like construction depends on natural lighting but by far the majority work indoors like me where it matters very little if it's dark outside or not. If we really wanted to provide optimal daylight the sun would shine 4PM-12PM instead. I really doubt I'd spend any more electricity 8AM-4PM than I do today 4PM-12PM, the difference is that I could spend that time outdoors in the sun instead of being stuck in an office.

      The current time zones were set in a time when you tried to preserve candles, lamp oil and firewood. People worked from sunrise to sunset, often on a farm or other outdoor work and spent the nights mostly in the dark. Today it's completely backwards and we should change it so that we work in the dark and have our time off when the sun is up. Today you go home and it's pitch dark when you come home so you end up doing some sort of passive activity like watch TV, sit at the computer, read a book or whatever. If it was daylight outside you could do something, anything it'd be almost like a small weekend every day. It'd be wonderful.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:like that works by tchuladdiass · · Score: 2

      Well here's a strange thought. If you don't have enough daylight after work, how about going to work an hour early, and getting out an hour early? Nothing really gets done early or late in the work day anyway, so co-ordinating with others' time in the office shouldn't bee that big of a deal (as long as everyone is there during a core 5-hour period).

    4. Re:like that works by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      the sun sets later in the west than it does in the east ... I moved 400 miles east along roughly the same latitude in the same eastern time zone. ... I didn't take into account the difference 400 miles makes. The sun really set 30 minutes earlier.

      30 minutes later (this is Slashdot - would you expect not to be corrected?).

      I live in NY. When I travel to western Ohio (western edge of the eastern time zone) it's hard to get used to the sun setting much later.

    5. Re:like that works by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Nothing really gets done early or late in the work day anyway

      Or around lunch time, so why go in at all?

    6. Re:like that works by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Why on earth would you want the sun out until midnight?

    7. Re:like that works by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      He moved east, not west. Earlier.

    8. Re:like that works by srg33 · · Score: 1

      Are you sure? peregrin said that he/she thought 9PM. Thirty minutes earlier than 9PM would be 8:30PM. He/She moved 400 miles EAST in the same timezone - the sun would set earlier OR he/she would perceive/see the sun set earlier.

    9. Re: like that works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are wrong. He moved to the east. The sun sets earlier in the east.

    10. Re:like that works by peragrin · · Score: 1

      I moved east not west.

      however I moved from upstate ny to Boston,

      and it is unsettling to have the sun up earlier and setting earlier.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    11. Re:like that works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True fact:

      Time zones were invented by Steve Jobs as an early warning system. If the world ends, California will find out about it before it happens there due to the magic of the Internets, and have time to send our best and brightest off-planet via the Cupertino Launch Arco.

    12. Re:like that works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the sun sets later in the west than it does in the east ... I moved 400 miles east along roughly the same latitude in the same eastern time zone. ... I didn't take into account the difference 400 miles makes. The sun really set 30 minutes earlier.

      30 minutes later (this is Slashdot - would you expect not to be corrected?).

      I live in NY. When I travel to western Ohio (western edge of the eastern time zone) it's hard to get used to the sun setting much later.

      He moved 400 miles EAST, thus the sun sets earlier. Your example involves traveling WEST.

    13. Re:like that works by bondsbw · · Score: 2

      Good thing we have International Date Line Welfare. If you get too far behind, you'll be pushed ahead of everyone else!

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    14. Re:like that works by sjames · · Score: 2

      Because people have this thing called a boss, sometimes depicted with pointy hair? He's congenitally predisposed to doing the wrong thing for productivity or morale given the free choice but he can be tricked by things like resetting the office clock.

    15. Re:like that works by sjames · · Score: 1

      He traveled east, so he was right, it sets earlier.

    16. Re:like that works by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      GP here. I misread the GGP - my bad. But did it really need 6 posts correcting it?

    17. Re:like that works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, time zones exist because of whiners that can't get used to reassociating the time the sun comes up with the arbitrary number assigned to a clock position.

      If everyone used "Zulu"/GMT/UTC (or some other constant-time/variable-sunlight system), whenever you went somewhere far from your home, you'd get used to the fact that the sun rose at 16:00 and set at 06:00 (Hawaii?, assuming GMT). And then if you traveled around the world some more, you'd get used to it when the sun rose at 02:00 and set at 14:00 (Eastern Europe?). Of course, those 14-hour days only happen in the summer, but you'd still be able to get used to it in the winter when the sun rose at 12:00 and set at 20:00 (Central US) or rose at 00:00 and set at 08:00 (India). (For reference, I'm using a very simple sunrise-at-0600 baseline for all of those, which wouldn't hold perfectly true through the seasons.)

    18. Re:like that works by sjames · · Score: 1

      Sorry about that, those appeared between the time I loaded the page and when I read your post.

    19. Re:like that works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      time zones exist because the sun sets later in the west than it does in the east.

      What are you talking about? The sun always sets in the West. It has never in all of history set in the East.

    20. Re:like that works by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      I thought International Date Line was an outfit that let you chat with, and hook up with Asian chicks.

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    21. Re: like that works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is slasdot...

    22. Re:like that works by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      In winter, it gets dark about 4:30pm. But I see what you are saying, everything just shuts down at dusk, and we don't do anything after dark.

  6. Not a good idea by weave · · Score: 2

    The reason for timezones is to somewhat coordinate daylight with when we are up and about. Obviously this can be shift a bit each way and the seasons certain screw with that, but on the plan OP posted, the west coast would be light until after 1am in the Summer and remain dark until about 10am in the Winter.

    If you'd want to do two zones, they should be at least two hours apart from each other.

  7. Do Away With It! by DaMattster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I say just do away with daylight savings time altogether! All we really need is two time zones: one for east of the Mississippi and one for the west. Simplicity is underrated.

    1. Re:Do Away With It! by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Just make sure we do away with DST after the autumn change.

    2. Re:Do Away With It! by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Funny

      I once read a long pointless diatribe against standard time demanding that we make Daylight Saving's Time permanent - that's an hour of my life I'll never get back...

      (Rimshot)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    3. Re:Do Away With It! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lots of cities right on the Mississippi are going to hate that plan.

    4. Re:Do Away With It! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Since I cross the Mississippi to get to work, I'm not sure I could handle leaving for work at 6:30 in the morning and arriving 15 minutes later at 5:45.

    5. Re:Do Away With It! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt Hawaii would go along with that!

    6. Re: Do Away With It! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just think about all of the time you've lost just reading pointless drivel in comments sections over the years!

    7. Re:Do Away With It! by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      make Daylight Saving's Time permanent

      a/k/a War Time

    8. Re:Do Away With It! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I once read a long pointless diatribe against standard time demanding that we make Daylight Saving's Time permanent - that's an hour of my life I'll never get back...

      (Rimshot)

      Ahh, admit it. You would have wasted it anyway!

    9. Re:Do Away With It! by Miamicanes · · Score: 2

      > one for east of the Mississippi and one for the west. Simplicity is underrated.

      And how, precisely, does leaving most of the midwestern US's largest cities split between two timezones make things any simpler for real people? Look at the Mississippi River, and notice how many big cities straddle it.

    10. Re:Do Away With It! by rossdee · · Score: 1

      What about those of us who live either north or south of the Mississippi ?

      I am sure the people in "The Cities" would not agree to that - including the politicians in St Paul.

  8. The best way to fix Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is to abolish it. It serves no legitimate purpose anymore. Standard time for all!

    1. Re:The best way to fix Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. Summer time is a horrible failed experiment from last century. It doesn't save energy, no matter what the supporters claim. If you really want to have more time in the evening, why are you living by fixed schedules and adjusting your clock when you could simply adjust the schedule and leave the clock alone. It'd make all my date calculations far easier, too.

      Time zones are also fairly annoying, but they're a necessary evil for avoiding day changes in the middle of a light cycle and to avoid too much skew within a metro area. Still, I'd prefer if they were abolished as well.

      Technically, the best solution is if time was specific to your location. You could easily make watches, phones, and cars automatically track it using global positioning signals (they provide UTC and you can triangulate your location, so calculating the correct local time is trivial). You could at least reduce it to 1 degree increments. Few metro areas (Los Angeles being one of very few prime examples) would have more than 5 minutes of disparity from edge to edge.

    2. Re:The best way to fix Daylight Saving Time by Chelloveck · · Score: 1

      And that standard is UTC. For everybody, everywhere. Problem. Solved.

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    3. Re:The best way to fix Daylight Saving Time by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Interesting idea for an app there...

    4. Re:The best way to fix Daylight Saving Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You serve no legitimate purpose AC!

  9. How do you like midnight? by Overzeetop · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You should move to Scandinavia. Then you'll realize how silly is is for Americans to bitch about when the sun rises and sets in the extreme months.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:How do you like midnight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right. Because Alaska isn't part of the U.S. Why would we need to travel to a ridiculous part of the world just to see extreme daylight shifts.

    2. Re:How do you like midnight? by SerpentMage · · Score: 1

      How many Americans actually listen to what Alaskans do and want? Oh yeah nobody...

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    3. Re:How do you like midnight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seattle's shortest day is 8.5 hours, it's longest is 16 hours. Stockholm's shortest day is 6 hours, it's longest is 17.5 hours. Stockholm's more extreme but those of us in the northern USA have a pretty good grasp of the difference in day lengths in the extreme months.

    4. Re:How do you like midnight? by Nethead · · Score: 2

      Volvo. 'nuff said.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    5. Re:How do you like midnight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Then there is Denmark, but they are really too insignificant to even bother talking about.

      One word: LEGO

    6. Re:How do you like midnight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, in 2008, Republicans.

    7. Re:How do you like midnight? by chilvence · · Score: 1

      Touch a nerve or something?

    8. Re:How do you like midnight? by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

      they're welcome to move here if they don't like it

    9. Re:How do you like midnight? by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      Then there is Denmark, but they are really too insignificant to even bother talking about.

      Oh yeah, apart from magnetic storage (the wire recorder or "telegraphone", precursor to all magnetic storage media), the loudspeaker, the dry cell battery, the colostomy bag, LEGO, Saccharomyces Carlsbergensis (one of the most important brewer's yeasts in the world), disulfiram (antabus), the electric drum motor, the concept of an ombudsman, amusement parks (Bakken and Tivoli), Skype, Kazaa, C++, Femi-X (female viagra), the O-ring, the pH scale, the typewriter (called the "writing ball"), the endoscope and a ton of other stuff.

      Oh yeah, and Maersk, the largest shipping company in the world.

      "Insignificant"? Not really.

      --
      Eat the rich.
  10. Sure, whatever, do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go ahead, do whatever you want to the time system. Give each country its own zone, move us all to UTC, switch us over to .beats, whatever. I really don't care. Just make sure my sys-libs/timezone-data is updated and that you don't break NTP while doing it.

  11. UTC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm rarely in a meeting where more than half the people are on the same hemisphere, let alone timezone. If you're going to make time correspond to anything other than the position of the sun, then why don't we all just swich to UTC?

    1. Re:UTC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Having everyone have meetings at the same time means whoever doesn't live at HQ's city has to work a shift that will never let them sleep normal hours.

      If everyone was on UTC, that also means many businesses would have to operate 24/7.

      If you don't follow my logic...

      Banks, Post offices and Government services are all 9-5 jobs, they don't work on weekends. As soon as you start changing the times now the bank time in UTC is 1am to 9am in New York and 4am to noon in San Francisco

      Basically it shifts the problem from coordinating business hours and meetings from a locally relevant time to an irrelevant one. The only ideal condition for this is for all businesses to operate 24/7, thus not having to coordinate anything.

      What the world needs is to operate on just 4 time zones, India, America Time(Central), Europe/Africa Time(Germany), Australia/Asia Time(Japan) And operate like this:

      Most of America operates currently in Pacific time or Eastern Time, and most people would probably not care if there was just one time zone here because it would mean everyone could watch the same TV show at the same time. Most people not in Eastern Time get screwed already by live events held in Eastern Time.

      Unlike switching to UTC, just having a continent-wide time zone that only overlaps by about 4 hours allows the time to be locally relevant (some stores may choose to open at 7am some may choose 11am... there are stores in pacific time that do this anyway) without having to operate 24/7

      Only computers can use UTC because they do not need to sleep.

    2. Re:UTC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Only computers can use UTC because they do not need to sleep.

      UTC doesn't tell you when to sleep.

    3. Re:UTC by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      What the world needs is to operate on just 4 time zones

      If you have trouble counting to 24, just use a computer :)

  12. Stop changing it already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems some busybody wants to change the status quo every few years, which leads to a lot of patches. Stop it already. Take a vacation during switch or something to acclimate to the new hours.

  13. Epic Stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Daylight saving time is a pain, that I would like to see eradicated. I've lived in areas that adhere to DST and I've lived in areas that don't, though they have all been in lower latitudes. In those lower latitudes, no DST is a far superior system. I'm uncertain how it would feel in upper latitudes.

    But, two time zones is ridiculous outside of fantasy land.

  14. Screw that - let's go Roman! by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    http://romanvoices.wikispaces.com/Roman+Timekeeping

    With computerized everything, we can just alter the days in perfect sync. And once we kill television schedules and make everything on demand it won't matter "when" something comes on!

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  15. Quit your whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do something more productive, instead of jetting back and forth between time zones and causing Global Warming just take a pill or something and chill out.

  16. I don't see the problem by fermion · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I have been changing clocks all my life and it simply has not been the nerve racking. I don't know where all the drama is coming from.

    And less so now when most clocks are set automatically, and the few that aren't have 'dst' switches. Get to work an hour earlier or an hour later. It is just one of those costs of living in society. I know some people are very compulsive, and this causes stress, but I see DST no more inconvenient than speed limits. If there is a real problem it is that instead of just going with majority rule on something that is largely trivial, some communities are boneheads and want everything their way.

    That said, I think most of the reasons for DST have diminished with time. While switching is easier now, the world is different. The fact that the US is now completely linked with instant communication and many people are now no longer primarily part of one region is a factor.

    At some point a rational discussion on this will be possible, and it will likely end. Some of this going to be generational. While some of the world have been using DST from the early 20th century, in the US has only been widespread for maybe 50 years. This means that some people who are very attached to it are still alive.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    1. Re:I don't see the problem by hurwak-feg · · Score: 2

      So if it causes some people stress with little benefit (possibly even detriment) to millions of people, it is not a big deal? Sounds like a big deal to me.

    2. Re:I don't see the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And less so now when most clocks are set automatically, and the few that aren't have 'dst' switches

      Which of course was broken when Congress and the President decided to move the time changes in the fall and spring for no reason. Many of those automatic clocks now don't work correctly and can't be reprogrammed. So yes, it is a big deal. Also, you still see cases of DST causing problems in computer systems and mobile devices.

      Here's the rational discussion: there is simply no need for DST. Anyone attached to it is not being rational. Whether we have two, four, or six time zones is meaningless to me. But moving time around arbitrarily is complete nonsense.

    3. Re:I don't see the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      so, why not schedule work an hour earlier, instead of forcing everyone to change their clocks?

      Nov 4th 2013 is the day everyone shows up at 8 instead of 9.

    4. Re:I don't see the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Which of course was broken when Congress and the President decided to move the time changes in the fall and spring for no reason. Many of those automatic clocks now don't work correctly and can't be reprogrammed. So yes, it is a big deal.

      Yes, the manufacturer of your equipment designed it poorly. Are we to let the incompetence of an electronics manufacturer dictate to the rest of the world what will happen? Great, now Microsoft will fucking screw us even more.

      Also, you still see cases of DST causing problems in computer systems and mobile devices.

      My mother was in an airport. Her cellphone changed time on her. She wasn't expecting that, even though she was in a different time zone. It fooled her.

      This had nothing to do with DST, but yeah, her device was doing something she didn't expect. What to do about that?

      Here's the rational discussion: there is simply no need for DST. Anyone attached to it is not being rational. Whether we have two, four, or six time zones is meaningless to me. But moving time around arbitrarily is complete nonsense.

      That's not a rational discussion either.

    5. Re:I don't see the problem by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      I have been changing clocks all my life and it simply has not been the nerve racking. I don't know where all the drama is coming from.

