So, if the western states opted out of daylight savings time changes, they'd be an hour behind Arizona year-round, which would mean earlier sunsets year-round too. I gave up when I realized the choices were either lobby the federal government to change the regulation or change the entire culture of the western US to start and end its business day earlier.
Furthermore, this time is very "sticky" with all kinds of regulations, processes, organizational practices etc having fixed on a particular start-end time, so one does not simply live according to a natural schedule, and it's much harder to change that than the single centralized decision of the time zone.
Thus, switching to a timezone where middle of the astronomical day is 13:00 means that the people's day is better aligned with the sun.
But wouldn't DST be the opposite of what you want, then? Shifting the clocks one hour forward, as DST does, pushes typical business and waking hours one hour earlier in the astronomical day.
Due to accumulated cultural baggage from earlier centuries where the "habits" were formed in a very different environment with different needs than we have now, currently we (well, most of us, e.g. farmers have different schedules) have unused/spare daylight in mornings and too much darkness in evenings after work, so pushing typical business and waking hours one hour (or possibly more) earlier in the astronomical day is just the thing that we need, giving us more daylight in the evenings (which we all need) at the cost of less daylight in mornings (which most of us waste).
It's just that for the current interconnected set of practices it's a sticky "local minimum" where there's a disadvantage for any person or organization to deviate from the accepted local hours (e.g. businesses can't deviate from habits of customers, schools can't deviate from time needs of parents/teachers, customers can't deviate from schedules of their large employers and kids schools, etc), so we can't expect to ever switch gradually, and the best solution to that coordination problem is a global change for everyone at once like switching a timezone.
If you need to wake up at the sunrise to tend crops, then wake up at the sun's rise regardless of time.
If you like to stay up late, don't let the tine dictate it. Seems silly considering if/once the rest of the country switches as well it would lead to further confusion and already is since AZ has set the precedent for your timezone already
I'm curious how many people are confused about which part of the year is Daylight Savings Time. I've corrected people who "hate daylight savings" on a few occasions. They had it backwards.
Assholes invent all kinds of things. It's those who enforce and tolerate it at fault.
>File under “qwerty-level bad choices”
Qwerty wasn't actually that bad, and Dvorak was more like self-promoted infomercial-snake-oil-style cargo-cult
Moreover, people in modern times have attempted to create improved keyboard layouts (e.g. BEPO, Coleman) which are also better for typing Unix commands, suggesting that such a rearrangement may be helpful etiher for reducing RSI or for increased speed.
But the nice things about keyboard layouts in the digital age is that it doesn't matter: You can believe that it's all hogwash and continue clunking Qwerty.
people are so obsessed about time, all the time! it just cause them unneccesry stress. maybe if these kind of things are changed, people will start to look in other areas how time is affecting them and also make adjustments there to live more free and relaxed.
now i know some things are stuck with specific times, public transport, work times etc., but even there you can make your life so that you don't need to worry about it or have it influence you. i usually get up far before i need to leave for work, so i dont need to worry about catching the train or not, i can just get the next one, or the one after that. subsequently i also don't ever need to worry about that start time of work, because that's tied to the same mechanism. it saves tons of stress in the morning, which makes all days feel much much more relaxed even though i'm doing the same things and not missing time sensitive appointments (not to cause others stress because of their obsession of time!).
time is a funny thing, and one needs to be careful how to use it. it's arguably just a construct of our imagination, so don't let it be a nightmare ;D
It's amazing how many places would benefit from hanging a simple clock. Airports, for example...
Here in Seattle, it seems the transit clocks are always changed a month or two (!) after each DST change. Some public clocks never get changed. There's a significant fraction of the year where I simply can't trust any clock I see.
They want their clocks to be permanently shifted one hour, instead of shifting their schedule one hour.
Solar noon matching clock noon would require daily clock shifts as well as differing clocks at each slight difference of longitude. Almost no one wants that, and the various differences people want from that are all about (different ideas of) social convenience.
> They want their clocks to be permanently shifted one hour, instead of shifting their schedule one hour.
No, they want society’s clocks shifted an hour, because that is something practical for government to do, whereas shifting society’s schedules by an hour is not.
It's equally easy to regulate that everybody change their schedules at the same time as you regulate the clock. It's just less popular. Doesn't make it impossible.
