I understand the parents that complain that their kids have to wait for a bus in the dark though.
There's that as well... although because so many parents drive their kids to school these days, I don't know if that's as big of a problem as it may have once been. The far more serious aspect is that of inadequate morning sunlight exposure, and its impact on melatonin levels for *EVERYONE*... including children. While needing to be at work before sunrise in the middle of winter for some people is unfortunate, pushing the clocks ahead in the winter would force even *more* people to not have any morning sunlight in the middle of winter. The desire to have more afternoon sunlight for the sake of mere convenience should not be more important than the health of the general public.
For what it's worth, Morning rush hours in most urban areas run from about 6:00AM to 9:00AM, with the peak time typically being at about 8AM, where people who needed to be at work by 8 are just arriving to work, and people who work later are often just getting on the road.
As sunrise in the winter in Washington is usually *before* 8AM (and only after it for a few days when you are practically living on the Canada US border), people who need to be at work by 8AM are still generally getting the benefits of some morning sunlight during their commute.
Regardless, pushing the clocks ahead an hour in the winter would suddenly force a lack of morning sunlight upon virtually *EVERYBODY*, and would certainly result in more widespread cases of health disorders that are related to inadequate sunlight.
Which means that at least part of your morning commute is after sunrise, and you are gaining benefits of exposure to sunlight which helps your melatonin levels.
And even if you went to work much earlier, why should the preference for having sunlight in the evening be more important than people's health?
My point is that it is counterproductive to try and govern our time in a manner that negatively impacts our own health, however democratic that might be. Sunrise currently happens after 7:30AM throughout the entirety of December anywhere north of about Portland Oregon, and the peak commute time in most urban areas is 8AM, while pushing sunrise to after 8:30AM at that time would mean that most people would suddenly get no exposure to sunlight at all in the morning. The mere convenience of having an extra hour of daylight in the afternoon should not outweigh the proven health benefits that accompany getting sunlight exposure shortly after waking up, particularrly since getting that exposure late in the day does not achieve the same health benefits with regards to melatonin levels and a persons' natural sleep cycle.
It's also worth mentioning that the further north you go, the later the sun stays out in the summer anyways, and in the middle of summer, an extra hour of sunlight is not really needed (who ordinarily needs the sun to still be up at nearly 11PM?)
One cannot simply change the function of human biology because doing something which runs contrary to it might somehow create the perception in a large number of people that one has more usable leisure time in the evening.
Our evolution is not guided by a democratic process.
BC is even further north than Washington state, and the problem would be even worse where you live.
Sticking to DST year âround means that iâ(TM)ll At least have some dusk and natural light for the drive home, or even when Iâ(TM)m at home after work.
I'm not knocking the idea of having some sunlight when you go home or after work, but having sunlight exposure late in the day, after you have been awake and working throughout it, will not have the same beneficial effect on melatonin levels that exposure to sunlight earlier in the day has.
If you need to be at work even before the sun is up in the depths of winter, that's unfortunate for you, but pushing the clocks ahead in the winter will mean that this will also be the case for virtually everybody, as the peak morning rush hour commute time is currently *AFTER* sunrise, even in the middle of winter.
That will be problematic for Washington, where for a period of about 10 weeks in the winter, sunrise already doesn't happen until after 7:30AM, and up near the Canadian border it doesn't rise until after 8AM... having DST in effect year round pushes that sunrise to after 8:30 AM and as late as shortly after 9AM. Peak morning rush hour commute time is 8:00 AM which means that more people will be getting deprived of having sunlight exposure at all early in the day, which is a very critical aspect of maintaining proper melatonin levels and having a healthy sleep cycle. This, in turn, is going to cause a sharp uptick in the number of health disorders related to inadequate sunlight exposure and/or restful sleep... having that extra hour in the evening might be convenient, but does not convey the same health benefits as exposure to sunlight shortly after waking up.
But hey.... gotta love those unintended consequences, right?
It is far more common for a person to ignorantly express a wholly biased point of view than it is for a person to hesitate to express themselves because they realize they do not know enough to express any kind of recognizable opinion. For this reason, I do not think that the reason you give is the most common reason people do not vote.
I would suggest that most of the people who do not vote simply don't believe there are enough other people out there that think as they do to make a difference.
Because, unless you take the time to actually be informed and to form a realistic opinion, you are doing everyone a disservice by expressing your opinion at all.