      For a while it seemed like every year I had acquired yet one more clock that needed resetting. Even now, however, not all or even a majority of my clocks support DST, either via a setting or automatically, and one of the worst offenders is the dashboard clock in my car. And some of the rituals required to change digital clocks are so arcane that I have to dig out the manuals every time.

      Aside from the annoyance of spending the next week chasing forgotten clocks, however, DST is pointless. The A/C runs according to temperature, not the clock, as does the refrigerator. Only the water heater and cooking times shift, and in the case of cooking, it means that dinner moves closer to the hottest part of the day, adding additional loading to the A/C. And in this part of the world, A/C is only optional if you like heatstroke.

    6. Re:I don't see the problem by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "Some of this going to be generational... some people who are very attached to it are still alive."

      Weak argument in a lot of ways. You seem to make the assumption that DST is some kind of majority-rules thing, when it's not. DST is one of those fairly boneheaded ideas that come up once in a while in a representational Congress (kind of like setting pi to 3), which is dumb but so low-priority that there's no major political pushback against it. And it's led by a fairly small group of marketers who think there's more shopping time from it. I bet that right now or any time in the past if there was a general vote on the issue it would be abolished.

      At any rate, the lack of economic benefit and demonstrated increase in heart attacks around DST makes it unwarranted if not downright cruel. But, you know, America.

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120307162555.htm

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    7. Re:I don't see the problem by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      But speed limits, especially on highways are mostly useless. Look at the unregulated sections of autobahn. Unlimited speed limits, safer than U.S highways.

    8. Re:I don't see the problem by pauljlucas · · Score: 1

      Look at the unregulated sections of autobahn. Unlimited speed limits, safer than U.S highways.

      Just a guess, but German drivers are probably better trained and follow conventions (such as not driving in the passing lane or moving over when somebody behind you flashes his headlights) than American drivers.

      I see so many people who drive in the passing lane for no reason and others who are mystified as to what a headlight-flash means. Either that, or they're just being jerks. Either way, I can't see unregulated speed limits working in the US.

      --
      If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
    9. Re:I don't see the problem by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      The drama is off the charts... is it that hard to change your clock (if you even need to do it manually) twice a year? And good luck telling people the daytime in summer will now be an hour shorter. And given that people are regularly zipping coast to coast a one hour change twice a year can't be that big a hardship. Heart attacks? Wow.. ok so how many heart attacks are caused by 1, 2, 3 or more timezone shifts travelling on business or vacation?

      As to the two timezone proposal.. the "real" time difference between the east coast (say Boston) and the west coast (say Seattle) is 3 hours 25 minutes. This is not some fake, made up notion. Two timezones means losing or adding an hour of light non uniformly. So the idea then is to fuck over the people on both coasts whether they want to be earlier or later or not, just so the lazy drama queens will shut up. I don't think so.

      The time zones as drawn may not be perfect but they are far better than going from four to two. And how wonerful it must be to live in China where to get to work at 8am means really being up at 3am on the wester border and going to bed at 11 pm means 6pm. Whoot!

    10. Re: I don't see the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need Congress to act. Each State decides which timezone it is in and whether or not to participate in DST.

    11. Re:I don't see the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the rational discussion: there is simply no need for DST. Anyone attached to it is not being rational. Whether we have two, four, or six time zones is meaningless to me. But moving time around arbitrarily is complete nonsense.

      That's not really a "rational discussion." That's an opinion with no analysis of the benefits of DST. Certainly, we do not NEED to switch the clocks twice a year. In fact, one could argue that we don't even need to keep track of time at all. But there are advantages to keeping track of time, so we do it. And there are advantages to DST, so we do it. The advantages are well known and readily searchable, so I won't repeat them here. And it's not an "arbitrary" movement. It's a regularly scheduled change twice a year.

      Please, in the future, if you're going to join the conversation, do something more than spout your uninformed opinions.

    12. Re:I don't see the problem by fuzznutz · · Score: 1

      I see so many people who drive in the passing lane for no reason and others who are mystified as to what a headlight-flash means. Either that, or they're just being jerks.

      I always move over almost with one exception. About once or twice a week as I am passing a car, some asshole runs right up on my rear bumper so close you couldn't slide a piece of paper between us. No headlight flash, just tailgating. And I am invariably speeding already. I NEVER move for them. After they pass me on the right, I move over. No courtesy for me? No courtesy for you.

    13. Re:I don't see the problem by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 1

      There is a perfectly rational reason for it -- the additional light we get from longer days in the summer is not distributed according to our preference. The marginal utility of adding an hour of light between 6-7PM is much greater than adding it from 5-6AM. Unfortunately for us, as the days get longer, they get longer equally in both directions from noon (the zenith).

      Picture this, it's the winter solstice and the daylight is 8-4. Now someone says "where is the best place to add an hour of light, at the end or the beginning?" -- at first it's equal -- the first 2 hours bring us to 7-5. But after that, the utility of adding 6-7AM is much less than adding 5-6PM, since people aren't going to wake up an hour earlier to take any advance of the former. Similarly for 6-7PM and so forth.

      Our preferences are not symmetric, the natural extension of light is. DST fixes that.

    14. Re: I don't see the problem by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      > You don't need Congress to act. Each State decides which timezone it is in and whether or not to participate in DST.

      Actually, no. The only thing a state can decide is whether or not to participate in DST, as defined by the federal government. A state can't decide to "participate differently", nor can it redefine or change its own timezones.

      Florida, for example, would arguably be better off if we permanently changed the part of the state that's now "Eastern Time" to either year-round "Eastern Daylight Time", or moved ourselves to Atlantic time & abolished DST (both of which would have exactly the same effect). But we aren't allowed to.

    15. Re:I don't see the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The simplest solution is to move to UTC everywhere and then each locality sets the standard start of workday. DST causes major problems for people with delayed sleep-phase syndrome while it is liked by people with advanced sleep-phase syndrome, I'm inclined to split the difference and get rid of it. Then there are all the extra collisions on the road due to sleepy drivers. Given the minimal demonstrated benefits and blatant costs I've been planning to write to my state's government and request they put a measure on the ballot to discontinue observing DST (the only option allowed by federal law), I'm not so big headed that I think others may disagree.

    16. Re:I don't see the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The simplest solution is to move to UTC everywhere and then each locality sets the standard start of workday.

      You mean like setting up time zones so that everyone in a certain area shows up at work at 9am? Timezones are SO hard.

    17. Re:I don't see the problem by egburr · · Score: 1

      Actually, many A/Cs now do run according to the clock. For the past 10 years, my thermostat has been programmable on a weekly schedule, and thanks to our government changing the weekends of the DST changes, I have had to manually reset its clock 4 times a year: correct it for not shifting on the right weekend in the spring, correct it again when it shifts automatically on the wrong weekend, correct it for shifting automatically on the wrong weekend in the fall, and correct it again when the right weekend arrives.

      I recently upgraded to a wi-fi capable one (so much easier to program the schedule through a web interface), and it will change correctly on its own (I assume, since this weekend will be the first DST change since I've had it).

      I would still prefer to get rid of the DST shift altogether.

      --

      Edward Burr
      Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
    18. Re:I don't see the problem by luckymutt · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points.
      I'd like to remain on DST year round. Since I can't just decide to shift my work schedule for half the year. My boss would have an issue with that. I'm also not crazy of the idea of dropping my kids off at school an hour earlier than everyone else.
      Seriously, to hell with Standard Time. Let's remain on DST. We've done it before.

    19. Re:I don't see the problem by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      In germany they ticket you for driving slow in the left lane. If they did that in the U.S instead of lowering speed limits it would benefit everyone. This talks about canada but the argument is the exact same. http://youtu.be/2BKdbxX1pDw

    20. Re:I don't see the problem by rossdee · · Score: 1

      "And less so now when most clocks are set automatically, and the few that aren't have 'dst' switches"

      A lot of clocks that do it automatically, do it wrong since Congress changed the date of the change a few years ago.

      And also animals and old peop[e are confused by the change. (Some residents already want to get up at 4:30am
      And I have to work tonight, its gonna be a long night.

    21. Re:I don't see the problem by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      with little benefit (possibly even detriment) to millions of people

      [citation required]

    22. Re:I don't see the problem by Megane · · Score: 1

      Many of those automatic clocks now don't work correctly and can't be reprogrammed.

      Fortunately for us, any of them using the WWVB radio signal do work correctly, but only because the DST information is part of the radio signal. Of course this is the US DST, so anyone in Mexico (and probably Canada too) who wants to use the DST info is fucked.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    23. Re:I don't see the problem by Megane · · Score: 1

      Mine is also based on talking to a "cloud" server via wifi which handles the DST change, as well as a web site that lets me change the info.

      I'm surprised that you had to change the old one four times a year... it didn't support places like Arizona and Indiana that don't do DST? The worst case should have been to turn off DST and change the clock manually twice a year.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    24. Re:I don't see the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except your argument assumes that the entire country travels simultaneously, which it doesn't. If the entire country traveled at least one time zone to the east on a single day, you'd see a similar jump in heart attacks and car accidents. The time change is the only time people in this country do this simultaneously. A small number of drivers being impaired by travel surrounded by people that are not impaired by travel doesn't result in distinctly more accidents, but if there is nobody that can compensate for the impaired driver because they are similarly-impaired, that's when/why we have a problem.

      We're also comparing apples and oranges. Turning the clocks forward is the harmful part, not turning them back to normal. Let's just make noon the definition of "noon" that it had been for thousands of years: the highest point of the sun in the sky in a particular location. Is that too much to ask?

    25. Re:I don't see the problem by brunnegd · · Score: 1

      I agree. No rational reason for DST.

    26. Re:I don't see the problem by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      A study has shown a rise in heart attack rates after the time change. Yeah I can see how that isn't that big of a deal.
      You probably have never missed a meeting due to the clocks being wrong. Or you probably adjust quickly to the time change, while several people take a week or more to adjust their sleeping schedule.
      Just because "it is one of the costs" doesn't mean it is good or should be changed.

    27. Re:I don't see the problem by gsslay · · Score: 1

      DST makes a difference depending on your latitude. Time zones are longitudinal. Two entirely different things.

      If you live in a low latitude you maybe don't see much point to DST, but the further you go from the equator, the more sense it makes.

  17. concluding with a question by fche · · Score: 2

    Why can't a conclusion be phrased as a statement instead of as a rhetorical question?

    1. Re:concluding with a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see a rhetorical question in "How we measure time has always evolved with the needs of commerce."

    2. Re:concluding with a question by fche · · Score: 1

      That could be because your quote is not at the end of either in the slashdot extract or the original article.

  18. regular changing sleep cycles?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Half a year you go to sleep with one hour difference. People change their sleeping activities more frequently voluntarily.
    This change doesn't show statistically.

  19. Safety by gary_johnson_53 · · Score: 1

    Putting more of the morning commute for schoolkids in the light is a good reason for DST

    1. Re:Safety by F.+Lynx+Pardinus · · Score: 1

      Sounds like your school district needs to set the school hours so that the start hour in winter is later than the sunrise hour. I'm not sure why you would blame the clock or time zone for the decisions of your school superintendent.

    2. Re:Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the schools could change what time they start during the season to adjust for local light.
      Why do the *clocks* have to change to adjust for local issues ? Its just nonsense.

    3. Re:Safety by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Yes, they could do that. But guess what - most of those kids have parents who work. So you make the starting time of school later - are their parents still at home to get them off to school, or did they already leave for work? Oh, you say, let the parents go to work later too. But what if the timing of their jobs is dependant on other things, like the opening hours of a business. What do you do then, just open the business an hour later? This would have an enormous ripple effect. So why not just make it easy on everyone, and move the clocks?

    4. Re:Safety by F.+Lynx+Pardinus · · Score: 1

      You're describing an issue that's independent of DST. School districts have school hours, job have work hours, and people have to coordinate the two, which often don't match.

    5. Re:Safety by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Putting more of the morning commute for schoolkids in the light is a good reason for DST

      Huh? DST moves the morning commute back into the DARK, just when the solar cycles start making it light. Hardly a year goes by around here when at least one local kid gets hit on that account.

    6. Re:Safety by tepples · · Score: 1

      Unless you view DST as a tool used to coordinate work hours with everything else that depends on work hours.

    7. Re:Safety by AsmCoder8088 · · Score: 1

      Huh? DST moves the morning commute back into the DARK, just when the solar cycles start making it light.

      I was just about to post the same thing. I guess the OP figured he had a 50/50 chance of being right and just decided to wing it!

    8. Re:Safety by mrsquid0 · · Score: 1

      Daylight Saving Time results in fewer hours of light in the morning, not more. DST puts less of the morning trip to school in light, not more.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    9. Re:Safety by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      > You're describing an issue that's independent of DST.

      Actually, it could be argued that DST is a way for otherwise-powerless employees with institutionally-inflexible employers to use the political process as a weapon against them, and accomplish the change in working hours that their employers would otherwise never allow them to have.

    10. Re:Safety by Megane · · Score: 1

      It is now that they made summer time last longer back in 2005. The sunrise/sunset time is like a sine wave, and DST change is right in the part with the fastest rise/fall time, so two or three weeks can make a big difference. Meanwhile it keeps the sun from waking you up at oh-five-thirty in the summer. Not to mention that bird that likes to sit outside your window chirping loudly soon after sunrise. (Apparently not outside your window, or you would understand. I have had a problem with this in the past.)

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  20. Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by kurisuto · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Part of the proposal here is to reduce the U.S. to two time zones. The Eastern time zone would be on the same time as what's now Central Standard Time.

    I'm in Boston, MA. Under the proposed change, sunset in December would come at 3:11 p.m. Um, no, thanks.

    1. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by kjell79 · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's the case. In what is currently the eastern time zone, we would roll the clock back by an hour the same way we normally would and leave it there for good. The central time zone would do nothing. So the sunset would be the same 4:11pm in December as it always was (if we did nothing this Autumn it would be 5:11pm instead). It would be much later in the central time zone depending on how far south you are.

    2. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does it matter what time the clock says, when the Sun sets? Seriously that seems like such a weird argument. Its like people who got upset when Pluto got reclassified as a Dwarve Planet. It didn't change Pluto at all, just what you remember Pluto to be in your head. After a couple of seasons no one will give two shits that the sunset would come so early.

    3. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by mrsquid0 · · Score: 1

      For this proposal to work the two time zones will probably need to be EST and MST, and put the boundary approximately between Iowa and Illinois. This will minimize the discrepancies between clock time and Solar time.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    4. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is that a bad thing? Do you believe everyone Boston would still work from 9-5 or would the work day shift so you are working 8-4?

    5. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      Why would it matter in any sense if sunset happens at 3:11? Would it make you happier if we called it something else? You understand that the correlation between when we do things and what number is on a clock is completely arbitrary, right? We could go from 3:10 to HERBERT O'Clock and then to 3:12 every day and skip over the whole issue of sunset at 3:11. It would happen at HERBERT instead.

    6. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I live on the east coast too and the sun seems to set at 4:30 during winter.

    7. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      As a practical matter, Southern California would probably LOVE to move to MST, or even year-round MDT/CST. I'm guessing that they haven't been allowed to do it because everyone ELSE on the west coast knows that if LA moves to Mountain time, they'll get dragged into it by LA-dictated TV, sports, and work schedules by default.

      Historically, when the decision has been left up to voters and popular opinion, timezone boundaries have tended to drift westward over time. People grumble about early-morning darkness, but will fight tooth and nail to preserve evening sunlight. Part of it is probably because of the feeling that your mornings are mostly still dictated by the need to be somewhere at a specific time, while your evenings are more open-ended and yours. Obviously, this isn't true for everyone... but it's a use case that can be safely said to apply to most.

    8. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      > Why would it matter in any sense if sunset happens at 3:11?

      Because businesses are inflexible, and most of the people who live there would be stuck having most of their daylight hours fall when they're either passed out and asleep, or stuck at work. The hours on the clock might be completely arbitrary, but HR-dictated working hours are equally arbitrary. DST is a rare example of the political process actually working to accomplish something people want (evening daylight) over the objections of business bureaucracy.

    9. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by Megane · · Score: 1

      So the sun sets in December at 4:11pm in Boston now? How many hours difference do you think there are between EST and CST?

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    10. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      Under the proposed change, sunset in December would come at 3:11 p.m. Um, no, thanks.

