It's about the time of the year DST begins, and so here is the yearly thread about it. As we know, two states have opted out of it: Arizona (except for the Navajo nation) and Hawaii, and I consider some arrangements to account for that.
Arizona has Mountain time as its standard. However, for one hour a year, I consider they are in its own time zone (as no other parts of the USA are in it), which I call Arizona time. This time zone lasts from when the Mountain time zone moves into DST until the Pacific one does so, at which point Arizona joins Pacific time. I do the same for my timekeeping purposes within this forum (I move from Eastern to my own zone at UTC-5 for a hour, then to Central; though I do observe DST starting at the end of March with the rest of Europe, and thus reverting to Eastern).
Hawaii shares its time zone with the Aleutians, which do observe DST. Thus, once DST starts, I consider the Hawaii-Aleutian time zone to split into separate Hawaii and Aleutian time zones.
Also, I've heard at least one member call this the "Daylight Wasting Time". Nice one :sombrero:.
Why are we starting up a new thread on this?
Tradition!
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on March 06, 2017, 07:13:44 AM
Also, I've heard at least one member call this the "Daylight Wasting Time". Nice one :sombrero:.
I call it Daylight Stupid Time.
Rabble rabble let's go to DST this year and never revert rabble rabble I hate when it gets dark early rabble rabble farmers can suck it
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:23:31 AM
Rabble rabble let's go to DST this year and never revert rabble rabble I hate when it gets dark early rabble rabble farmers can suck it
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
Looking forward to this weekend. More light in the evenings when I get home. Now if it will just stay dry for a few weeks, I can get some things done outside that I need to do before everything leafs out and greens up.
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:23:31 AM
Rabble rabble let's go to DST this year and never revert rabble rabble I hate when it gets dark early rabble rabble farmers can suck it
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
That is a preposterous twisting of logic - what hours are assigned to the clock is just as much an arbitrary social construct as people's clock preferences.
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:50:08 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:23:31 AM
Rabble rabble let's go to DST this year and never revert rabble rabble I hate when it gets dark early rabble rabble farmers can suck it
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
That is a preposterous twisting of logic - what hours are assigned to the clock is just as much an arbitrary social construct as people's clock preferences.
No, 12:00 PM is supposed to be midday and 12:00 AM is supposed to be midnight.
Before clocks, people naturally did most of their activities between sunup and sundown, so we developed clocks accordingly, with 12:00 right up at the top. Now people complain they don't have enough daylight in the evenings, yet someone who works a normal shift (7-to-4 or 8-to-5) should have approximately the same amount of daylight before work as after work. If we as a society have made room in our daily schedules to allow for a bunch of leisure time and want to take it during daylight hours after work, then we should go to work earlier to make that time available to us–not redefine what noon and midnight are.
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 12:01:30 PM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:50:08 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:23:31 AM
Rabble rabble let's go to DST this year and never revert rabble rabble I hate when it gets dark early rabble rabble farmers can suck it
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
That is a preposterous twisting of logic - what hours are assigned to the clock is just as much an arbitrary social construct as people's clock preferences.
No, 12:00 PM is supposed to be midday and 12:00 AM is supposed to be midnight.
Before clocks, people naturally did most of their activities between sunup and sundown, so we developed clocks accordingly, with 12:00 right up at the top. Now people complain they don't have enough daylight in the evenings, yet someone who works a normal shift (7-to-4 or 8-to-5) should have approximately the same amount of daylight before work as after work. If we as a society have made room in our daily schedules to allow for a bunch of leisure time and want to take it during daylight hours after work, then we should go to work earlier to make that time available to us–not redefine what noon and midnight are.
Most people I know prefer to wake up - go to work - come back - relax.
So work starting 2 hour after sunrise fits best for them. Now the problem is that sun doesn't cooperate and refuses to go up at 7 AM for entire year.
And it looks like our mid-day is closer to end of typical business hours. So probably having astronomic noon somewhere after lunch break, 1.30-2 PM, would be a good option for many - just to keep astronomic noon somewhere close to actual mid-day.
Unfortunately, that means morning commute in the dark for 2-3-4 winter months...
I am actually a strong supporter of DST, especially in my latitude. I can see how those who live closer to the equator would find it nonsensible though.
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:50:08 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:23:31 AM
Rabble rabble let's go to DST this year and never revert rabble rabble I hate when it gets dark early rabble rabble farmers can suck it
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
That is a preposterous twisting of logic - what hours are assigned to the clock is just as much an arbitrary social construct as people's clock preferences.
Cool, then we can go back to setting noon by whatever time the sun it at its highest in the sky while watching trains ram each other head-on.
Quote from: Brandon on March 06, 2017, 02:28:55 PM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:50:08 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:23:31 AM
Rabble rabble let's go to DST this year and never revert rabble rabble I hate when it gets dark early rabble rabble farmers can suck it
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
That is a preposterous twisting of logic - what hours are assigned to the clock is just as much an arbitrary social construct as people's clock preferences.
Cool, then we can go back to setting noon by whatever time the sun it at its highest in the sky while watching trains ram each other head-on.
I'm not saying we shouldn't have clocks, just that there is no non-social reason midday has to be 12:00 instead of 1:00
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AM
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
Exactly. DST, and the different on and off times for it around the world, makes a complexity out of what should be a simple calculation. Not to mention the difficulties it makes with transportation going on when the hour is either repeated or skipped, making planes, trains and buses either early or late automatically. And it also complicates the payroll for businesses with hourly workers on the late shift.
Just do away with it and if you want "more" time off during daylight hours, find a job that starts earliier and lets out earlier.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 06, 2017, 08:06:56 AM
Why are we starting up a new thread on this?
Because it bips.
Looking forward to finishing my morning runs before sunrise again. Right now sunrise is a 6:21 AM. I usually start out at 5:15 AM and get back 6:55-7:00 AM. I've been getting headaches from looking straight into the sun for the last couple miles....worse it's encouraging the walkers to come out early too.
With that in mind I would greatly prefer staying sprung ahead all year. I find the sunlight much more useful later in the day then in the morning in the winter. Darkness kind of discourages people from traveling I've observed over the years making it much easier for me to get around given I get up so early.
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AMSwitching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
I agree. Spain is technically in DST all year round (Even in double DST for seven months), as we are in Central Europe time zone but we should be in the Western Europe one (CET is UTC+1, and I live sightly
West of Greenwhich). And of course, our schedules are silly, we go to sleep near midnight for example.
On another forum I'm on, we have a pretty nonsensical thread (http://atariage.com/forums/topic/26594-the-knight-rider-2600-project/page-1) that it's become tradition to bump every New Year's at midnight. Maybe this should be such a thread.
Quote from: kalvado on March 06, 2017, 02:16:50 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 12:01:30 PM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:50:08 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:23:31 AM
Rabble rabble let's go to DST this year and never revert rabble rabble I hate when it gets dark early rabble rabble farmers can suck it
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
That is a preposterous twisting of logic - what hours are assigned to the clock is just as much an arbitrary social construct as people's clock preferences.
No, 12:00 PM is supposed to be midday and 12:00 AM is supposed to be midnight.
Before clocks, people naturally did most of their activities between sunup and sundown, so we developed clocks accordingly, with 12:00 right up at the top. Now people complain they don't have enough daylight in the evenings, yet someone who works a normal shift (7-to-4 or 8-to-5) should have approximately the same amount of daylight before work as after work. If we as a society have made room in our daily schedules to allow for a bunch of leisure time and want to take it during daylight hours after work, then we should go to work earlier to make that time available to us–not redefine what noon and midnight are.
Most people I know prefer to wake up - go to work - come back - relax.
So work starting 2 hour after sunrise fits best for them. Now the problem is that sun doesn't cooperate and refuses to go up at 7 AM for entire year.
And it looks like our mid-day is closer to end of typical business hours. So probably having astronomic noon somewhere after lunch break, 1.30-2 PM, would be a good option for many - just to keep astronomic noon somewhere close to actual mid-day.
Unfortunately, that means morning commute in the dark for 2-3-4 winter months...
I don't know that many people who start at 9. 6 AM sunrise would be perfect, though. It's so hard to wake up in the half/majority of the year when it's later.
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 12:01:30 PM
someone who works a normal shift (7-to-4 or 8-to-5) should have approximately the same amount of daylight before work as after work.
Your definition of a "normal shift" intrigues me. My office is nominally 9 to 5 and that is what I've always understood to be the standard. Dolly Parton seems to concur as well.
But yes, not every office does the same. Government offices often operate 8 to 4, and construction typically operates 7 to 3.
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:50:08 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AM
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
That is a preposterous twisting of logic - what hours are assigned to the clock is just as much an arbitrary social construct as people's clock preferences.
Unfortunately people have a tendency to assign more significance to the numbers on the clock than they actually have and set expectations accordingly. Agreeing to start work an hour earlier from Mid-March through early November is mathematically equivalent to setting the clocks forward, but the latter is easier for people to handle psychologically because we're socially conditioned to react to what the clock says.
What's more absurd than this, though, is the inconsistency of people's social conditioning on different matters. What is everyone's obsession with staying out late on Friday and Saturday nights? It only makes Monday morning that much worse and it accomplishes nothing that could not also be accomplished by simply starting the party earlier. I would much rather wake up and go to bed at the same times seven days a week, since this is the best way to remain the most well rested, but I can't because social demands are often placed on me that I stay up past my "bedtime" on weekends.
As an IT guy, I don't care as long as it's consistent. Looking at you Chile.
oh lets see - too far east? KEEP IT!!! further west? DROP IT!!!
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 06, 2017, 04:03:22 PM
Looking forward to finishing my morning runs before sunrise again. Right now sunrise is a 6:21 AM. I usually start out at 5:15 AM and get back 6:55-7:00 AM. I've been getting headaches from looking straight into the sun for the last couple miles....worse it's encouraging the walkers to come out early too.
With that in mind I would greatly prefer staying sprung ahead all year. I find the sunlight much more useful later in the day then in the morning in the winter. Darkness kind of discourages people from traveling I've observed over the years making it much easier for me to get around given I get up so early.
If DST were to ever be dropped, it would be better where I am to have it sprung ahead all year. Doesn't get dark here in the summer until 9-9:30 with DST.
