!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
You could address Daylight Savings Time by just having people set their own schedule, but it was generally seen as easier for the government to change the clocks.
As others have mentioned, there are typically schedules that are assumed based on time. It is easier from a social setting to keep time universal and adjust based on time zones. The context informed by local time is fast more useful than a standard time.
eh... do you really want to be scheduled to start work at 8am when 8am is mid-afternoon? me neither.
If we had a single time zone, we couldn't use "am" or "pm".
These mean ante-meridiem and post-meridiem. So, before midday and after midday. There would be no concept of midday linked to hours that could apply to all locations.
The most apropiate would be talking in 24h format. It wouldn't bother me if someone said I have to wake up at 13 and finish my job at 21. These are just numbers.
But yeha, it's still a bad idea because people would have to change calendars constantly because of daylight savings.
yeah I see what you mean. you'd have to replace all 12 hour clocks world-wide though - and then accept that it would take generations for people to adapt. it'd probably never going to happen.
What you do is you have both, kind of like we already do, but with the global time being the default rather than local time. So, if I were to look at my phone right now, it would say something like 1433 9:33AM.
When referencing the time to people I know to be local, I'd use the local time, but any time confusion could occur, I'd use the global time. We have everything in place already, we just need people to get used to knowing what time it is UTC
I doubt most people would use local time in their day-to-day life if global time is the default. You would just get used to the new schedule the same way that you have gotten used to the current one based on local time.
I do think that it might be useful to have something like a "world clock" when traveling. So your clock may say "14:33, like 09:33 at home". But I'm not even convinced how useful this would be. Once you remember one or two timeframe references or if you can see the sun you will have a rough idea of what time-of-day it is anyways. And generally the local schedule will vary a bit from your home schedule anyways so having exact local-equivalent time will probably not be that valuable.
I agree, and once people get used to it, we can phase local time out. But we'll definitely need it to begin with
There are lots of negative opinions in this thread. But I think it is actually a good idea!
It makes time math a lot easier. Of course the switching cost is very high. (And probably not worth it). Much like it would be better if we counted using base 12 it is a better system once the switch would be made.
The main upside is that it is very easy to agree on times. I've had job interviews missed because time math was done wrong. They told me my local time and the interviewer their local time but they didn't match! And it isn't obvious to either party. When I see "10:00 America/Toronto, 08:00 America/San Francisco" it isn't really obvious that there was an error here unless you happen to have the offset memorized. With a global time everyone would immediately agree on a time.
One common complaint is that you can no longer use "local time" to estimate if someone is available. But if anything I consider this a feature! Not everyone wakes up at 8 and is at work by 9. Some people prefer to have meetings later, some prefer earlier. Maybe it is best to stop assuming and just asking people. "Hey, what times do you like to take meetings at?" But even if you don't want to do that it is just as easy to look up "work hours in San Francisco" than it is to look up "current time in San Francisco". (In fact it may be easier since you don't need to then do math to find the offset and hope that daylight savings doesn't change the offset between when you look it up and when the event happens.) On top of that if someone schedules a meeting with you then you immediately know if it works well for you, because you know what times you like to have meetings at. IMHO it is much better to know the time of the meeting reliably than to try to guess if it is a good time for other parties. If the other parties can reliably know what time it is scheduled for they know if it is a good time for them, and can let you know if it isn't.
I think the real main downside is in how we talk about times and dates. Right now it is very common to say something like Feb 15th, 14:00-19:00. However if the day number changes during the day it can be a bit confusing. But honestly I'm sure we will get used to this quickly. Probably it just ends up being assumed. If you write Feb 15th 22:00-03:00 people know that the second time is the the 16th. People working night shifts deal with this problem now and it has never seemed like a big complaint. Things like "want to grab dinner on the 15th" may be a bit more confusing if your day rolls over around dinner time where you are, but I'm sure we would quickly adopt conventions to solve this problem. It would definitely be a big change, but these aren't hugely complex problems. Language and culture would quickly adapt.
So overall I think it is better. It makes it 100% reliable to agree and discuss specific times and it doesn't really change the difficulty of identifying a good time in a particular location. The only real downside is how we communicate about time currently, but I think that would be pretty easy to overcome.
However I don't think it is really worth changing. It would be a huge shift for a relatively little gain. How about we just focus on getting rid of Daylight Savings Time for now, then we can ponder switching to UTC and base 12 counting in the future.
We already have it: it's called UTC. You should read about it probably, instead of asking the whole fucking world to change its uses for your convenience, shouldn't you?
“you’re fucking late to your goddamn shift you lazy piece of shit it’s already 35*()*46 B,shk past 73!!”