For some offices, tech like Teams/Outlook would certainly help, sure. But the majority of offices aren’t using that. But even still, people would do it regardless. Say you’re going on vacation and want to know when daylight hours are, you’d still be doing the same thing. Timezones may be annoying, but they ultimately make sense. We have a universal time for the planet powering the system, there’s really no reason to change it, in my opinion.

But… We have UTC already, so calculating the difference is a non-issue. If you got rid of timezones, you’d still end up creating it in all but name since the vast majority of business will be occurring during daytime hours around the world. For example, an office in Tokyo sending emails to their NYC office at 0800 UTC (currently 0400 EDT in NYC) wouldn’t end up getting answered for at least 3-4 hours when those employees started logging in. In other words, people would still be doing calculations in their heads to know when business hours are in that region, essentially recreating timezones.

As for your second paragraph, I agree, and I did have it backwards, thanks for the correction. In the summertime where I live, the sun has risen by roughly 0530 and sets around 2100. In the wintertime, the sun is rising around 0700-0730 and setting around 1630-1700 at its shortest daylight hours. Like you said, staying at standard would mean in the summertime we’d have brighter mornings, but curtains and shutters exist for a reason. Personally, I think having it still be bright out at 2030 is kind of annoying.

Yeah, timezones are absolutely helpful from a logistics and coordination standpoint. Daylight savings time, though… That nonsense needs to be eliminated. So what if it will be dark well into morning wake hours in the winter, I’d take it over dealing with the time change twice a year.

Narrator: It didn’t.

Legitimate question, is Russia still able to get all the materials required to make nuclear ICBMs?

Gotta start somewhere. Tens of thousands of demonstrators don’t show up at a moment’s notice. Honestly surprised even 3000 showed up that quickly.

Do you mean the Kansas experiment? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_experiment

If not, I apologize. If so, yeah, it’s been proven time after time after time that trickle down economics is complete bullshit.

Man, paramedics always have some of the craziest stories. They definitely don’t get paid enough for what they do and have to go through, especially in bigger cities.

From my understanding, companies that use open software in paid products are charging for their services and support and not the software itself. Correct me if I’m wrong, as I may well be. I just know that’s how companies like Elastic and what not get away with primarily using OSS in their products.

This has nothing to do with their newer malfunctioning planes. The 777 has been in service for over 30 years at this point.

That would be Russia, is my guess:

The memoranda, signed in Patria Hall at the Budapest Convention Center with US Ambassador Donald M. Blinken amongst others in attendance, prohibited Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom from threatening or using military force or economic coercion against Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, “except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.” As a result of other agreements and the memorandum, between 1993 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons.

Isn’t that a Black Mirror episode?

I’d add that local charities will know their communities far better than outside organizations. The locals will likely trust them to a much higher degree versus foreigners. As a result, there’s likely to be less waste as communities will be less likely (obviously not a given) to steal/hoard from themselves versus simply taking resources from outsiders who they have no connection/relationship with.

Of course there are exceptions, particularly for those communities that have been so damaged and are so desperate that this approach isn’t likely to succeed. I’m not a international aid expert though, just my two cents.

You underestimate the PRC’s capabilities. There’s a reason their cyber warfare capabilities are considered to be among the best if not the best in the world. They did the same thing to the US’s Office of Personnel Management databases back in the early 2010s. It’s pretty ingenious, as it allows them to know who everyone works for, how much they get paid, and other useful intel. Additionally, if you ever waged a war, hacking the government’s finance office so soldiers aren’t getting paid would be incredibly effective at demoralizing troops and hurting their effectiveness (e.g. soldiers are stressed/distracted about family at home losing their house, not being able to buy food/pay other bills, etc).

They don’t want to get rid of the cartels. The DEA has a vested interest in staying relevant, as it’s part of the whole law enforcement industrial complex. Hell, one of the deadliest cartels’ soldiers were previously trained by American special forces back in the day ( https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2010/11/3/us-trained-cartel-terrorises-mexico ). Guess who trained Taliban? You got it, the US. Who trained many of the guerrillas that would turn into tyrants in South America? Correctomondo, the US once again. We love to destabilize regions for corporate interests.

Because they only have to start the fire, the native population does the rest. All Russia does is exploit historical cultural tensions within a country and fan the flames online. I’ve always said in the past that some of the research psychologists and sociologists have done over the last century or so was the equivalent of developing WMDs when it comes to psyops. Once a competent psyops department is equipped with how to manipulate people en masse, they can do crazy damage without firing a shot. The US and other countries have done the same thing to great effect.

Edit: I should point out that this form of psyops is most effective in countries with minimal censorship and liberal freedom of speech laws, i.e. most Western countries. That’s why it isn’t as effective when westerners attempt to do the same to countries like China, Russia, Iran, etc.

They need to ban all corporate social media, not just TikTok.

The whole conversation around banning TikTok is pretty silly and hypocritical. Meta spies on even more Americans than TikTok does, and just as egregiously. Additionally, Meta is willing to sell much of that data to anyone, including China. So even if the US bans TikTok, all that changes is that now China has to pay more money to access the same information as before. By banning one app and not another, it just becomes painfully obvious that it’s corporate protectionism all in the name of national security, and how many times have we seen other ridiculous laws passed using that as an excuse? E.g. the joke that is TSA, Patriot act and all of its facsimiles, DEA, etc.

Radicals gonna radical, unfortunately.

Pretty much. It’s as if having massive, invasive privacy intrusion in the name of national security against terrorists/whatever is an excuse to spy on political opponents/activists/etc.

You are correct.