Skip Navigation

Why don't we have one timezone covering the whole earth?

And instead changing the time work and other things happens depending on where you are. Would be easier to arrange meetings across the globe. Same thing applies to summertime. You may start work earlier if you want, but dont change the clocks!

161 comments
  • It's a cool idea, but then you lose the local representation of the daylight cycle, which just complicates things again as you try to schedule things with people in other countries without knowing if it's their bedtime or not.

    I play games with international friends and work with international colleagues, so I have my fair share of troubles with time zones. If anything, abolishing daylight savings worldwide would yield much better results.

    On a side note, when scheduling events on Discord, I like to add in a unix timestamp that shows everybody their local time. Quite convenient!

    • It's a cool idea, but then you lose the local representation of the daylight cycle

      We already lost that with our 1-hour time zones and daylight savings. Clock time is no longer bound to solar time, and I think we're overdue for the retirement of local time.

      Managing geographically-dispersed schedules on a single unified time standard isn't any more complicated than trying to remember everyone's time zones already is, and would likely reduce confusion overall since unlabeled timestamps would no longer be ambiguous.

      If some manager wants to shift their workers' schedule to account for seasonal light availability? Then just fucking do that and don't make everyone have to run around manually updating all the clocks.

      • True, but time zones offer a good compromise between solar time and globally-synchronized time.

        Having 12pm noon be approximately when the sun is highest in the sky is better than not at all, and still gives some form of regional cohesion in terms of timekeeping.

        There are pretty extreme examples, of course; China is one entire UTC+8 time zone, and that means Tibet is still dark when Shanghai is wide awake, which is dumb, and as annoying as the US's 4 time zones is (not counting Alaska and Hawaii), it still makes regional sense.

        Fuck daylight savings time.

  • People that proposes to replace local timezones with global UTC must be living in europe where it doesn't impact them much if we do abolish the timezone. Now consider people that lives in the other side of the planet. Most people are active during the day, yet for them, the day will end right in the afternoon under the new system. So you tell your friend "hey, let's meet tomorrow", then your friend would be like "do you mean this afternoon, or in the morning next day?". No way people living in the asia pacific would accept this without military intervension.

    • I think they mean concepts like morning and evening, or day and night would remain. The difference would be that in London, midnight would be 12:00am, but in San Fransisco, midnight would be... 16:00 / 4:00pm. Each timezone would have to adjust the numbers, in the same way the southern hemisphere considers January to be in the summer.

      • isn't that just timezones with extra steps?

      • I think the compromise would be the country/region that proposes global time should get the +12h offset. If the benefit really outweigh the pain for them, then they can deal with such a large offset themselves and spare the rest of the world from the brunt of the pain.

    • must be living in europe

      This is a very dismissive argument. I live in a time zone where the day number would roll over during my waking day. But I still think that it would be better overall. (But not worth the switching costs.)

      “do you mean this afternoon, or in the morning next day?”

      It takes very little imagination to realize that this would not be an issue. "Tomorrow" would almost certainly be interpreted as roughly the next daylight period. This issue already exists as people are often up at midnight and somehow we don't get confused when people say "I'll see you tomorrow" at 23:55. We know that they don't mean in 5min. This is just a source of jokes, but no one gets confused.

      The real issue would be things like "want to meet on wednesday" if there is a transition during working hours or "want to go out for dinner on the 17th" if the day transition happens near dinner time. I think this would be the hardest part to adapt to, but language is a flexible thing and I doubt it would take long for it to adapt.