That, or you could have a compromise with people who want "winter time" all year round of having the clocks 30 min later :bigass:
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 12:01:30 PM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:50:08 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:23:31 AM
Rabble rabble let's go to DST this year and never revert rabble rabble I hate when it gets dark early rabble rabble farmers can suck it
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
That is a preposterous twisting of logic - what hours are assigned to the clock is just as much an arbitrary social construct as people's clock preferences.
No, 12:00 PM is supposed to be midday and 12:00 AM is supposed to be midnight.
Before clocks, people naturally did most of their activities between sunup and sundown, so we developed clocks accordingly, with 12:00 right up at the top. Now people complain they don't have enough daylight in the evenings, yet someone who works a normal shift (7-to-4 or 8-to-5) should have approximately the same amount of daylight before work as after work. If we as a society have made room in our daily schedules to allow for a bunch of leisure time and want to take it during daylight hours after work, then we should go to work earlier to make that time available to us–not redefine what noon and midnight are.
Actually, before clocks people got up when it got light enough to see what they were doing. Kind of like we do by shifting the clocks an hour later.
The obvious solution is to eliminate nighttime altogether. Then everyone will be happy.
Quote from: SignGeek101 on March 06, 2017, 11:25:28 PMIf DST were to ever be dropped, it would be better where I am to have it sprung ahead all year. Doesn't get dark here in the summer until 9-9:30 with DST.
So presumably doesn't get light until 8:30-9 in the morning in midwinter if you were on DST? Having that on normal time a couple of degrees further north, I can tell you that isn't a happy thing at all, given I have it for about 8 weeks a year, and post-8am dawns for most of October, November, December, January and February (note lopsidedness thanks to DST - despite Jan having later sunrises than Dec).
Quote from: kkt on March 07, 2017, 12:41:13 AMActually, before clocks people got up when it got light enough to see what they were doing. Kind of like we do by shifting the clocks an hour later.
Except they were able to fine tune it well, whereas DST is a blunt instrument of a large shift twice a year. Add in that the 7-5 (Europe) / 8-4 (US) month bias towards noon-at-1am is lopsided - Spring starts about the right time for a 6 (Europe) or 6.5 (US) month stint of DST, but we then don't change back until a good few weeks after we should, and DST becomes an even more terrible way of meeting the aim of our natural bodies - with overly late sunrises in Fall meaning we're all getting up in the dark in October just because we want the kids trick-or-treating in the light.
DST makes sense when the dawn wakes us up a good while before the alarm clock, but the numbers on the clock when we are 'meant' to wake up don't really allow for much time in the year when that is the case - especially in North America where dawns don't get as extreme as in the UK (other than Alaska and the large expanses of Canada north of the 50th where just a tiny fraction the people live) and there's a culture of getting up earlier than we do in the UK. But DST isn't about maintaining the dawn to be a useful time - it's about making evenings lighter - a worthwhile aim, but not one we particularly cared about until the late 19th century - we're happy to stay up long after nightfall, but we are not as happy to get up in the dark.*
Plus the energy consumption argument has been debunked.
*We're also not that happy to go to bed in the light. It being light at 10pm is the bane of many parents who haven't invested in blackout curtains in the UK (of course, much of their worry is based on the incorrect notion that we need the same amount of sleep in summer as winter). And Cub camps (as a cub, and as a quasi-young leader as my Dad was pressganged in to be a leader when I left) in June were always fun: most years it never got dark, so we had to be tired out. Going on 5 mile hikes leaving around 8:30-9 pm (physical exercise, but not adrenaline producing like a running around game would be). Force-fed low-sugar high-milk cocao to try and make us drowsy. We were never sent (or never sent the cubs) to bed until gone 11pm and they had a strict rule of no noise until we say so. The second night was a bit easier as we tire them out more during the day, but even then it's still about an 11pm bedtime - just that they actually fall asleep not long afterwards.
I grew up in Indiana with no DST. I liked it better that way, but as an adult I came to learn that the benefits of not being on DST were outweighed by the confusion that it caused everybody else visiting the state and not knowing the time.
The biggest problem with DST is in areas that are already in the wrong time zone (like Indiana) so DST pushes a sunrise that is already one hour too late to being two hours too late. Kids should not have to wait for school buses in darkness at 7:30 am because adults like having more sunlight in the evening.
Assuming most employers are unlikely to accept the notion of a wholesale change in work hours, I can't see any benefit to year-round DST here in the mid-Atlantic region as some people propose, and it would only be worse further north. Using Christmas Day for convenience because I can never remember whether the solstice is Dec. 21 or 22, in my ZIP Code (22315) sunrise on Dec. 25 using standard time is at 7:25 and sunset is at 16:53, meaning if it were a work day rather than a holiday you get up in the dark and come home in the dark. If you push that to DST, from a practical standpoint nothing changes–the majority of people working a 9-to-5 (or 5:30, which I think is a more common end time) would still get up in the dark and come home in the dark. At least with standard time the morning commute has some level of light. For the sake of comparing to summer I used a date six months away, June 25; in my ZIP Code, the DST sunrise and sunset times are 5:45 (before many people get up) and 20:37. The 19:37 sunset if we kept standard time is no big deal in principle, but the 4:45 sunrise would be if, as I suggested, we operate under the presumption that employers won't open offices earlier.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 07, 2017, 07:32:40 AM
Assuming most employers are unlikely to accept the notion of a wholesale change in work hours, I can't see any benefit to year-round DST here in the mid-Atlantic region as some people propose, and it would only be worse further north. Using Christmas Day for convenience because I can never remember whether the solstice is Dec. 21 or 22, in my ZIP Code (22315) sunrise on Dec. 25 using standard time is at 7:25 and sunset is at 16:53, meaning if it were a work day rather than a holiday you get up in the dark and come home in the dark. If you push that to DST, from a practical standpoint nothing changes—the majority of people working a 9-to-5 (or 5:30, which I think is a more common end time) would still get up in the dark and come home in the dark. At least with standard time the morning commute has some level of light. For the sake of comparing to summer I used a date six months away, June 25; in my ZIP Code, the DST sunrise and sunset times are 5:45 (before many people get up) and 20:37. The 19:37 sunset if we kept standard time is no big deal in principle, but the 4:45 sunrise would be if, as I suggested, we operate under the presumption that employers won't open offices earlier.
Based on commuting times and rush hour traffic, normal working hours start as early as 7 or 7:30am...and working days end commonly starting around 3:30/4pm. (And of course, earlier and later than that)
That said, around Christmas, those people will still be going to work in the dark. The earliest workers get home with a little daylight left, but most are still coming home during the last bits of sunlight for the day.
When I was a senior in high school (winter of 1974), based on the shock of the first Arab oil embargo, full-time Daylight Savings Time was enacted for that winter. After less than a month year-round daylight savings time was rescinded, due to numerous early morning accidents around the country involving school busses and students.
Quote from: Duke87 on March 06, 2017, 08:18:16 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 12:01:30 PM
someone who works a normal shift (7-to-4 or 8-to-5) should have approximately the same amount of daylight before work as after work.
Your definition of a "normal shift" intrigues me. My office is nominally 9 to 5 and that is what I've always understood to be the standard. Dolly Parton seems to concur as well.
9-5 assumes no lunch break. 8-5 is more common in my experience because that's gives folks an hour for lunch. My office is nominally 7:45 to 5:30 with 45 for lunch since we work a 9/80 schedule (9 hour days, every other Friday off) but it's flexible as long as you get your time in that day.
Quote from: english si on March 07, 2017, 06:25:49 AM
So presumably doesn't get light until 8:30-9 in the morning in midwinter if you were on DST? Having that on normal time a couple of degrees further north, I can tell you that isn't a happy thing at all, given I have it for about 8 weeks a year, and post-8am dawns for most of October, November, December, January and February (note lopsidedness thanks to DST - despite Jan having later sunrises than Dec).
DST has nothing to do with why the latest sunrise / earliest sunset doesn't fall on solstice. It would happen either way:
https://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/equation-of-time.html
http://earthsky.org/earth/winter-solstice-and-late-sunrise
QuoteThe exact date of earliest sunset varies with latitude. But the sequence is always the same. For the Northern Hemisphere, earliest sunset in early December, winter solstice, latest sunrise in early January.
- Which is the case where I live.
Quote from: english si on March 07, 2017, 06:25:49 AM
So presumably doesn't get light until 8:30-9 in the morning in midwinter if you were on DST?
Latest sunrise here is 8:27 AM (without DST). Even before that time, most people would be going to work / at work, and kids would be getting ready to go to school. Making the sunrise an hour later wouldn't change much because most people are already getting up and ready in darkness anyway (either way). The earliest sunset is around 4:30 or so. Extending to 5:30 would increase personal safety by allowing people to commute home in daylight, especially for women. It also (at least for me) is psychologically better to be able to work during more daylight (instead of wasting it sleeping early in the morning).
Quote from: SignGeek101 on March 07, 2017, 09:58:21 AMDST has nothing to do with why the latest sunrise / earliest sunset doesn't fall on solstice. It would happen either way:
And my point went whoosh over your head. The lopsidedness in when late dawns are is caused by DST carrying on too late in the fall and works the other way to the actual lag in sun times.
QuoteLatest sunrise here is 8:27 AM (without DST). Even before that time, most people would be going to work / at work, and kids would be getting ready to go to school.
Because we don't change our working hours with the seasons as if we've conquered nature and can ignore the sun. Plus we start too early anyway (even though an 8-5 day still is designed to give us more light before work than after, despite having an added hour at the beginning of the day over the traditional 9-5) - a study in Newcastle, England showed that starting high schools an hour later to 10am significantly decreased truancy (especially in winter) and increased grades.
QuoteMaking the sunrise an hour later wouldn't change much because most people are already getting up and ready in darkness anyway (either way). The earliest sunset is around 4:30 or so.
So you are on half-DST anyway - 3h33 before noon the sun rises, 4h30 after it sets: solar noon is therefore at half 12.
QuoteExtending to 5:30 would increase personal safety by allowing people to commute home in daylight, especially for women.
By making the morning more dangerous - when the UK trialled moving to CET in the 1970s by not changing the clocks back one fall, the accident rate went up, as did mental heath issues, for the years we trialled it.
I'm fine with DST in the summer as there is actually the sunlight to shift it to the end of the day without stealing it from the beginning. I'm not fine with it early Spring/late Fall when there's not the spare light in the morning to move to the evening. And I'm definitely not OK with it in winter when there's not even the light in the morning in the first place.
QuoteIt also (at least for me) is psychologically better to be able to work during more daylight (instead of wasting it sleeping early in the morning).