This is absolutely not true. To answer the question "What time is it in my country?", everyone turns to a single national source of time. Changing that central source for time is absolutely trivial.
Changing signs on every door on every business, changing timetables of every train and every bus line, changing opening hours of every school, and changing people's conventions - that is absolutely not trivial.
I'm assuming everyone here who says you should just change your own time doesn't have friends.
Basically the convo was:
A: People want to change their clocks to summer time instead of changing their personal schedule
B: They don't want to change their personal time but rather society's time
A: They could just change society's schedule, it's just as easy.
C: Nah, you'd have to change a lot of things, signs, timetables, etc...
I'm saying that that is absolutely not the case, and that grandparent is delusional.
No, it's not, and I think if you spent a little while thinking how you'd write a law or regulation to do each you'd recognize that.
Small business and other organizations will follow to not be left out. You only need to do this once or a handful of times before society will learn to shift schedules on their own.
Clocks update themselves. Store hour signs, bus tables, stickers in windows, business cards, Outlook calendars, etc. They do not.
I don't like changing clocks twice a year; sticking with one time-zone offset is better. But having the entire population shift their working, banking, classroom, and service hours ad hoc is strictly worse than a universal hour shift. Instead of "Open M-F, 9a-5p", you suggest that "Open M-F, 9a-5p, Winter, 10a-6p Summer" is more elegant? Because that's what all vinyl stickers on glass doors would look like.
And it's still centralized and regulated, just like DST is now. So what have we gained?
There's more examples like this, famously electric negative and positive poles that would have been reversed compared to the current standard if the scientists would have known how things work.
Many current standards have unintuitive quirks that only live on because they're old and entrenched, and that wouldn't have existed if the standards were set today instead.
So let's stop with the dumb quirks before it's entrenched.
Also, even if you use DST, most people still won't have the sun be directly overhead at noon.
Not gonna hold my breath for that one.
By contrast, in most places where I've lived, I have found that daylight savings time less convenient than the one which approximates the astronomical situation.
Not having to change clocks is nice. Pressure companies / employers to have flex time to allow earlier starts and earlier leaves. Even though Japan culture tends to lag 10 to 15 years behind, it does change.
Now if the rest of the world (London / New York) would stop shifting clocks around on different dates, it would make global synch ups easier to handle.
"Illustrative program reductions in FY 2019
-$6.3 million supporting fundamental measurement dissemination, including the shutdown of NIST radio stations in Colorado and Hawaii"
Databases like tzdata do that, and they have half a dozen updates every year.
Or, like in the case of most phones, GPS-enabled devices know what time zone you're currently in, and then automatically adjust accordingly.
GPS does not contain your current timezone, like NTP it gives out UTC.
The reason your phone (that's set to use "New York" as a timezone) knows to change the UTC offset from -4 to 05 on the first Sunday of November is because it has received a firmware update at some point since 2006. A standalone device from before 2006 can not know that the spring forward/fall back dates in the US changed, unless it's updated.
Your statement "None of those require firmware updates. It's quite nice to never mess with the clocks and have everything just be correct" seems naive at best.
Fair enough, good point - I didn't think about that.
> Your statement "None of those require firmware updates. It's quite nice to never mess with the clocks and have everything just be correct" seems naive at best.
I never said that, possibly you're replying to a different person than intended.
I lived in Japan as a student, and when you wake up at noon to get only 4 hours of daylight it's really depressing, and feels like you've wasted your whole day in bed.
Anyway, prepare to adjust your watch twice a year!
Well it’s half true
That's just a normal winter to some people.
Anyway - I don't really think it matters too much whether it gets light at 4:00 AM in the peak of summer or 5:00 AM. People can adapt their schedules to take advantage of the daylight at the beginning or end of their day as needed. What really sucks is having your schedule abruptly changed twice a year for DST - something which people aren't really adapted to handle.
I really don’t understand the resistance to waking up a bit earlier in summer. Btw I don’t even consider myself a morning person really, it’s just that when I moved to a place that gets light early in the morning I naturally started waking up earlier.
DST, on the other hand, pushes daytime later, so if you wake up at say 8 (after sunrise for most of the year) and go to sleep at midnight (after sunset), you see more daylight.
In some countries, even to +/-15 min - Russia comes to mind.
Edit: downvoted for asking people to go up at another clock time in order to match the daylight, instead of going up at the same clock time and changing the clock to follow daylight.