  • Because it:

    • causes the question "What time is it there?" to be useless/unanswerable
    • necessitates significant changes to the way in which normal people talk about time
    • convolutes timetables, where present
    • means "days" are no longer the same as "days"
    • complicates both secular and religious law
    • is a staggering inconvenience for a minimum of five billion people
    • makes it near-impossible to reason about time in other parts of the world
    • does not mean everybody gets up at the same time, goes to work at the same time, or goes to bed at the same time
    • is not simpler at all
    • causes the question “What time is it there?” to be useless/unanswerable

      That is a feature, it removes one thing to worry about.

      necessitates significant changes to the way in which normal people talk about time

      Yes, I think this is the biggest argument against. It would take a long time to get used to.

      convolutes timetables, where present

      How?

      means “days” are no longer the same as “days”

      Same as point 2.

      complicates both secular and religious law

      How?

      is a staggering inconvenience for a minimum of five billion people

      How?

      makes it near-impossible to reason about time in other parts of the world

      How? In my opinion it makes it easier.

      does not mean everybody gets up at the same time, goes to work at the same time, or goes to bed at the same time

      Yes. This is true.

      is not simpler at all

      Of course it is simpler. You have just removed a huge source of complexity. It still isn't simple because people will still live their life at different times. But it is simpler.

      • means “days” are no longer the same as “days”

        Who gets to pick when "noon" is when the sun is usually above their head? Let's assume Greenwich for posterity sake. That means a bunch of the world will spend most of their "daytime" in traditionally nighttime hours. Thus spending your day (time when the sun is up) and your day (the time when you do your work) will not intuitively mean the same thing

        complicates both secular and religious law

        Islam requires regular prayer in the direction of mecca and plenty of nations have Islamic law. At a minimum they'd have to rewrite those laws, at most it'd cause a literal schism

        is a staggering inconvenience for a minimum of five billion people

        "We changed how clocks work for almost everyone on the planet to make some nerds' lives easier. Please go change your planners, clocks, schedules, applications, signs, etc to adjust"

        makes it near-impossible to reason about time in other parts of the world

        In most of the world, you can reasonably assume the sun goes up around 7 am and sets around 7. Obviously that changes but you can pretty reasonably assume when people will be around and doing stuff by looking at their time. In this new system you'll need to figure out what times people do most of their activities based off of geological segments of the planet and checking what their "daytime" is. Which is already a problem timezones address

        is not simpler at all

        On a base level maybe, but after fixing all the other problems it causes the resulting system would likely be just as if not more complicated than our current time system

  • Because time relates to the position sun and tells us something about what period of the day it is in that timezone. Your proposal would strip off that information, which means that you would have to look up in a different system what the business hours are in another country, when it’s night, etc. That means that you’re basically reinventing timezones by putting them in a separate system, which defeats the purposes and makes it more complicated than it already is.

    Sure, time differences might be a bit cumbersome, but timezones have a name and can be converted from one to another. Also, most digital calendars (for meetings, etc) have timezone support and work perfectly fine when involving people from multiple timezones. To find a good moment to meet, you will still have to keep the time difference in mind, but in the current system you can at least take it into account just by looking at the time difference.

    • you would have to look up in a different system what the business hours are in another country

      Don't you need to do this anyways? Different businesses open at different times. Different people work at different times. In some countries restaurants and shops tend to open relatively later and in some they open relatively earlier.

      Really it just saves a step. From:

      1. It is 12:00 here.
      2. Is is 9:00 there.
      3. Do they open at 9?

      To:

      1. Is is 12:00 here.
      2. Do they open at 12?

      Sure, step 3 can often be guessed. (It is highly likely that a business is open at 14:00 local time) But you still need to look up an exact number to convert from local time to target time. So instead you just look up when they open (or what time businesses are usually open in that place).

      • Sure, but roughly speaking you know that 14:00 local time is probably okay for a business call, whereas 2:00 local time is probably not. You can get that information in a standardized way and the minor deviations due to local preferences and culture can be looked up or learned if needed. In contrast, with the other system there is no standard way of getting that information, except for using a search engine, Wikipedia, etc. The information not encoded anymore in the time zone, because there is no timezone.

        Also, consider this: every software program would have to interpret per country what “tomorrow” means. I mean, when I’m postponing something with a button until tomorrow morning, I sure want to sleep in between. I don’t want tomorrow morning to be whenever it’s 8:00 hours in my country, which can be right after dinner. That means yet again that we need to have a separate source giving us the context of what the local time means, which is already encoded in the current system with time zones.

