3 ms·

> Times have meanings that would be quite difficult to track without the reference points. Precisely. When's breakfast? About 7 am UTC. And 7 am NZDT. And

by rodgerd 12y ago

> Times have meanings that would be quite difficult to track without the reference points. Precisely. When's breakfast? About 7 am UTC. And 7 am NZDT. And 7 AM PDT. And so on and so forth. This proposal only makes sense from the point of a lazy programmer who is arrogant enough to imagine that their local understanding of schedule trumps everyone else's.

icebraining 12y ago
My breakfast is at 0630. My collegue's at 0900. My brother eats it at 1030. The idea that there's a "time for breakfast" (or for working, or for sleeping - my father-in-law in a night guard) is no less arrogant. If you want to know what time to call someone, how about you ask them?
- jtheory 12y ago
  It's not arrogant to know there's a "most common" time for meals, working, and sleeping. When you're actually setting up a specific event, of course everyone will participate ("actually, a 7am call is great for me -- I work early"), but knowing the defaults saves a lot of time.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
coldtea 12y ago
Where does the idea that when getting rid of timezones we'll also get rid of "relative time" reference points stems from? We'll also know that 12am is noon in England and dawn in New York. We could have handy mappings to look that up too. We just wont have all the constant need for mental conversion baggage associated with timezones, and the crazy boundary issues.
- manicdee 12y ago
  No, you'll just have the ever-present mental baggage of knowing that "today" lasts until about the first tea break at work, at which point we flip the calendar over to "tomorrow". What an absurd, broken world to live in, just because someone was too lazy to use a calendaring system that was timezone-aware! Sorry folks, living on a round planet orbiting a star means you have different sleep/wake cycles when compared to a common clock. It's a solved problem, and changing the solution won't make the problem go away.

by rodgerd 12y ago

icebraining 12y ago

My breakfast is at 0630. My collegue's at 0900. My brother eats it at 1030. The idea that there's a "time for breakfast" (or for working, or for sleeping - my father-in-law in a night guard) is no less arrogant. If you want to know what time to call someone, how about you ask them?

jtheory 12y ago
It's not arrogant to know there's a "most common" time for meals, working, and sleeping. When you're actually setting up a specific event, of course everyone will participate ("actually, a 7am call is great for me -- I work early"), but knowing the defaults saves a lot of time.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

coldtea 12y ago

Where does the idea that when getting rid of timezones we'll also get rid of "relative time" reference points stems from? We'll also know that 12am is noon in England and dawn in New York. We could have handy mappings to look that up too. We just wont have all the constant need for mental conversion baggage associated with timezones, and the crazy boundary issues.

manicdee 12y ago
No, you'll just have the ever-present mental baggage of knowing that "today" lasts until about the first tea break at work, at which point we flip the calendar over to "tomorrow". What an absurd, broken world to live in, just because someone was too lazy to use a calendaring system that was timezone-aware! Sorry folks, living on a round planet orbiting a star means you have different sleep/wake cycles when compared to a common clock. It's a solved problem, and changing the solution won't make the problem go away.