You
are using it in the morning if you wake up after dawn - it's wasted if we don't let the light reset our circadian rhythms. OK, there's dawn lights and such like that can fake it, but the same can happen in the evening with regular lights (a far cheaper solution). Of course it's better to work during daylight - the issue is that we work too long in winter, forcing us to finish later than we would want (despite starting too early), not that we start too late.
Of course the problem is less DST and more an unhealthy cultural fetish for early risers, starting everything too early.
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on March 06, 2017, 04:12:04 PMI agree. Spain is technically in DST all year round (Even in double DST for seven months), as we are in Central Europe time zone but we should be in the Western Europe one.
Stupid fascists!
How's the proposal to undo Franco's act of solidarity with Hitler going? Last I heard it was going well and the Spanish were progressing towards readopting sensible timekeeping, though the French proposal to abandon what they all happily smear as Berlin time has lost steam in the last couple of years.
QuoteAnd of course, our schedules are silly, we go to sleep near midnight for example.
Or in other words, you've shifted your day an hour later wrt the clocks to make it fit the sun better as year-round DST is bad, even as far south as Spanish latitudes.
Quote from: realjd on March 07, 2017, 09:50:40 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on March 06, 2017, 08:18:16 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 12:01:30 PM
someone who works a normal shift (7-to-4 or 8-to-5) should have approximately the same amount of daylight before work as after work.
Your definition of a "normal shift" intrigues me. My office is nominally 9 to 5 and that is what I've always understood to be the standard. Dolly Parton seems to concur as well.
9-5 assumes no lunch break. 8-5 is more common in my experience because that's gives folks an hour for lunch. My office is nominally 7:45 to 5:30 with 45 for lunch since we work a 9/80 schedule (9 hour days, every other Friday off) but it's flexible as long as you get your time in that day.
Ironically, Dolly Parton's normal schedule would've been weeknights and weekends...the exact opposite of most people!
If the normal schedule was 9 - 5, then why are the roads jammed with traffic before 5pm?
Cincinnati is on DST in winter, and double DST the rest of the year.
I sort of like the time change. It feels cool "manipulating" the time.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 07, 2017, 12:01:24 PM
If the normal schedule was 9 - 5, then why are the roads jammed with traffic before 5pm?
I think it's people who offset their schedule backwards to "beat the traffic".
Quote from: english si on March 07, 2017, 06:25:49 AM
Quote from: kkt on March 07, 2017, 12:41:13 AMActually, before clocks people got up when it got light enough to see what they were doing. Kind of like we do by shifting the clocks an hour later.
Except they were able to fine tune it well, whereas DST is a blunt instrument of a large shift twice a year. Add in that the 7-5 (Europe) / 8-4 (US) month bias towards noon-at-1am is lopsided - Spring starts about the right time for a 6 (Europe) or 6.5 (US) month stint of DST, but we then don't change back until a good few weeks after we should, and DST becomes an even more terrible way of meeting the aim of our natural bodies - with overly late sunrises in Fall meaning we're all getting up in the dark in October just because we want the kids trick-or-treating in the light.
It is a blunt instrument, making the change all at once. However, you probably know that most of the natural change in sunrise times is packed into the months of the equinoxes. For Seattle (where I live, 47 degrees north) sunrise times:
March 1: 6:49 AM PST
March 31: 6:49 AM PDT (5:49 AM PST)
Despite its defects, I definitely don't want to use standard time year around, much less DST year around. Making an hour shift all in one night seems like a lot better idea than two or three half-hour shifts.
The change back does happen too late in the year, even in Europe, and even later in the US and Canada. It
should be dark during trick or treating. If that's too scary, maybe you should keep your elementary school kids inside watching "It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown" instead of trick or treating. I'd put it at the beginning of October.
What would it take for the US, Canada, and Europe to switch on the same dates? Obviously I don't expect equatorial countries to start changing, but there's no reason the northern temperate zone countries couldn't all change at the same time.
Quote
DST makes sense when the dawn wakes us up a good while before the alarm clock, but the numbers on the clock when we are 'meant' to wake up don't really allow for much time in the year when that is the case - especially in North America where dawns don't get as extreme as in the UK (other than Alaska and the large expanses of Canada north of the 50th where just a tiny fraction the people live) and there's a culture of getting up earlier than we do in the UK. But DST isn't about maintaining the dawn to be a useful time - it's about making evenings lighter - a worthwhile aim, but not one we particularly cared about until the late 19th century - we're happy to stay up long after nightfall, but we are not as happy to get up in the dark.*
Of course nobody cared about it much until the late 19th century, there weren't all that many activities that ordinary people engaged in that required exact times of day.
Quote
Plus the energy consumption argument has been debunked.
*We're also not that happy to go to bed in the light. It being light at 10pm is the bane of many parents who haven't invested in blackout curtains in the UK (of course, much of their worry is based on the incorrect notion that we need the same amount of sleep in summer as winter). And Cub camps (as a cub, and as a quasi-young leader as my Dad was pressganged in to be a leader when I left) in June were always fun: most years it never got dark, so we had to be tired out. Going on 5 mile hikes leaving around 8:30-9 pm (physical exercise, but not adrenaline producing like a running around game would be). Force-fed low-sugar high-milk cocao to try and make us drowsy. We were never sent (or never sent the cubs) to bed until gone 11pm and they had a strict rule of no noise until we say so. The second night was a bit easier as we tire them out more during the day, but even then it's still about an 11pm bedtime - just that they actually fall asleep not long afterwards.
I'm curious, is there really good evidence that kids require less sleep in the summer than the winter?
Quote from: Duke87 on March 06, 2017, 08:18:16 PM
Agreeing to start work an hour earlier from Mid-March through early November is mathematically equivalent to setting the clocks forward, but the latter is easier for people to handle psychologically because we're socially conditioned to react to what the clock says.
I do realize that what I'm quoting was not in direct reply to me, but...
We anti-DST folks generally advocate
both not changing the clocks twice a year
and not changing our work schedules twice a year. My point earlier is that full-time DST is mathematically the same as eliminating DST altogether, except that 12:00 is moved even further away from midday and midnight. I say we put 12:00 as close to midday and midnight as reasonable, then leave the darned clocks alone.
North America and Europe did change the clocks on the same days at one time. It was the United States which changed the dates.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 07, 2017, 03:19:12 PM
North America and Europe did change the clocks on the same days at one time. It was the United States which changed the dates.
In March 2010, I drove south of the border, then drove back north again six days later. While I was in Mexico, the USA switched to DST. I had to explain to everyone with me why they hadn't had to change their clocks on the way down yet had to change them on the way back up. I told them the US Congress doesn't have any authority in Mexico so, when they extended DST in 2005, it didn't apply to Mexico. Minds were blown.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 07, 2017, 03:19:12 PM
North America and Europe did change the clocks on the same days at one time. It was the United States which changed the dates.
Really? Um.. Sorry about that, folks.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 07, 2017, 03:19:12 PM
North America and Europe did change the clocks on the same days at one time. It was the United States which changed the dates.
Actually, spring forward in Europe is a week earlier than it used to be in the United States (last Sunday in March, vs. first Sunday in April as it once was in the US).
And in Spain we used to do the fall change on the last Sunday of September, thus staying half a year in both DST and standard time. Now we spent more time in DST than in standard time.
Quote from: english si on March 07, 2017, 11:42:45 AMStupid fascists!
How's the proposal to undo Franco's act of solidarity with Hitler going? Last I heard it was going well and the Spanish were progressing towards readopting sensible timekeeping, though the French proposal to abandon what they all happily smear as Berlin time has lost steam in the last couple of years.
No news about that.
Quote from: english si on March 07, 2017, 11:42:45 AMOr in other words, you've shifted your day an hour later wrt the clocks to make it fit the sun better as year-round DST is bad, even as far south as Spanish latitudes.
Yup, that explains why I think 6:00 a.m. is too early. In fact I was on the road at that time only once.
Quote from: kkt on March 07, 2017, 02:28:47 PMDespite its defects, I definitely don't want to use standard time year around, much less DST year around. Making an hour shift all in one night seems like a lot better idea than two or three half-hour shifts.
The change back does happen too late in the year, even in Europe, and even later in the US and Canada. It should be dark during trick or treating. If that's too scary, maybe you should keep your elementary school kids inside watching "It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown" instead of trick or treating. I'd put it at the beginning of October.
Agree with all of this.
There were two interesting items in the news over the past year:
Utah was considering exempting itself from DST.
Massachusetts was considering moving to the Atlantic time zone and then exempting itself from DST.
Does anyone here know the outcome on these considerations?
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 07, 2017, 04:53:30 PM
There were two interesting items in the news over the past year:
Utah was considering exempting itself from DST.
Massachusetts was considering moving to the Atlantic time zone and then exempting itself from DST.
Does anyone here know the outcome on these considerations?
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2017/01/11/massachusetts-time-zone-change-eastern-daylight-saving-time-standard/
Apparently they have until March 21, 2017 to finish a report.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 07, 2017, 04:53:30 PM
There were two interesting items in the news over the past year:
Utah was considering exempting itself from DST.
Massachusetts was considering moving to the Atlantic time zone and then exempting itself from DST.
Does anyone here know the outcome on these considerations?
MA still considers that, as far as I know. They believe shifting clock in winter would make life better in terms of people seeing more sunlight and being willing to actually stay in Boston after graduating MIT/Harvard. Somehow I doubt that would make a difference...
Apparently NH is considering it too, but only if Mass goes through with it..
http://www.concordmonitor.com/time-zone-Atlantic-bill-7545169
Quote from: inkyatari on March 07, 2017, 05:22:09 PM
Apparently NH is considering it too, but only if Mass goes through with it..
http://www.concordmonitor.com/time-zone-Atlantic-bill-7545169
Maine should follow if NH and MA change, probably RI as well. VT probably would stay with NY, but can be either way. CT, until willing to split like IN does, is too much tied to NYC.
Yeah, it would be silly for MA and NH to be an island in a different time zone.
All I know is I lose an hour of sleep :-(
It would suck for western Mass.
They might consider splitting the state, with Boston to Worcester in Atlantic, accompanied by Maine, N.H., and R.I.
Quote from: vdeane on March 07, 2017, 01:13:47 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 07, 2017, 12:01:24 PM
If the normal schedule was 9 - 5, then why are the roads jammed with traffic before 5pm?