Not everyone who needs to be convinced to get out and vote is unaware of what the issues are, and even if they were, you are suggesting that it should be acceptable to suppress voters who don't meet some arbitrary qualification of being "informed" enough to vote... who sets that criteria? This is isomorphically equivalent to suppressing voters who simply have a different opinion than you.
Why? Serious question... why should a vote from a person who needed some convincing to go out and vote count for less than a vote of a person who enthusiastically does so? Or perhaps putting the shoe on the other foot, why should only the people who think that they know better how important it is to vote have any more say in a democratic society than those who might not think they have any real power to make a difference? Doesn't that sort of defeat the point of democracy?
Of course, because no legitimate reason exists to engage in any international calls... nobody from outside the USA would ever have any legitimate business they wanted to conduct with someone within the USA without actually being in America while they do it.
Hell, foreign tourism alone would be rendered unworkable as nobody from outside of the country could even book a hotel until they were inside the USA.
It would be pointless for me to cite any such studies to you, since you appear to have already out of hand dismissed all such studies. Even if you didn't believe in seasonal mood disorder as a clinical diagnosis, however, it is impossible to discount the impact that changes to body chemistry related to improper melatonin levels and its impact on the amount of decent sleep that a person would be getting as a result can potentially have on a person's mood.
The extra hour of sunlight in the evening will not regulate a person's melatonin cycles the same way it does when you have exposure to sunlight shortly after waking up.
It seems screamingly obvious to me that most people would prefer a little extra daylight after work. That has the most utility to the most people.
Not if you measure utility in terms of health. For a period of about 10 weeks from the end of November until early February, sunrise north of about the 45th parallel (which for reference represents about 50 million Americans or so) doesn't happen until after 7:30AM, and actually as late as about 8:15AM. If daylight savings were implemented year 'round, then sunrise would happen in these areas between 8:30AM and 9:15AM. As the peak morning commute hour is around 8AM, this means that even in the depths of the winter months, if daylight savings were in effect, more people would be getting no direct exposure to sunlight in the morning, which ordinarily boosts the body's ability to make melatonin, improving sleep cycles, and provides numerous other health benefits.
I can certainly appreciate the convenience of wanting an extra hour of daylight in the evenings after work or school, but the consequence of doing so during the winter months would certainly be accompanied by a dramatic increase in incidence of seasonal mood disorder and other health issues related to inadequate exposure to sunlight. I do not think this is worth it.
Make no mistake, however.... I know that we should not be constantly changing our clocks twice every year, but I think we should stay on standard time, not daylight savings. In the summer, the sun already sets late enough the further north you go that an extra hour is not even necessarily really needed anyways, so there's that as well. A compromise might be to split the difference and instead only adjust the clocks by a half-hour one last time if we are to permanently abolish DST, although I think that this would still be pushing it.
Really, if it could *really* emulate the human brain and they switched it on yesterday, it should have done *something* by now that was worth reporting...
And with only million cpu's, isn't that a few orders of magnitude to small to emulate a human brain anyways, which has hundreds of billions of neurons?
Way off.... by almost 2 orders of magnitude, in fact. More than 15% of the USA population lives north of about 45 degrees, which happens to also be the southernmost point in Canada.
So while not exactly a majority of Americans, sure... it's not exactly a small number of people either. More people than the entire population of Canada itself, in fact (not to mention how Canada, as the USA's neighbor and second largest trading partner, would also be affected by it, since there would be substantial economic and political pressure to keep in synchronization with the USA).
Certainly not 0.2%.
In countries south of the 49th parallel, DST is just a PITA. In countries north thereof, it's a way to enjoy the little winter daylight while not being woken by the dawn chorus...
As DST isn't typically observed in the winter, I'm wondering how you figure DST contributes to that particular winter phenomenon.
The reason is that even in winter, it gives people more waking daylight hours than Standard Time does.
Not north of about 45 degrees latitude. In the depths of winter, staying on "summer time", the sun wouldn't rise until nearly 9 o'clock or often even later, by which time most people would have had to already endure a sunless morning commute, which in addition to an increased level of danger with children would also have to walk to school in the dark, as well as in potentially cooler temperatures (since the hour before sunrise is also typically the coldest hour of a 24 hour period in any given location), for many weeks throughout much of the winter months, the lack of any sunlight in the early morning during a morning commute for a period of perhaps approximately 10 or 11 weeks or so in the winter lasting from about near the end of November until early February would certainly negatively affect the melatonin cycles of many people, and worsen the frequency of the associated health issues that come with that. This is not as big a problem in the summer because the sun usually rises earlier enough to offset this, but in the long run, the best time to stay on year-round is standard time.