      Is there really a difference between 4:11pm and 3:11pm? I guess if you are getting off work at 3:00pm that means an hour of dim sunlight. But considering that MOST people get off work at 5:00pm it doesn't really matter what time the sunset.

    11. Re:Sunset at 3:11 p.m.? by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

      because when it sets at 4:11PM, that's so much better!

  21. Get rid of that stupid anachronism.. by silverdr · · Score: 1

    .. which is time zones in the first place. They stem from the times when circumnavigating the globe took months if not years, and even back then it was not really useful. Time zones in general bring more harm than good and they only exist in order to feed our habits of having specific digits on the clock when we do various things. Whenever there is a need for something unambiguous and not susceptible to errors people learned long ago that the only way is to use single time description for the whole planet. Aviation, military and many other services use the only reasonable, unambiguous time description: "Zulu time" aka UTC. When you really think deeply and throw away the "that's impossible" prejudices about time zones - there is really nothing that we would lose by throwing away them completely and saving lots of confusion, unnecessary dealing with them, unnecessary handling of errors with them, etc.. There is only one thing that would be very difficult to adjust ourselves to: New Year would have to start in full sun in some places...

    --
    Now, mod me down freely. My karma can't get any worse...
    1. Re:Get rid of that stupid anachronism.. by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Time zones are a relatively recent invention. Originally, time was solar time and noon was when the sun was at its highest point.

      The real impetus for time zones came with the railroads when people began travelling rapidly enough and far enough that having a different solar time every time you moved East or West a few miles got to be a problem so they normalized the time into strips more or less following the longitudinal lines - time zones.

      The closer your time is to solar time, the easier it is to keep a reference to the local light/dark cycles. So down at the OK Corral, a shootout at 18:00 loses some of its magic.

  22. Do Some Homework Allison by dcw3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "The actual energy savings are minimal, if they exist at all."

    Blah, blah, blah...She obviously doesn't know if they're minimal, because she doesn't know if they exist. You can love or hate it, but at least if you're going to argue for one side or the other, present some fucking facts.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
    1. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My fact is that I don't want to lose my extra hour in bed, and I've already coded everything for compensation. So I'd lose all the hours of work, plus an hour of sleep. 1 Universal time zone I might consider, even more likely if it always begins with Star Date..

    2. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Did you RTFA? The link she provides explains that the extension of DST in California in 2008 had little or no effect on energy consumption in California.

      So she provided the facts, you are just a stupid fuck for not reading the goddamn article.

    3. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by sribe · · Score: 5, Informative

      Blah, blah, blah...She obviously doesn't know if they're minimal, because she doesn't know if they exist. You can love or hate it, but at least if you're going to argue for one side or the other, present some fucking facts.

      The fact is that multiple studies have tried to document the extent of the alleged savings, and the conclusions vary from 0.18% at the high end, to an even more minuscule increase at the "low" end of the savings. Therefore her statement that "actual energy savings are minimal, if they exist at all" is a completely accurate summary of the facts.

    4. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      You're letting your bias get in the way of seeing the point I was making. You at least attempted to utilize some unreferenced "facts". She didn't. I'm not implying that you or Allison are actually wrong, but if you're going to spout off and call it journalism, at least don't be so god damn lazy.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    5. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      Except the population distribution in California is biased towards the lower latitudes, and the savings make themselves more apparent in higher latitudes.

    6. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by rockmuelle · · Score: 2

      Luckily for this discussion, the data actually exists. Indiana recently went from not changing time to chaning time. Turns out energy costs are 1-3% more under daylight saving time than with out it.

      Here's the citation:

      NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES
      DOES DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME SAVE ENERGY? EVIDENCE FROM A NATURAL EXPERIMENT IN INDIANA
      Matthew J. Kotchen Laura E. Grant
      Working Paper 14429 http://www.nber.org/papers/w14429

      -Chris

    7. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, dickhead, journalists can actually use research without citing it. The confidence interval on all of the research done in the last 2 decades includes 0. They all lean towards some energy savings, but "minimal, if they exist at all" is a very, very accurate way,and might actually reflect the One Journalist Who Understands Statistics.

    8. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      You're letting your bias get in the way of seeing the point I was making.

      There's some bias here, all right, but it's not sribe who's exhibiting it. You seem bizarrely determined to find fault with a completely accurate statement.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    9. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      You're letting your bias get in the way of seeing the point I was making.

      There's some bias here, all right, but it's not sribe who's exhibiting it. You seem bizarrely determined to find fault with a completely accurate statement.

      I see that reading comprehension is not your strong point. I defy you to point to any bias in it. I sided neither for or against daylight saving time.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    10. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by sribe · · Score: 1

      I see that reading comprehension is not your strong point. I defy you to point to any bias in it. I sided neither for or against daylight saving time.

      Your bias is in insisting that a completely accurate summary of available research was incorrect.

    11. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by tibman · · Score: 1

      The percentage is minimal but the dollar amount is not. The studies also average north and south regions together or cherry pick whichever one produces the numbers they want. Usually the north saves a lot and the south spends more. Take that how you will.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    12. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except in a study in Indiana after they became the 48th state to adopt DST in 2006 (where all the population is at least as far north as San Francisco and most are near the northern border of CA in latitude) that showed springing forward immediately increased energy consumption by 1%.

      Every US state, except HI, is north of the Tropic of Cancer, so if it doesn't work in IN, it doesn't work in at least 70% of the US. The problem is that we don't have a baseline to work from for any other state because they keep moving DST to cover a larger and larger percentage of the year. If they moved the spring back forward a single week, we could get useful data and find out whether it has any positive effect anywhere in the country. I suspect it has negative effects for most and no effect on many, so the only argument for it is a straw man.

    13. Re:Do Some Homework Allison by Guppy06 · · Score: 0

      Except in a study in Indiana after they became the 48th state to adopt DST in 2006 (where all the population is at least as far north as San Francisco and most are near the northern border of CA in latitude) that showed springing forward immediately increased energy consumption by 1%.

      And there is no state in the Union as schizophrenic about time as Indiana. Good luck trying to argue that any change there, better or worse, is independent of all other factors.

  23. The only thing more wasteful ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The only thing more wasteful than Daylight Saving Time is all the time people spend griping about it and pushing some great plan to eliminate it.

  24. An hour difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An hour difference in my sleep has the affect of a couple drinks on me.

    I wake up groggy and tank up with caffeine - which results in an attention span of a gnat.

    And I'm driving on the road with you.

  25. Terrible idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see so many flaws in the thinking here it's just not funny.

    But hey, journo's can say what they like and not really correctly weighted references to their reasoning.

    'There's evidence that regularly changing sleep cycles, associated with daylight saving, lowers productivity and increases heart attacks'

    So how regular is twice a year? This entire line makes me wonder where these people get their PhD's from.

  26. In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... they abolished Standard Time and kept DST.

    Really, they did.

    1. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, time abolishes YOU!

      Er, wait, that actually makes sense.

  27. Heart attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's absolutely true. Every day that clocks go back an hour, heart attacks increase by approximately 4%. In fact, the incidence of many phenomena seems to increase by 4% on these strange days. What an enigma.

    1. Re:Heart attacks by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Is that due to the time change or due to the stress of ranting about DST twice a year?

      People regularly pick holiday destinations around the globe, with +- 6, 8, 9 hours time difference.Does the rate of hear attack rise for those people, too? If it's so much stress, why are they doing it?

      When you're staying a bit longer at a birthday party and sleep in that 2 hours the next morning, that's technically TWICE the effect of a DTS change, and you wouldn't call that irresponsible behaviour.

      --
      bickerdyke
    2. Re:Heart attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An interesting corollary to this which the previous coward neglected to mention is that we seem to be far more robust to changes in the other direction. In the spring, on the days when the clocks are put forward by an hour, a reduction of approximately 4% in heart attacks is observed.

    3. Re:Heart attacks by Lodlaiden · · Score: 1

      You missed the joke... Clock goes back an hour. This day suddenly has 25 hrs. (4% is 100 / 25) There is an extra 60 mins for people to have heart attacks and be recorded. Statistical play.

      --
      Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
    4. Re:Heart attacks by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Whoosh.

    5. Re:Heart attacks by en.ABCD · · Score: 1

      I think that the point was that the day the clocks go back is 4% longer than any other day, because of the time change, and therefore, on average, 4% more heart attacks occur on that day compared to any other day.

    6. Re:Heart attacks by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      I*m wooshing myself......

      --
      bickerdyke
    7. Re:Heart attacks by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      I think the AC was subtly pointing out that adding an hour to a 24-hour day, making it a 25-hour day, increases all other events in that day by 4%, which it mathematically has to. Just like early studies of traffic accidents went into a tizzy when they noticed there were 75% fewer car accidents on February 29 than other days, before someone remembered it only occurs on leap years.

      That said, if the heart attacks occur when the day is shortened from 24 to 23 hours, a 4% increase is mathematically significant.

  28. China's Single Time Zone by Phoenix666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, China's 5 time zones operate on a single time zone, which works great if you're in Beijing, but sucks balls if you're one of the poor schmucks in Urumqi who has to get to work at 3am.

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
    1. Re:China's Single Time Zone by SerpentMage · · Score: 1

      Thank-you! I wish you were modded much higher!

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    2. Re:China's Single Time Zone by rjstanford · · Score: 1

      Although in exchange you do get to knock off at noon!

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    3. Re:China's Single Time Zone by rjstanford · · Score: 1

      In fact, that'd gives you tons of free time in the light. Coordinating DST to work hours helps the employer (and only then if they use natural light) and hurts the employee.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    4. Re:China's Single Time Zone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Rational question: why?

      You will be at work 4 am - 12 noon, and then have the ultimate daylight savings time experience, 12-evening, at YOUR disposal, and not your employer's.

      Or course you go to bed at sunset usually, but one can argue thats natural.

    5. Re:China's Single Time Zone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      aren't you looking at it the wrong way?
      with 1 timezone you're saying the people further west would have to get work at 9am eastern time
      except that they wouldn't. they'd start work at a more appropriate time relative to their location
      so in the single timezone case the eastern regions would start at "9am", whereas western region would start "12pm"
      same goes for when you finish as well. instead of finishing 6pm, you're finishing at 9pm

      hence the case of ignoring timezones altogether and just having a non-offset UTC time
      breakfast time in china and dinner time in nyc could both just be midnight UTC+0
      the only problem there has ever been is the interpretation of time of where oneself is in comparison to someone else

    6. Re:China's Single Time Zone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank-you! I wish you were modded much higher!

      You mean sooner!

    7. Re:China's Single Time Zone by infinitelink · · Score: 1

      The actual time of rising in China will vary across industries and need. Thus a lot of people there still rise and set with the sun...the clock is used for this (e.g. alarms) but isn't the ultimate factor.

      --
      Intelligent idiots are we. | Evil men do not understand justice.
    8. Re:China's Single Time Zone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Do you suppose that schools/businesses/television/etc all work normal Beijing hours?

    9. Re:China's Single Time Zone by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Well if you're working the Chinese 16 hour day it doesn't really matter.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  29. I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When the Bush-era change happened, I supervised the change in my company, having to track the dozens of updates of Windows, Java, and Oracle (often because each one had to incorporate a patch to detect if one of the other two had not actually been patched). This amounted to basically $50,000 of my companies dollars wasted for no actual benefit - $50,000 just to say we still worked.

    And the worst thing about it all was that even after all that money on our part, and on the part of Microsoft, Sun, and Oracle (who saw even less money relative to the efforts it took), nobody would be able to say 100% that it was "right". There still could have been one stupid little detail that would have gotten it wrong on the day of the switch or projecting forward to the switch-back.

    Current estimates is that the DST change of 2005 cost the economy $5 billion in expenses *just to keep working at all* - that's 5 billion that wasn't spent on improvements, or new features, or anything actually giving new value to their customers. It simply ceased to exist, for the illusion of savings in other markets (energy and retail) that never materialized.

    And I still saw most of my local trick-or-treaters after dark, so saying an extra hour of light for Halloween also was a pointless exercise.

    --
    "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
    -- Joe
    1. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When the Bush-era change happened, I supervised the change in my company, having to track the dozens of updates of Windows, Java, and Oracle (often because each one had to incorporate a patch to detect if one of the other two had not actually been patched). This amounted to basically $50,000 of my companies dollars wasted for no actual benefit - $50,000 just to say we still worked.

      And the worst thing about it all was that even after all that money on our part, and on the part of Microsoft, Sun, and Oracle (who saw even less money relative to the efforts it took), nobody would be able to say 100% that it was "right". There still could have been one stupid little detail that would have gotten it wrong on the day of the switch or projecting forward to the switch-back.

      Current estimates is that the DST change of 2005 cost the economy $5 billion in expenses *just to keep working at all* - that's 5 billion that wasn't spent on improvements, or new features, or anything actually giving new value to their customers. It simply ceased to exist, for the illusion of savings in other markets (energy and retail) that never materialized.

      And I still saw most of my local trick-or-treaters after dark, so saying an extra hour of light for Halloween also was a pointless exercise.

      Keep that cost in mind as you read other Americans argue there is nothing wrong with keep doing DST changes because they have not problem with it, blah blah blah... And then think about how DST wastes I.T. staff resources, and think about how the world is moving more and more into I.T.

      Then you will reach the inevitable conclusion that Americans' stupidity is going to eventually kill American's advantage in IT. As you said, $5B per year just to keep working for 2005, and that bill is going to get bigger every year, not even counting any potential for hiccups when things don't go smoothly. All the while China has only one time zone and no DST changes at all.

    2. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Current estimates is that the DST change of 2005 cost the economy $5 billion in expenses *just to keep working at all* - that's 5 billion that wasn't spent on improvements, or new features, or anything actually giving new value to their customers. It simply ceased to exist, for the illusion of savings in other markets (energy and retail) that never materialized.

      If it cost $5B in expenses, that means somebody enjoyed $5B in revenues. OTOH, if it cost business $5B in lossed economic activity, that would be a drain on the economy. Almost all studies tied to the cost/benefit of DST are contradictory because there are so many variables and methodologies involved.

      These studies do aggree, however, that retailers prefer DST because it brings in more customers, traffic safety is improved because of more light for evening commutes and people tend to be more active outside than they would have been without it (leading to health benefits). So, while corporate America might not like it, consumer America, evidently does. And it is consumerism that ultimately driving the economy.

      BTW, if the time shifts are causing so much disruption for big business, there's nothing to say they have to keep the same work schedule. They could just as easily change their start and stop times to coincide with the change to/from DST. You would think if it would save them $5B, they would jump at that. Chances are, they know the changeover doesn't cost them that much and that is why they don't.

    3. Re:I'm not going through this again... by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      You think it's bad in the U.S.? Look at Australia's plethora of time zones, and then consider that they don't all switch from standard time to summer time on the same days.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    4. Re:I'm not going through this again... by munch117 · · Score: 4, Informative

      If it cost $5B in expenses, that means somebody enjoyed $5B in revenues.

      Broken window fallacy.

    5. Re:I'm not going through this again... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      When the Bush-era change happened, I supervised the change in my company,

      In case you hadn't noticed, the time zones have been stupid anyway. These days it's a matter of pushing some patches of a sort that have already been agonized over. If we plan well in advance, we can reasonably get those patches installed.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      The disruption is all in IT. Computers don't just magically know what time it is. They have a chip that tells them the number of microseconds since some arbitrary date (happens to be Jan 1, 1970, which means a 32bit int is gonna run out sometime around 2038 - the next "y2k" problem).

      Everything else they need to be programmed to know. Every DB has its own implementation for deciding this. Every VM (including the JVM) has its own. Every OS kernel has its own. Every custom DB environment (like, say, airline reservation and tracking systems) all have their own. Every power grid system has its own.

      When the rules change, these ALL need to be updated to keep up, and (this is the important bit) they kinda need to be updated in sync with each other, because each layer may be asking the previous layer what it thinks, but if someone doesn't update, say, windows XP ('cause MS won't push any patches for it), well, Java still needs to know and get it right, and so does Oracle and MySQL and PHP and any other number of things someone might be running on the XP box they can't afford to upgrade/replace (or why should they, it works just fine for what it is being used for, right?). In the airline industry, not only do the airlines need to be correct within their own systems, they need to be assured they are correct with regards to TSA's systems, and the FAA's systems, and every *separate and independent* airport's flight control tower (oh, and they all need to be correct with regards to each other as well). And that's even before we get into the issue of airline ticket purchase exchange systems, the means by which 3rd party sites like Orbitz and Priceline get their tickets - they need to be sure that they are getting the right information from every supplier of flights to their systems, or have their own means of helping the customer correct their flight reservations if they get it wrong because, say, US Airways didn't get a patch right.