I think it's people who offset their schedule backwards to "beat the traffic".
There are also plenty of people who work longer hours than what is usually considered a "normal" schedule. I used to work 7:30 to 7:00 most days.
I'm not sure I know a single person who works 9 to 5.
Quote from: ET21 on March 07, 2017, 05:55:47 PM
All I know is I lose an hour of sleep :-(
That's because you choose to not lose an hour of being awake instead. :sleep:
Every two years when the Texas Legislature reconvenes, somebody files a bill either to opt Texas out of DST or to make DST year round. And every two years the bill goes down in flames.
The proposal this time would end DST but would bring El Paso into the Central time zone, which solves a problem the last bill had: a tiny sliver of PDT next to CST. But I foresee a similar fate to this bill.
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article136827253.html
Quote from: Road Hog on March 08, 2017, 12:47:29 PM
Every two years when the Texas Legislature reconvenes, somebody files a bill either to opt Texas out of DST or to make DST year round. And every two years the bill goes down in flames.
The proposal this time would end DST but would bring El Paso into the Central time zone, which solves a problem the last bill had: a tiny sliver of PDT next to CST. But I foresee a similar fate to this bill.
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article136827253.html
The legislator would also like to unify the state into one time zone according to the article, but his bill wouldn't do that. The bill would only eliminate DST. The bill has not yet been through committee and could be amended. This is the introduced version: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/85R/billtext/html/HB02400I.htm (http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/85R/billtext/html/HB02400I.htm) The change made by the senate bill is exactly the same.
Quote from: Road Hog on March 08, 2017, 12:47:29 PM
The proposal this time would end DST but would bring El Paso into the Central time zone
I find that rather ironic for two reasons:
(1) The whole state of Chihuahua switched from Central Time to Mountain Time in 1998, and one of the two reasons was so Juárez would be in the same time zone as El Paso. If this bill were to pass, they would again be in different time zones.
(2) After much debate, cities within the border zone in México began in 2010 to observe the same extended DST period as the USA. If this bill were to pass, the largest of those border cities would again have DST issues with its sister city to the north.
Quote from: kkt on March 07, 2017, 02:28:47 PM
The change back does happen too late in the year, even in Europe, and even later in the US and Canada. It should be dark during trick or treating. If that's too scary, maybe you should keep your elementary school kids inside watching "It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown" instead of trick or treating. I'd put it at the beginning of October.
I don't disagree with this, but I wonder if more light during trick-or-treating hours encourages more younger children (or their parents) to participate, and discourages older kids (i.e. more about making mischief) from participating? In the neighborhood where I grew up (which is where my parents still are and where we take our son trick-or-treating) I've noticed a significant drop in the amount of teenagers "trick-or-treating" since DST was extended into November. I recognize that is a tiny sample size, though.
I make darned sure to wait till after dark before going trick-or-treating with my kids. Because that's when you're supposed to go trick-or-treating, doggone it! If I lived in a place that restricted trick-or-treating to daylight hours (like Des Moines), I might have to move.
Quote from: kphoger on March 08, 2017, 01:51:20 PM
I make darned sure to wait till after dark before going trick-or-treating with my kids. Because that's when you're supposed to go trick-or-treating, doggone it! If I lived in a place that restricted trick-or-treating to daylight hours (like Des Moines), I might have to move.
Agreed! Well, I wouldn't move just because of that. But, yes, it's supposed to be dark.
Quote from: DTComposer on March 08, 2017, 01:42:59 PM
Quote from: kkt on March 07, 2017, 02:28:47 PM
The change back does happen too late in the year, even in Europe, and even later in the US and Canada. It should be dark during trick or treating. If that's too scary, maybe you should keep your elementary school kids inside watching "It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown" instead of trick or treating. I'd put it at the beginning of October.
I don't disagree with this, but I wonder if more light during trick-or-treating hours encourages more younger children (or their parents) to participate, and discourages older kids (i.e. more about making mischief) from participating? In the neighborhood where I grew up (which is where my parents still are and where we take our son trick-or-treating) I've noticed a significant drop in the amount of teenagers "trick-or-treating" since DST was extended into November. I recognize that is a tiny sample size, though.
Fewer teenagers participate, but I don't think daylight is the reason. I'd attribute it to (in no particular order): Lots of homework, no time to make costumes. Parents don't feel like making costumes for teens, and teens wouldn't want them if they did. Would rather go to a party with other teens than trick or treating. Those teens here who do go trick-or-treating start after 6:00, by which time it's pretty dark. Neighborhood business districts here offer trick-or-treating for younger kids from about 3:00-5:00.
Quote from: kphoger on March 08, 2017, 12:59:54 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on March 08, 2017, 12:47:29 PM
The proposal this time would end DST but would bring El Paso into the Central time zone
I find that rather ironic for two reasons:
(1) The whole state of Chihuahua switched from Central Time to Mountain Time in 1998, and one of the two reasons was so Juárez would be in the same time zone as El Paso. If this bill were to pass, they would again be in different time zones.
(2) After much debate, cities within the border zone in México began in 2010 to observe the same extended DST period as the USA. If this bill were to pass, the largest of those border cities would again have DST issues with its sister city to the north.
Not to forget that Las Cruces would be still on mountain time and a lot of people commute to El Paso or vice versa. Really that part of Texas has much more in common with New Mexico than it does the rest of Texas, so why change?
Quote from: Pink Jazz on March 07, 2017, 04:12:07 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 07, 2017, 03:19:12 PM
North America and Europe did change the clocks on the same days at one time. It was the United States which changed the dates.
Actually, spring forward in Europe is a week earlier than it used to be in the United States (last Sunday in March, vs. first Sunday in April as it once was in the US).
Don't forget the "first Sunday in April" was a recent change in the US. It used to be the last Sunday in April to the last Sunday in October. The Reagan Administration successfully pushed to move it to the first Sunday in April. I believe that started in 1987.
I like DST, though I think it could start later and finish earlier. I usually wake up at 6:55am for school/co-op, and right now, the sunrises at 6:45am which is nice. However, once DST starts this weekend, sunrise will be pushed back to around 7:40am. It's kind of sad waking up in the morning when its still dark out :/
Back when the states controlled DST, it end on the last Sunday in September in the Northeast. In other areas it ended as early as Labor Day weekend.
Quote from: 7/8 on March 08, 2017, 09:49:14 PM
I like DST, though I think it could start later and finish earlier. I usually wake up at 6:55am for school/co-op, and right now, the sunrises at 6:45am which is nice. However, once DST starts this weekend, sunrise will be pushed back to around 7:40am. It's kind of sad waking up in the morning when its still dark out :/
Dark waking is my main issue with DST.
Quote from: kphoger on March 09, 2017, 10:17:38 AM
Quote from: 7/8 on March 08, 2017, 09:49:14 PM
I like DST, though I think it could start later and finish earlier. I usually wake up at 6:55am for school/co-op, and right now, the sunrises at 6:45am which is nice. However, once DST starts this weekend, sunrise will be pushed back to around 7:40am. It's kind of sad waking up in the morning when its still dark out :/
Dark waking is my main issue with DST.
I am using a brilliant novel discovery to combat that. It is called "light bulb". Price is pretty steep, $1-2 a piece - but they can really do some wonders with illumination. You should save a bit and try one yourself. It really changes night into day!
Quote from: kalvado on March 09, 2017, 10:43:39 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 09, 2017, 10:17:38 AM
Quote from: 7/8 on March 08, 2017, 09:49:14 PM
I like DST, though I think it could start later and finish earlier. I usually wake up at 6:55am for school/co-op, and right now, the sunrises at 6:45am which is nice. However, once DST starts this weekend, sunrise will be pushed back to around 7:40am. It's kind of sad waking up in the morning when its still dark out :/
Dark waking is my main issue with DST.
I am using a brilliant novel discovery to combat that. It is called "light bulb". Price is pretty steep, $1-2 a piece - but they can really do some wonders with illumination. You should save a bit and try one yourself. It really changes night into day!
:rolleyes:
Electric light is nowhere near as effective as sunlight at waking people. Seattle doesn't get the return to dark waking after DST starts, but we get it for about 6 weeks in winter (depending on what time you need to get up). It's a hard time of year.
Quote from: kphoger on March 08, 2017, 01:51:20 PM
I make darned sure to wait till after dark before going trick-or-treating with my kids. Because that's when you're supposed to go trick-or-treating, doggone it! If I lived in a place that restricted trick-or-treating to daylight hours (like Des Moines), I might have to move.
As someone who grew up in Minnesota, where things are more or less normal, things here in Des Moines are whack. Yet all the natives I know act like the strange stuff is normal. I just laugh. I still don't understand the point of moving trick-or-treating to the day before, on the 30th.
Quote from: kalvado on March 06, 2017, 02:16:50 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 12:01:30 PM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:50:08 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 06, 2017, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: corco on March 06, 2017, 11:23:31 AM
Rabble rabble let's go to DST this year and never revert rabble rabble I hate when it gets dark early rabble rabble farmers can suck it
Switching to DST all-year is silly. Just get rid of DST altogether. If our schedules don't line up with standard time, then our schedules are out of whack, not our clocks.
That is a preposterous twisting of logic - what hours are assigned to the clock is just as much an arbitrary social construct as people's clock preferences.
No, 12:00 PM is supposed to be midday and 12:00 AM is supposed to be midnight.
Before clocks, people naturally did most of their activities between sunup and sundown, so we developed clocks accordingly, with 12:00 right up at the top. Now people complain they don't have enough daylight in the evenings, yet someone who works a normal shift (7-to-4 or 8-to-5) should have approximately the same amount of daylight before work as after work. If we as a society have made room in our daily schedules to allow for a bunch of leisure time and want to take it during daylight hours after work, then we should go to work earlier to make that time available to us–not redefine what noon and midnight are.
Most people I know prefer to wake up - go to work - come back - relax.
So work starting 2 hour after sunrise fits best for them. Now the problem is that sun doesn't cooperate and refuses to go up at 7 AM for entire year.
And it looks like our mid-day is closer to end of typical business hours. So probably having astronomic noon somewhere after lunch break, 1.30-2 PM, would be a good option for many - just to keep astronomic noon somewhere close to actual mid-day.
Unfortunately, that means morning commute in the dark for 2-3-4 winter months...
If a company wants to run its business day from 4AM until noon by solar time because they think that this serves its (and its customer) interests the best, that is what they should do. We should leave the clocks alone and return to time zones that approximate mean solar time for the reference meridian (and no area should be more than 45 minutes ahead or behind the same).
