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

Swatch Internet Time

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 103 posts

Re: Swatch Internet Time

#51

Post by coldtea »

Tomdarkness wrote: post #21
ComSubVie wrote: post #17

Lots of things would be easier if everybody uses the same time. It could stay the 24h/day time format, but timezones are a pain - I always have to recalculate them for local time. Why couldn't everybody work with UTC? And by the way: when will we finally get rid of the daylight savings time?!?

Consider this. Suppose I want to phone someone who lives in Japan and I live in the UK. Japan is +9 hours ahead of UK local time (GMT). Therefore I know if I phone slightly before lunch then I'll be phoning them in the evening. Now suppose we all had the same time. If I phoned them just before lunch, which would mean shortly before 12:00 in the UK then I'd have to try and figure out what Japan would be doing at that…

You need to remember the exact same bits of information in both cases, so I don't see the problem. In one case you remember it as "time difference" ("now is 12:00 +9 there"), in the other case you remember it as earlyness/lateness compared to you ("12:00 here is LIKE 12:00 +9 there").

So that would need the same exact effort.

The man benefit would be for the "let's meet at the same time online" etc coordination stuff -- where's its brain-dead easy when everybody has the same time.

Re: Swatch Internet Time

#52

Post by mprovost »

gerbal wrote: post #41
willholloway wrote: post #29

I think the biggest problem with time keeping systems is that they counts up, but our lives are not infinite. For us, time is really counting down. After trying to reconcile the solar year with decimal time in a way that made sense, I abandoned my effort and created a time keeping system with 1095 units of time of time per year (1098 in leap years). The units are 8 hours long, because no progress on hard problems is…

Jan 1 is a entirely arbitrary demarcation that's not actually terribly useful to the way we actually experience time and the year. IMO a better place would be one of the solstices or equinoxes (I'm partial to the spring equinox). Also breaking the year into quarters, from equinox to solstice would be a better match for to scale we live an think on. Also it's just the right amount of time for a good portion of a large…

It's only the spring equinox on your half of the planet! You'd have to call it the March equinox which is arbitrary again. Or maybe the Northward equinox.

Re: Swatch Internet Time

#53

Post by gaius »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #2

I've always loved this idea. It just makes sense. People argue against the "circular notation" of a clock face and how it relates to 60 minutes/seconds, but all that analog stuff is dead.

The way you experience time most certainly is analogue. Hint: time does not advance in units of seconds, it is continuous.

Re: Swatch Internet Time

#54

Post by ComSubVie »

Tomdarkness wrote: post #21
ComSubVie wrote: post #17

Lots of things would be easier if everybody uses the same time. It could stay the 24h/day time format, but timezones are a pain - I always have to recalculate them for local time. Why couldn't everybody work with UTC? And by the way: when will we finally get rid of the daylight savings time?!?

Consider this. Suppose I want to phone someone who lives in Japan and I live in the UK. Japan is +9 hours ahead of UK local time (GMT). Therefore I know if I phone slightly before lunch then I'll be phoning them in the evening. Now suppose we all had the same time. If I phoned them just before lunch, which would mean shortly before 12:00 in the UK then I'd have to try and figure out what Japan would be doing at that…

Ok, but I know a lot of people who are available at work at times which do not match the "usual" work hours. Also shops have no universal opening times, some open at 7, some at 10, so you always have to check if the other side is available before calling (or just try).

I guess calling would also be easier if the used system can show if the other side is available like Skype or even better when she is available.

Re: Swatch Internet Time

#55

Post by DanBC »

VLM wrote: post #46
mmahemoff wrote: post #35

When people say Bitcoin is a money standard for the internet, it reminds me of this. A time standard for the internet, similar to UTC but human-friendly. A few things worked against its adoption. First, it was too proprietary. A modern initiative based on open standards would have a much better chance of gaining a foothold in niche communities, much like Bitcoin. Second, it was before its time (no pun intended). The…

"grassroots movement" Having lived thru it, it was astroturf at most. It was a marketing gimmick to solve a problem that still doesn't exist. "Here, try this, its just like things that work perfectly such as UTC or Eastern Time, but way more confusing"

Eastern time means nothing to me. How many hours do I go forward or back? How do I know if you're in daylight savings? What if I'm in saylight savings?

Sensible time for wod wode use is still a problem for casual users.

Re: Swatch Internet Time

#56

Post by pedalpete »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #2

I've always loved this idea. It just makes sense. People argue against the "circular notation" of a clock face and how it relates to 60 minutes/seconds, but all that analog stuff is dead.

Beats time is no more 'digital' than the 24-hour day. It's 10 base which makes it easier for us to calculate, and without time zones, makes it easier to communicate around the world as we become more global.

I think maybe Swatch gave up to early on this? It could have just been another measurement on their watches. Not the main one, but secondary.

There's no way this was going to be an overnight change.

Re: Swatch Internet Time

#57

Post by rmc »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #33
jber wrote: post #8

It was a nice idea but I think Swatch made a big mistake by taking their headquarters as the base to calculate it. It needed to be an independant concept to bring other companies/competitors on board.

Not to be too US centric, but the time standard should be set around New York City. Bankers in London and San Fran all work on NYC time.

What about non-bankers in London or the rest of Europe?

Re: Swatch Internet Time

#58

Post by throwaway2048 »

julioademar wrote: post #7
bluedevil2k wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1/10th of a day is just as arbitrary, maybe less so, then 1/24th of a day.

It's not arbitrary. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal

base 12 (or 24) and base 60 are actually much nicer to work with mentally than 10.

10 divides by 1 5 and 10 so you can easily figure out halves and tenths thats about it.

12 divides by 1 2 3 4 6 and 12 so you can easily figure out halves, thirds, quarters, sixths, and twelths without much of an issue, less non terminating decimal nastyness.

60 is even better, as it divides by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, 30 and 60 you get a whole wealth of easy fractions, and easy mental division.

This is probably the reason why a lot of ancient societies had a preference for base 60 and base 12.

you can count to 12 on your fingers aswell, using your individual finger bones on one hand + your thumb as an index.

You can extend this system to count to 60 by using the 5 fingers of your other hand seqentially to represent each set of 12.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_60

Re: Swatch Internet Time

#59

Post by jber »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #33
jber wrote: post #8

It was a nice idea but I think Swatch made a big mistake by taking their headquarters as the base to calculate it. It needed to be an independant concept to bring other companies/competitors on board.

Not to be too US centric, but the time standard should be set around New York City. Bankers in London and San Fran all work on NYC time.

Do you mean that only bankers can afford a watch ? ;-)

Re: Swatch Internet Time

#60

Post by dfc »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #2

I've always loved this idea. It just makes sense. People argue against the "circular notation" of a clock face and how it relates to 60 minutes/seconds, but all that analog stuff is dead.

> People argue against the "circular notation" of a clock face

I have never heard this argument and I am not very sure I understand what it means. What is the argument? Who are these "people"?

Post reply on HN