Really? What's so important about the number on the clock? Why not just be consistent with daylight, and let the clocks be normal?
Clocks are standardized, which means there's a simple point of coordination for fixing them.
You may not like it, you may not understand it, but other people like their conventions, and you're simply in a tiny, tiny minority if you don't get that.
"Hi, our family's switched from observing the clock, like everyone else in school, to operating on a schedule that is in rhythm with the ebb and flow of sunrise through the year. From now on, we'd like our kids' school attendance and lesson times to start and finish on a solar timescale. Perhaps a separate buzzer tone could be set up to convenience any kids who will be running their day according to the sun. We do understand the challenge to teachers in accomodating this natural schedule alongside other students who stick with the more familiar clock-based one, but hey - the sunlight is the convention we follow."
I mean I live in quite a hippy place but that just ain't gonna fly.
Because jobs, business hours, travel schedules?
Why again does people want clock time not to match solar time? It's far more sane to change the numbers on the schedule than to change the clock.
Making DST permanent "just" requires a singular change of legislation, and basically never switching the clocks back to "normal" time.
As has already been stated twice in a sibling discussion here, "changing an entire culture is hard", but I'm honestly interested in hearing your approach.
It's ridiculous to suggest that it's easider for every business update Google (and Yelp and everything else) twice yearly, and that everybody check that before they go anywhere. That is way more human labor than daylight savings.
In fact even my regular calendar app can support this but itself, it can notify me of changes in booked appointments automatically.
And even that's assuming you didn't already know the change in schedule because it was listed right there on the website.
Currently, clocks automatically change twice a year.
In your proposal, all schedules for businesses, schools, transport, etc need to be entered into multiple online services. Plus each person needs to use one of those services and tell it about all of their plans. Then they need to be notified by that service whenever anything changes, and when hours change in a way that's conflicting, they need to manually resolve that.
As an example, I was just talking with someone who has to pick up kids from two different schools; the route involves two different transit systems. All work meetings must be carefully scheduled to match, and there are inevitably errands that will involve zero, one, or two kids and getting to some place before they close. This is hard enough when hours are stable. Now imagine it with schools, transit systems, stores, work clients, and work vendors all potentially adjusting operating schedules 2 or more times per year.
Google Now can't do that, and probably won't before the Singularity.
If you want clock noon in "the middle of the waking day", for some reason, then by your on admission, permanent-DST (+1hr) isn't going to solve your problem, either.
Once you decouple clock noon from physical noon, I don't see why it has to be 1 hour, or even a multiple of 1 hour.
Just like the Fed can print more money, the government can just make minutes worth more.
Why do we need 60 minutes in an hour? If we only had 30 minutes in an hour, then we would get twice as much done in half the time!
Every reference that I have seen agrees with https://agamerica.com/myth-vs-fact-daylight-saving-time-farm... that farmers don't like DST. In fact the original reason to introduce it was to save energy, and it doesn't do that either.
I know that I will vote for the repeal.
Saskatchewan has never had DST.
But I did find that crime rates drop: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brookings-now/2015/10/29/figh...
I will not be voting for the repeal.
The California bill is for permanently being on DST. Which is equivalent to the present for most of the year, in my opinion is better in the winter, and avoids the disruption twice a year.
And to answer your question, I do engage in outdoor activities. Mostly hiking and the beach. My preference for hiking is for later in the day because I want to sleep in, and wait for the heat to break.
Seriously, arguments for DST are absolutely ridiculous. In the summer when the days are longest it kicks in, which is pointless. In the winter when days are shorter it's not active.
Throw DST into the trash where it belongs.
If you want to be outside in the sunshine, you can go outside while it's sunny, whatever time of day that happens to be.
Instead we just approximate the correction with a one hour step function every year, and everyone is coordinated on it automatically. If a few programmers have to use more complicated date/time functions, it's a small price to pay for everyone to be able to keep their bodies on a more natural schedule.
This is a denial of the actual problem, which is that time zones get separated from times in practice. It's not a programming problem that can be solved by technicians. Blaming them is like blaming shortcomings of the taxation system on the IRS. As you wrote, "changing an entire culture is hard"
In the real north, the part with very short/long days/nights, an hour one way or the other really makes no difference.