        Not to mention the fact that it’s plain weird to go to a new calendar day in the middle of the day. “Let’s meet the 2nd of January!” That date could span an afternoon, the night and the morning after. That feels just plain weird and is not compatible with how we’re used to treat time. Which country will get the luxury of having midnight when it’s actually night?

  • We do (known as Zulu/Military time, Greenwich Mean Time, or Universal Time Coordinated) but it's not convenient for the average person to use locally, so almost everyone defaults to whatever their time zone is.

  • Fun fact: In 1793 France defined the metric time consisting in one single timezone, 10 hours per day, 100 minutes per hour and 100 seconds per minute. The people never used it and everyone forgot about it. It was later renamed decimal time

  • It wouldn't make it easier to arrange meetings because you'd have no clue if you were arranging the meeting for when people would be at work, have finished for the day, or fast asleep at night.

    • I think it would:

      1. When talking about time everyone knows exactly what time you mean.
      2. It is just as easy to look up when someone is available to meet as it is to look up the time where they are. (And accounts for personal difference in schedules)

      For example imagine two conversions:

      1. I want to meet with Jim.
      2. Jim is in $city.
      3. Time in $city is 7h ahead of me.
      4. So if Jim gets off work at 5 then we should meet at 9:30.
      5. "Jim do you want to meet at 4:30?"
      6. "My time or your time?"
      7. "Your time".
      8. "Sorry, I actually quit work at 4. How about 3:30?"
      9. "Adjust your local 9:30 to 8:30."
      10. "That's a bit early for me, can we split the difference for 4?"
      11. "Sure"

      vs

      1. I want to meet with Jim.
      2. Jim is in $city.
      3. Work hours in $city are 14:00-22:00.
      4. My work hours are 21:00-05:00
      5. "Jim do you want to meet at 04:30?"
      6. "Sorry, I actually quit work at 4. How about 03:30?"
      7. "That's a bit early for me, can we split the difference for 4?"
      8. "Sure"

      It isn't much difference, but it is easier.

      1. Instead of converting time and assuming work hours you just look up work hours. This is at most the same, but if the person's work hours are not "normal" for their location skips a step.
      2. Requires no conversion, less room for mistakes.
  • Here’s a hypothetical store in a place where, say, 9:00 is now 23:00 using global time. The store would have been open 9:00-21:00 Mon and Wed, and 10:00-22:00 on Tuesday. But with global time it would look like this:

    Mon 23:00 - Tue 11:00

    Wed 0:00 - 12:00

    Wed 23:00 - Thu 11:00

    Not to mention the general headache of having the day change over in the middle of the day every day. “Meet me tomorrow” when tomorrow starts at lunchtime.

    Plus, although you’d easily be able to set up international meetings in terms of getting the time right, you will have no idea whether any given time is during work hours in the other country, or even if people would be sleeping. Instead of having time zones you could look up, we’d have to look up a reference chart for, say, when lunchtime is in a country and extrapolate from there. Or imagine visiting a country and you need to constantly use a reference guide to figure out the appropriate time for everything throughout the day.

    Books that reference time would all be specific to their time “zone”.

    It would make so much sense to have a universal time that everyone can refer to for that use case of wanting to schedule things. And, in fact, UTC already exists.

  • We would need to know what the normal time to start work in our given region would be. Perhaps we should divide the world up into longitudinal strips to designate where and when stuff like work should start, so that everyone could be synced up. Yeah, that’s be a little weird at borders, but since everyone would be aware of the borders then they’d be aware of the differences across them.

    Maybe we could also just offset their time in these zones from each other so that we could standardize the times with the approximate position of the sun! That way, you could know if a local time was meant to be during the day or at night. If we didn’t do that, you’d need to figure it out and adjust your thinking everytime you went anywhere, since “noon” would lose all meaning.

    Of course, when there are advantages to having a single time be represented everywhere, maybe we could have a separate time “zone” that encompasses the entire world; and when people need it they could just reference that. Some kind of universal, coordinated time zone…

    Oh look, we solved all the problems of your suggestion by re-inventing the current system. Funny, that.

