4 ms·
As much as I don’t like DST (Arizonan, here), time itself is pretty effective low resolution synchronization mechanism for humans. My preference would be to sta
by jonhohle 7y ago
As much as I don’t like DST (Arizonan, here), time itself is pretty effective low resolution synchronization mechanism for humans. My preference would be to standardize on UTC or metric time or something unrelated to position in the universe and adjust schedules for environmental convenience. A meeting at 4:00pm should be at 4pm (or whatever system of measure is chosen) regardless of where you are.
- Spivak 7y agoI think it’s funny that wall clock time is considered low resolution when a unit of human time is like 15 minutes. Like if you had a watch that just went 9:00 9:15 9:30... very little would change.
- jonhohle 7y agoHigh ranking Starcraft players can perform 300-600 actions per minute and some gamers can perceive differences between 60fps and 120fps (24fps bothers me, and I can often notice 60hz flicker). Musicians perform, in large groups at similar frequencies - 300-450 notes per minute. Audio that’s unsynchronized by 200ms is easily perceptible. At a macro level, 15 minute resolution may be fine, but there are many sub-second tasks that humans often perform.
- detaro 7y agoIt'd be quite inconvenient while using transport.