What they measured there was the mass, which for masses that small can be measured by applying a known force while it is moving (typically through an orthogonal magnetic field) and measuring how quickly its trajectory is altered. How much inertia it has, however, does not necessarily mean that it reacts to gravity the same way as normal matter.
Slashdot Mirror
Oregon?
Near Ontario?
You're kidding, right? This is a joke, isn't it?
There's that as well... although because so many parents drive their kids to school these days, I don't know if that's as big of a problem as it may have once been. The far more serious aspect is that of inadequate morning sunlight exposure, and its impact on melatonin levels for *EVERYONE*... including children. While needing to be at work before sunrise in the middle of winter for some people is unfortunate, pushing the clocks ahead in the winter would force even *more* people to not have any morning sunlight in the middle of winter. The desire to have more afternoon sunlight for the sake of mere convenience should not be more important than the health of the general public.
For what it's worth, Morning rush hours in most urban areas run from about 6:00AM to 9:00AM, with the peak time typically being at about 8AM, where people who needed to be at work by 8 are just arriving to work, and people who work later are often just getting on the road.
As sunrise in the winter in Washington is usually *before* 8AM (and only after it for a few days when you are practically living on the Canada US border), people who need to be at work by 8AM are still generally getting the benefits of some morning sunlight during their commute.
Regardless, pushing the clocks ahead an hour in the winter would suddenly force a lack of morning sunlight upon virtually *EVERYBODY*, and would certainly result in more widespread cases of health disorders that are related to inadequate sunlight.
Which means that at least part of your morning commute is after sunrise, and you are gaining benefits of exposure to sunlight which helps your melatonin levels.
And even if you went to work much earlier, why should the preference for having sunlight in the evening be more important than people's health?
It's also worth mentioning that the further north you go, the later the sun stays out in the summer anyways, and in the middle of summer, an extra hour of sunlight is not really needed (who ordinarily needs the sun to still be up at nearly 11PM?)
One cannot simply change the function of human biology because doing something which runs contrary to it might somehow create the perception in a large number of people that one has more usable leisure time in the evening.
Our evolution is not guided by a democratic process.
BC is even further north than Washington state, and the problem would be even worse where you live.
I'm not knocking the idea of having some sunlight when you go home or after work, but having sunlight exposure late in the day, after you have been awake and working throughout it, will not have the same beneficial effect on melatonin levels that exposure to sunlight earlier in the day has.
If you need to be at work even before the sun is up in the depths of winter, that's unfortunate for you, but pushing the clocks ahead in the winter will mean that this will also be the case for virtually everybody, as the peak morning rush hour commute time is currently *AFTER* sunrise, even in the middle of winter.
That will be problematic for Washington, where for a period of about 10 weeks in the winter, sunrise already doesn't happen until after 7:30AM, and up near the Canadian border it doesn't rise until after 8AM... having DST in effect year round pushes that sunrise to after 8:30 AM and as late as shortly after 9AM. Peak morning rush hour commute time is 8:00 AM which means that more people will be getting deprived of having sunlight exposure at all early in the day, which is a very critical aspect of maintaining proper melatonin levels and having a healthy sleep cycle. This, in turn, is going to cause a sharp uptick in the number of health disorders related to inadequate sunlight exposure and/or restful sleep... having that extra hour in the evening might be convenient, but does not convey the same health benefits as exposure to sunlight shortly after waking up.
But hey.... gotta love those unintended consequences, right?
#eyeroll
That probably depends.... did they sign a contract with you agreeing to pay such a fee if they terminated service before a certain date?
And what about those within the USA who might have a legitimate reason to accept incoming international calls?
It is far more common for a person to ignorantly express a wholly biased point of view than it is for a person to hesitate to express themselves because they realize they do not know enough to express any kind of recognizable opinion. For this reason, I do not think that the reason you give is the most common reason people do not vote.
I would suggest that most of the people who do not vote simply don't believe there are enough other people out there that think as they do to make a difference.
Not everyone who needs to be convinced to get out and vote is unaware of what the issues are, and even if they were, you are suggesting that it should be acceptable to suppress voters who don't meet some arbitrary qualification of being "informed" enough to vote... who sets that criteria? This is isomorphically equivalent to suppressing voters who simply have a different opinion than you.