      So huge IT suppliers like Oracle and Microsoft and HP all need to work to keep their software correct with the changes, while not breaking the current dates before the change is actually meant to take place. Huge and small IT-dependent businesses all need to keep up with all of those patches and test their products and services on them in order to be sure they are right.

      Getting it wrong could be disastrous. We got it right in 2006...but we could also have just gotten lucky. Going through that again will be painful.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    7. Re:I'm not going through this again... by mrsquid0 · · Score: 1

      >These studies do aggree, however, that retailers prefer DST because it brings in more customers, traffic safety is improved because of more light for evening commutes

      The improvement in evening traffic safety is offset by a corresponding decrease in morning traffic safety. Most of the safety studies that I have seen suggest that morning commutes are inherently more dangerous than evening commutes, probably because people are not fully awake. If this is the case, and safety is the primary reason for DST, then it would be better to have the daylight before work than after.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    8. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You lost me at "basically".

    9. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      The broken window fallacy doesn't apply in this case. Here, the premise is there is a direct cost associated with the change in DST, at least in the way the OP presented it. If there is a direct cost, either more wages are paid or more supplies are used or more fuel or more of any other resource, then somebody on the other side of that transaction, whether an employee a supplier or some other manufacturer has had an increase in their economic position. Once company cannot spend more money without somebody else receiving more money. That is why I differentiated between simple $5B in additional costs and lost economic activity. Lost economic activity definitely does fall under the broken window fallacy.

      It should also be noted that the broken window fallacy is not universally accepted and often hotly contested among economists (just look at the debate over cash for clunkers the US did during the recession).

    10. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      The disruption is all in IT. Computers don't just magically know what time it is. They have a chip that tells them the number of microseconds since some arbitrary date (happens to be Jan 1, 1970, which means a 32bit int is gonna run out sometime around 2038 - the next "y2k" problem).

      2038 has nothing to do with DST, nor do computers rely on hardcoded DST information any more. Most modern computers set their clocks from a network which sets its clock from another network or source. As for DST, that is mainly handled through a database query upstream. For instance, when you wake up in the morning on Sunday, assuming you are in the US, your cell phone will show the correct time. It doesn't have some chip embedded in it saying when DST begins or ends like days gone by. It gets its time signal from the cell tower which gets it from your carrier's time source.

      While 2038 may be a problem for personal computers it is unrelated to the economic impact of changing the clocks because of DST.

    11. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      >These studies do aggree, however, that retailers prefer DST because it brings in more customers, traffic safety is improved because of more light for evening commutes

      The improvement in evening traffic safety is offset by a corresponding decrease in morning traffic safety. Most of the safety studies that I have seen suggest that morning commutes are inherently more dangerous than evening commutes, probably because people are not fully awake. If this is the case, and safety is the primary reason for DST, then it would be better to have the daylight before work than after.

      Actually, because morning commutes are statistically more dangerous than evening commutes, the impact of DST actually has less of a statistical impact on them than it does the evening commute. Put differently, the accident rate decreases more significantly for evening drivers than it increases for morning drivers.

    12. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      I never said 2038 has anything to do with DST. I said that it is a y2k like problem where very old data storage systems will run into a limit and be unable to figure out if the next day is September 2038 or January 1970.

      And every computer still has configuration files for timezones and DST info. Just because a computer CAN sync up with a central server doesn't mean it always does, and the issue is not knowing what time it is NOW, it is that of software being able to properly schedule for time in the future or accurately reflect time in the past. I can't just send a "what time is it really" query to some central generic server when writing for an event to take place in November 5th, 2013 (on the other side of the American line, but long since past the European switch, and yet not quite into the South American switch...oh, and Brazil nicely changes theirs every year so that it never changes before Carnevale is over, did you know that?).

      I need to be absolutely accurate to the time the user expects it to happen, or else when that day comes up, the event they wanted is an hour off. I have to write the code to do this and trust that the libraries I rely on are accurate in their DST information.

      And I have been writing software like this, in several languages, for much of the 20 years of my career so far.

      How about you?

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    13. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      never said they weren't. I just said that if you ask the corporate IT world to go through this hell of trying to update systems to reflect a large-scale American change all over again, they'll laugh at you...and give their 527 PAC money to your opponents in an instant, ensuring you'll be kicked out of office.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    14. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      It wasn't $5b per year - it was $5b as a one-time expense. There's nothing more to do now that it is done (and admittedly most platforms made their systems more flexible so they could adapt to other changes, like Russia's DST-365, with much less effort on implementation and testing).

      It is unrelated to the supposed claim of $2b per year in "lost productivity", whatever that means (translation: any discussion of 'productivity' requires defining what you mean by it, and nobody can agree on that when it comes to IT work).

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    15. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      The point is that from the perspective of the company having to pay members of their IT department to work on the DST change, that money was going into an effort that would not, directly, lead to increased sales, increased profits, or increased interest from a marketing standpoint.

      It is wasted money.

      In the case of the major vendors, they had to do this effectively for every client they had even if they didn't have a support contract to do so. Their support teams "lost" money doing this work, relative to the number of customers that benefitted from the change.

      This is in contrast to spending money making a new feature, or fixing REAL bugs, things that actually can increase sales. Billions were spent just to keep working at all, because of the ignorant decisions of lawmakers who have no idea how computers work.

      You can try to look at it as the sense of, "well, those IT guys like you spent that income anyways", but that misses the point: when I create something for my company, that is in effect *inventing* money - I increase the value of my company's product, who in turn increase the value of the companies that purchase it by leading them to cost savings and increased profits which get invested etc etc etc. This is the economic power of Intellectual invention, it is why the whole system works (and why IT companies do so well in the stock market - it isn't a limited resource like how much coal there might happen to be under some mountain somewhere).

      When that money is spent just to keep something functioning at all, there is no value added, only money lost. The stock market reflected that loss at the time with flatlined growth for almost four months 'til it could recover again. Nobody had any profits to feed into the market after that.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    16. Re:I'm not going through this again... by sjames · · Score: 1

      It's not the twice a year change that costs $5B, it's updating all the software if we change when (or if) DST happens that costs billions.

    17. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No shit. When people reference Y2k, I quickly correct them that DST change was a much bigger headache. Granted I don't work on system programmed 20 years ago, so YMMV, but the fact that Y2k was discussed years before it happened and the DST change snuck up was a big factor in the ability to handle it with grace.

    18. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Yes, your date issue is different than DST, however the thread was about DST, not the reliability of the tz database.

      As for systems development, my first job was on an IBM 360, so I've been doing it probably from before you were born.

    19. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      The point is that from the perspective of the company having to pay members of their IT department to work on the DST change, that money was going into an effort that would not, directly, lead to increased sales, increased profits, or increased interest from a marketing standpoint.

      That is only true on a micro level. On the macro level, those extra wages are used to purchase goods and services so any economic loss experienced by that company is made up for by other companies or the individual themself. The other issue is whether or not extra money was actually spent. If the IT workers are salaried, they are going to draw that salary come DST or not. So, unless there is a significant amount of work devoted to DST, chances are, the lost time would be picked up in slack time in any projects versus taking on new tasks.

      I have no doubt that for any particular company DST can cause more expenses. Likewise, for any particular company DST can cause increased revenues. However, the question is whether or not the decreases exceed the increases and most major economists agree that there is a slight benefit to DST and actually propose DST year round.

    20. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      It's not the twice a year change that costs $5B, it's updating all the software if we change when (or if) DST happens that costs billions.

      I'd get new programmers. There are public domain databases that have all of the time zone data including DST. If your system isn't reading those for its data, then something is really wrong. Even if, for some reason, you need to maintain your own code, surely you aren't reprogramming everything twice a year and rely on an internal table to tell the system that the time has change. In reality, the most likely scenario is that you are reading the system time, which is set from the network server, which hopefully accesses a public ntp server for its time info. So, if it costs you anything, it's because of poor design, not DST.

    21. Re:I'm not going through this again... by sjames · · Score: 1

      You clearly have never dealt with it. Quick, will your elevators and security panel do the right thing? Does the vendor know? Does the vendor still exist? Can you just disable DST and set it manually? How about Whizz-Bang 2000.5? Does it use the system time, an internal database, or what?

      What about that legacy system in the corner, where does it keep it's DST table and what format is it in?

      Next up, did EVERY LAST SYSTEM in the place get it's new copy of that wonderful public domain database?

      Again, it's not a matter of each individual time change (such as this Sunday morning), it's when the rules change, like in 2007 when we went from last Sunday in Oct to 1st Sunday in Nov.

      Finally, in spite of that, a few things do the wrong thing anyway. Consequences vary from mostly minor annoyances to the very occasional big problem.

    22. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      you have absolutely utterly failed to see the point. you have absolutely no idea - i was talking ABSOLUTELY about macro-econ, not micro. at the micro-econ level, it is just money spent.

      at the macro-econ level, it is money spent that *provided no value*. Everybody was $5 billion less than they had before, but the products were, in effect, merely the same as they were before all this effort. Nothing was gained. Intellectual and economic power was wasted.

      there is a difference, regardless of if you care to see it or not (so far, you don't).

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    23. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      I only brought up the damn 2038 thing as an aside. For crying out loud the comment about it was in parenthesis. Sheesh...

      I have been talking about DST, and the DST change, and what it takes for a software firm to deal with it, and why each firm has to deal with it even if for the most part they get their DST information from patches from systems software vendors. And my primary damn point, which is that when companies have to test and track their software to systems software updates that do (or don't) correctly give them the DST information they need for the timezones they care about, that is money spent, and when the government arbitrarily changed it because they have no idea how much work it really took for people like me to figure out what the impacts of it will be on our systems, that was money wasted.

      DST and TZ data is closely interrelated - when we changed, others didn't.

      I know what the hell I've been talking about here, thank you.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    24. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      THANK YOU! somebody else actually 'got it'.

      Currently I am having to track and get our system up to date for several other countries timezones that have changed their DST rules in the last 5 years, like Iraq and Egypt (both dropped DST entirely), plus trying to figure out, without actually coding a lunar calendar into my system, when Brazil postpones their DST end date by a week to avoid closing Carnivale early (yeah, lots of people don't know they do that...). (oh, you guys who think this stuff is easy while we're at it, go ahead and, fresh from scratch, calculate how many seconds UTC epoc (since Jan 1970) it is to get to the "third sunday of march".)

      Oh, and as for whiz-bang DST / TZ libraries? They should try doing all this on a client-side html5 app where all you have is raw javascript that has access to none of that. Yes, we do actually have situations where we need to code to this stuff straight out because whiz-bang DST/TZ library doesn't exist for our platform. date.js is good, but isn't perfect (like the regular javascript Date, it sucks trying to deal with timezones outside of what the browser thinks it is in) and hasn't been updated for useful stuff like this since it came out almost 10 years ago. node.js servers can make system-level calls for some of this, but a browser has no such benefit.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    25. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I get it very well. I've worked on software that literally has zero tolerance for errors. While usually cost prohibitive, in certain situations the consequences are far greater. That said, all of the "problems" you mention are design problems. If designed in house or custom, then the design is flawed. If purchased off the shelf, you do have a point, but unless you rely on the vendor for testing instead of your own, you should already know the answers to those questions.

      As for every last system getting a new copy of the public domain database, I sure hope not, what a waste of bandwidth. Hopefully, your devices all get their time from a local time server which gets its time from outside. I'm not sure why you are down on the tz database, you can hit it yourself, or hit the government servers instead, or hit your own in house table, your choice, but ultimately, you don't need to code your own table in every application.

      Again, one would hope that mission critical system and systems related to security and public safety, including elevators, are tested not only by the vendor but the company purchasing them.

    26. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Oh, and as for whiz-bang DST / TZ libraries? They should try doing all this on a client-side html5 app where all you have is raw javascript that has access to none of that. Yes, we do actually have situations where we need to code to this stuff straight out because whiz-bang DST/TZ library doesn't exist for our platform. date.js is good, but isn't perfect (like the regular javascript Date, it sucks trying to deal with timezones outside of what the browser thinks it is in) and hasn't been updated for useful stuff like this since it came out almost 10 years ago. node.js servers can make system-level calls for some of this, but a browser has no such benefit.

      Might be that client-side html5 isn't the optimum platform for what you are trying to do, then. Again, that would be a design decision and if you are having to hack code because of poor design, that is not really the fault of DST.

    27. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      you have absolutely utterly failed to see the point. you have absolutely no idea - i was talking ABSOLUTELY about macro-econ, not micro. at the micro-econ level, it is just money spent.

      at the macro-econ level, it is money spent that *provided no value*. Everybody was $5 billion less than they had before, but the products were, in effect, merely the same as they were before all this effort. Nothing was gained. Intellectual and economic power was wasted.

      there is a difference, regardless of if you care to see it or not (so far, you don't).

      If at the macro level the products were merely the same as they were before the effort and nothing was gained, then nothing was lost. Ergo, there couldn't be a $5B loss. The only way there can be a loss is if DST causes there to be less economic value than before. It doesn't do that on a macro level. It only does it on a micro level. On a macro level at worst, it transfers economic value from one group to another, such as business to employee. But that isn't an economic loss.

      So, if you really were talking about macro-econ, which cannot generate an economic loss because of DST, where does the $5B loss come from in the point you were trying to make?

    28. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it ensured that people had enough to do, otherwise they might be a victim of technological unemployment.

    29. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      I only brought up the damn 2038 thing as an aside. For crying out loud the comment about it was in parenthesis. Sheesh...

      I have been talking about DST, and the DST change, and what it takes for a software firm to deal with it, and why each firm has to deal with it even if for the most part they get their DST information from patches from systems software vendors. And my primary damn point, which is that when companies have to test and track their software to systems software updates that do (or don't) correctly give them the DST information they need for the timezones they care about, that is money spent, and when the government arbitrarily changed it because they have no idea how much work it really took for people like me to figure out what the impacts of it will be on our systems, that was money wasted.

      DST and TZ data is closely interrelated - when we changed, others didn't.

      I know what the hell I've been talking about here, thank you.

      I really do appreciate the problem you and others face when the government arbitrarily changes the parameters of DST, but in reality, that isn't a DST problem but a problem with government implementing a policy without examining the consequences. Even without DST, though, and to your primary point, companies will still have to test and track their software to systems software updates -- that's going to happen because of the need to work in various timezones, again, not directly related to DST. What DST does is complicate that testing by making time vary for a given timezone. But unless the world wants to get rid of timezones altogether, something unlikely to happen, the problem will remain, even if everybody got rid of DST.

    30. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      It isn't the best at all. I inherited this API. Trying to see if we can take the pressure off by having the API send a date-time string back instead of making the UI responsible for the epoc conversion, so the server (with much better resources) becomes responsible for it. As it is a published API for our customers to also use, it is a pretty big change to do that.

      That said, I've been rather proud of what I've managed to achieve so far with the limited resources I've got.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    31. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      Just having some database isn't enough in and of itself. One needs to be able to process it and interpret it correctly so that it "makes sense" to the business model one is using.

      In addition, code that looks backwards in time (reporting engines, for example, or event history viewers) need to be able to use the old rules as they look back, while looking at the current (and potentially new) rules looking forward, and have to know at what year/date some country made the decision to cut DST. This is a reason the TZ folder/file on linux boxes (for example) is as large as it is.

      No, we're not mission-critical like medical stuff, but that doesn't stop the customer base from griping when the DST-handling code was broken before I was assigned to fix it.

      And this DST issue is somewhat different from what I was originally ranting about, which was the amount of work I was going through building test plans and cases for actually being able to see if the software I was working on at the time handles the DST change correctly, coordinating and tracking all of the OS and software patches (there were 10 updates to Java's JDK/JVM alone in a matter of 5 weeks, ALL related to this issue) and ensuring our stuff would work.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    32. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      Which was my point, I thought I made clear, from the very beginning. Keeping up with software updates (that theoretically aren't supposed to change anything unless they make it better, even if it means an API difference to code to) is one thing. Generally, one can hold back a patch and coordinate it with some other release cycle.

