I am happy to have more sun after I get out of work. It was a breath of fresh air this week getting out of work and seeing daylight.
I am happy to have more sun after I get out of work. It was a breath of fresh air this week getting out of work and seeing daylight.
don’t care about it one way or other.
Glad that junior devs in the future will have less time related bugs in their code.
It's like the day isn't ready to get up yet, just like me.
And driving in darkness is cool. I like all the pretty lights.
Introducing a (permanent, i.e. unlike DST) offset to solar time just seems like a ridiculous solution to any real or perceived problem.
How would that ever work? I can't think of a single thing requiring near that level of coordination that we are able to do. Automatically changing peoples closed seems infinitely easier.
I understand some people don't like it, but don't pretend there is another way to move everything around. People are barely willing to do it as is.
Outdoor venues already have seasonally shifting time tables. Schools in some places have successfully shifted from starting at 8:00 to 7:30 or 8:30. Shops adjust their opening hours all the time as well.
Citation needed.
We don't need 300 millon people to experience jet lag twice a year to save some bougy superintendent the inconvenience of scribbling out a number and writing a different one one time.
Servers which miss that patch break because of various Auth schemes which require clocks to be reasonably in sync between machines.
So you get a bunch of outages whenever the next time shift is post-rules change.
I am less annoyed with DST than I am at how often we are fucking with it and breaking stuff.
(Did you know Australia has 11 possible time zones of which up to 9 are being used right now? It might even be 12. Most people don't, which is why most programmers fuck it up)
Yes, indeed. But we also have to change what people do manually when the rules change.
That's because every developer and sysadmin with more than a year of professional experience knows that you never, ever, do your own time zone math. You use your system time utils, and keep them updated so that your code reflects the latest laws.
Though, there are devs that work on those system tools. There are also cases where times need to sync and the changing can cause some issues. Stored times should be UTC but where they aren't it can makes some systems use local time incorrectly for a bit on the rollback. I have also seen network libs in games not use ticks for session starts that would be problematic on rollbacks playing at switchover. There have also been flaws in system time utils previously.
Lots of unnecessary potential edge cases, all for an unnecessary time change of time itself except a few places like Arizona.
First, if you timezone is 'right', on average the sun should rise about 6 am. In winter, it rises later, in summer it rises earlier.
Where I grew up in Germany the sun rose as late as 8:20 am in winter. And funny enough, the latest rise in Madrid in Spain is at 8:40 am in winter. That's because Madrid is on the 'wrong' timezone: it's in the same timezone as Germany, but much further west.
(You are right however, that time zones do roughly keep noon around 12-ish. It's just that the band of variation around the world is quite a lot wider than you might imagine.)
And this idea is critically important because?
Having the date change at lunchtime would be really confusing.
Most notably, the concepts of "today" and "tomorrow" stop making sense!
It's 6 AM in London. What time is it in Denver?
The way things work now, it's approximately midnight in Denver, or close enough that the safe answer to the question "What is my business partner in Denver doing?" is "Sleeping" which neatly answers the question of what their likely response will be were I to call them now.
Now, imagine we abolish time zones:
It's 6 AM in London. What time is it in Denver?
It's 6 AM. It's 6 AM in Beijing, in Cairo, in Honolulu, at McMurdo Station, and in Sidney, Montana. I have little idea what anyone in Denver is doing, unless I happen to know that Denver is placed such that their dawn is six-ish hours after mine. But I have no way to express that conveniently, and nobody else thinks in those terms, so I can't build up a database of such information.
At least, not without reinventing something...
It's 6 AM in London. What time is it in Denver?
What would I be...
It's 6 AM in London.
Something occurs...
The clock is striking thirteen.
I almost...
DENHAM'S DENTIFRICE!
Consider the lilies of tzdata...
DENHAM'S...
Sorry, got a bit caught up there.
> The way things work now, it's approximately midnight in Denver, or close enough that the safe answer to the question "What is my business partner in Denver doing?" is "Sleeping" which neatly answers the question of what their likely response will be were I to call them now.
Memorizing a timezone offset is basically still what you'd need to do. To know that it's approximately midnight in Denver, you have to have that memorized or look it up.
Once you have that 6 hour number, in a single-timezone world, you'd simply say "ok what were people here doing 6 hours ago?" and you'd have your same answer.