If you want leisure time with the sun up after work, arrange to start work at or before sunrise (or to be allowed to work from home later in the evening). If your employer is inflexible (because they think that they need staff at particular times), offer to trade off with someone who has the opposite preferences some of the year. Some people like to get up early, go for a run or a swim and hang out.
We could fix a lot of things, if the market and people's preferences were to be respected.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 08, 2017, 09:58:38 PM
Back when the states controlled DST, it end on the last Sunday in September in the Northeast. In other areas it ended as early as Labor Day weekend.
States controlled DST? I always thought that was a country-wide thing. How would one know when they went from one state to another North & South what time it was?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 09, 2017, 12:14:37 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 08, 2017, 09:58:38 PM
Back when the states controlled DST, it end on the last Sunday in September in the Northeast. In other areas it ended as early as Labor Day weekend.
States controlled DST? I always thought that was a country-wide thing. How would one know when they went from one state to another North & South what time it was?
You have discovered why it stopped being a state-by-state thing :)
Often there would be signs posted at state borders.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 09, 2017, 12:14:37 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 08, 2017, 09:58:38 PM
Back when the states controlled DST, it end on the last Sunday in September in the Northeast. In other areas it ended as early as Labor Day weekend.
States controlled DST? I always thought that was a country-wide thing. How would one know when they went from one state to another North & South what time it was?
It is fairly common that once your flight lands there is an announcement along the lines of "Welcome to XXX, local time is..., temperature outside.... ". ANd these days your cell phone would take care of the issue by itself.
Usually that helps (but once upon a time I got screwed up flying to ORD and driving to Indiana...)
Quote from: kkt on March 09, 2017, 12:29:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 09, 2017, 12:14:37 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 08, 2017, 09:58:38 PM
Back when the states controlled DST, it end on the last Sunday in September in the Northeast. In other areas it ended as early as Labor Day weekend.
States controlled DST? I always thought that was a country-wide thing. How would one know when they went from one state to another North & South what time it was?
You have discovered why it stopped being a state-by-state thing :)
Often there would be signs posted at state borders.
The question remains valid for international borders. No signs tell you what the DST rules are when crossing from one country to another (at least the borders I've crossed).
Quote from: kphoger on March 09, 2017, 12:38:46 PM
Quote from: kkt on March 09, 2017, 12:29:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 09, 2017, 12:14:37 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 08, 2017, 09:58:38 PM
Back when the states controlled DST, it end on the last Sunday in September in the Northeast. In other areas it ended as early as Labor Day weekend.
States controlled DST? I always thought that was a country-wide thing. How would one know when they went from one state to another North & South what time it was?
You have discovered why it stopped being a state-by-state thing :)
Often there would be signs posted at state borders.
The question remains valid for international borders. No signs tell you what the DST rules are when crossing from one country to another (at least the borders I've crossed).
This would be important only if you're in the country during daylight time change. Then you can rely on local news / hosts / hotel desk to help you out.
Besides, your phone is still likely to get time update from network, even if you have limited roaming. Last, but not the least - ask Almighty Google...
Quote from: kalvado on March 09, 2017, 12:37:03 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 09, 2017, 12:14:37 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 08, 2017, 09:58:38 PM
Back when the states controlled DST, it end on the last Sunday in September in the Northeast. In other areas it ended as early as Labor Day weekend.
States controlled DST? I always thought that was a country-wide thing. How would one know when they went from one state to another North & South what time it was?
It is fairly common that once your flight lands there is an announcement along the lines of "Welcome to XXX, local time is..., temperature outside.... ". ANd these days your cell phone would take care of the issue by itself.
Usually that helps (but once upon a time I got screwed up flying to ORD and driving to Indiana...)
But that's more a time zone thing vs. a DST thing.
Quote from: kkt on March 09, 2017, 10:59:21 AM
Quote from: kalvado on March 09, 2017, 10:43:39 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 09, 2017, 10:17:38 AM
Quote from: 7/8 on March 08, 2017, 09:49:14 PM
I like DST, though I think it could start later and finish earlier. I usually wake up at 6:55am for school/co-op, and right now, the sunrises at 6:45am which is nice. However, once DST starts this weekend, sunrise will be pushed back to around 7:40am. It's kind of sad waking up in the morning when its still dark out :/
Dark waking is my main issue with DST.
I am using a brilliant novel discovery to combat that. It is called "light bulb". Price is pretty steep, $1-2 a piece - but they can really do some wonders with illumination. You should save a bit and try one yourself. It really changes night into day!
:rolleyes:
Electric light is nowhere near as effective as sunlight at waking people. Seattle doesn't get the return to dark waking after DST starts, but we get it for about 6 weeks in winter (depending on what time you need to get up). It's a hard time of year.
Yeah, electric light isn't even in the same league as natural sunlight. If anything, turning on the light next to my bed when my alarm goes off only serves to EMPHASIZE the fact that I got up when it still looked like midnight outside. And around here, that's fully half the year.
Of course, I'm a natural night owl. I'd go to bed around 2-3 AM and wake up around 9-11 AM every day if I could. Alas, I have to work if I want to avoid things like being homeless and starving to death, and employers don't cater to my whacked out circadian rhythm.
Prior to 1967 the states, or even cities, did control DST. Twenty-one states did not have it.
When daylight savings time dates were under state control, neighboring states would often come to agreement between themselves and adopt the same dates to change. But there were a few oddballs.
Quote from: kkt on March 07, 2017, 06:08:03 PM
It would suck for western Mass.
They might consider splitting the state, with Boston to Worcester in Atlantic, accompanied by Maine, N.H., and R.I.
CT is considering going full year EDT (AST). Would only make sense if the rest of the northeast say east of a line from Ottawa, down I-81 to I-64 then down to the NC/VA border west of Richmond did
Quote from: kalvado on March 09, 2017, 01:00:28 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 09, 2017, 12:38:46 PM
Quote from: kkt on March 09, 2017, 12:29:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 09, 2017, 12:14:37 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 08, 2017, 09:58:38 PM
Back when the states controlled DST, it end on the last Sunday in September in the Northeast. In other areas it ended as early as Labor Day weekend.
States controlled DST? I always thought that was a country-wide thing. How would one know when they went from one state to another North & South what time it was?
You have discovered why it stopped being a state-by-state thing :)
Often there would be signs posted at state borders.
The question remains valid for international borders. No signs tell you what the DST rules are when crossing from one country to another (at least the borders I've crossed).
This would be important only if you're in the country during daylight time change. Then you can rely on local news / hosts / hotel desk to help you out.
Besides, your phone is still likely to get time update from network, even if you have limited roaming. Last, but not the least - ask Almighty Google...
As I mentioned, though, it's happened to me. I crossed the Mexican border when neither country was yet on DST, then crossed back again when only the USA was on DST. Relying on local news, Google, etc. only helps if you have access to those things–and that it even occurs to you that the rules are different. It never occurred to any of the ten people I was driving with that the DST rules might be different.
Time zone and DST differentials also affect public transportation schedules. In 1998, Chihuahua switched time zones but none of my atlases reflected that change (until very recently, actually). In 2001, I booked a flight to El Paso, having researched intercity bus schedules in Mexico ahead of time (this was shortly after 9/11, so my flight times ended up changing a LOT meanwhile, but whatever). Arriving in Juárez, I discovered the local time was not what I thought it was. If the switch had occurred the other way, I would have missed the last bus of the day from Cd Chihuahua to my final destination; fortunately for me, the switch occurred so it was advantageous for me. On the return trip, however, I needed to shell out some extra cash for an express bus back to Juárez due to having one hour less for travel than I had anticipated.
I used to work a schedule that required me to be at work at 1am. That meant waking up somewhere from 6pm to 11pm and going to bed somewhere between 9am and 12pm.
I was able to adapt to that after a little practice and some equipment (blackout shades, melatonin, caffeine). The real challenge was people insisting on scheduling things like training classes, doctor appointments, meetings, etc. at times like 2pm that were in the middle of my sleeping time no matter when I went to bed. It wasn't the fact that I had my sleep schedule at an odd time that was difficult, it was changing away from that schedule and then changing back that was hard.
Waking up in the dark is something people could adapt to if they felt the need to put in the effort. I did it because I was going from a $20k/year job to a $32k/year job and I was more than happy to put in the effort. If we all consistently woke up in the dark then it would probably not be anything anyone even thought about. But it becomes an issue when we have to wake up in the dark for X weeks of the year because it's a change.
(Note that this doesn't address edge cases like seasonal affective disorder, etc.)
Not sure if that is DST related - although timing is close:
I just saw a few VMSes with "STAY AWAKE / STAY ALIVE" message...
My day/night schedule changes every two weeks. 2 weeks of 0600-1800 and 2 weeks of 1800-0600. A small little change like going from EST to EDT is nothing to me. All I know is I spend the entire winter going to and coming home from work in the dark no matter what shift I am on. During the summer it is daylight both ways regardless of shift.
I only bitch about the time change if:
A) I am the one stuck working nights when we go from Daylight to Standard as I am stuck working 13 hours instead of 12 (and I can only put 12 down on my time sheet).
-or-
B) I am the one stuck working days when we go from Standard to Daylight as I lose that hour of sleep. This one isn't as bad as it sounds as all I do is cut out an hour of post work BS Saturday Night and go to bed an hour earlier so it doesn't kick my ass as bad when I wake up at 0500 Sunday morning.
If it happens like its going to happen this year, on my weekend off, then it is an absolute non issue (especially since I just completed my two weeks of days and don't have to be back to work until 1800 Monday Night).
Back in the fall I got lucky for the first time in years, I was working the night we went from Daylight to Standard so I only had to work 11 hours while still logging 12 on my time sheet.
I have been working this schedule for almost 20 years now and its so normal to me I have had none of the issues that the circadian doomsayers predict will happen to us if we work a jacked up schedule like this. I sleep when its time to sleep, I am awake when its time to be awake.
You work 13 hours but are only allowed to report and get paid for 12? Sounds like a complaint to your state's Dept. of Labor is in order. That's theft of wages.
It's probably due to a software limitation. If the software requires reporting when you start/end or punching in/out, then it would specifically need DST flags to recognize the correct number of hours. Not sure how many places would have this issue, so it might be easier for the company to just say "it should even out in the long term" and leave it be.