      Having to adapt to an arbitrary, non-technical reason mandated by a clueless government is something else, a very EXPENSIVE, something else, as it is as i noted, something that adds no value to the product but costs as much as a new large feature would. And in this case, the deadline wasn't set by us either, but by the same government - we couldn't hold the patches back. Quite the opposite, we needed to get them in and tested ASAP as customers using our app to project into the future needed to have that date information accurate.

      My response (see the title this thread has had all along) was in response to the continual suggestions that happen twice a year, every year, right on schedule, for getting rid of DST, but clueless dolts who think it is "easy" to do and wouldn't have any impact except some alleged positive one based on some analyst's arbitrary definition of "productivity". While getting rid of DST might eventually have a long term benefit, it will still have an expensive short-term cost that needs to be carefully considered based on the experiences of 2005-2007.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    33. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are public domain databases that have all of the time zone data including DST. If your system isn't reading those for its data, then something is really wrong.

      And if you system relies on public databases for accurate DST handling, have fun explaining to management when the database screwed up the DST for a couple timezones and messed up the time for 200,000 transactions that cost the company $2M to fix (including payback to customers).

      So, now you have to roll your own DST databases...

      Even if, for some reason, you need to maintain your own code, surely you aren't reprogramming everything twice a year and rely on an internal table to tell the system that the time has change. In reality, the most likely scenario is that you are reading the system time, which is set from the network server, which hopefully accesses a public ntp server for its time info. So, if it costs you anything, it's because of poor design, not DST.

      And whatever mechanism you are going to use, you need to test it twice every year, and your test need to cover transactions going to/from every timezone you do business in which have DST change. For an international company, that would mean hundred of test cases. And that kind of testing is not a "cost" in your eyes?

    34. Re:I'm not going through this again... by acroyear · · Score: 1

      you really don't get it. money spent on a product that adds no value to the product is money lost.

      if you don't get that simple *fact*, I'm not going to bother to say anything anymore.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    35. Re:I'm not going through this again... by sjames · · Score: 1

      I AM talking about off the shelf and embedded software. Do you know how to update the software on your building's security panels? Do you know if it can be updated? There is often little choice but rely on the vendor, most are a bit stingy with the source code (mostly not a problem for me, we're a Linux shop, but for others it's a problem).

      You may think the elevator thing is a non issue, but in some places they don't operate normally during the off hours. Having every elevator from the parking deck stop in the lobby could cause a mess on a Monday morning. Some buildings automatically require a key card during odd hours.

      As for testing and the vendor, Har Har Har. They may get safety inspections (I sure hope so) but when is the last time the company that services the elevators you are responsible for sent someone to test the firmware upgrade procedure?

      I'm not at all down on the TZ tables. I can't think of a better way to do it. I think it's great that it's in the public domain. I just recognize that when the law changes, so too must the tables. Not every system that may need the timezones is even on the net (and some for very good reasons).

      Totally trivial example, I have an old but functional VCR. It's clock will never do the right thing again. There is no way to update.

      All those updates and testing cost money.

    36. Re:I'm not going through this again... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      That is only true on a micro level. On the macro level, those extra wages are used to purchase goods and services so any economic loss experienced by that company is made up for by other companies or the individual themself.

      False. The wages were there regardless of the change. Only if the company had to hire external contractors does you argument make any sense. If I spend $50 in time applying a windows update at work, it's $50 I don't spend doing something else productive. If those $50 of time were of no gain then it's an economic loss.

      This makes sense in the micro and macro environment.

    37. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Huh - Australia has fewer 'base' timezones (not considering DST) than the US (+10, +9:30, +8). Three zones in winter, five in summer. The US has six in winter (four mainland, plus Hawaii and Alaska) and also has areas that don't do daylight saving time just like Qld/WA/NT in Australia (e.g. Arizona). All up, the complexity is, if anything, more in the US.

      Though I think at least they do all change on the same day in the US (for the places that do actually change...)

    38. Re:I'm not going through this again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't understand the broken window fallacy.

  30. Wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "People got to work at 8 am instead of 9 am, restaurants were packed at 6 pm instead of 7 pm"
    People wake up at 9am to work in New York and eat their dinner at 7pm?
    I'm Canadian, in the same timezone(EST) and we generally wake at 6AM to work at 7AM and eat between 5~6PM here... What is wrong with you americans?

    1. Re:Wait... by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      What, do the moose wake you up that early?

  31. heart attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "daylight saving [...] increases heart attacks."
    Especially in the group of people that regularly get angry about daylight saving.

  32. how about getting rid of timezones entirely by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 2

    What does it matter if we happen to live somewhere where the clocks say 7pm when the sun rises? I say one global time and you just use common sense when calling people far away ... like you got to do now when calling overseas anyways. I don't remember when daylight savings kicks in in Germany but I know they are ~4-6 hours away so sometime before noon seems okay.

    Heck we could even schedule things with the sun like people that work for themselves (farmers, construction etc) already can. You go to work sunrise + 1hr and work whatever number of hours that are expected. Everyone gets some daylight hours to themselves sure more in summer than winter but you aren't trying to dance the time around so that you can try to get some daylight only to epically fail in the northern latitudes: I live near Toronto sunrise in the winter is ~8am and sunset around 5 so you can literally commute to work in the dark and it is dark by the time you live the office seeing the sun for 0 hrs a day isn't a good thing if for no other reason than sometimes you need to do something outside where you can see what you are doing.

    I fight this in the office all the time and I don't see why cross office/company interaction needs to be any different: we need to remove the dependency on concurrent interaction. People send email and then knock on the door 10 min later and ask if you've seen it. We need to get in the habit of planning work enough that we can wait a couple days for a reply almost always and then learn to wait patiently not block waiting to make progress because we insist on dealing with things one at a time regardless of if the necessary person has time at the moment.

    1. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1

      Oh and I might add that almost everything doesn't have to happen right now so running on an interrupt based scheduling model is just silly. Example from my work: Really you need this bug in the dev branch fixed RIGHT NOW? Really? When is the next integration build going to run? When is the next release? I'm pretty sure almost always things can wait a few hours and this is with CI since our test runs take 10hrs to run you are on average 5hrs away from anything that will affect others. Shipping at most companies happens roughly twice a day morning shipments and afternoon shipments. So again things are inherently batchy and as long as it happens within the batch that it comes in/is required happening right now doesn't matter we still aren't sending an empty truck out the LA with your one part on it, fed ex is still probably only going to send their guy around once a day etc.

    2. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been saying this same thing for years. So what if the sun comes up at 3:00 (for example) and we generally start work at 4:00? I'm a 3rd shift worker and I'm totally adjusted to getting up around 7 or 8pm and going to sleep around noon.

    3. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      What does it matter if we happen to live somewhere where the clocks say 7pm when the sun rises?

      OK, you first. Evangelize the genius simplicity of your plan by communicating all times exclusively in UTC.

      Heck we could even schedule things with the sun like people that work for themselves (farmers, construction etc) already can.

      Because these industries are completely isolated from all other economic activities and have no need to communicate times outside their domains?

      Besides, everyone has been using mechanical clocks for so long that nobody besides astronomers and navigators remembers just how lousy a timekeeper the sun is.

      I live near Toronto sunrise in the winter is ~8am and sunset around 5

      It's not about the 2145Z sunsets but the 0930Z sunrises that DST is meant to compensate for. Since you note sunlight is so critical, you should realize the benefits of making sure those hours of daylight (when available) are during waking hours.

      so you can literally commute to work in the dark and it is dark by the time you live the office seeing the sun for 0 hrs a day isn't a good thing

      Another "you first" opportunity: explain to your employer the benefits of having a 2+ hour lunch, particularly when all of your customers and suppliers don't.

      We need to get in the habit of planning work enough that we can wait a couple days for a reply

      I note you wrote this less than 90 minutes after this story was posted. Why not (again) lead by example and send your missive off to the editors of a weekly or monthly magazine instead?

    4. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I say one global time and you just use common sense when calling people far away ...

      Common sense isn't an actual thing; much like various deities, good and evil, and Santa Claus, it's a made-up concept.

      The good news is we surely have the technology now to have your phone prompt you, "Yo, asshole - it's 3 AM there. You really want to call this guy?"

    5. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by rjstanford · · Score: 1

      I live near Toronto sunrise in the winter is ~8am and sunset around 5 so you can literally commute to work in the dark and it is dark by the time you live the office seeing the sun for 0 hrs a day isn't a good thing if for no other reason than sometimes you need to do something outside where you can see what you are doing.

      Indeed, the current TZ really helps your employer at the cost of the employee's personal time. And even that's assuming that they're using natural light, which these days is highly unlikely.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    6. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by ApplePy · · Score: 1

      It's not about the 2145Z sunsets but the 0930Z sunrises that DST is meant to compensate for. Since you note sunlight is so critical, you should realize the benefits of making sure those hours of daylight (when available) are during waking hours.

      I'm guessing you have trouble with the old correlation vs. causation, too.

      Hours of daylight are regulated by Earth's axis tilt as it orbits the Sun. Not by your clocks.

      Thus, if we standardized on one time, you would set your alarm clock earlier in the summer in order to arise earlier in the day. In other words, EXACTLY the same thing you do now, except without the inconvenience of changing clocks twice a year.

      Time != measurement of time

      Not sure why this is so hard.

      --
      That I'm right, and you don't like it, doesn't mean I'm a troll.
    7. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      Thus, if we standardized on one time, you would set your alarm clock earlier in the summer in order to arise earlier in the day. In other words, EXACTLY the same thing you do now, except without the inconvenience of changing clocks twice a year.

      Aside from the fact that you're again/still advocating for a return to sundials, why would my employer, my customers, and my suppliers be inclined to synchronize to such gradual and constant shifts along with me?

      Why aren't you doing it now yourself?

    8. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I say one global time and you just use common sense ...

      Yeah I stopped reading at this point. If you're relying on common sense your system will break down very epically.

    9. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1

      Why do they do it now twice a year? You don't need to be exactly coordinated +- 30min should be fine. Easily can spend the first part of the day catching up with email, getting equipment turned on etc.

      I realize you didn't post directly to me but I do do as I suggest. I work flex time and generally come into work later during the winter than during the summer. Since the majority of people now do office work not making stuff it can work for the majority of people. A minority of people have jobs that require them to have people around the entire time they work. If someone isn't in already you can usually find something else to do in the mean time. Syncronizing people's schedule for the sole purpose of "we might want a meeting first thing in the morning once in a while so it would be convenient if everyone is in at 8am just in case" is just silly. Just like programming synchronize when you have absolutely no way around it, otherwise avoid it like the plague.

    10. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1

      Not only that it assumes that everyone is equally effective getting up at the same time. It is actually counter productive for both the employee and the employer. It does my boss no good for me to come in at 8am if I can't focus well till 11am. Better I do my household choirs or someother mindless activity when I'm half awake then my coding.

      There are exceptions of course and large number of people will be stuck on a schedule: store hours, shipper receivers etc. But since most people are office workers now (and of manual laborers only some work in an environment that truly needs a schedule mandated from on high (not all factory workers just the ones working in a factory with multiple shifts for example)) the ability for flexibility is much greater. A few people needed to operate a machine can agree when to start we shouldn't be treated like babies anymore needing a pointy haired boss to say "be here at 8 ... or else".

    11. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      If someone isn't in already you can usually find something else to do in the mean time.

      Like taking your business elsewhere.

      Flex time or no, no business exists in a vacuum. You have customers whose money you want, and you have suppliers whose product you want. And if you can't be bothered to coordinate with both, they will find someone else who can and will.

      This is why we have clocks to begin with.

    12. Re:how about getting rid of timezones entirely by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1

      Our business is software our vendors are no one (well we cut a check once a year for MSDN and one a month to AWS but otherwise ... Our customers: dealt with through resellers in their particular country so generally no we don't need to interact outside the office much. We have ~100 devs and 10 office people. The 100 devs don't even have phones. There is very few times that a supplier/customer will absolutely must get a hold of you in the first hour of the day or last hour. Dealing with your intracompany stuff from 11-3 is pretty easy to do for 99% of things. For the remaining 1% you hire people specifically for being available at that time or a call relay service to ring the person that happens to be on call.

  33. Everyday, I like to put a little time aside by vm146j2 · · Score: 1

    . . . then at the end of the year, I have a few days to myself.

    - Steven Wright

    --
    "Lost time is not found again."
  34. Several flaws in this argument. by adjectivity6435 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1. Human beings don't need daylight. Evolution disagrees with you. 2. Americans schedule their day based on television. The trends towards time shifting the medium are increasing. The television audience is decreasing due to competing forms of entertainment. 3. It would be easy. Our infrastructure is built around the current framework. Who here has seen bugs from moving DST this week? I know I have. 4. States would cooperate with this plan when we have two that ignore the established system. We have states that enjoy flaunting less intrusive national laws that effect far fewer individuals. 5. Congress can't even pass a budget. They have important issues that need to be addressed that they are unable to resolve. The ineptitude and inefficiencies are dragging down our economy, our reputation and our elected representatives seem to only be concerned with their own jobs. If you want to fix something, let's start with something that is actually broken.

    1. Re:Several flaws in this argument. by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      1. Human beings don't need daylight.

      Who claims they don't? Citation needed.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    2. Re:Several flaws in this argument. by cashman73 · · Score: 1

      I don't schedule myself around television at all, since I don't get cable TV or any local stations (I live about 1 1/2 hours east of Nashville, so we just have a local PBS station). All of my TV comes in via the internet, so I watch what I want on my schedule, not the schedule set by some TV exec. I will adjust my schedule based on sports, but that's not really set as much by the television networks as much as it is set by the sports leagues and teams. As more and more people start cutting the cable, the television industry is going to have less and less influence on our lives.

  35. Interesting idea. Never gonna happen. by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    You think it might happen because it would be good for the economy in general? Did you learn nothing from the recent government shutdown and threats to limit the debt ceiling? Our "representatives" in congress don't give a shit about the economy at large, only their own personal economies.

    The only way this could happen is if there was a huge financial player interested in it happening. Why would one of those guys spend money and political capital to push something like this through congress if they aren't going to make a decent financial return on it? It can't/won't happen until someone figures out how to make a boat-load of money from the change. Until then, forget it.

  36. The only real fix by GIL_Dude · · Score: 1

    There is only one real fix - abolish time zones completely. As the summary states, time is arbitrary. Duration may be based on something concrete (like the decay of a particle or something), but the actual time itself is indeed arbitrary. Let's just agree that everyone uses UTC and call it done. Can you imagine the benefit? When is that world cup football (US: soccer) match on? Oh, at 17:00. Who gives a rat's ass where it is now? It is on when it is on. No, hmm, it is in Brazil, that is x time zones from me - wait am I forward x or back y from that - heck, when the fuck is it on! Just one time. World wide. Why does it matter if we get up at 23:30? It is arbitrary. If your boss then expects you at work at 2:00 - fine. Later in the year, if they want to change that to 3:00, no problem. But the time itself is just a referent. There is absolutely no reason that it cannot be 14:00 in California, Singapore, and the UK at the same instant. Who cares where the sun appears to be if you look up at that same instant? It doesn't matter. What matters much more is being able to coordinate things easily on a global scale. Get it done!

    1. Re:The only real fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up and also elect to legislative office.

  37. Completely unrelated? by InvisiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article seems to state that the problem is the constant changing of the time forward and backward due to DST. The proposed solution involves one final change at a regular DST interval, then no longer using DST. However, that change also involves redefining our four US timezones into two as well. I understand that it may be easier to make major timezone changes all at once, but I'm not sure the second is really related to the first.

    I've seen other suggestions about simply not using DST anymore. It sure seems to me that today's modern technology and 24x7 scheduling make the idea of shifting daylight hours to different parts of the clock seem a bit outdated. Do we really save that much electricity on lighting to counteract the issues of dealing with changing the time around every six months?

