Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Waste of Daylight

nms.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 251 posts

Re: The Waste of Daylight

#41

Post by tptacek »

TylerE wrote: post #36
tptacek wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The opposing case is stronger: you can't just change the school schedule, because school is part of the fabric of child care; change its schedule, and you change the schedules of parents, which means now you have a coordination problem. That problem ripples, so that by the time you've really addressed it, you've essentially recapitulated daylight savings time. Accidents aside, there's a lot to be said for not having…

Hawaii and Arizona have done without the time change for over 50 years.

Where do most people in AZ live relative to their time zone? I wonder how apparent these issues are to people in DC; they're very apparent in places like Michigan, on the edge of their time zone; you drive for an hour outside of Chicago and it's weird how long the sun is suddenly up.

Re: The Waste of Daylight

#42

Post by TheCoelacanth »

gweinberg wrote: post #16
chrishas35 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And there is a compromise to be had here... a one-time 30 minute change, and we’re done. There is strong consensus to eliminate the time change, but which time to choose as permanent seems quite divided. Compromise and let’s move on.

There absolutely is not. Most people agree that extra sunlight in the afternoon is more useful than in the morning.

Polling doesn't back up your opinion[1]. 40% preferred extra sunlight in the morning year-round, 31% preferred it in the evening year-round and 28% preferred switching.

[1] https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/14/politics/daylight-saving-time...

Re: The Waste of Daylight

#43

Post by Thorrez »

eucryphia wrote: post #17

City people could just get up an hour earlier in summer.

Are you suggesting we eliminate (go permanent standard time) and have people change their alarms 1 hour earlier in the summer? Does that mean you also go to bed 1 hour earlier in the summer? If you go to bed earlier, you have less evening time to enjoy.

Also adjusting your entire schedule (your alarm, your bedtime) twice a year would be very disruptive.

Re: The Waste of Daylight

#44

Post by TylerE »

tptacek wrote: post #41
TylerE wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hawaii and Arizona have done without the time change for over 50 years.

Where do most people in AZ live relative to their time zone? I wonder how apparent these issues are to people in DC; they're very apparent in places like Michigan, on the edge of their time zone; you drive for an hour outside of Chicago and it's weird how long the sun is suddenly up.

The state pretty much spans the width of mountain time. It's pretty large geographically, almost 350 miles across.

Re: The Waste of Daylight

#45

Post by Thorrez »

chrishas35 wrote: post #12
shmerl wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as the switch itself is dropped. Which one to drop is probably moot and benefits could depend on the region. It's easier to adjust local schedule than to switch the clock back and forth.

Split the difference and let’s move on.

I would prefer to not live in a timezone with a half hour offset from UTC (which do exist, in fact 15 minute offsets exist).

Re: The Waste of Daylight

#46

Post by didibus »

echelon wrote: post #7

For those that want to make a permanent change, let's stop talking about "DST". That's too confusing for a lot of people, and results in many favoring the wrong outcome. We should instead ask people if they want "summertime" or "wintertime" sunrise and sunset. Wintertime proponents use the animosity against the time change to argue against DST, but they seldom mention this means an earlier sunset. This comes down to…

> but they seldom mention this means an earlier sunset

I thought normal time meant a later sunset and later sunrise in the winter. That's why DST was enacted no? So that in the winter the sun rises earlier and sets earlier?

Anyways my preference would be for later sunrise and sunset, so that more of the day can be enjoyed around work. Which I think means staying on standard time the whole year.

Re: The Waste of Daylight

#47

Post by Thorrez »

gweinberg wrote: post #13
shmerl wrote: post #2

> The country follows the same DST schedule as most of Europe, setting the clocks forward one hour on the last Sunday in March and back again one hour on the last Sunday in October. Didn't EU plan to cancel DST? It's long overdue to cancel this erratic switch everywhere.

How about this: we get rid of the time change, but have schools start an hour earlier march through october than november through february. Change the eraly bird parking hours at bart similarly.

Adjusting your entire schedule (commute, job, child care, school, bedtime, alarm time, meal times) twice a year is much much more disruptive than changing your clocks twice a year.

Re: The Waste of Daylight

#48

Post by stopping »

TylerE wrote: post #36
tptacek wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The opposing case is stronger: you can't just change the school schedule, because school is part of the fabric of child care; change its schedule, and you change the schedules of parents, which means now you have a coordination problem. That problem ripples, so that by the time you've really addressed it, you've essentially recapitulated daylight savings time. Accidents aside, there's a lot to be said for not having…

Hawaii and Arizona have done without the time change for over 50 years.

AZ and Hawaii experience ranges of [10-14 hours] and [11-13.5 hours] of daylight across the whole year, respectively. More southern latitudes can get away with not shifting their clocks because the daylight variance is much smaller. In AZ, sunrise varies from 5:15AM to 7:25AM. In Seattle, without DST, it would range from 4:11AM to 7:57AM. If we use "civil twilight" (bright enough for outdoor activities), Seattle would start experiencing daylight at 3:30AM in mid-summer.

Re: The Waste of Daylight

#49

Post by tom_mellior »

lisper wrote: post #18

> Critics however claim that if adopted all year round, this would result in darker winter mornings which would be more dangerous for children going to school This drives me bananas. If you're worried about this, the right answer is not to force everyone to change their clocks, it's to change the school schedule to start an hour later.

Also, if you're worried about dangerous drivers, do something about dangerous drivers rather than toying with clocks.

Re: The Waste of Daylight

#50

Post by Thorrez »

chrishas35 wrote: post #11
echelon wrote: post #7

For those that want to make a permanent change, let's stop talking about "DST". That's too confusing for a lot of people, and results in many favoring the wrong outcome. We should instead ask people if they want "summertime" or "wintertime" sunrise and sunset. Wintertime proponents use the animosity against the time change to argue against DST, but they seldom mention this means an earlier sunset. This comes down to…

And there is a compromise to be had here... a one-time 30 minute change, and we’re done. There is strong consensus to eliminate the time change, but which time to choose as permanent seems quite divided. Compromise and let’s move on.

>There is strong consensus to eliminate the time change

Yes, but I'm not sure if those people have thought through the ramifications fully. When we went permanent DST in the 70s, it was quickly repealed 383 to 16 due to the problems it caused.

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-tried-year-round-daylight...

Post reply on HN