Of course people would still publish those sorts of "conversion tables"/offsets, because people would still have that exact problem! But they'd possibly be a bit more precise than historically - with current computer tech, it might actually be more accurate, e.g. using actual GPS coords instead of broad swaths, so it would be like "Denver is 6.24 (or whatever) hours behind your current location." Let alone how much better that might work for cities in single-timezone China, say.
(I'm personally against this idea, anyway, but that particular argument has never satisfied me.)
This is keeping (a rationalized version of) time zones in every respect except for how people set their clocks.
In the system you propose, people would operate at the equivalent of 9 AM to 5 PM, except you expect that they'd quote different times (even with fractional hours) to maintain the façade that time zones no longer exist. A business no longer operates nine to five, it's 1:15 PM to 9:15 PM, and people can't just say "Oh, Denver is six hours behind London right now" because Denver isn't exactly ninety degrees west of London.
Ironically, aside from everyone around the world setting their clocks to the same time, that's how time worked prior to the introduction of time zones, so I can't fault you for coming up with that idea.
Or imagine chatting with a friend at 23:00 about plans after you get off work at 1:00 the following "day". "See you tomorrow?"
Or do you reserve "tomorrow" for telling someone at 8:00 that you'll get back to them when you wake up at 16:00 that same "day"?
Today people only have to deal with this when communicating with people many time zones away, but now it's an issue even within a single area!
To be fair, isn’t that essentially what DST systems are? Literally the way that a society arranges to have everything start an hour earlier or later at different times of year is to designate dates where everyone sets their clocks back or forward an hour.
Granted, it doesn’t fulfill your “all without literally touching a single clock” requirement, because a few types of common clocks still require manual adjustment, but the complaints about DST aren’t about the hassle of literally adjusting the clock on your microwave, right? The complaints are about the sudden disruptions to one’s schedule, especially the amount of sleep one gets on two specific nights every year—and your proposal doesn’t solve that problem. And if we instead agreed to change, for instance, the operating hours of every business twice a year, surely the physical changing of signage would be similarly costly.
Not exactly: DST solves for not having to have seasonal/variable schedules.
Without DST, we lose that, and we do actually get to decide, once, how we want to arrange our lives in this new, linear time – implicitly or explicitly.
As students often use public transport to go to school, schedules often have reduced service during school holidays.
It will all become more ridiculous 20 years from now when popular demand has lead to offices and schools opening at 9am in the winter and people start calling for a new daylight savings time to get more hours of light in the evening.
The first issue is that DST causes general havoc with all kinds of activities that happen at night, by altering the length of the day and creating missing or repeated hours. This is an unintended negative consequence of how DST works.
The second issue is that DST gives day workers jet lag twice a year by altering sleep/work schedules. Here we have a legitimate choice whether we want to change the schedules in the winter or prioritize consistent sleep schedules instead. This negative consequence arises as a result of changing the schedules relative to absolute time, not as a result of DST per se. DST is merely the vehicle for enacting that change.
For all I care, the US could get itself on UTC, if they don't care too much about their clocks being in sync with the sun anyway.
this is pretty important though.
We need both absolute and relative time unfortunately, as a consequence of this messy physically embodied universe we find ourselves in.
I too yearned for One Time Scale to Rule Them All, to no avail.
At least if you want your day boundary line up with midnight on the clock.
It would be hilarious to have everyone run on UTC, but have the calendar tick over whenever it's local midnight.
But apparently not important enough to permanently use standard time (along with a one-time effort to shift all business hours back by 1, yielding the same solar start of business as permanent DST).
Staff dreaded working the fall-back shift because they ended up working an extra hour for free. The union brought this up at every round of negotiations, but were told to pound sand by the employer and asked what they would like to give up instead.
I take my dogs for a walk and go for a jog after in the dark and I love it. I want as much sun for after work/social activities as possible.
I also love coding in the morning and can't stand afternoon glare. This will allow me more time with windows open before the afternoon glare creeps in (I realize this is house dependent, but still)
(Small anecdote: in my first job one of my teammates came in at 5am and left about 2pm. I just thought he's a morning person. But when I asked, he admitted that he wasn't one at all; he just tried to avoid our new boss, because that guy was extremely chatty with him.)
Same here - I'm a zombie on autopilot in the morning, and I usually start the day with the mindset of "let's see what kind of problems are waiting for me" (e.g. nasty compliance emails with the subject "ACTION REQUIRED!!!", processes that have crashed or are stuck since X hours, etc..) therefore I have anyway a permanent negative association with the first hours of the day independently if it's dark or sunny or rainy etc... .