    Something I read previously suggested switching to Summer time and no longer using Winter time. Here in Michigan, it starts getting colder and darker earlier, then the DST change hits and it's suddenly dark pretty much as soon as you leave work. I'm not a fan of the author's suggestion to switch to Winter time (even if it is the "Standard" time) permanently. I'd much rather deal with dark mornings and have a little bit of light after work during the winter. I'm at the later edge of Eastern Time, so this effect should be even worse for those on the East Coast who would be seeing sunrise and sunset before me.

    The author seems to make some reasonable points about people matching their activities to other timezones. I don't have enough experience to say whether that's really true for the majority of people, so as to justify converting the whole timezone. If we were to do this timezone rearrangement, the DST change might be a good time to do it, since people are already accustomed to moving their clocks an hour. However, I don't think it really has anything to do with the DST change, and personally I don't like the idea of my timezone moving to Winter time permanently.

    1. Re:Completely unrelated? by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 2

      I got a different impression of the author's agenda. Consider these bits (excerpted, but not unfairly taken out of context IMO):

      Traders in California start their day at 5 am to participate in New York markets. True, not all Californians work on East Coast time, but research by economists Daniel Hamermesh, Catlin Meyers, and Mark Peacock showed communities are more productive when there's more time coordination.
      [...]
      Frequent travel between the coasts causes jet lag, robbing employees of productive work time. With a one-hour time difference, bi-costal travel would become almost effortless.

      It seems to me that the author is generalizing the "flyover states don't matter" attitude. The important people -- traders, people who frequently fly from coast to coast -- would benefit from timezone collapse. It might present a hardship for the rest (most) of the population, but really, those plebes ought to suck it up and adapt to the needs of their betters.

  38. Humans are diurnal by swm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Humans are diurnal (dI-UR-nal).
    It means we sleep when it's dark and wake when it's light. (compare nocturnal)

    The primary purpose of DST is to keep our scheduled wake time (as determined by school, work, etc) close to sunrise.
    Everything else (energy savings! more shopping hours!) is just confusion and wishful thinking.

    The controlling factor isn't east-west, it's north-south.
    The further north you go, the more sunrise time varies with the seasons, and the more an adjustment like DST helps.

    Stuffing the whole country into two time zones is a non-fix for a non-problem.

    See also
    How congress broke Daylight Savings Time
    http://world.std.com/~swmcd/steven/letters/dst.html

    1. Re:Humans are diurnal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can tell you that time and sleeping has no connection. I slept during the day about 1/3 in my life and am still alive.

    2. Re:Humans are diurnal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, I'm not clicking a link to "std.com". I do not want anything that those three letters might symbolize. Especially not flowers delivered to my doorstep.

  39. Well... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    Well, if you are going to go as far as the Shrager suggests, then why not just eliminate all time zones. Let people on the West Coast get up and go to work at noon and go home at 8pm? Or you could go the otherway and people in New York get up and go to work at 6am and go home at 2pm but using the standard clock in CA. Or, you could pick the midwest as the middle and let both costs, were the majority of people live either go to work and school in the dark or come home that way.

    If you don't like Daylight Saving Time, fine lobby to abolish it or to make it permanent. That is a totally different case than eliminating time zones.

  40. DST is pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've never given a crap whether the sun rises or sets a little earlier or later. It's winter anyway and not really all that sunny, so I don't actually give a damn whether it's dark or not and from what I can tell neither does anyone else.

    We should just move to a single time zone and be done with it.

  41. I've got an idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rather than wait for the goverment to tell us what time it is, why don't we all just establish our own new time zone (one for the whole country would be nice) and use it exclusively. Eventually the govenment will have no choice but to follow along.

    If I, and every person and business I associate with use a single time zone, then it really doesn't matter what any law says. I don't think I can be arrested for what time my phone/watch/clock says it is.

  42. Integrated Globalized World by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In this integrated globalized World, having one time zone for the planet makes perfect sense. We are all on 24/7 schedules anyway, so what difference does it make if I'm getting up 6AM local or 11AM UTC? It's just a number.

    And if I had a store job, they're hours could just be 12PM to 12AM or whatever.

    It would be wonderful to be able to say to someone in India "The meeting is at 1500" and not worry about time zones.

    Sigh ... it'll never happen though because my fellow old people wouldn't be able to adjust. They'd put up some sort of fight and we vote more than the rest of you.

  43. Time zones predate modern communication. by couchslug · · Score: 2

    Time zones were useful when we worked with clocks and dead-tree calendars. Those are antiquated.
    Modern comms make schedule adjustments easy and business "operating hours" would be more useful to all concerned if posted in GMT. If I need to contact a different country I don't have to figure out their time zone.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    1. Re:Time zones predate modern communication. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work with people exactly 12 time zones away. Contacting them is an interesting case were the 12 hour clock works better than the 24 hour clock.

    2. Re:Time zones predate modern communication. by westlake · · Score: 1

      Time zones were useful when we worked with clocks and dead-tree calendars.

      Time zones evolved with the railroads and the telegraph; before the railroad, clocks were synchronized to local solar time --- and changed about every twenty-five miles or so. The proto-geek of those days invented gadgets to fire off a shot of gunpowder at noontime.

      Modern comms make schedule adjustments easy.

      I'm not so sure about that.

      If I need to contact a different country I don't have to figure out their time zone.

      The machine can go 24 hours without light or sleep. If you are trying to reach out to a human, you have to show them a little more consideration.

  44. Re:Interesting idea. Never gonna happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or "we the people" could just start using a single time zone and fuck what time the government says it is. They'd be forced to follow along.

  45. Daylight wasting time by whizbang77045 · · Score: 1

    Since we're introducing new concepts here, I propose something I call "Daylight Wasting Time." We all get up an hour later and go to bed an hour earlier regardless of the time of year. To heck with the lawn, having time to shovel snow, etc. And oh, yes: leave the clocks alone.

  46. What is this unix-centrism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WHy not use TAI? It *has* an epoch defined and a rate. It has no leapseconds, so those HFT folks worrying about their transaction posting on the wrong day will be happy. The zero time is 1959

  47. Bad Examples by Etcetera · · Score: 1

    Schrager says that this strategy has already been proven to work in other parts of the world. China has been on one time zone since 1949, despite naturally spanning five time zones and in 1983, Alaska, which naturally spans four time zones, moved most of the state to a single time zone.

    China is a Totalitarian Communist society where you can be shot if you complain too much... especially if you're a poor peasant who, working on the land, might be most affected by the inconvenience of a wide divergence between local time and "sun time" and isn't a great fan of Mao.

    Alaska is composed of few cities and 100,000's of square miles of (mostly) uninhabited back country... the Unorganized Borough. Moose and caribou don't care about your lack of DST, man. They follow the sun anyway.

    Please try again.

  48. Crackpot time changes by russotto · · Score: 1

    Crackpot changes to daylight savings time and time zones get proposed all the time. Every once in a while, the changes actually get implemented, usually to everyone's detriment -- year round DST (US, since repealed), double DST (UK, also since reversed), moving the dates around a few weeks, etc.

    For some reason it's easier to mess with time than it is to mess with schedules that depend on time. Which is why this proposal is a dumb one. It puts Central and Mountain permanently one hour ahead of solar time (which was terrible when Carter did it). It puts California permanently two hours ahead of solar time.

    If some dictator were to appear and demand this happen, of course eventually schedules would be adjusted, but once that happens, you lose the benefits anyway -- if your East Coast office work hours are 9 to 5 Eastern, and your West Coast office work hours are 11 to 7 Western, that's no different than it is today.

  49. Live sports by tepples · · Score: 1

    And once we kill television schedules and make everything on demand

    I don't see how that can happen. There's a strong preference for watching sport telecasts with a delay of less than thirty seconds after the action happens. Cable companies have realized that this is their big advantage over "over the top" VOD-over-IP services such as Netflix, with Xfinity (Comcast's home brand) advertising that it has "the most live sports."

  50. If you like your extra hour you can keep it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody will take that away from you. Period.

  51. Do sports get time-shifted? by tepples · · Score: 1

    The trends towards time shifting the medium are increasing.

    Let me know when people start time-shifting Sunday Night Football or Monday Night Football.

    1. Re:Do sports get time-shifted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Been there, done that, do it all the time. Why watch live and be force fed commercials?!?

      In fact there are plenty of Monday's and Thursday's I work late, missing the live broadcast. Through the power of recording, I watch it later that night.

  52. What an idiot by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    Wow, nobody tell them that the light actually does hit the planet at different times in different parts of America. Apparently the author didn't realize that.

  53. I just use DST all the time. by Zaphod-AVA · · Score: 1

    I just use Daylight Saving Time all the time. I'm fine with everyone else being wrong, as long as it gets dark at 5:30 on the shortest day of the year instead of 4:30. Dark at 8am? So what, 8am sucks anyway. Worried about school kids? Set their schedule so they have an 8 hour day that always has daylight in whatever region you are in.

  54. This idea is just as stupid as DST by jensend · · Score: 1

    DST is an anachronism from the German Reich in the two World Wars. A generation from now, when DST has finally been relegated to history and people no longer take it for granted, governments forcing their citizens to lie to themselves about the time will seem just as perplexing and absurd as other fascist traditions already seem to us now.

    Using for Messing up everyone else's time just to serve the interests of the East Coast is a terrible idea. That they use China's subjugation of western provinces as an excuse for this "time zone imperialism" is again reminiscent of the fascists.

    1. Re:This idea is just as stupid as DST by jensend · · Score: 1

      Aagh, should have used preview. Of course I meant to cut the first couple words off that last paragraph.

  55. Atlantic Writer Blows It by skywire · · Score: 2

    Even if we conceded the utility of collapsing the US from four time zones to two, the Atlantic writer's proposal would certainly not be the way to go. One desirable characteristic of setting time zone boundaries is to minimize the difference, whether positive or negative, between the clock and solar time. If it didn't matter, she might as well have picked any two random zones in the world. She clearly is aware of that principle, but she blew it in the application. As her proposal stands, Central and Eastern would always observe Eastern. Okay. But Pacific and Mountain would observe Central! Think about it. Central does not get to observe its own true time, while two other time zones do observe it, with one of those having a two-hour offset! The obvious solution is this: Pacific and Mountain observe Mountain. Central and Eastern observer Central. Now you would be using the two time zones most central to the country, with no zone offset more than an hour from solar. And two of them would have no offset.

    --
    Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
    1. Re:Atlantic Writer Blows It by Megane · · Score: 1

      Do it like the TV networks already do it, make Eastern and Pacific the base zones, 3 hours apart. Then Alaska moves down to PST, since the southeast of it was already in the next time zone over. Except that Anchorage was already downshifted one time zone so now they would be two down from solar time.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Standard_time_zones_of_the_world.png

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  56. Rest of world thankful USA has timezones by mathew42 · · Score: 1

    Speaking on behalf of the rest of the world, we are very thankful that the USA has timezones. I'm too scared to think what Windows would be like if it was written to support a single timezone.

  57. Fix the Earth by Sperbels · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't see why we don't look into tilting the Earth's axis back perpendicular to the plane of the ecliptic. Bam! Problem solved. And none of those pesky seasons either.

    1. Re:Fix the Earth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or we could speed up the precession of the axis to complete a rotation every year. Then everyone can move to the side of the earth which has the season they like.

  58. Enlightened Arizonans by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    Those of us who are lucky enough to live in Arizona (the Navajo nation notwithstanding), know the benefits of not having to deal with Daylight Savings. But we also know the downsides. People who live east of us are regularly calling at 7am before we open for business instead of 8am thus disturbing our sleep cycles.

  59. Think of the children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I hate the "think of the children" argument, but this really fucks up a lot of people with developmental disabilities. My cousins with downs? 3 weeks of pain. Autistic son? 3 weeks of pain, twice a year, when his habits get fucked up for nothing.

    Oh by the way, NYC is not all of EST. Much of the country on EST starts work at 7:00 or 8:00, not 9:00.

    1. Re:Think of the children by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

      That wouldn't be "think of the children" specifically, though -- as you said, it messes with folks with developmental or cognitive disabilities, regardless of whether they're ten years old or (in my case) 36.

      Funny thing, though, I wasn't bothered by the time change much as a kid, as it didn't make an abrupt change in my schedule: Iwas called in for the night in sync with dusk (rather than a particular time) if it was warm enough for me to be outside, and once the temperatures dropped enough to keep me inside, I became too engrossed in my favorite hobbies to notice the sun going down. It's only been since I matured enough to sense my mortalitythat the sun setting started bothering me -- now Ihate DST and intensely wish we'd abolish it.

      --
      Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
  60. employers by nten · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It would be easy for your employer, and for schools to simply adjust the time at which people are expected to arrive. If some employers did it and others didn't, or some did it by different amounts or on different dates, it would also thin traffic at rush hour and lunch which could save lives, but cost more in labor for places that are only open at those times. If I were an employer I would have the work day begin after sunrise by the amount of my employees average commute, plus some margin. So your start time is different each day by a minute or two. I would rather have them mix up now and then and be a little late, than wake up in the dark and be groggy for a few hours.

    --
    refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
    1. Re:employers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I were an employer I would have the work day begin after sunrise by the amount of my employees average commute, plus some margin. So your start time is different each day by a minute or two. I would rather have them mix up now and then and be a little late, than wake up in the dark and be groggy for a few hours.

      If you were a smart employer and you had any employees with children, you would time your work hours to coincide with when schools open or risk losing good employees once they decide to have a life outside of work. People with young kids in school who need to be dropped off can't show up at a different time each day because someone hatches some ridiculous idea about requiring people to show up two minutes later each day. Many kids walk to school, and for safety reasons they shouldn't be doing so in the dark. So either change the start time of school or change the clocks, take your pick. I actually think it's easier to change the clock and keep your schedules the same, since it is already difficult to manage two work schedules (me and spouse) a daycare schedule and a school schedule at four separate locations. When I was 25 and single, I couldn't have given a flying freak, but life gets more complicated.

    2. Re:employers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were a smart employer, you'd let your employees work from home and save on office space, not to mention the employee's time and gas money.

    3. Re:employers by sg3000 · · Score: 1

      It would be easy for your employer, and for schools to simply adjust the time at which people are expected to arrive.

      But, why leave it up to people's employers? There's no business benefit to "giving" people more daylight for their leisure activities, and there's no way it would be uniform since it would be subject to the whims of all the companies. Throw the schools on top, and you've got chaos. We're more than just employees; we're citizens. So it makes sense the citizens (a.k.a., "the government") to step in and declare that we're moving the clocks around. I admit I used to be more annoyed with daylight saving time when I was younger, but now that I have kids, it's great to have more daylight hours in summer evenings to enjoy things outside.

      --
      Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
    4. Re:employers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it wouldn't as some employers are customer driven. The ripple effect from schools is widespread enough and effects a large enough part of the population that it is far easier just to adjust everyone's time.

    5. Re:employers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Having everyone do it exactly twice a year is really annoying and complicated, so instead we're going to make every single company and organization decide individually what they may or may not want to do, and just keep our fingers crossed that e.g. the schools and the employers manage to stay synchronized."

      Brilliant plan. I'm excited to be a part of it!

    6. Re:employers by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Except now you're running businesses at a different time to customers. There's a reason trade shops open at 7am, customers come at 7am. If they opened at 6am it's a waste of an hour so they aren't going to change.

      That may not be the best example but you can understand what I'm getting at, no? It is more disruptive to trading for some businesses to change but not others. If you have to do this then it needs to be done at a macro level i.e. all construction industry changes at once, all shopping industry, all business services, all schools, etc.

      Oh then several million websites need to change opening hours, posters need to be reprinted, people need to some how find out that these store times have changed. It would be easier to just move the clock.

    7. Re:employers by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      >If you were a smart employer, you'd let your employees work from home and
      > save on office space, not to mention the employee's time and gas money.

      a) Not everybody is a code-monkey or a helpdesk-script-reader. How, pray tell, are mechanics, bus drivers, construction workers, etc, supposed to "work from home"?

      b) Be careful what you wish for. If your job can be done from the other side of town, it can just as easily be done from the other side of the planet by some 3rd-worlder at a fraction of your current salary.

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    8. Re:employers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It would be easy for your employer, and for schools to simply adjust the time at which people are expected to arrive."

      Yeah, it would. Except that, they never do, and never will. So STFU with your "what if's" and "they could just's" and come back to reality.

  61. Alaska? Hawaii? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    interesting proposal. but article not mention Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands?