Why? Serious question... why should a vote from a person who needed some convincing to go out and vote count for less than a vote of a person who enthusiastically does so? Or perhaps putting the shoe on the other foot, why should only the people who think that they know better how important it is to vote have any more say in a democratic society than those who might not think they have any real power to make a difference? Doesn't that sort of defeat the point of democracy?
Of course, because no legitimate reason exists to engage in any international calls... nobody from outside the USA would ever have any legitimate business they wanted to conduct with someone within the USA without actually being in America while they do it.
Hell, foreign tourism alone would be rendered unworkable as nobody from outside of the country could even book a hotel until they were inside the USA.
Block the call entirely? Say goodbye to overseas incoming calls then.
It would be pointless for me to cite any such studies to you, since you appear to have already out of hand dismissed all such studies. Even if you didn't believe in seasonal mood disorder as a clinical diagnosis, however, it is impossible to discount the impact that changes to body chemistry related to improper melatonin levels and its impact on the amount of decent sleep that a person would be getting as a result can potentially have on a person's mood.
The extra hour of sunlight in the evening will not regulate a person's melatonin cycles the same way it does when you have exposure to sunlight shortly after waking up.
Not if you measure utility in terms of health. For a period of about 10 weeks from the end of November until early February, sunrise north of about the 45th parallel (which for reference represents about 50 million Americans or so) doesn't happen until after 7:30AM, and actually as late as about 8:15AM. If daylight savings were implemented year 'round, then sunrise would happen in these areas between 8:30AM and 9:15AM. As the peak morning commute hour is around 8AM, this means that even in the depths of the winter months, if daylight savings were in effect, more people would be getting no direct exposure to sunlight in the morning, which ordinarily boosts the body's ability to make melatonin, improving sleep cycles, and provides numerous other health benefits.
I can certainly appreciate the convenience of wanting an extra hour of daylight in the evenings after work or school, but the consequence of doing so during the winter months would certainly be accompanied by a dramatic increase in incidence of seasonal mood disorder and other health issues related to inadequate exposure to sunlight. I do not think this is worth it.
Make no mistake, however.... I know that we should not be constantly changing our clocks twice every year, but I think we should stay on standard time, not daylight savings. In the summer, the sun already sets late enough the further north you go that an extra hour is not even necessarily really needed anyways, so there's that as well. A compromise might be to split the difference and instead only adjust the clocks by a half-hour one last time if we are to permanently abolish DST, although I think that this would still be pushing it.
And with only million cpu's, isn't that a few orders of magnitude to small to emulate a human brain anyways, which has hundreds of billions of neurons?
Ah... my bad. I parsed the contract "it's" as "it is" instead of "it would be".
Way off.... by almost 2 orders of magnitude, in fact. More than 15% of the USA population lives north of about 45 degrees, which happens to also be the southernmost point in Canada.
So while not exactly a majority of Americans, sure... it's not exactly a small number of people either. More people than the entire population of Canada itself, in fact (not to mention how Canada, as the USA's neighbor and second largest trading partner, would also be affected by it, since there would be substantial economic and political pressure to keep in synchronization with the USA). Certainly not 0.2%.
So why still call it "pm" then? If 1pm is going to be the actual middle of the day, then noon should technically be called 12am.
As DST isn't typically observed in the winter, I'm wondering how you figure DST contributes to that particular winter phenomenon.
Not north of about 45 degrees latitude. In the depths of winter, staying on "summer time", the sun wouldn't rise until nearly 9 o'clock or often even later, by which time most people would have had to already endure a sunless morning commute, which in addition to an increased level of danger with children would also have to walk to school in the dark, as well as in potentially cooler temperatures (since the hour before sunrise is also typically the coldest hour of a 24 hour period in any given location), for many weeks throughout much of the winter months, the lack of any sunlight in the early morning during a morning commute for a period of perhaps approximately 10 or 11 weeks or so in the winter lasting from about near the end of November until early February would certainly negatively affect the melatonin cycles of many people, and worsen the frequency of the associated health issues that come with that. This is not as big a problem in the summer because the sun usually rises earlier enough to offset this, but in the long run, the best time to stay on year-round is standard time.
What they measured there was the mass, which for masses that small can be measured by applying a known force while it is moving (typically through an orthogonal magnetic field) and measuring how quickly its trajectory is altered. How much inertia it has, however, does not necessarily mean that it reacts to gravity the same way as normal matter.