Quote from: kkt on March 10, 2017, 12:38:29 PM
You work 13 hours but are only allowed to report and get paid for 12? Sounds like a complaint to your state's Dept. of Labor is in order. That's theft of wages.
Nope. Exempt government employee and all of that stuff. They do make up for it if you are lucky enough to be working that shift in the fall (you get that hour back). In any event, we get paid the same either way since we don't get overtime (in money, we do get it in comp time that we can use to take off from work and not use vacation or sick) so its just not worth fighting. FWIW I seem to remember someone (a sheriff's deputy) lodging that very complaint about 15 or so years ago, and he lost.
Yeah, as long as you're getting comp time, there's not much to complain about in that regard, then.
Quote from: vdeane on March 10, 2017, 12:56:00 PM
It's probably due to a software limitation. If the software requires reporting when you start/end or punching in/out, then it would specifically need DST flags to recognize the correct number of hours. Not sure how many places would have this issue, so it might be easier for the company to just say "it should even out in the long term" and leave it be.
Our system is actually simpler than that. There is no clock to punch. One doesn't log the start time or end time only the number of hours worked on that date. When Payroll gets our time sheets they merely key in those hours worked (or hours of comp/sick/vacation used) and our balances are adjusted based on that.
For our purposes a date doesn't start/end at Midnight, either-it starts/ends at 0600. I'm off today, but if I were to be working tonight at 1800 for example I would put down 12 hours for March 10th even though in your eyes I'd actually be working 6 hours on March 10th and 6 hours on March 11th.
Yeah, if you're paid in comp time there's not much of a case. Sorry.
Quote from: vdeane on March 10, 2017, 12:56:00 PM
It's probably due to a software limitation. If the software requires reporting when you start/end or punching in/out, then it would specifically need DST flags to recognize the correct number of hours. Not sure how many places would have this issue, so it might be easier for the company to just say "it should even out in the long term" and leave it be.
Our time entry software has exactly that: a field called "DST Flag" that has "Off DST" and "On DST" as the only options. It only appears during the week before and the week after the time change and you simply select whether we are on or off DST for every time punch you enter. As a practical matter it's irrelevant because the office is closed on weekends, but if someone had to work overnight Saturday, that flag is how the system would get the hours right.
Quote from: kkt on March 10, 2017, 01:47:02 PM
Yeah, if you're paid in comp time there's not much of a case. Sorry.
He said he's an exempt employee. Even without comp time there wouldn't be a case. Employers don't have to pay overtime for exempt/salaried employees.
Sunday in Terre Haute, IN, the sunrise will be 8:06 am and the sunset 7:53 pm. That's just absolutely ridiculous to have daylight shifted by that much. Indiana either needs to go back to not observing DST or move to Central time.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 10, 2017, 03:48:44 PM
Sunday in Terre Haute, IN, the sunrise will be 8:06 am and the sunset 7:53 pm. That's just absolutely ridiculous to have daylight shifted by that much. Indiana either needs to go back to not observing DST or move to Central time.
But, honestly speaking, this is a fairly reasonable timing for normal day - sun goes up about morning commute, and stays up for some time after evening commute...
Quote from: kalvado on March 10, 2017, 03:53:32 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 10, 2017, 03:48:44 PM
Sunday in Terre Haute, IN, the sunrise will be 8:06 am and the sunset 7:53 pm. That's just absolutely ridiculous to have daylight shifted by that much. Indiana either needs to go back to not observing DST or move to Central time.
But, honestly speaking, this is a fairly reasonable timing for normal day - sun goes up about morning commute, and stays up for some time after evening commute...
No, that's not anywhere near reasonable. Most schools start at or before 8:00 and there's no reason to have kids going to school in the dark except when the days are really short in Dec-Jan when it's pretty much unavoidable.
It's really sad that sunrises after 8am have come to be perceived as normal. It's the farthest thing from it.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 10, 2017, 04:01:13 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 10, 2017, 03:53:32 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 10, 2017, 03:48:44 PM
Sunday in Terre Haute, IN, the sunrise will be 8:06 am and the sunset 7:53 pm. That's just absolutely ridiculous to have daylight shifted by that much. Indiana either needs to go back to not observing DST or move to Central time.
But, honestly speaking, this is a fairly reasonable timing for normal day - sun goes up about morning commute, and stays up for some time after evening commute...
No, that's not anywhere near reasonable. Most schools start at or before 8:00 and there's no reason to have kids going to school in the dark except when the days are really short in Dec-Jan when it's pretty much unavoidable.
It's really sad that sunrises after 8am have come to be perceived as normal. It's the farthest thing from it.
Kids in the dark... There is no argument that can beat safety!!! of kids!!!!
Given that even crossing the road is now a no-go for KIDS! because it ENDANGERS!!! them - why dark is that big of a problem?
I think most people have their morning commute BEFORE 8. And, as mentioned, it sucks to wake up when it's still dark out.
If you've spent more than an hour a year arguing over DST, then you've already let the terrorists win.
I've said before that most of this leaves me unfazed; varying work hours, weekly travel time zones, shifting meal and sleep are already part of the job.
Quote from: vdeane on March 10, 2017, 05:07:22 PM
I think most people have their morning commute BEFORE 8. And, as mentioned, it sucks to wake up when it's still dark out.
Given the choice, I would rather have extra daylight after work.
Interesting hearing about working during the time change. I asked my boss if I could come in one hour early so that I can get my eight hours of work (this would be overtime pay) and I was told that we would get paid for eight hours even though we only work for seven that night. Considering that this will be my 12th straight night of work, I'll gladly take one less hour of work.
Looking around the house this morning I'm reminded that the biggest nuisance is not so much the time change itself as it is changing all the clocks and watches and such. I'm typing this while sitting at the kitchen table lingering after breakfast and I note nine devices in this room alone with some sort of clocks to change, including appliances with digital clocks built in. (Coffee maker, microwave, range, wall clock, radio, small clock on the end table, answering machine, kitchen timer that contains a clock, and cordless phone.) Yeah, I could skip some of them, but I find it really distracting if I look at a device and see the clock is off.
Earlier in the thread vdeane mentioned how the morning light is more jarring when you wake up and turn on the lights compared to the more gradual effect of natural sunlight. If that's something you find especially bothersome and you're willing to spend some extra money, you could try the Philips Hue color-shifting bulbs. One of the features is a wake-up cycle where you program a start time using the Hue app and you tell it the period of time (say, 20 minutes or whatever) over which you want the lights to come up to wake you. We have those particular bulbs in the master bedroom. The original reason was so we could voice-control them using our Amazon Echo, but then I discovered the wake-up cycle. I don't need it, but Ms1995hoo is horrible about getting up in the morning, so I set the bulbs' wake-up cycle to come up over a 20-minute period starting about 10 minutes after I get out of bed (basically letting her snooze while I get up, use the toilet, shave, brush my teeth, and shower). It's still not the same as real sunlight, but it's also a lot less jarring than the lights coming on full brightness all at once. Only problem is, while you can tell the app not to wake you on weekends or whatever (if, say, you're off Tuesday and Wednesday instead you can tell it to wake you only on the other five days), it doesn't have a setting to tell it to ignore holidays. I forgot to disable it prior to Washington's Birthday and I was awakened as the lights gradually came on at 6:50 AM–but I just rolled over, told Alexa to turn off the lights, and went back to sleep (I fall asleep very easily and I usually fall back asleep easily until I've gotten up in the morning).
Those bulbs cost more than regular bulbs and there's a bit of a start-up cost because you have to buy the "hub," a white square box a little bigger than a hockey puck that uses a wired connection to your wireless router. But the bulbs are supposed to last 20+ years, so the price didn't bug me that much.
Morning light has nothing to do with when I wake up. That's usually determined by either the alarm clock or my bladder.
Quote from: hbelkins on March 11, 2017, 11:58:26 AM
Morning light has nothing to do with when I wake up. That's usually determined by either the alarm clock or my bladder.
Same here with one addition: On the weekend at home during the winter, I usually have trouble sleeping past 8:00 because the thermostat is programmed to bring up the heat by 8:30. It's set at 58°F overnight and it goes up to 67°; since it's set for 8:30, the system starts the heat earlier so it
reaches 67° by the target time. I find it hard to sleep with warm air blowing, so I wake up and start the laundry while my wife sleeps in. (The same issue doesn't happen in the summer because the AC is set to a colder temperature at night than during the day. When it stops running, that doesn't wake me up the way the heat coming on does.)
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on March 06, 2017, 07:13:44 AM
Also, I've heard at least one member call this the "Daylight Wasting Time". Nice one :sombrero:.
I call it Daylight Shaving Time, as it shaves off an hour of time.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 10, 2017, 04:01:13 PM
It's really sad that sunrises after 8am have come to be perceived as normal. It's the farthest thing from it.
I live near Chicago, on the far eastern end of our time zone, so this doesn't really happen. Everything is earlier in Chicago. Of course, that also means that the sun sets around 4 FREAKING OCLOCK in the winter.
Daylight savings time doesn't benefit farmers or office workers, it only serves to help the US chamber of commerce and the retail industry: one extra hour to shop in the summer months. Just like the idea of the Christmas Holiday season in the winter (a cold, dark, grey and horrific time), get people to go shop and spend their hard-earned cash.
The makers of Rockford charcoal are said to have lobbied hard for the extensions of the DST.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on March 11, 2017, 01:16:11 PMI call it Daylight Shaving Time, as it shaves off an hour of time.
However you'll get that hour back in Fall, so every day in a calendar year lasts on average 24 hours.
As I've already said, I use my local time minus 6 hours for timekeeping purposes in this forum (Which most of the time is Eastern time) So, tomorrow I'll be waking up at 1 am as I'm going on a road trip. Then, at 2 am, since I don't switch to DST now, my "forum time" will get stranded in a void at UTC-5, as the whole USA doesn't switch at the same time like Europe does. Then, at 3 am that time will now match Central time. Finally, and since I observe the European DST rules, on March 25th at 8 pm my "forum time" will be 9 pm, thus going back into Eastern time.
Quote from: kalvado on March 10, 2017, 04:06:23 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 10, 2017, 04:01:13 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 10, 2017, 03:53:32 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 10, 2017, 03:48:44 PM
Sunday in Terre Haute, IN, the sunrise will be 8:06 am and the sunset 7:53 pm. That's just absolutely ridiculous to have daylight shifted by that much. Indiana either needs to go back to not observing DST or move to Central time.
