5 ms·
> Having kids walk to school or to the bus in the dark is ridiculous. I agree. The solution to that is not to have kids go to school stupid early. Studies sho
by HWR_14 5y ago
> Having kids walk to school or to the bus in the dark is ridiculous.
I agree. The solution to that is not to have kids go to school stupid early. Studies show that kids prefer to learn later in the day.
Besides, after school activities continue into the dark in the winter. Better to let the kids be able to be outside/playing/doing band/whatever in the evening instead of stuck inside because it's dark with their free time.
- nemo44x 5y agoStudies also show that parents have to get the kids dropped off before work. And 8:30 is stupid early.
- colordrops 5y ago8:30 is a number. We should base schedules around when the sun is out rather than a number.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoWouldn't that defeat the purpose of this shift? If we are trying to give workers more daylight in the evening, then we shift the work and school day later, the impact would be nil. Fundamentally, for this change to satisfy its mandate, the kids have to to to school in the dark during the winter. Fwiw, I think it's a fine thing. I always found it very romantic to go to school when it is still dark when I was young.
- colordrops 5y agoNo, we should get rid of any shift of the clock, and then set schedules for work and school based on the sun. The start and end times of school and work should change during certain parts of the year if there is concern about daylight.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoI understand you feel that way, but that's more or less the purpose and effect of the daylight savings time shift. That's the status quo. It's exactly what many of us want to see eliminated.
- colordrops 5y agoNo, changing school and work times only changes school and work systems. Changing the entire clock time adds endless complexity to computer systems and society as a whole. It's like global vs local vars, the scope is too much.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoOkay, but most folks who want to change to permanent DST don't care about the effect on computer systems. They want more light in the evening. Your proposal would not satisfy the primary goal of the proponents of this policy. It would also still require one or more coordinated, discrete shifts in the schedules of schools and workplaces, which would likely be more complicated for computers and other systems than the status quo.
- colordrops 5y agoWe shouldn't satisfy their goal. It's not their business to impose this on all of society. We should stick to a standard time and let individuals or groups do whatever they need at the local level. Most other countries do this and they are fine. YAGNI. No need for additional complexity.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoThe status quo is more complex than what the senate has voted for (it requires transitions, the shifting of schedules twice a year, etc.). The new approach is less complex. The assertion that the time is "not someone's business" is incorrect. The time is everyone's business. We are going to stick to a standard time after this policy -- it's going to be daylight savings time all the time, although we will probably stop calling it that after we all get used to the policy. Individuals or groups will be equally free to adopt their own schedules both before and after this policy change -- this policy is not a change on that front.
- spiznnx 5y agoIt's a shame that public transit can't take kids to school in America. There would be a lot of economic benefit.
- giantg2 5y agoI know a kid in middle school that wasn't allowed to literally walk across the street to school (wasn't even a busy road). The bus would pick up the kid, move about 10 feet, and turn into the parking lot. Supervision and legalities related to it can be boarderline oppressive in some places.
- HWR_14 5y agoEveryplace in America (except apparently California, and a couple major cities like NYC where there is areal public transit) there are school buses.
- spiznnx 5y agoGenuinely curious, why do working parents drop off their kids if there is a school bus?
- giantg2 5y agoWhy is 8:30 "stupid early"? It doesn't seem bad at all to me. The majority of people have to be at work before then too. https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/overflow-data-finds-the-average-time-most-americans-get-to-work https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/overflow-data-finds-th...
- nemo44x 5y agoTypo - was saying it isn't stupid early.
- giantg2 5y agoOh, ok.
- HWR_14 5y agoBecause schools don't pick up kids at 8:30. If you look up that stupid article whining about kids waiting for the bus in the dark (which is a non-issue), they were waiting at 7 am
- giantg2 5y agoIt should at least be twilight at 7am, not fully dark. And that's using a high latidute (US) example of Massachusetts.
- CWuestefeld 5y agoVirtually no parents have to get the kids dropped off at all. The vast majority, afaik, can rely on a school bus to pick them up. And IMHO, beyond elementary school (and perhaps earlier) there's no reason most kids can't be unsupervised briefly before letting themselves out to get to the bus, or after being dropped off by the bus. See the whole thing about free range kids, helicopter parents, and so forth.
- geerlingguy 5y agoAgreed; there are too many school districts that start at 8 or even 7(!) AM.
- giantg2 5y agoWhat's wrong with starting at 8? Starting much later than that doesn't leave a lot of time nor night for other activities. And really just pushes back the rest of their schedule and bed time.
- Apocryphon 5y agoGrowing kids need their sleep https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/child-sleep-zzzs/202108/the-benefits-later-school-start-times https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/child-sleep-zzzs/202...
- giantg2 5y agoCare to add something to that? That link doesn't have any of the data or methods used. It also completely ignores the realities of childcare, normal work schedules, etc as it only evaluated one angle (systems thinking analysis would be preferable) and did not look into the feasibility of it or n-order effects.
- Apocryphon 5y agoThere's more links elsewhere https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30690965 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30690965
- giantg2 5y agoAgain, anything that looks at this from a systems thinking standpoint? It's just focused on sleep and they don't take a n-order impacts into consideration like burden on parents, loss of job/income, etc. Not to mention some of the links are done by an industry group - the Nation Sleep Foundation (potential for bias). Some of the articles are pure anecdotes and opinions too. It says as late as 11pm. Another one says some of the later time can be explained by other things like light exposure. This seems to indicate that a 10pm bed time could be attainabke with a wake up time of 6 or 6:30 providing adequate sleep. Some of the studies show that even on weekends without the waking constraint teens are getting 7-8 hours or less. It's also indicative of weak influence when we see the remote learning being called a disaster yet these articles are touting the benefits of the extra sleep associated with them - where is the mitigating impact then? Also from the articles, “As I often phrase it, multilevel interventions are needed,”. Why not start with the less intrusive interventions? Not all kids require a later start time, and could even be hurt by it. A later start time would have hurt me, for example. We need to make sure we aren't hurting some people in an effort to help others. Perhaps the strongest evidence is that adults are not affected by the hormone related shift and yet they too do not get the recommended sleep. This points to the idea that environment and habit could be factors. So far I see no absolute evidence of societal net benefit, largely because the studies ignore n-order impacts and fail to fully explore alternative explanations and remedies. Don't forget, a lot of this is psychology and is just towing the line. They don't even know why bi-phasic sleep disappeared. I would love to see the data for adolescent sleep times and duration for the past 150 years, but it appears the studies completely ignore this. For knowing so little, they certainly are pushing hard for a specific change (a change that some of the studies don't believe will fix the issues, such as achievement gap, hormone altering light exposures, etc).