  62. Continuous adjustment? by TimeZone · · Score: 1

    I know a lot of people hate what may seem to them to be random adjustments of the time. Personally, I like the way the time ends up aligning with daylight better after the adjustment, but I hate the way it's a big jump, all at once, twice a year. I would really like to see continuous adjustment of the time, such that noon is always the time at which the sun is at the highest point in the sky. Yes, this would be a pain for people who still wear watches, but I'd think we could manage it for all the core infrastructure (i.e. networks and stuff). TZ

  63. A Generally Bad Idea by Ferretman · · Score: 1

    This skews time to work to the benefit of the coasts rather than the heartland. Not my idea of fair.....

    --
    Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
  64. Where do "we" send the petition? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am up for this ALL THE WAY!

    I have worked almost my entire professional Engineering career in the electrical power generation industry and NEVER have understood why UTC is not the "standard" for all "time stamps" - sure would make dealing with the [expletive deleted] USNRC and their [expletive deleted] attitude that NOTHING exists in "fly over land" between their artificial boundaries of 150 mile of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans (dumb-ass ex-nuke navy pukes!). [Lord, I apologize for that one there, and please be with all the starving Pygmies down there in New Guinea! Amen! ]

    I am working on my siblings and remaining parent to understand that is why I have all their computer clocks set to UTC for the "time zone".

    IF I may, however, the "unions" would NOT like this, because it means that they lose the [expletive deleted] B.S. issue of what is considered to be "normal working hours", in an 'industry' that runs LITERALLY continuously.

    1. Re:Where do "we" send the petition? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a small but growing petition to get the White House to consider her change. http://wh.gov/lWFgg

  65. You do realize... by Endloser · · Score: 2, Insightful

    that changing what time your clock says has nothing to do with how long the Sun is visible, right?

    1. Re:You do realize... by swalve · · Score: 1

      It is all psychological and practical. Nobody wants to get up at 4:45 in the morning to enjoy the extra daylight of summer, and there is nothing to do at that time anyway. Why sleep through an hour of sunlight when it is relatively easy to change the clocks and use the daylight in the evening? If there is going to be a change made, I'd be all for staying on summer time all year. Whether the sun rises at 7am or 8am is irrelevant to most people, but setting at 3:30 versus 4:30 makes a bigger difference.

    2. Re:You do realize... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that you sound like a douche that has not read through the comment his responding to ? There's nothing there to justify your silly strawman.

  66. White House petition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a petition to get the White House to consider her change. http://wh.gov/lWFgg

  67. 1/2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Move the clock back 1/2 hour...done.

  68. They're called STATION FEEDS, dummy. by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    I found that in Austin, everyone did things at the same times they do them in New York, despite the difference in time zone. People got to work at 8 am instead of 9 am, restaurants were packed at 6 pm instead of 7 pm, and even the TV schedule was an hour earlier.

    Uh, yeah. TV shows are going to run an hour earlier. Network and cable television channels are run on two different station feeds, one runs on Eastern Time, the other runs on Pacific. People who live in Central Time are going to be given the Eastern feed since it more closely meets the intended broadcast time of the shows. Television, while the content itself is pre-recorded, is shown live from the feed. A local delay of an hour on all programming wouldn't even be an option on satellite since the same dish up in the sky is being used for multiple time zones. So the famous line "Film at 11" referring to the nightly news is for ten o'clock news over here.

  69. Half hour by redelm · · Score: 1

    Reducing the number of time-zones is a very good idea, especially in the modern era of telecommunications and broadcasting.

    I suspect this is why the USSR operated all on Moscow time and why modern India is on a half-hour timezone to fit in. I'm not sure anything explains Venezuela, still less Newfoundland :)

    1. Re:Half hour by Erikderzweite · · Score: 1

      USSR used 11 timezones, actually. What exactly do you mean by "operated all on Moscow time"?

  70. This.... by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

    I actually like DST, but if we're going to mess with it let's just dump time zones altogether, they don't really serve a purpose anymore.

    --
    Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
  71. I can already see the bumper stickers by decsnake · · Score: 2

    Repeal Obamatime!

  72. 8 AM? in Austin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People do NOT get to work in Austin at 8 AM.

  73. Why stop there? by cercie · · Score: 1

    With all the other B*S we have to deal with in our country he wants to inject such a mandate. This sounds like something that the current Administration would try pulling!!! SO why stop there??? Make it one F*ing time zone? F* me, F*ckity, F*ck, F*uck!!!

  74. Aren't zones unnecessary anyway? by rump360 · · Score: 1

    A clock is a coordination tool. Splitting time up into different zones only hinders coordination. Just set everything to UTC or some other arbitrary mark and do away with DST.

    1. Re:Aren't zones unnecessary anyway? by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      Having it all be UTC would only hinder coordination, not help. To coordinate with someone several timezones away, knowing what their clock says isn't actually the most important thing. It's needed for exact scheduling true, but the first thing I need to know is "What are their normal working hours?". As it stands I can generally make an assumption: standard day-shift office hours are roughly 9-5 their time regardless of where they are. From that and a timezone chart I can work out what that corresponds to in my time and figure out where the overlap with my regular day is. If you put the whole world on UTC, I still need a chart listing times for every timezone in the world. It's just that now instead of showing offset from UTC it'll show... offset from UTC. Because it still has to show when their local workday, the equivalent of 9-5 local time, is relative to mine and mine's in UTC.

      Most of these proposals come from the idea that humans are tied to the clock. We aren't. We're tied to the day, to the progress of the sun from sunrise to sunset. We like to wake up roughly at sunrise, not too much earlier or later. We like our workday to be done before sunset. We like our midday meal to happen roughly half-way through that day. Timezones are just a mechanism for satisfying that, to make midday on the clocks we use for precision measuring line up with midday in the solar day we like to run on. And no matter how else you try to list it, for simplicity people are quickly going to go back to "This is when things happen on my clock, how far ahead or behind it are things for them?".

    2. Re:Aren't zones unnecessary anyway? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Most of these proposals come from the idea that humans are tied to the clock. We aren't.

      But socially we are, and that's the problem. The notion of 9-5 is so strongly ingrained in our business culture and school culture that now DST is simply a way to work around that. Businesses don't want to change their "open hours" through the year, so the time changes for them. It's become such a hurdle that it's easier for us to change the definition of the hours twice a year than it is for business to change.

  75. Shifting times by an hour or two by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The parent is being facetious, but this is still a valid point. In some countries, office hours start at 09:00 or even 10:00. In others, everyone is on deck at 07:30. Why do people in the US think that all office workers have to work 8 to 5? Even in the current system, it would make sense for places on the East edge of a zone to keep different times than places on the West edge. Why are people so slavishly tied to the numbers on a clock?

    1. Re:Shifting times by an hour or two by chilvence · · Score: 1

      I'd love to see a clock that goes by the position of the sun in the sky rather than rigidly following the rotation of the earth. Lunchtime would always be at high noon, and your alarm would always go off at dawn. Fuck the lost time in the winter, spend it by the fireplace!

  76. Spoiler by tepples · · Score: 1

    Why watch live and be force fed commercials?!?

    So that you know the final score the moment it becomes final without spoiling the rest of the game. As far as I can tell, it's OK to DVR it and fast-forward past the downtime and commercials between plays, so long as the viewer has caught up to live by the fourth quarter's two-minute warning.

  77. Blech- just stop changing by markdavis · · Score: 1

    The proposal in the article sounds stupid and is certainly not less confusing.

    My suggestion- STOP F'ING WITH TIME. Just STAY on Daylight Savings time all year long and stop changing it. Done

    No more adjustments. No more confusion. No more going to work in the dark AND getting home in the dark.

  78. DST-haters are exhausting. by Delusion_ · · Score: 1

    Just stop. Mind you, I'd be happy with a country-wide single-time-zone if and only if either I were at the western edge of it, or if we just pushed the clock ahead 2-2.5 hours ahead before standardizing it.

    All of the "just change your schedule instead of the time" arguments come from a naive understanding of what it's actually like to hold a regular job like most people have: your employer is pretty much the one and only determiner of your schedule for the majority of your week and your life. "Hey, I'm just going to come into work a few minutes later each day in the winter, and I'll start to float back the opposite way once spring kicks in" presumes the corporate world gives a damn about your scheduling needs. Most of the working world does not have the luxury of a job that, if they arrive 30 minutes late as a regular basis, they will not be fired from. Many people who work in workplaces with a time clock will get fired if they're a few minutes late from the employer-mandated start time more than a few minutes per month.

    Also, many detractors of DST obviously don't have to schedule their work life with the starting times of their children's schools. "Well, if everyone floated,they could all float the same!" That's simply not happening. Workplaces like standardized time for a reason: because it places the burden of scheduling the workplace on the employer without having to have complicated time shifts every day (or every few weeks). If you have a job and children, and they shift time expectations in blocks independent of one another, the problem persists.

    Many DST-detractors also seem to presume that, if you have children, getting them to school is simply a matter of getting them up in time to catch the bus, or to walk. Most areas of the country either do not have dependable public transportation where children can learn to commute themselves, nor live within walking distance of their school, and an increasing number of parents have to drive their children to school every year precisely because tight education budgets means something has to get cut, and school busing is one of the first to go - and it's easy to justify, because the logic is that if the parents don't approve a busing millage, they're the only ones who will be inconvenienced by it, anyway. Admittedly, this is a political failure where the citizen is somehow given collective veto power over the funding of schools, police, and fire services, but can't disapprove "millages" for any meaningful government spending such as corporate tax breaks and military weapon systems.

    As far as California goes, some of its tech service sector effectively works from 5 to 5 precisely because they have to serve the needs of a country whose major business hubs are either in Eastern Time, Central Time, or Pacific Time. Mountain Time is said to exist, but I have deliberately chosen to forget it does.

    Moving to one time zone wouldn't be impossible, of course. China does it and they are, roughly speaking, as wide as the mainland US.

    Whatever the solution is, if it means that most Americans who leave work after 5PM get almost no useful daylight time for much of the year, it's a dead letter, and that won't change regardless of how many slashdotters who make their own hours tell them to "just" adjust their schedules.

    1. Re:DST-haters are exhausting. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      China does it and they are, roughly speaking, as wide as the mainland US.

      Sure... if you consider over a thousand km difference to be "about the same". The *average* width of the continental US is about 4800 km, while China at its widest is about 3100 km.

  79. We're not all farmers. And even if we were, wtf? by eyenot · · Score: 1

    I always hear about how DST was about "giving farmers more daylight to get their farming done to keep America's breadbasket full".

    That's so stupid. I've lived and worked on a farm. You tend to get up early enough that it's dark out any way. You tend to go to bed when the work is done whether it's still light out or not. We have electricity and light, these days. For the most part, work gets done early and you tend to go to bed while it's still partially light out, either out of exhaustion or because there's nothing to do and you'd like to be well rested for the morning. The clock often doesn't get switched to daylight saving's time until a day or two later when somebody gets back from town and remembers to mention the clocks are all different. Everybody's too busy to sit down and fiddle with their clocks. Daylight savings, whether forward or back, is immediately met with ridicule and complaint.

    I've read about some really rustic farmers who still get up at "the crack of dawn", sandwiching wake-up somewhere between the rooster's call (which can be at 3am, you never know) and the beginning of sunrise, as long as a look out the window shows some light. I don't think they give a rat's ass about daylight savings time, either.

    And if you aren't a farmer, how much does one hour of daylight savings save you? Save you in terms of what? Save you from a boring life where time is reliable and routine is, well, routine? I've never met one person, my whole entire life, who felt that Daylight Savings Time should be maintained. Especially while I've lived in Michigan, where the concept of daylight is sort of a joke. Nobody here in Michigan would care if the beginning and end of the day shifted back and forth, and in my opinion most people would be slightly more intelligent because they would benefit from a direct relationship with the real nature of astronomical time, of light and the effect it has on the seasons due to axial precession. Shifting the frame of reference back and forth robs people of this natural adjustment to their latitude, and attempts to stuff them into a weird and artificial day.

    Granted, most people would just get up when they felt well rested and felt like doing things, and would just go out and hunt and gather, if left entirely to themselves. But, we work according to a clock. But shifting the clock back and forth under command does, as I pointed out, rob a person of the ability to experience the regular, back and forth shifting of natural light. I think people would find it very worthwhile to get to experience how driving to work at 8am means driving under a different ambient light at different times of year, and that the degree of change is different depending on what latitude they live in. It would be a decent trade-off for living on a clock.

    --
    "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
  80. Why stop half way? by msobkow · · Score: 1

    Switch to GMT and be done with it.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  81. Re:We're not all farmers. And even if we were, wtf by eyenot · · Score: 1

    >> I've never met one person, my whole entire life, who felt that Daylight Savings Time should be maintained. Especially while I've lived in Michigan...

    I should have corrected that to, "and the sentiment against DST is Especially strong in Michigan", because I was already speaking in an absolute term. I have never met anybody who supported DST and thought it was a meritable exercise, but I have met people who "never really thought about it". In Michigan, I've met very, very few people who don't have some strong opinions about Daylight Savings Time and how it needs to be put where the sun doesn't shine.

    --
    "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
  82. Easiest Solution by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

    Switch the entire world the Zulu Time - We no longer have any need for Timezones. All that you would then need to communicate is that my office is open from 2200-0600 and everyone around the world will know not to bother calling at 0800 since no one is there.

    --
    Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
  83. Tv schedule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually the tv schedule has three time zones not two. Central and Eastern combine, but there are still two more. And the Alaska example is ignorant; being so close to the north pole makes the longitude span meaningless. But abandoning the summer/winter time shift is a good idea. At least it would be one less thing for people to bitch about twice a year.

  84. Java TZUPDATER utility behind Oracle paywall. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure. Just go changing the time zone rules again. Good luck patching older versions of Java you're stuck supporting if you don't have a paid Oracle support contract that gives you access to the TZUPDATER utility.

    See here: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/timezones-137583.html#tzu

    Sun used to provide that tool for free. So did Oracle (until about a year ago.)

  85. The right fix - suggest businesses to vary hours by xtronics · · Score: 1

    No need for the officious, wasteful daylight savings time. Get the government out of my clocks! Just zulu time would work for me.

  86. Another stupid east coast proposal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sunset in California winters at 4:00pm or earlier.
    Standard stupid east coast idea just because they can't figure out if they should add or subtract 3 hours to get to Pacific time. Why not be like Russia and put everyone on Moscow time?

  87. Two time zones are enough by XB-70 · · Score: 1

    In the Great White North, there are two daylight zones: Mosquitoes and Winter. It's completely in tune with the environment and no one has to adjust a clock when the changeover comes.

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
  88. The Problem with Grand Projects, is Size by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    Consider the Obama Care web site. Don't it all at once, have pilot projects. This is great idea, but lets try it one part at a time. Personally, I would love to vanquish Day Light Savings, because it doesn't save me anything.

  89. Condradicts itself by jblues · · Score: 1

    The article contradicts itself. On the one hand it says that people in individual cities already adjust their time locally to cater to the environment there. (Sunrise time, weather, trading partners, culture, etc). On the other hand it says that changing the clocks will allow more collaboration and trading time with cities that were previously in different zones.

    --
    If it acquires resources on instantiation like a duck, then its a shared_ptr<Duck>
  90. Before daylight "savings" time by p51d007 · · Score: 0

    I wish they would just leave the time alone. In the USA, we had it a little around WW1, then during WW2, and then it pretty much stayed during the made up energy crisis of the 70's. In today's 24/7 world, there really isn't any "savings". I agree that (at least in the USA), we have pretty much run our lives around the schedule of television programs, but, I think that is also disappearing. With Tivo, Dvr's, time delay etc...who watches tv around what the idiot networks say? I wish they would just leave it either on DST or standard time and leave it alone. The only "real" issue with playing around with the clocks now is going to work in the dark & coming home in the dark, when they change it to standard time.

  91. Disruptive micro-optimizations considered stupid by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    Every time someone messes with time zones and clocks it causes temporary confusion and additional work for systems not field upgradable now needing to be manually screwed with.

    Nothing measurably good comes of it as people adapt to underlying reality regardless of what time the clock says. Your brilliant reason why x is better than y is an illusion it does not matter. It never did.