    EDIT: alright, without the snark, what I am saying here is: we will need time zones either way, so what’s easier to coordinate: shifting the actual clock time in each zone, or shifting every other possible schedule, every person’s perception of what happens when, with each zone change? And also, UTC or Coordinated Universal Time does provide you with a single, global, same-everywhere time to use for coordination. It’s just seen as nerdy to use it, so no one in civilian life really does. Which is why you gotta go google what time a game is releasing when it’s not in your time zone

  • What you do is you have both, kind of like we already do, but with the global time being the default rather than local time. So, if I were to look at my phone right now, it would say something like 1433 9:33AM.

    When referencing the time to people I know to be local, I'd use the local time, but any time confusion could occur, I'd use the global time. We have everything in place already, we just need people to get used to knowing what time it is UTC

    • I doubt most people would use local time in their day-to-day life if global time is the default. You would just get used to the new schedule the same way that you have gotten used to the current one based on local time.

      I do think that it might be useful to have something like a "world clock" when traveling. So your clock may say "14:33, like 09:33 at home". But I'm not even convinced how useful this would be. Once you remember one or two timeframe references or if you can see the sun you will have a rough idea of what time-of-day it is anyways. And generally the local schedule will vary a bit from your home schedule anyways so having exact local-equivalent time will probably not be that valuable.

      • I agree, and once people get used to it, we can phase local time out. But we'll definitely need it to begin with

  • There are lots of negative opinions in this thread. But I think it is actually a good idea!

    It makes time math a lot easier. Of course the switching cost is very high. (And probably not worth it). Much like it would be better if we counted using base 12 it is a better system once the switch would be made.

    The main upside is that it is very easy to agree on times. I've had job interviews missed because time math was done wrong. They told me my local time and the interviewer their local time but they didn't match! And it isn't obvious to either party. When I see "10:00 America/Toronto, 08:00 America/San Francisco" it isn't really obvious that there was an error here unless you happen to have the offset memorized. With a global time everyone would immediately agree on a time.

    One common complaint is that you can no longer use "local time" to estimate if someone is available. But if anything I consider this a feature! Not everyone wakes up at 8 and is at work by 9. Some people prefer to have meetings later, some prefer earlier. Maybe it is best to stop assuming and just asking people. "Hey, what times do you like to take meetings at?" But even if you don't want to do that it is just as easy to look up "work hours in San Francisco" than it is to look up "current time in San Francisco". (In fact it may be easier since you don't need to then do math to find the offset and hope that daylight savings doesn't change the offset between when you look it up and when the event happens.) On top of that if someone schedules a meeting with you then you immediately know if it works well for you, because you know what times you like to have meetings at. IMHO it is much better to know the time of the meeting reliably than to try to guess if it is a good time for other parties. If the other parties can reliably know what time it is scheduled for they know if it is a good time for them, and can let you know if it isn't.

    I think the real main downside is in how we talk about times and dates. Right now it is very common to say something like Feb 15th, 14:00-19:00. However if the day number changes during the day it can be a bit confusing. But honestly I'm sure we will get used to this quickly. Probably it just ends up being assumed. If you write Feb 15th 22:00-03:00 people know that the second time is the the 16th. People working night shifts deal with this problem now and it has never seemed like a big complaint. Things like "want to grab dinner on the 15th" may be a bit more confusing if your day rolls over around dinner time where you are, but I'm sure we would quickly adopt conventions to solve this problem. It would definitely be a big change, but these aren't hugely complex problems. Language and culture would quickly adapt.

    So overall I think it is better. It makes it 100% reliable to agree and discuss specific times and it doesn't really change the difficulty of identifying a good time in a particular location. The only real downside is how we communicate about time currently, but I think that would be pretty easy to overcome.

    However I don't think it is really worth changing. It would be a huge shift for a relatively little gain. How about we just focus on getting rid of Daylight Savings Time for now, then we can ponder switching to UTC and base 12 counting in the future.

  • “you’re fucking late to your goddamn shift you lazy piece of shit it’s already 35*()*46 B,shk past 73!!”

161 comments