Should We Make Daylight Saving Time Permanent? | Hacker News Reader

Should We Make Daylight Saving Time Permanent?

nytimes.com

22 points0in22 comments

You know what's worse than choosing between Daylight time and Standard time...not choosing and having the biannual switching of the clock.

Just pick one and stick with it!!!

I equate this with the MLB finally resolving the dual nature of the designated hitter rule (NL not having and AL having it) and finally having a consistent standard across both leagues. I do disagree with what was chosen, I think consistency is MUCH MORE important

In my experience some personality traits, such as being an early-bird, extrovert, or worrywart, inherently include a preference for everyone else to mimic that behavior, while people with the opposite personality traits, like being a night owl, introvert, or laid-back individual are okay with everyone else doing what they prefer.

Any time there's a conflict between any of those personality traits and their opposite, the the people in the former group will win out over time, unless the trade-offs are stark enough to force an equalization no matter peoples' preferences. It's especially apparent in success of companies, because the competitive nature of an open market allows for changes much faster than the more stringent controls of a government operation.

Companies that are worrywarts don't invest in new markets, and go out of business. This was well documented in The Innovator's Dilemma by Clayton Christensen. Also, companies that have strict work schedules for office employees that otherwise do not have a scheduled meeting don't attract enough productive employees and do not get as much out of their employees. Those companies are outpaced by those with accommodating schedules. Something similar is happening with strict requirements on where someone works, for example requiring employees to work in an office even when no one they collaborate with works in the same office.

Daylight savings time is a bit slower to change, due to the literal act of congress required, but forcing early-birdism is something we've tried in the past, and completely failed at, nearly 50 years ago, so it's about time we try again, likely with the same outcome as the negative effects are very clear. We aren't like to switch permanent standard time, as the people who prefer it aren't as forceful as those who prefer not to have it, but if we did most of the negative effects of permanent daylight savings time would be reversed, so we could actually keep it.

I prefer standard time, but I’d prefer more for them to pick one and stick with it. Schools can easily change what time they start, that’s always seemed like a stupid objection to me.

So, instead of everyone in unison adjusting their clocks twice a year, you suggest that individual schools should all decide for themselves when/how to change their school's start times, which now causes schedule changes which clash with the unchanging schedules of other places/businesses that don't do any clock changing?

Businesses have schedules that absolutely cannot change, therefore we must change time itself to accommodate the seasons?

In many places of the world, summer and winter hours are a normal thing. Schedules are easy to change.

Schools can _already_ decide for themselves when to start

If they started using that power to change what time they started every few months, you don't think that would cause logistical problems?

In the non-hypothetical places that already do this, it doesn’t.

No, we should make standard time permanent.

Daylight savings time is bad for our bodies particularly in the winter.

It also makes noon even more out of sync with solar noon.

> Daylight savings time is bad for our bodies particularly in the winter.

Here's a study that demonstrates this by comparing the sleep quality and health outcomes of people who live on the eastern edge vs. the western edge of a time zone: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01676... . People on the western edge (sunrise goes later) get on average 19 fewer minutes of sleep per night, are more likely to be sleep deprived, and are more likely to face negative health outcomes associated with circadian rhythm disruption.

Still, if the US ever abandons the switch, the government will always pick permanent DST over permanent standard time. The economy goes before every other concern, and permanent DST helps to promote evening shopping.

Which one to make permanent gets you a different answer based on what edge of a time zone you're on. The obvious move is to further subdivide the timezones at the :30 mark and make one half permanent standard and the other half standard -0:30

One point I began to consider this week is that a "permanent DST" puts the USA closer to Western Europe, and further away from East Asia and the Pacific Rim.

No matter how we set our own time zones, Americans will still need to deal with everyone else's time changes, and their changes to those time changes.

Now my burning question is: if the United States adopts "permanent DST" then what will corporations do about their assumption that "everything is EST"? Will they switch to "everything is EDT"? Will they finally accept the safe, standard labels such as "ET" and "PT"?

https://archive.is/NpmpB

People take airplanes all the time and cross timezones. Is the 1 hour switch worse for our sleep?

The idea that we might already have an optimal system but that it requires the sacrifice of feeling mild discomfort for a day or two is unfathomable for some people.

Meet in the middle and set it to be 30 minutes and be done with it!

You know different states could choose different answers to which time zone to make permanent and most of the drama of the question would go away.

Actually, states can't legally pick permanent daylight, only permanent standard, which is what started this whole fiasco. A lot of states want permanent daylight time, not standard.

But there's an inherent issue if you look at the sunlight maps for this whole drama that northern states and southern states are affected vastly differently: The solution here is that rather than nationwide making a choice, based on arbitrary vertical bands, we need to allow states to break with those bands.

https://www.newsweek.com/map-shows-how-permanent-daylight-sa...

Of course a region could ignore that, and just choose the absolute worst time zone possible, like Boise Idaho. They only get nine hours of sunlight in December, and they're in the Mountain time zone, which puts sunrise right aaround 8:00 and sunset right after 5:00. If you work a regular 8-to-5 office job, and you aren't seated near a window, you could completely miss seeing the sun, unless you go outside for lunch.

Why is this even a federal issue in the US? In Australia time zones and daylight time are solely the responsibility of the states. I don't see why you need the feds involved.

Something about interstate commerce, so congress gets to put their hands on it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com