    Last time DST got moved to "save energy" **surprise** no savings had been measured.

    It is akin to changing the form of 110v outlets to make them "better". Disruptive change which solves nothing is simply a waste of everyone's time.

  92. China time zone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Atlantic example of China's time zone is misleading. Most of China's population is crowded into 10% of its arable land space on its east coast. More important is reconciling Russia's time zone problem spanning the distance from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok.

  93. Screw Commerce by sgage · · Score: 1

    Time is NOT arbitrary. Noon should be close to when the Sun is on the meridian. I don't have time [sic] to read the 350 comments on this article, but I hope someone made the point. We have already yielded so much up to "commerce". NOT time. Fuck commerce. The economy exists to serve human wants and needs. Humans do not exist to serve the economy. This article is absurd and disgusting.

  94. Keep the time zones, just whole DST thing. by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Just get rid of that whole shifting times twice a year completely and stick to just one time for a given location.

    I'd suggest just keeping DST for the whole year, but that is carries more logistical problems for people in more northern locales than keeping the "standard time" throughout the year.

    1. Re:Keep the time zones, just whole DST thing. by brunnegd · · Score: 1

      I agree. Get rid of DST, standard time all year. Live in AZ for a year, realize how stupid DST is.

  95. DST and America, you guys crack me up by AbRASiON · · Score: 2

    Americans seem to HATE the shit out of DST, why I don't know - it baffles me.
    There's always these debates, every year same old arguments each time.

    Fact is we lead mostly 9-5 lives. You can argue all you like that if I want more daylight, I should get up earlier and leave work earlier, that's never going to happen - life isn't going to change like that.
    I love the shit out of DST, it's beautiful, every Melbournian I know loves it, in summer we get these awesome awesome long evenings of light, peoples moods are better, you can go out and so and enjoy stuff for hours. If you're fortunate enough to finish work around 4-ish you can really get a lot done in peak summer. It's cheery and it's great.

    If anything, winter should be moved to DST too :/ I don't care if I'm going to work in the dark but coming home in the dark is gruesome and depressing.
    As for the complexity of it, my PC's all do it automatically, my phone does it automatically, I need to change the time on my wristwatch, microwave and house clock. This is not a major issue.
    3 DST

    1. Re:DST and America, you guys crack me up by brunnegd · · Score: 1

      Who works 9-5? I keep hearing the expression, have yet to find such a job. I hate going to work inthe dark. Depressing, coming home in the dark is no big deal.

  96. Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have mixed feelings about this.

    On one hand, I hate when it gets dark early, because it takes me an hour or more to drive home from work instead of 35-45 minutes.

    On the other hand, I live on the east coast, and if we were forcibly moved to Central Time & businesses maintained traditional 9-5 hours, it would be like getting to work from 10-6 with no strings attached. That's actually a big deal, I have DSPS, and my "fall asleep naturally" time is pretty solidly between 2-3am (EST) and 3-4am (EDT). It's remarkably stable, and I have to be sleep-deprived almost to the point of death AND on Ambien to sleep earlier and REMAIN sleeping past 2-3am (otherwise, I'll crash & burn at 9pm, wake up around 1 or 2, then be wide awake until I'm suddenly crushed by sleepiness right around dawn).

  97. Swatch had it right by noelhenson · · Score: 1

    1000 86-second ticks per day. Same time everywhere, every day.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatch_Internet_Time

  98. DST? Time Zones? Why? by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1

    The whole idea of "time zones" was so that the mid-19th century populace, who was accustomed to setting their clocks (such as they were) to 12Noon at Sun transit (which is the definition of "noon" anyway) could all be persuaded to agree on whatever time the railway station master said it was - and all the railway station masters had to agree on what time it was to keep from banging trains together. So "time zones" are entirely artificial contrivances.

    The best description I ever saw was a cartoon back in the early 70's; Richard Nixon in a rocking chair, explaining that he was going to make this blanket longer by cutting a foot of the blanket from one end and sewing on to the other - just like daylight savings time did, you see.

    The British had (used to have?) "Summer time", which was like DST. The Bermudians didn't bother to change the clocks; they had "summer hours" for most businesses. from like 7AM to 3PM. It accomplished the same thing.

    I see three practical options.

    1. Do nothing. It ain't broke, so don't try "fixing" it. We're mostly accustomed to the quirks of DST, so who cares?

    2. Set a single "American" time zone, and set all the clocks to it. Businesses and schools can set their opening/start times and closing/end times to whatever they want. Two time zones would be foolish.

    3. Switch everything over to GMT. We're a global economy; we ought to have a global clock. Besides, what relevance does sunrise or sunset have when you're on the Moon, or in a space habitat? After all; Arthur C. Clarke wrote "If man survives ... then for all but a vanishingly brief instant near the dawn of history, the word 'ship' will mean 'spaceship.'"

  99. Time is an Illusion by snowbike · · Score: 1

    C'mon. Everyone is bitching about DST. Let's really just admit time is an illusion* and embrace it! I say we just insert an extra hour every weekend (and never "give it back"). I also propose a single timezone for the whole world and using a 10 hour day (metric time). But I'll settle for an hour inserted every weekend.

    *Lunch time double so.

  100. Oh for fuck's sake.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For fuck's sake, don't change the freaking time change AGAIN! How many "automatically changing" clocks ended up in the landfill due to them needing adjustments 4 times a year (instead of them autocorrecting) after the first change... *Sigh*

  101. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  102. This all sounds rather... by sv_libertarian · · Score: 1

    Wibbley Wobbley to me.

  103. It's a joke, really by slew · · Score: 1

    Of course this wasn't the only genesis, but some folks attribute daylight savings time as a joke started by Benjamin Franklin who off handedly suggested that one way to save money on home lighting costs at night would be to force everyone to get up earlier in the summer. For the record he apparently wrote this in French as a suggestion for Parisians, no farmers involved. That whole farmer thing is a crock.

    As with most jokes, nobody took this seriously until WWI when Germany decided to actually attempt this to help conserve energy for the war effort. After Germany did this, nearly every country involved in WWI followed suite (including the US).

    Like many crazy things that require a massive societal change, it took place during a war. You might blame Americans for making the joke, but I choose to blame the Europeans for falling for the joke and dragging the rest of us into it.

  104. Oh hell no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Americans on Pacific time should set their clocks forward one hour.

    Seriously, fuck that. My employer expects me to work the usual 8 to 5, and I doubt that would change under this proposal. I'd much rather have more daylight at the end of the day than at the beginning so I can do things that take a variable amount of time during the daylight. Or, do I need to do winter yard work under construction floodlights? Or take a day off to enjoy an after-work drink in the winter sun?

    No, thanks. I'm not interested in this proposal. In fact, I'd rather do the opposite that we do now and spring back/fall forward.

    1. Re: Oh hell no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am aware that it meets my fall-forward requirement, but not my spring-back. If we are going to change it, I want it my way, damnit!

  105. Works for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live on the west coast and I'm so sick and tired of being woken up by east coast motherfuckers (usually indian recruiter types) that never heard of time zones.

  106. Daylight Saving Time/Time Zones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apples/Oranges! Regardless of the number of time zones, any system that includes DST will require a twice yearly adjustment to clocks by exactly the same number of people.

    Generally, only frequent travellers are affected by time zones. The vast majority are largely unaffected in their daily life.

    Fewer time zones will mean a larger difference in the time of sunset and sunrise from one edge of a time to the other edge. With one hour (15 degree) time zones, there is a one hour difference. Two hour time zones (30 degree) will mean there is a two hour difference within a time zone.

  107. 1 world timezone! by hankito6950 · · Score: 1

    Guys, guys, guys. You're all totally missing it. What color is the ribbon going to be for the One World, One Time Zone campaign and how many if you are with me to changing your location to UTC. /sarcasm Ok seriously, wake up with the sun and sleep when its dark. I'm confident there are people in the world with no internet access or time keepers who would look at us strangely with the 'move this time here, no there, then here' mentality. I'd prefer we just get rid of changing clocks but don't see the point in combining timezones its kind of set in our brains now, 24 timezones, 24 hours to make a revolution. Just like imperial vs metric systems, you just won't ever get us Americans to use metric and that's just the way it is.

  108. We'll have to wait for the next President by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We'll have to wait for the next President, because we all know WHO will say it's wrong and evil, will lead us into complete darkness (no pun) if President Obama we're to try and approve this change.

  109. No DST by brunnegd · · Score: 1

    We stand a better chance of eliminating DST than moving to a two time zone system. And since 280 million Americans have never experienced the pleasures of no DST, it won't happen. The debate over energy savings is superfoulous, the system is too ingrained to change. I envy the lucky people in AZ.

  110. back to local time and UTC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Best I understand the DST is really an enhancement to timezones and we do not need timezones. Do your research and then ask why the kids do not have wristwatches.

    From this I am reminded of the old MIT computer labs. Maybe we each need our own personal timezone.

  111. Antiques R Us by TinyTiger8 · · Score: 1

    Time zones of 1 hour are a remnant of the 19th century railroad time table sync problems. Up to then, everybody followed the natural (sun) local times. For centuries it did not seem to cause any problem because travel times were much slower than sync times. Now we are the other end of the spectrum, we can bridge time zones at a speed that makes arbitrary one-hour divisions kind of quaint. Here is my proposal: there is no problem whatsoever having actual sun time to the millisecond- network time everywhere. Anybody can post their actual time online and make it clear that they open or close at their actual time. Time translation apps are a cinch, as we all know. If I can do business with a West coast store from Indiana with 3 hour shift, what exactly is the problem doing so with a, say, 2h47 shift? Besides, by having a continuous actual time, there will be no zigs and zags to the time maps. An ordinary gps unit will be all that is needed to tell you the local time. So, when you finally adopt the metric system, consider adopting modern time management?

  112. Re:As someone on the East Coast by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

    ^^^ Actually, you don't loathe and despise DST... you loathe and despise STANDARD TIME. To shift the clock so the sun sets later during the winter (when it's cooler and you WANT to golf after work), you'd want daylight saving time to be the normal time ALL year.

    It could be worse, though... you COULD live in California, which gets *completely* screwed by being in Pacific time rather than Mountain time (especially Los Angeles). I dare *anybody* to look at the sunrise/sunset times for Los Angeles in June & December and justify it being 3 hours behind New York instead of 2. Without even getting into travel logistics or flogging the energy horse, it's obvious that LA is in the wrong time zone, period, unless you're a vampire who likes having a few extra hours of darkness to go shopping before stores close at 9.

    Seriously... in the summer, the sun comes up in LA around 4:45am, but still sets a little after 7pm. And people in Las Vegas get even MORE screwed by being in Pacific. At least in LA, they get to enjoy about an hour of twilight as the sun sets. In Las Vegas, the sun drops behind the mountains to the west, the city gets engulfed by the shadow, and that's *it* -- early twilight to total darkness in something like 5 minutes. The first time I ever went to Las Vegas, it totally blew my mind. I walked into a 7-11 my first day right as the sun was starting to set, and walked out 3 minutes later into pitch-black night.

    If anything, it might make sense to abolish Pacific time AND permanently split the difference between MST and MDT (creating a new "Pacific/West" timezone that was permanently UTC-6.5), which would have the effect of shifting times in what's now Pacific Time to an hour and a half hour later than they are now (so that in the summer, sunrise/sunset would be around 6:11am/8:38pm, and in the winter it would be around 8:28am/6:24pm). In the worst case, Summer/Winter sunrise/sunset times for Seattle would be 5:45am/9:30pm and 9:28am/5:58pm. In exchange for driving to work in total darkness (instead of pre-dawn darkness), they'd at least get to see real sunlight while driving home.

    Likewise, a case could be made for Central merging with Eastern into a new East/Atlantic timezone that was permanently UTC-4.5 (splitting the difference between EST and EDT, shifting what's now Central back by 1/2 or 1-1/2 hours), the only big city with REALLY crazy sunrise/sunset times would be Minneapolis (9:51am sunrise in the winter... but 6:11pm sunset in return). If Minnesota really hated it, they could move into the new Pacific/West timezone at UTC-6.5), which would make their sunrise/sunset times almost exactly the same as New York's. I suspect, though, that they'd just stay in East/Atlantic and enjoy the late winter sunsets.

    Of course, some might object that the creation of two new timezones (East/Atlantic at UTC-4.5, and Pacific/West at UTC-6.5) on the grounds that they'd be oddball half-hour timezones compared to the rest of the world... but fuck it. India got away with it, and we're at least as important globally as they are. Not to mention the fact that Europe would probably do the exact same thing with CET once the soft taboo was broken.

  113. Why not just one time zone for the US by rssrss · · Score: 1

    At least for the lower 48. China does it. If under the Schrager plan more than three fourths of the population will be an hour off of local solar time, why would it be so bad to have them be 2 hours off? If you picked GMT-6 (Central Standard) as the base time, the West Coast would be 2 hours off solar time, but they would be on the same time as NYC and Chicago for business purposes. Of course things that are local and need some coordination with the sun like school starting times would seem odd. But, people would get used to them.

    As for TV network times. They are rapidly becoming obsolete. The times for sporting events should be set for the comfort and convenience of the players and spectators, not the TV networks. News is now 24 hours. And, dramas and other contrivances can be made available any time.

    --
    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
  114. get over it! by metaforest · · Score: 1

    Fuck you people. Most of my clocks are on NTP.... the few that aren't are easy to adjust..... DST/DT is what it is FFS it is not a big deal.
    I like having my day shifted by an hour twice a year so I don't have to go to work in the dark and return in the dark half the fucking year.

  115. Abolish Time Zones... by zoid.com · · Score: 1

    I think it's time to abolish time zones all together. In reality most of the world works off of UTC. Displaying different offset times only confuses things. Maybe it made sense in the 1800s but not anymore with the global economy.

    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Abolish-Time-Zones/218240794869421?ref=hl

  116. Here we go AGAIN by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

    The same people who predicted the ice age coming in the 1970's, the same people who are predicting horrible, dire consequences for Global Warming, climate change, what ever, are the same people who stuck us with Daylight Savings Time... And there are legions of people out there who religiously believe everything these people say we need in order to save ourselves from certain destruction.

    Maybe the problem is... these people, not the time zones.

    --
    Murphy was an optimist
  117. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  118. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  119. New York effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is one interesting thing that the summary touches on that I don't feel has been fully addressed. That is the effect of New York being in the Eastern timezone.

    The summary notes:

    I found that in Austin, everyone did things at the same times they do them in New York, despite the difference in time zone. People got to work at 8 am instead of 9 am, restaurants were packed at 6 pm instead of 7 pm, and even the TV schedule was an hour earlier.

    That is true, but a major reason for that is that east-coasters have complained for more than a century how hard it is working in New York. They live two states away and have to commute in by train that takes an hour. They have to commute that same hour back. And employers have gone along with it. The trouble is, New York is not nearly so special as it likes to think. People in Atlanta, Austin, and Chicago also have hour-long commutes. They just don't get slack from employers like they would in New York. (I know of at least one large corporation -- name withheld -- that granted New York employees a paid hour for commuting, theoretically because they could working on the train. Their financial people also had a running bet on how long it would take someone in Chicago to figure that out and demand the same hour off.)

    I suspect this is the main reason New York is an hour off from the timezone. I also suspect that -- New York being the labor sync that it is -- this applies to a lot of the Northeast. I would be curious to see if this applies to D.C. as well, and to the communities near the metro line that funnels laborers into D.C. every day. Finally, I would be curious to know about the Carolinas and Florida, who I suspect do not generally demonstrate the hour shift.

  120. Daylight Savings Time actually increases crime by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Robbers prefer dark where there is not much light to spot them, and are not early morning people for the most part.

    Thus, DST is a plot to increase Crime in America.

    P.S.: Canada just installs better LED streetlights btw.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  121. Blankets? by cwsumner · · Score: 1

    The American Indians have a saying about Daylight Saving Time:
    It is like cutting a strip off of one end of a blanket and sowing it onto the other end, and thinking you have made the blanket longer !
    (All "white men" are crazy, no matter what color they are !)

  122. How is this simpler? by badasawsomeness · · Score: 1

    How does giving each section of the US its on rules on how to adjust for DLS make things simpler? Keep it or get rid of it, stop trying to make things more efficient, it just confuses people...