On the other hand usually by the end of the day I have stabilized the situation and if I'm lucky I can still go out and enjoy a little bit the sun(set), so the longer that lasts the better for me.
I wonder if HN-people in general (doing mostly IT work?) tend to push working hours towards the evenings/nights and are therefore more in favour of daylight savings?
I know it's stupid, but I just think DST is really unnecessary because of the fact that we have to adjust the clock on our microwaves, ovens, and cars. Not to mention, because not everyone observes DST, it leads to a lot of additional complexity when scheduling international meetings.
Overall, regardless of your preferences, the world would be better if we didn't have to adjust the clock for no reason.
> DST is really unnecessary because of the fact that we have to adjust the clock on our microwaves, ovens, and cars
While that may make it a hassle, it doesn't make it unnecessary, DST has a real benefit - giving an extra hour of sunlight after you leave work, an hour you couldn't use otherwise as you would either be sleeping or at work. Also being a bit tech-headed here but time sync has been a solved problem in IT for quite a while, NTP and all that :P.
> it leads to a lot of additional complexity when scheduling international meetings
We already have to deal with timezones, does DST really make that difference? Can't you schedule the meeting at 4PM EST and whoever is in that area figures out if it's 4PM or 5PM? Also google calendar and all that.
If you ask "Would you like the sun to set later in the evening?" most people will say yes. Who doesn't like more sunlight?
If you ask "Would you rather go to bed early and wake up early, or go to bed later and wake up later?" most people will choose to stay up late and sleep in the next day. There might be some disagreement from early risers, but consider when most people choose to sleep during the weekend.
Everyone thinks of Daylights Savings Time as "yay, more sunlight," without realizing it also requires them to wake up earlier, relative to their circadian rhythms.
Wasn't that debunked? Just look at what happened to people who slept in a cave for a few days, they came out of it having no idea of how long they were in there, even if they were somehow conditioned by others who guessed their own time. If the body had an internal clock, their estimation would not be off by 17 days out of 40. That's some serious mismatch.
https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/science/french-cave-d...
Timing of light and absence of light is critical - early morning light exposure greatly benefits people with SAD.
Not having affected by the light as much doesn't give anyone powers to tell others what to do.
"More" perhaps, but probably not by that much? Schools start around 8, most people need to be in the office before 9, and so on. I don't know many people who are able to get up later than 7:30 or so, unless they work from home. And with permanent DST, the sun won't finish rising until after 8 am.
This is only true for the northernmost reaches of the US on the darkest days of the year. Portland Maine will see sunrise at around 8:15 on the darkest day, Seattle will have it around 8:30. 99% of Americans will still wake up to sunrise year-round
I hardly know anyone who gets up regularly before 8am.
I'm not saying we should do away with the entire system of timekeeping. Just adjust work and school start/stop times to be better synced up with natural daylight.
Of course, you aren't getting that in either system; even in Standard time the sun doesn't actually rise in the early morning. You're still going to need the wake-up light either way.
With permanent DST, you'll actually get more of a chance to witness the sun in general, as there's a greater span of time that it'll be available for use when you're allowed outside at the end of the workday.
Up in the dark, home in the dark just flat out sucks for the 4 months of the year these conditions occur; minimizing the number of people who have to deal with that and minimizing the number of days they have to deal with that should be top priority.
This reminds me of another conversation on HN about color sensitivity in human vision:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_vision
I imagine that waking up long after sunrise could affect our sensitivity to certain light spectrums to the point that "night owls" and "morning people" are seeing completely different colors, but calling them the same name.
In other words, two people who wake up early in the morning might both perceive a certain color of orange as "dark / muted", while people who wake up later in the day might perceive that same color of orange as "bright". On the opposite side of the spectrum, the color blue may appear more vibrant to people who wake up early, because their vision is bombarded with yellow (sunlight) in the morning.
Uh, yes, that's the point - and many businesses and schools will stick to a consistent nominal time (like 8am) which will now be one hour earlier in real terms.
"Relative" terms -- i.e. relative to sunrise. Eliminating daylight savings means that all times are now "real" terms.
The far east coast sees the sunset at 4:18PM on the winter solstice. Most people aren't even off work by then.
They’ve pushed back start times in decades, I doubt they’ll do it now.
Also many many jobs with standard hours (not talking about 3rd shift, or the guy who makes the donuts) start at 8am, which in most of the country is early enough that you have to wake up before sunrise in the winter.
Ok, I'm actually for it.