But, honestly speaking, this is a fairly reasonable timing for normal day - sun goes up about morning commute, and stays up for some time after evening commute...
No, that's not anywhere near reasonable. Most schools start at or before 8:00 and there's no reason to have kids going to school in the dark except when the days are really short in Dec-Jan when it's pretty much unavoidable.
It's really sad that sunrises after 8am have come to be perceived as normal. It's the farthest thing from it.
Kids in the dark... There is no argument that can beat safety!!! of kids!!!!
Given that even crossing the road is now a no-go for KIDS! because it ENDANGERS!!! them - why dark is that big of a problem?
It's not about the kids' safety; the post you replied to made no mention of safety. Instead, it's ridiculous to make your children (who need more sleep than adults to begin with) wake up, get ready, and get to school all before the human body is naturally wired to wake up–and then, in the summer, to make them go to bed while it's still light outside. And God help every parent who is in the middle of sleep-training a baby during the DST switch; I've been there before, and it ain't pretty.
My goodness, you should have seen my middle son yesterday. He could barely finish supper because he was so tired, having woken up an hour earlier than usual (in reality, not by the clock).
Quote from: hbelkins on March 11, 2017, 11:58:26 AM
Morning light has nothing to do with when I wake up. That's usually determined by either the alarm clock or my bladder.
In the summer, I wake up at or before my alarm clock due to the lightening sky, and I find it easy to get out of bed and get ready. In the winter, I rarely wake up before my alarm clock, and it takes a feat of determination to get out of bed; I was four minutes late to work today because I just couldn't drag myself out of bed. For most of my working life, the spring forward has come right around the time I was starting to get out of bed at dawn instead of in the darkness; it rips the happiness out from under my feet.
Ah DST....just when I was starting to board my train after sunrise, it is now dark again on the platform, and it was "blue hour" when we arrived downtown.
The problem I have with DST are the consequences in the shift forward, today is generally the most dangerous day regarding traffic accidents of the year. Combine that with a potential winter storm (which is happening later on today here) and you have a real double whammy.
Quote from: kphoger on March 13, 2017, 12:05:58 PM
My goodness, you should have seen my middle son yesterday. He could barely finish supper because he was so tired, having woken up an hour earlier than usual (in reality, not by the clock).
Tell him that someone in NY feels exact same pain....
As for "keep in bed after sunrise" - I would prefer to see more morning activity before leaving for work as a more common alternative to staying up late, especially in summer - when sun cycle warrants earlier wakeup. But "wake up and head to work" is programmed too deep..
Quote from: kalvado on March 13, 2017, 12:44:31 PM
As for "keep in bed after sunrise" - I would prefer to see more morning activity before leaving for work as a more common alternative to staying up late, especially in summer - when sun cycle warrants earlier wakeup. But "wake up and head to work" is programmed too deep..
Even more difficult when we have to change the clocks to make sunrise an hour later.
Inasmuch as Benjamin Franklin "proposed" DST, he did so
as part of a parody, suggesting the following to help people rise with the sun instead of sleeping the morning away:
Quote from: Benjamin Franklin: "An Economical Project," as a letter to the editor of the Journal of Paris, 1784
(1) Let a tax be laid of a louis per window, on every window that is provided with shutters to keep out the light of the sun.
(2) Let ... guards be placed in the shops of the wax and tallow chandlers, and no family be permitted to be supplied with more than one pound of candles per week.
(3) Let guards also be posted to stop all the coaches, &c. that would pass the streets after sunset, except those of physicians, surgeons, and midwives.
(4) Every morning, as soon as the sun rises, let all the bells in every church be set ringing; and if that is not sufficient?, let cannon be fired in every street, to wake the sluggards effectually, and make them open their eyes to see their true interest.
All the difficulty will be in the first two or three days; after which the reformation will be as natural and easy as the present irregularity; for, ce n'est que le premier pas qui coûte. Oblige a man to rise at four in the morning, and it is more than probable he will go willingly to bed at eight in the evening; and, having had eight hours sleep, he will rise more willingly at four in the morning following.
Quote from: kphoger on March 13, 2017, 12:05:58 PM
It's not about the kids' safety; the post you replied to made no mention of safety. Instead, it's ridiculous to make your children (who need more sleep than adults to begin with) wake up, get ready, and get to school all before the human body is naturally wired to wake up–and then, in the summer, to make them go to bed while it's still light outside. And God help every parent who is in the middle of sleep-training a baby during the DST switch; I've been there before, and it ain't pretty.
Now I'm wondering if DST might be the reason why my circadian rhythm is out of whack. I've always been EXTREMELY resistant to change (to the point where I completely refused to breast feed because the hospital where I was born had Mom bottle feed me when I was there), and I was born just a couple weeks away from the switch to DST. I wouldn't be surprised if I got used to standard time and my biological clock just refused to switch over (though it doesn't help that I'm a natural night owl).
Quote
In the summer, I wake up at or before my alarm clock due to the lightening sky, and I find it easy to get out of bed and get ready. In the winter, I rarely wake up before my alarm clock, and it takes a feat of determination to get out of bed; I was four minutes late to work today because I just couldn't drag myself out of bed. For most of my working life, the spring forward has come right around the time I was starting to get out of bed at dawn instead of in the darkness; it rips the happiness out from under my feet.
That's the same issue I have. Doesn't help that I have to wake up during the week at the time my body is naturally coldest (I don't warm up until an hour later), so not wanting to leave the warm blankets is a double whammy. In past years, my only motivation to get up is so I could curl up over a heat vent, by my apartment changed something, and I no longer get blasts of hot air; this year, it's gotten to the point where I have had to start punishing myself if I end up late to work as motivation.
Plus, with sunrise later, that means more/harder ice to scrape off the windshield of my car, since the sun doesn't have much of a chance to start defrosting it before I go.
RE: De facto Atlantic Time in New England. The TV industry would never go for it. Unless they wanted to do a seperate feed for New England, which would be expensive and cause the availablity of "spoilers", not to mention impact people who live in one state but get TV from another (not an issue in Canada because Quebec is there to sepeate the two English speaking areas), cause primetime would run 9-12. It would also impact TV sports since national things like national night NFL games would air starting well after 9 PM (and require a kickoff at that time if the Patriots were playing, since the time is dictated by Eastern time. Similarly nationally shown Red Sox games would not start locally until 9, and locally shown baseball, assuming a 7 first pitch, would be on at 8 ET.
It will never happen.
Quote from: vdeane on March 13, 2017, 01:54:51 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 13, 2017, 12:05:58 PM
It's not about the kids' safety; the post you replied to made no mention of safety. Instead, it's ridiculous to make your children (who need more sleep than adults to begin with) wake up, get ready, and get to school all before the human body is naturally wired to wake up–and then, in the summer, to make them go to bed while it's still light outside. And God help every parent who is in the middle of sleep-training a baby during the DST switch; I've been there before, and it ain't pretty.
Now I'm wondering if DST might be the reason why my circadian rhythm is out of whack. I've always been EXTREMELY resistant to change (to the point where I completely refused to breast feed because the hospital where I was born had Mom bottle feed me when I was there), and I was born just a couple weeks away from the switch to DST. I wouldn't be surprised if I got used to standard time and my biological clock just refused to switch over (though it doesn't help that I'm a natural night owl).
While I doubt your present circadian rhythm is related to how closely you were born to the time switch, I do feel you about the breast-vs-bottle problem. When my oldest son was born, they took him out to the nursery while my wife was still in recovery from the C-section. The nurse measured his blood sugar and told me it was slightly low–49 out of a benchmark 50–then asked if I wanted them to give him a bottle. Being uneducated in the matter, I said yes, and he immediately sucked that nipple flat. Then, overnight, when he would cry, the nurse kept suggesting she take him out to the nursery for a bottle. Being desperate for peace and quiet, we said yes, and he quickly grew accustomed to the fast flow of the bottle. Breastfeeding was a struggle from then on, barely lasted a few months, and hardly every worked exclusively. We learned our lesson, and things got better with each of the two subsequent sons–such that, by the time we had friends babysit our youngest for the first time, he had never even actually taken a bottle before (we had only ever tried once, and he refused it like it was on fire).
Quote from: SP Cook on March 13, 2017, 02:57:19 PM
RE: De facto Atlantic Time in New England. The TV industry would never go for it. Unless they wanted to do a seperate feed for New England, which would be expensive and cause the availablity of "spoilers", not to mention impact people who live in one state but get TV from another (not an issue in Canada because Quebec is there to sepeate the two English speaking areas), cause primetime would run 9-12. It would also impact TV sports since national things like national night NFL games would air starting well after 9 PM (and require a kickoff at that time if the Patriots were playing, since the time is dictated by Eastern time. Similarly nationally shown Red Sox games would not start locally until 9, and locally shown baseball, assuming a 7 first pitch, would be on at 8 ET.
It will never happen.
I'm not sure how much say the TV industry has in this kind of thing...
All I know is that I was able to take a decent nap yesterday after the NASCAR race was over (and Joey Logano and his crew beat the crap out of that little twerp Kyle Busch) and still was able to go outside and feed the dogs while it was still daylight. No arguments against DST here.
Quote from: hbelkins on March 13, 2017, 03:09:31 PM
All I know is that I was able to take a decent nap yesterday after the NASCAR race was over (and Joey Logano and his crew beat the crap out of that little twerp Kyle Busch) and still was able to go outside and feed the dogs while it was still daylight. No arguments against DST here.
I was happy to be able to grill some steaks without needing a flashlight or other lamp.
Quote from: SP Cook on March 13, 2017, 02:57:19 PM
RE: De facto Atlantic Time in New England. The TV industry would never go for it. Unless they wanted to do a seperate feed for New England, which would be expensive and cause the availablity of "spoilers", not to mention impact people who live in one state but get TV from another (not an issue in Canada because Quebec is there to sepeate the two English speaking areas), cause primetime would run 9-12. It would also impact TV sports ....
Broadcast TV is dying anyway. Yes, live events like sports would be a problem.
I'd go for splitting the too-large leagues into Atlantic-Eastern-Central timezone leagues and Pacific-Mountain-Alaska-Hawaii leagues, with maybe just a playoff series between them.
Don't like your kids (or yourself, if you are one) getting up too early for school?
Ask them to shorten it. But there is one problem: schools don't care about the early waking problem. They just don't like having to bear the effects of it. And of course, schools are more willing to turn to disciplinary actions than get to the source of the problem.