The biggest issue is traffic accidents as a result of commuting directly into the rising or setting sun. It's especially acute if there are children crossing streets to get to school at the same time. It doesn't take many dead kids to make headlines.
If I remember correctly, Chile abolished DST, and then after they have a ton of traffic fatalities, they added it back two years later.
It's not as clear cut as people make it out to be.
Data from 21 years of United States' fatal automobile accidents were gathered. The mean number of accidents on the days at the time of the shifts (Saturday, Sunday and Monday) was compared to the average of the corresponding mean number of accidents on the matching day of the weeks preceding and following the shift. This was repeated for each DST shift. The number of accidents for a particular shift was also correlated with the year of the accidents.
There was a significant increase in accidents for the Monday immediately following the spring shift to DST (t=1.92, P=0.034). There was also a significant increase in number of accidents on the Sunday of the fall shift from DST (P<0.002). No significant changes were observed for the other days. A significant negative correlation with the year was found between the number of accidents on the Saturdays and Sundays but not Mondays.
They don't do the time-changing thing.
I feel like Central and Mountain states have the geographic flexibility to decide either way without significant impact to interstate commerce on the whole. From the same lens, Pacific and Eastern states don't appear to have the same flexibility insofar as the potential for a 4-hour gap if Pacific states drop DST while Eastern states perpetuate the status quo. I'm just selfishly thinking in terms of synchronization, overlap, engagement opportunity, jet lag...as if 3-hour gaps weren't already a chore.
On the flip side, being an early bird on an 8-hour schedule is a non-issue with my current employer. In fact, 5:45am-2:15pm was clockwork for a certain graybeard engineer; if you couldn't schedule and conclude your business with him within those hours, you were simply out of luck, and any manager with a clue of who really transforms shit into green leaves in our branch would be seriously hardpressed to upset this balance.
I love the feeling of getting up early, getting a ton done (gym, errands, personal projects, work) all day, and that night falling asleep in minutes when my head hits the pillow.
I mean this sincerely: I don't understand how the federal government gets away with stuff like this. I don't see where DST is in the constitution. And according to the 10th Amendment, that means that decision belongs to the States or the People, right? So the federal government, I suppose, could make the law, but the states should have the ability to say no to anything the Feds say without an Amendment being passed. What am I missing here?
> To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
In practice, I imagine if California passed a state amendment fixing themselves to PST, the federal government would either change the law or refuse to enforce it. Opposing such an amendment would be pretty unpopular.
But in theory, the federal government does have power to "fix the Standard of Weights and Measures" nationwide. I see no reason for a court to rule this as being outside federal jurisdiction.
West Wendover, NV (for instance) follows Mountain Time to synchronize with nearby Salt Lake City. So far as I know, they never asked for federal permission.
That said, I do agree the regulation of DST definitely falls under the weights and measures clause. We can't have Shelbyville continue to operate on metric time, we here in Springfield gave up on that years ago. One might even be able to successfully argue an interstate commerce argument on standardizations of timekeeping.
However the weights and measures stuff makes sense and is something I completely overlooked.
"Because in some infinitesimally small way, someone might lose money."
Time is already crazy for programmers and logistics, but imagine it being essentially a continuously changing band with longitude with slight local variations. The modern economy relies on a sane, more or less consistent view of time.
I’m not a lawyer, but from my reading of the respective regulations and the little case law that exists, I believe California has the legal authority to elect to move to Mountain time.
Also why not just move to one zone west. POE Pacific ocean east time.
Except, of course, that half the country does it.
We are living in a strange country.
I don't recall this part of the enumerated powers of the federal government from when I read the constitution. Has there been a recent amendment?
No, it's in the bare unamended text:
“The Congress shall have power [...] To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures” (Art. I, Sec. 8; emphasis added)
Sounds like a repeat of the Imperial vs Metric system divide. Why does the USA always have to be the odd major modern country using obsolete customs? Is there a cultural explanation?
Yes they're lacking in culture. :P
Seriously though, I think culturally they think whatever they're doing must be "the best", irregardless of whatever the rest of the world thinks. And it caused NASA disasters too!
The word that comes to my mind is "arrogance". Is there a better fitting word? (Honest question, not a native speaker)
Funny, one could say the same about Europeans. And it'd be an equally sweeping and divisive claim.
