OK. That's a specific use case that's hard to argue with. It didn't occur to me as I've never needed it...and I can't think of anything that it would be useful for that I either do or would like to do.

I wonder what "wearables" represents in the original language of the decision. That would make a big difference.

What do you use an oura ring for?
(Since you've bought an upgrade, you must have some uses...but I couldn't think of any, so I never considered buying one.)

Can you? In my experience rechargeable batteries tend to have a lower voltage and slightly larger size/stored power than well designed single use batteries. Once you get to hearing aid size this may be significant. (OTOH, my experience of the comparison is about two decades old.)

Useless? To whom? This is being run by the government. It will provide the advice the government desires it to provide. It will collect the information the government chooses to collect.

In principle this could lead to an ideal outcome, but that presumes that all controlling parties have consistent good will and excellent foresight. Not something I expect of any entity.

Descartes started off looking for his axioms. He settled on "I think therefore I am", but if you believe that was his only axiom, you reasoning is faulty. That, by itself, can't justify choosing between solipism and predeterminism, never mind the other possibilities.

I don't know enough about Kant to be able to specifically refute your assertion that he's an example, but since I'm already disagreeing with Descartes I suppose I may also be disagreeing with Kant. I'm NOT disagreeing with Euclid, and anyone who does had better be able to explain why if they want me to take them seriously.

EVERYONE "just use their mental skills to justify whatever conclusions they arrived at NOT using these skills".

You can't reason without starting from axioms accepted for some other reason. And nobody really knows what their axioms are. This is all a matter of degrees. Some people's conscious thoughts are more consistent than others...and that's about as far as you can justify. (But I tend to think more highly of those that agree with me.)

The big underlying issue is why does Microsoft deliver software with so many flaws?

I think a better answer would be for everyone to use the same time number, and adjust their hours of operation to fit local standards. For this I pick Zulu time for purely historic reasons, though it's really no better than any other arbitrary choice. And scrap leap seconds. Every once in awhile you might have a leap minute...either that or use leap microseconds as needed once/year...say at the spring equinox.

Yeah, let 6:00 AM be defined as the local sunrise time! (I live shaded by a hill at astronomic sunrise.)

Well, I really think running everything on Zulu (Greenwich) time makes more sense. The number you put on the time is arbitrary. It's not like schools consider the schedules of the parents anyway, and everything that's automated runs 24 hours/day.

Well, time zones make sense unless you want to run everything on Zulu (Greenwich) time...which would have some advantages.

You're being silly. If the time is stable, then you'll set your hours to what it is. There's nothing special about the time number "10:00 AM". Businesses could have summer and winter hours if they chose to...at one time that wasn't uncommon.