SM-S320VL
Windfarmer, my school district contracts out school busing. I expect this is pretty common. In order to save money, they have each bus collect kids for three schools, one after the other. To have time for the bus run, they're about an hour apart. So the schools are pretty arbitrarily divided up into starting too early (7:45 AM), too late (9:45 AM), and just right (8:45 AM). If you're really 12, you might think 9:45 would be fine rather than too late, but when the kids are too young to get themselves ready for school in the morning it prevents one parent from holding most jobs. Also if they start at 9:45 and have a full school day, there's no time for after school clubs, sports, a job, or other activities.
Schools do care, they're just chronically short of money. Doing anything other than the cheapest solution possible, even if it has demonstrated bad effects on kids' learning, doesn't have a chance.
Regardless of all the other issues, the later sunset was nice tonight (snow notwithstanding) because it meant not having the sun in our eyes on the drive home.
Come to think of it... how DOES broadcast TV deal with the time zones anyways? I know for Central and Eastern they just use the same feed and everyone in Central has to mentally subtract an hour (and have their local news schedule jumbled around relative to how it is here), but I was looking at some programming listings for other cities, and Mountain and Pacific appear to have their own separate feeds rather than using one feed. Is there a reason why Central and Eastern use the same feed but the other two each have their own rather than using the same one?
Quote from: vdeane on March 13, 2017, 11:49:20 PM
Come to think of it... how DOES broadcast TV deal with the time zones anyways? I know for Central and Eastern they just use the same feed and everyone in Central has to mentally subtract an hour (and have their local news schedule jumbled around relative to how it is here), but I was looking at some programming listings for other cities, and Mountain and Pacific appear to have their own separate feeds rather than using one feed. Is there a reason why Central and Eastern use the same feed but the other two each have their own rather than using the same one?
It's funny you mention that, because I was thinking about the same thing. Back when I watched a lot of network TV I always remember the announcer saying "remember to catch (insert show name here) Sunday at 8, 7 Central and Mountain" I never remember them mentioning Pacific at all.
When I lived in Chicago we saw everything as you were seeing it in New York, just an hour earlier. Our primary late local news was 10pm (over the air WGN always had an early 9PM news).
I guess Mountain just delays everything another hour by waiting until it's 7pm there to show the same program you and I already watched.
I would guess if Pacific used the same feed as Mountain that would have them starting that first show at 6pm, not allowing people enough time to get home from work and have dinner before settling in for the prime time shows?
I recall when The West Wing aired that live presidential debate, they did two live performances, the second of them for Pacific time, rather than airing a recording out west.
Whenever I've been in Canada and have watched TV, they mention the air times for Atlantic time as an hour ahead (for example, if Seinfeld airs at 9:00 Eastern, as it did, it will air at 10:00 Atlantic and 10:30 Newfoundland). Speaking of Seinfeld, I worked in Montgomery during the summer of 1997 and it was pretty convenient having that show air at 8:00 instead of 9:00–still had the bulk of the evening free after it was over.
Quote from: vdeane on March 13, 2017, 11:49:20 PM
Come to think of it... how DOES broadcast TV deal with the time zones anyways? I know for Central and Eastern they just use the same feed and everyone in Central has to mentally subtract an hour (and have their local news schedule jumbled around relative to how it is here), but I was looking at some programming listings for other cities, and Mountain and Pacific appear to have their own separate feeds rather than using one feed. Is there a reason why Central and Eastern use the same feed but the other two each have their own rather than using the same one?
Back before Indiana did DST, the South Bend TV market would be all in the same time zone during the winter but in two different time zones during the summer. Prime time network TV ran from 8-11 Eastern year-round, so in the summer on the Indiana side it ended up being 7-10. So the late local news was at 11pm in the winter and 10pm in the summer.
Quote from: Windfarmer on March 13, 2017, 05:48:22 PM
Don't like your kids (or yourself, if you are one) getting up too early for school?
Ask them to shorten it. But there is one problem: schools don't care about the early waking problem. They just don't like having to bear the effects of it. And of course, schools are more willing to turn to disciplinary actions than get to the source of the problem.
Seems a lot simpler to just stop changing our clocks twice a year.
Quote from: kkt on March 13, 2017, 06:29:52 PM
Windfarmer, my school district contracts out school busing. I expect this is pretty common. In order to save money, they have each bus collect kids for three schools, one after the other. To have time for the bus run, they're about an hour apart. So the schools are pretty arbitrarily divided up into starting too early (7:45 AM), too late (9:45 AM), and just right (8:45 AM). If you're really 12, you might think 9:45 would be fine rather than too late, but when the kids are too young to get themselves ready for school in the morning it prevents one parent from holding most jobs. Also if they start at 9:45 and have a full school day, there's no time for after school clubs, sports, a job, or other activities.
Schools do care, they're just chronically short of money. Doing anything other than the cheapest solution possible, even if it has demonstrated bad effects on kids' learning, doesn't have a chance.
And it is important to understand that schools are one of biggest expenses. I don't want to dig out numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if they consume more than military.
We in NY have one of most expensive schools in US - state average spending is just north of $20k per student annually, or quarter million till high school graduation. If you will, same amount of money would buy one a college degree plus a reasonable house for a couple. Most other states are a bit below, but scale is still there.
Or - one of 40 working adults works in school education. So just paying them average salary requires 2.5% tax on each and every paycheck.
So running 3x buses and paying 3x drivers, nice this nice that would easily send everyone bankrupt. And given limited transportation options for most kids...
Quote from: kalvado on March 14, 2017, 11:44:13 AM
Quote from: kkt on March 13, 2017, 06:29:52 PM
Windfarmer, my school district contracts out school busing. I expect this is pretty common. In order to save money, they have each bus collect kids for three schools, one after the other. To have time for the bus run, they're about an hour apart. So the schools are pretty arbitrarily divided up into starting too early (7:45 AM), too late (9:45 AM), and just right (8:45 AM). If you're really 12, you might think 9:45 would be fine rather than too late, but when the kids are too young to get themselves ready for school in the morning it prevents one parent from holding most jobs. Also if they start at 9:45 and have a full school day, there's no time for after school clubs, sports, a job, or other activities.
Schools do care, they're just chronically short of money. Doing anything other than the cheapest solution possible, even if it has demonstrated bad effects on kids' learning, doesn't have a chance.
And it is important to understand that schools are one of biggest expenses. I don't want to dig out numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if they consume more than military.
We in NY have one of most expensive schools in US - state average spending is just north of $20k per student annually, or quarter million till high school graduation. If you will, same amount of money would buy one a college degree plus a reasonable house for a couple. Most other states are a bit below, but scale is still there.
Or - one of 40 working adults works in school education. So just paying them average salary requires 2.5% tax on each and every paycheck.
So running 3x buses and paying 3x drivers, nice this nice that would easily send everyone bankrupt. And given limited transportation options for most kids...
Don't forget, the solution to poor test results is to throw even more money at the schools. Because lots of fancy whirligigs makes kids smarter.
Quote from: kphoger on March 14, 2017, 11:47:32 AM
Quote from: kalvado on March 14, 2017, 11:44:13 AM
Quote from: kkt on March 13, 2017, 06:29:52 PM
Windfarmer, my school district contracts out school busing. I expect this is pretty common. In order to save money, they have each bus collect kids for three schools, one after the other. To have time for the bus run, they're about an hour apart. So the schools are pretty arbitrarily divided up into starting too early (7:45 AM), too late (9:45 AM), and just right (8:45 AM). If you're really 12, you might think 9:45 would be fine rather than too late, but when the kids are too young to get themselves ready for school in the morning it prevents one parent from holding most jobs. Also if they start at 9:45 and have a full school day, there's no time for after school clubs, sports, a job, or other activities.
Schools do care, they're just chronically short of money. Doing anything other than the cheapest solution possible, even if it has demonstrated bad effects on kids' learning, doesn't have a chance.
And it is important to understand that schools are one of biggest expenses. I don't want to dig out numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if they consume more than military.
We in NY have one of most expensive schools in US - state average spending is just north of $20k per student annually, or quarter million till high school graduation. If you will, same amount of money would buy one a college degree plus a reasonable house for a couple. Most other states are a bit below, but scale is still there.
Or - one of 40 working adults works in school education. So just paying them average salary requires 2.5% tax on each and every paycheck.
So running 3x buses and paying 3x drivers, nice this nice that would easily send everyone bankrupt. And given limited transportation options for most kids...
Don't forget, the solution to poor test results is to throw even more money at the schools. Because lots of fancy whirligigs makes kids smarter.
Money are definitely part of it - but not ultimate part. We want best teachers, best doctors, honest cops.. In broad terms (education, healthcare, protective services) that is roughly 20% of workforce. Think about your high school classmates and say "this guy would be a good doctor, those two girls - great teachers, and thatn we all knew was a future cop". Having hard time designating people like that? That is because teachers, doctors, cops... you name it.. just average people....
Q: What do you call the student at the bottom of his graduating class in medical school?
A: Doctor.
kphoger, please realize that a lot of those tests are complete nonsense. Written by people who never taught in school, without reference to curriculum that the state says schools are supposed to be teaching in each grade, with statistical processes that don't bear examination. They're invented not to help identify weak spots in kids, but simply to have a brick to throw at the schools. Any yahoo with political connections can make up a test, get the legislature to require the schools to administer it, and get taxpayer money that should be going to schools to go to them instead. Kids lose weeks of time that they ought to be in class every year taking these damn tests. Private schools and charter schools can be state accredited but don't have to do all those tests.
Quote from: kkt on March 14, 2017, 12:40:32 PM
kphoger, please realize that a lot of those tests are complete nonsense. Written by people who never taught in school, without reference to curriculum that the state says schools are supposed to be teaching in each grade, with statistical processes that don't bear examination. They're invented not to help identify weak spots in kids, but simply to have a brick to throw at the schools. Any yahoo with political connections can make up a test, get the legislature to require the schools to administer it, and get taxpayer money that should be going to schools to go to them instead. Kids lose weeks of time that they ought to be in class every year taking these damn tests. Private schools and charter schools can be state accredited but don't have to do all those tests.
Preaching to the choir, don't worry. I'm the parent of home-schooled children.
I wish I could homeschool my kid.
Having good friends who are teachers in the public school system makes us ever more glad we chose to home-school. It's amazing what many third-graders don't know.