You're viewing part of a thread.
they're used less frequently than timezones are now. Because the offsets only purpose is to show to explicit time of the local solar time, anywhere in the world. relative to your local solar time (which is not very useful.)
Your proposal is exactly how time is used at my work. All meetings are in GMT. You use the timezone time when thinking locally. Instead of everyone using GMT and timezones already, why should we introduce a while new concept?
you say you already use this at work, but then say it's an entirely new concept. I don't think you've quite comprehended this properly.
We are literally already doing it, there is no reason not to switch to it.
We are using GMT + timezones. You are the one who opposed timezones and said you have a different approach. But yours is exactly like timezones. My question is that why should anyone switch to something "like" timezones when there are actual timezones?
because the thing that is "like" timezones is fucking better, why else would you switch?
How is it better?
how is it not better?
It's not better because your offset time is much granuler and hard to calculate in your mind than timezones. And it doesn't offer anything new over timezones. Since you suggested it, you must see a benefit. What is it?
what the fuck do you think timezones currently do?
Are they just arbitrarily stuck to "maybe sometime close to local solar time"
It could literally be equally as granular as existing timezones. You could just remap timezones to the offsets directly, hell even less granular because who cares. Just delete the half hour offsets.
it's not adding anything new, that's not the point, in fact it's impossible to add something "new" to the concept of time, we've already defined it. It's an improved variant of timezones, where coordination is immediately more accessible, and less involved. It's explicitly less arbitrarily defined than the current timezones that we have no, because most of the time, you just wouldn't use them.