DST seems to be one of those weird Anglophone things that we do, I would't criticise the USA directly for this one, they're not alone. As a New Zealander I was actually surprised to learn that DST isn't standard across the globe.
But it will change, specifically: twice a year any UK-EU timezone offsets would change, affecting all communication and arrangements between UK and EU. Currently we are all in sync even though we are offset, so it might actually be more hassle to keep it DST if the EU does not.
It would change the time relative to Ireland, which is in the same timezone as the UK and has very close ties to it. It would introduce timezone differences along the Irish border. It would also change the time difference to every EU country twice a year; those differences are currently constant.
> So yeah, considering the amount of hassle it would be to change
What hassle would that be?
Given we couldn't even be bothered to move to a timezone that EU other countries are on (Portugal aside), I can't see there being much appetite for change.
Now, if the EU Commission had said they were forbidding the removal of daylight saving, I think it would be a completely different story...
And -the republic of- Ireland! A "timezone" border to be added to the one already introduced by Brexit
Legally, it is almost comical.
The Act of Parliament defining daylight savings time has a significantly different mechanism to how daylight savings time has operated in harmony with the E.U. for the past several decades. It allowed for double daylight savings time, ran over a different part of the year, and had to deal with Easter.
It was modified by an Order in Council in 2002, which removed double daylight savings time and changed the rules for the start and end. This was not the first time that the 1972 Summer Time Act had been modified by statutory instrument for harmonization with the E.U., either.
But that Order in Council was done by the Queen under the authority of the European Communities Act 1972, which is repealed by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. That, in turn, classes the Order in Council as "EU-derived domestic legislation". It retains it, but abolishes the Act that authorizes such orders. Adding to the comedy, the 2002 Order in Council also abolished the original authority to issue statutory instruments that was in the 1972 Summer Time Act itself.
So a different new mechanism has to be created to authorize further orders in council if the 1972 Summer Time Act is to be altered with another statutory instrument. There apparently isn't one in the E.U. Withdrawal Act 2018, by my reading, as "EU-derived domestic legislation" is not covered by the infamous so-called "Henry 8" provisions for dealing with "direct EU legislation". Otherwise and more likely, a full Act of Parliament has to be made to replace the (modified) 1972 Summer Time Act.
However, now look to history. There have been numerous attempts at this over the years, some fairly recent. They have got nowhere. The upshot of the legal tangle and the political will that effectively blocks changing the status quo is thus very likely that the U.K. will keep to the old E.U. rules after the E.U. itself abandons them. This is highly ironic for Brexit.
Article 50 is quite clear. If you invoke it, you start the timer: "The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, [...]".
Although there is a possibility to extend that period "[...] unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period".
But the word crucial word is "unanimously". It's very unlikely that for example Spain would agree to that.
> No clear plan for doing this has yet been presented,
Yes. But don't underestimate the power of all-nighters. Politicians are at least as good with them as programmers are.
> and doing it without a plan looks like immediate disaster.
Yes. But Brexit is fitting for the crazy times we find ourselves in. So I don't think they will get less "interesting".
With regards to cancelling article 50 - there is no precedent for it, but there was no precedent for using it either. It’s considered an ornament. A lawyer who wrote it insists it should be revocable - but nowhere in law says it is revocable. Or irrevocable for that matter. So those who want to reverse it should plan on getting total unanimity from EU27+U.K. because anything else might not be enough.
There are plenty of valid reasons to criticize the US but this isn’t one of them. And the mere fact that you would read an article about the EU and your mind immediately jumps to what the US will do almost lends credence to the idea that the US is indeed exceptional.
"I live in UTC+2 and you live int UTC-5, meeting at 15:00UTC?" ain't that easier? I add 2 hours, you take away 5 - math a 6 year old can do.
And yet we refer to timezones with some made up meaningless words like Easter European Time - what does that even mean? It's not even accurate description as not all Eastern Europe follows it - pure madness.
Your phrasing was ambiguous. For a moment I thought you meant https://qntm.org/abolish. Still, you can't remove the past, and since the names carrying disambiguating meaning (notably DST changes, is UTC+01:00 CET or BST?) even if you remove them for the future the past still exists so you still have to handle them.
- I'm going to lunch I see you early tomorrow ?
- But we have meeting this afternoon !
- Yes tomorrow, should I remind you we are UTC+12 ?
