Fuck you dude. You have a problem and the only way you can think of to solve that problem is to move the clocks twice a year despite evidence that it hurts others. Fuck you. YOU are not that special. Get over yourself.

>"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.

>"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.

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.

Um, that has been true for this website since it was founded. I am mildly surprised that you are only now realizing this is true for AI chatbots too.

That doesn't matter anymore. They are no longer legitimate. They are clearly corrupted. Nothing they do can be relied upon in a legal matter.

Thank you for showing us that your lens is cracked.

Pervasive surveillance is antithetical to a Free Society. Period.

Weird. Communications just aren't all that important to you. *shrug*

Let's hope you never have a need for communications. Actually, since you do not want anyone else to have it either, I hope for ALL of us that a dire emergency where communication would save lives never happens.

I can agree that in non-emergencies, AM radio is an utter waste. I can agree that emergencies where major infrastructure is not terribly impacted, AM radio is a waste. If even one bomb gets dropped, you would be VERY glad for AM radio. The amount of infrastructure it needs is so minimal that a singular individual could stand up a station with minimal infrastructure. A shame all of the Radio Shacks are gone now. Makes it slightly more difficult to set up an AM transmitter.

This account has been active since 2004 or so. That counts as a long time. 20+ years definitely qualifies as a "long time".

LOL, do you really think the leopard will change its spots? The second step is ALWAYS needed. Who is the leopard in this scenario? The one who has the power... currently a UK company.

*hug*

Look bro, have you ever heard this saying:

"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
-- H.L. Mencken"

It was indeed, the War of Northern Aggression. The reasoning by the North was valid, the path taken was not. That should be fixed first. Centralized power is the ill that is killing the USA right now.

Since some people are unable to think clearly, what I am saying is that Slavery absolutely *IS* bad; however, the ends do not justify the means.

Aha! Someone else who understands.