I am totally in favor of this though, I was ranting about it to a friend on Sunday.
(i think i'm only half joking)
also then just move everyone to GMT for the hell of it.
If you get up at 8 every day, you're getting up ~2 hours after dawn (depending on date/location). When DST hits, 7 becomes 8, and you're getting up ~1 hour after dawn.
When the days are very short in winter to begin with, and you spend a third of them out and about, someone somewhere is going to be out and about before or after dark.
It also seems to me like your job starts a bit early in the day, relative to most tech jobs anyway. If I get in before 10 I'm usually the first one there in the morning.
I'm all for not changing our clocks anymore, but DST is stupid. If you want to get up earlier and have more daylight in the evening, great, do that. If you want to get up later so it's not dark when you leave in the morning, sure, makes sense. And if you want to change your schedule as the year progresses to adapt to the seasons, I'm with you.
The real problem is that we have this weird idea that our whole society has to operate synchronously. And hey, I get it, some groups of people do have to coordinate with each other. An assembly line won't work if people show up whenever. But most people aren't in that situation and even that assembly line doesn't have to be synchronized with all the other assembly lines in the country. Heck, it might even be a good thing if we didn't all drive to work at the same time...
We have to agree on what time it is so that we can coordinate, and as long as we're doing that, let's agree on something that's not a lie. If we're going to meet at noon, the sun should be straight over head, damnit.
Timekeeping systems are meant to coordinate human activity, yes, but if you're calling daylight saving time a lie... then so is standard time, and all other timekeeping systems, for that matter.
And then I realized that you can’t even count on “high noon” meaning much at all, DST or not, because using solar noon is basically the same thing as having arbitrarily many timezones for each unique longitudinal point on Earth.
Now I’m tempted to go full UTC and to hell with all of it
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/01/01/this...
https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/6920/why-do...
I try to when I can. But you are right. Most people's lives revolve around work. For most of human existence, our lives revolved around the sun. Now it revolves around a job.
I blame our corporate reality as much as the next guy but tbh even without work most people's lives don't exactly revolve around the sun. Or else the clubs on the weekends would be empty
people with dogs. Dogs don't care about clocks and they will totally wake you up so they can poop and have breakfast.
So you don’t know why farmers, laborers, gardeners, contractors, garbage men, etc? There’s a long list of jobs where there’s practical reasons to start work when it gets light outside.
It's not like life is radically different on the east and west sides of a time zone either.
Or whatever time that their toddler(s) tell them to ;)
The change would help enable the executive class to play golf after work hours...
Well now you do
I do everything in UTC, don't use daylight savings, and I do set my wake up time based on sunrise
And once you partner with another you must now hope you both can be afforded that luxury of a job.
Despite working remotely since 2008 I'm married to someone who works at a hospital and must be there by 7am. Getting woken up and trying to fall back asleep is much worse than just going to bed with her and waking up with her to get uninterrupted sleep.
Add on kids to that equation who must be at the bus stop at a certain time and the number of working households who can wake up with the sun is minuscule.
This sounds like internet forum flamebait. "Clearly?" I have a relatively consistent job start time around 9am on most days which I think is quite possibly the median start time of all jobs and is well after sunrise.
> I'm married to someone who works at a hospital and must be there by 7am
I would hypothesize that the majority of people are not married to people who need to be at their jobs at 7am.
For those that do, I imagine sunrise is not really much of a factor anyway, they will probably be getting up before sunrise regardless.
BLS collect data on this in the 'American Time Use Survey'. According to https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2015/article/night-owls-an... 29% of people are working at their main place of employment at 7am on any given day. 52% are at work at 8am. The time use survey doesn't distinguish though between people who are at work at 7am coming up to the end of a night shift vs those who are at work at 7am at the start of a day shift.
Regardless, it certainly gives the impression that households where at least one working adult has to be at work by 7 are not freakish outliers. The reality of construction, retail, cleaning, healthcare, childcare, transport and many other common lines of work is early starts.
Many of these jobs aren't early directly because they line up with daylight, though - they're early because they need to get started before the rest of the workforce begins its day, because they exist in service of it. So if we all agree 'well, sure, lawyers can put up with a few more dark mornings in December', we're implicitly also deciding 'and baristas can have dark starts from October through to March'.
They completely ignore the increased suicide rates and other effects the switching of the clock has. It even affects the cows of farmers. It has negative side effects for millions of people, but NOOOOOO, those poor people who need to get up earlier, they'll be having a much harder time!