From the local perspective: "I always eat breakfast at 8am!" - two people can communicate when they eat (or do whatever). When you move to different country instead of sticking to your routine (minus jet-lag) you have to adjust your brain to completely different hours.
Benefits of using UTC internationally would only be good for companies and people that do a lot of international meetings so using UTC would make their life easier (instead of wrapping their heads around multiple timezones)
If you're not in UTC+01, it's easier to work out what time that would be for you than if I said I wanted to have a tele-meeting at 09:00 CET.
GMT does not observe leap seconds for instance.
UT1 essentially doesn't need leap seconds, because it is the correct mean solar time and not an 1Hz approximation of it (which UTC pretty much is).
GMT should be defined by UTC, but not the other way around
I am also not too hopeful about US changing considering its federal-state model. In EU, multiple countries can agree on a decision, but US states are adept at bikeshedding and not getting anything done :(
The only federal regulation that applies here is that states wouldn't have the option to choose between summer or winter time as their permanent time, as the EU states can. IOW, US states are allowed to disregard the observance of DST, but they can't change their time zone without federal congressional approval.
(I'm personally sympathetic; I live in the northeast US and I'd much rather go to work in the dark than leave work in the dark. Summer time or bust!)
(I would love this)
And Indiana. Except for the part that's part of the Chicago market.
And about a quarter of Arizona actually does change time. The Navajo Nation goes with New Mexico/Denver time.
Interestingly, that seems to be the exact opposite of EU where countries can choose their own timezones but (currently) have to observe DST.
In a few thousand years they can change timezones ONCE to deal with leap seconds adding up. It won't even count as noise next to how much happens for random political reasons.
Now we're going to have to pick either summer time or winter time, to be on all year. Pick the latter? Bye-bye awesome summer afternoons with the sun setting down at 8:30. Pick the former? Say hello to waking up in darkness with the sun rising at 9 during winter.
I agree. Before the nonsense about turning the clock twice a year was "invented".
"During World War I, in an effort to conserve fuel, Germany began observing DST on May 1, 1916." 
See, there was shortage of fuel, and they thought DST would save energy. I don't think anyone has any credible data to support that it does. This has been an ongoing experiment for a century. Maybe we all can declare the experiment over.
On a global or national scale this can be a very large amount - calling it miniscuLe is a little disingenuous
Except that's not what we do. The sun doesn't shift rise and set times by an hour on two magic days of the year. You know this right?
That's what abolishing the DST gets us closer to, and the answer is - nothing is stopping us. Arizona has it that way, and they're fine.
A longer answer: time zones are just an approximation to "sun is highest at noon" because it's awfully convenient to have clocks show the same time for people within a several hundred mile radius. The railroads made it pretty much a necessity, but even things like scheduled television programming would be very tedious with astronomical time: every city would end up with a slightly different schedule.
Think about it this way: the circumference of the Earth is about 25000 miles, and one revolution is 24 hours. That means that 1000 miles is roughly an hour difference, and 100 miles is about 5 minutes.
That means that, with astronomical time, if you have a 100-mile commute (sadly, not uncommon), you also have to account for the 5 minutes time difference between your home and work!
While this might not be the question you are asking, some threads on HN have considered the possibility of everyone being on astronomical time, since we can put a GPS chip in every clock (...heck, we pretty much do that already), and everyone gets their schedules from realtime systems.
But perhaps a more compelling alternative is just to give up and have everyone follow the same clock, extending the convenience of time zones (which are, after all, arbitrary and are an awful approximation for Solar time!) to the whole globe.
Which is the point I was trying to make. Thank you.
EDIT: my latitude was too precise for the distance mentioned. Simplified it.
> . . . in my subjective opinion it does it the wrong way around, I want more daylight in the winter evenings . . .
I believe this is because DST originated as an energy saving measure to maximize usage of morning light.  I tend to agree with you as well. If we're not trying to conserve energy in the evenings, DST doesn't make much sense.
In the end no matter how you look at it trying to match any form of "sunlight cycle" by merely offsetting time is bound to fail. It's not a translation you need, it's a homothety.
DST is approximation to what exactly?
It's an artificial construct with a vague purpose, and nothing else. Please do basic research before accusing others of pedantry.
OP seemed to be suggesting a gradual shifting of clocks each day instead of a single leap around each inflection point.
