Yes, much of the world is bilingual -- their non-English, native tongue, and... ENGLISH. English is the unifying language; the language of air traffic control; the language of the United Nations; the language of the Internet and programming languages -- it's the language of technology. It's not arrogance to say that it's the language that the remaining and dwindling numbers of non-speakers want to learn. Until some unforeseen hiccup happens, English is the language of the future of planet Earth.

Admittedly, I DO speak some Spanish, along with some Russian and Japanese. But, as technology progresses, as the rest of the world learns English, I grow less and less interested in learning any other language. What's the use?

>"With permanent Daylight Saving Time, the latest sunrise in Atlanta would be 8:45am vs 7:45am without. If you are trying to get to work/school by 8am, you are up in the pre-dawn hours either way."

Exactly my point I was making. A large majority of people will be in the dark on waking, leaving, driving, and probably even arriving to work/school, anyway. So it isn't going to totally "solve" the issue for most people. Although it is true there will be more times there is light when waking on the thresholds of the changes. Yet they completely gloss over the sleep disturbances that occur for many people when trying to adjust their schedule due to the time changing.

There is no perfect solution. Only tradeoffs, and it will vary by latitude. Hence, let States have all three options and they can decide what works best for them.

Please note that in the text I quoted, only satellite relativistic corrections were listed, and those have nothing to do with particle physics.

"Don't forget GPS satellite relativistic corrections!"

That came from studying Special Relativity, not Particle Physics. A completely different branch of physics altogether.

changing my stone sundial twice a year is really, really hard work.

>"Well, yeah, of course; but the question is why did Congress make it that way? It just seems like a rather odd place to draw the line."

Never made any sense to me.

>"States are allowed to choose between implementing twice-yearly DST switches or sticking with year-round standard time... but they can't choose permanent DST?"

Because Congress made it that way. They can just as easily make it so States can choose all three options instead of just two. We can see how unpopular permanent Standard Time is, since only two States use that option. I suspect more than several would choose permanent Savings Time if given the ability.

I remember reading a history book about the Battle of Midway (No, I don't remember the name any more.) that mentioned that the IJN ran on Tokyo Time no matter where they were. As the fleet included transports carrying soldiers to invade Midway after "dealing" with the USN, the soldiers, mostly poorly educated peasants, were left wondering why the sun was rising at 3 AM. Now, imagine what it would be like for children who never bothered to go to school if we try year-round DST again. That's not an argument against the idea, just an observation about one of the side effects of doing so.

One is the clock
The other one is the schedule
The clock is arbitrary
So is the schedule
There is absolutely no reason to start work or school at 8:00
If we all used UTC, we could schedule work or school at any time

HubSpot appears to be one of the worst Email spam entites in the world. I block them completely. I wish they would cut 100% of their jobs and just go away. Constant Contact can follow along with them. Grrrrrr

>"The health evidence points to standard time, largely because morning light matters for our body clocks, sleep, and mood."

That entirely depends on where you are and when you wake. For many people, being forced to adjust to a time change twice a year can really screw with sleep a lot more. Some people take weeks or longer to adjust.

>""Our biological clocks need morning light to stay synchronized with the 24-hour day," said Simon Fraser"

And in the winter, where I am, it is still dark in the winter when I wake most of the time, so it never really solves that "issue", if it even is one. The difference is that with permanent Daylight Saving Time, it would not be dark when I return home, so I was have at least some daylight I could actual use after work. And if necessary, I could set a timer with bright full-spectrum lights each morning before waking in the winter.

Again, it depends primarily on your location and latitude and when you must awaken. Which is why the best idea is to allow States (or in this case Provinces) choose what they want to do for themselves:

1) Stay on Standard Time permanently
2) Stay on Saving Time permanently
3) Change time twice a year.

What is right for Maine isn't necessarily the same as for Virginia or Florida. They have very different latitudes. They can experiment and see what is best for THEM, rather than forcing the entire country into a single mode.

But if we can only have a single change/standard, I would vote for either permanent time option, rather than the insanity of switching time twice a year.

The longer you leave the old heart in a young person, the younger it gets. That way, you don't have to go through the transplant surgery as often.

What bizarre world is it that I actually want Comcast (of all companies) to WIN in a lawsuit.

As Eric Raymond (ESR) says, AI is a force multiplier. My elaboration: If you are good at what you do, it will let you do accomplish more good stuff faster. If you are not very bright, AI will let you be not bright more efficiently, but it won't make you bright. It's just a tool. It needs to be utilized correctly. There is no shortage of things in this world that can do tremendous damage if not used properly. AI is nothing new in that regard.

"AI slop" is so 2024. That argument isn't valid any more.