> It's an artificial construct with a vague purpose, and nothing else
A 24hr day is an artificial construct. DST is mostly an energy saving measure, and some also enjoy more daylight after leaving work.
> Please do basic research before accusing others of pedantry.
I certainly know the basics of DST and the earth's orbit. Thank you very much. These are the type of threads that tend to spawn from OP's style of comment, and I regret my reply.
It's hard for me to see how it can be interpreted that way.
>These are the type of threads that tend to spawn from OP's style of comment,
Please don't blame OP for what you wrote, which is - to quote - "It’s called an approximation", and what you wrote now doesn't explain what you meant by that.
The fact that daylight saving time is an approximation for fixing sunrise to a specific time is common knowledge and should not require a thorough explanation. But for posterity  is a graph that illustrates the approximation.
The first question is: which specific time? This time will differ based on the timezone and geography. Because of timezones, sunrise time effectively makes a one-hour jump at the transition points, which makes this chart of yours look different for people living living close to timezone border vs. someone living in the center.
To that end, which time zone and which city was this chart made for? Because we'd need many charts like that to see the effect of DST on sunrise time. (Remember, timezones make sunrise/sunset times depend on longtitude (exact coordinates, actually) as well as latitude and time of year!).
Thankfully, some people have done just that (note that  is interactive!).
As you can see by playing with , if your goal is to have sunrise before 7:00AM across the country on as many days as possible, then DST works against this goal.
Of course, one can always throw one's hands up in the air and say "it's an approximation". In the same sense, 0 is an approximation to any number -- just not a very good one.
The US foreign debt is approximately 0 dollars, if you don't talk about error margins.
Now, looking at the interactive chart at , do you really think that DST is a better approximation to "having the sun up at (your chosen time)" than doing nothing at all? Or shifting the whole timezone by an hour?
That's not what it's about. The specific time is irrelevant - that's just an arbitrary number. The reasoning in the blog posts you link to is just based around making comparisons to another arbitrary number (7 AM).
Rather, the point is shape of the curve. DST makes the sunrise time approximate a constant line.
In other words, if you plotted the time difference between sunrise and "x o'clock" (for any x) for every day across the year, DST reduces the standard deviation of those values.
The argument is that circadian rhythm causes humans to naturally wake up near sunrise. Most people also wake up at some fixed time in order to start their workday (because businesses generally have fixed hours, and people wake up just before going to work). DST makes it so that the difference between this fixed time and 'sunrise' can be minimized over the year. Without DST, you will not be able to have a fixed wake-up time and also minimize the difference between that time and sunrise.
Now that I've experienced daylight savings time in both the UK and NZ, I would much rather have a minor inconvenience twice a year to make the most of the sunny days.
I'm surprised it's unmentioned here. My recollection was that a kid got hit by a bus in the morning, and that ended that.
Sounds awesome, if you ask me. As a kid, I didn't care in the slightest what the world was like in the morning, but getting home from school in the dark made for pretty tiresome winters.
I think the children were used as an excuse to push something the legislators wanted yet again.
May a better idea would be winter time only in Northen Europe and symmer time only when you get further south.
I do most of my sports outside, in the summer while it's still light, DST is a great! It's just wonderful to windsurf or kitesurfing till 22:30 in May, June and July.
Getting rid of DST means a lot let sporting hours for me...
uh, in France it's more like 10pm in Paris at the end of June, and 10:20 in Brest (western France).
How? The correct timezone is the one where the sun is closest to directly overhead at 12 noon.
The real problem is that 9 to 5 is a lopsided working day, because it's centred on 1 pm, not noon. DST just moves solar noon to 1 pm, when the correct fix would be to move the working day to 8 to 4.
I don't care where the sun is at noon; I care where the sun is after work.
Precisely, so it's the working day that should be changed, not the clock. The clock affect everyone, including people who do care where the sun is in the sky (e.g. those working outdoors).
If I recall correctly the EU prefers their members to choose this because most people prefer more daylight at the end of the day.
I hope they do, I don't mind the darkness in the morning but that extra hour of light at the end of the day helps me go outside after dinner instead of turning on the telly and doing nothing all evening.
For whatever it's worth, there are plenty of people who hate this. The sun is still up when they're going to bed, meaning summer is a season of lost sleep.
Unfortunately that's not how the EU works.