To reference the premise in the article: What if Uncle Steve in Melbourne is a baker or a night security guard? Then 4:25am would absolutely be a fine time to call him.
All these machinations to find a mutually convenient time. Heck, I have trouble finding a mutually convenient time to arrange a sit down chat with my wife, and we both live (and work) in the same house in the same time zone. Meetings almost always means at least one party has to compromise their existing schedule and suffer some level of inconvenience.
# Before abolishing time zones
I want to call my Uncle Steve in Melbourne. What time is it there?
Google tells me it is currently 4:25am there.
It's probably best not to call right now.
# After abolishing time zones I want to call my Uncle Steve in Melbourne. What time is it there?
Google shows me a daylight map (First result https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html)
It's probably best not to call right now.
We are just used to the insanity that is timezones. Of course, I say this because I have to deal with time and timezones every day at work and bugs are always prevalent. Each DST switch there are new bugs we find; every time we change our core date and time code there are bugs. Just painful.In the end, we'd build new tools and intuitions around time. People would adapt and my life would be measurably better (though not completely solved; scheduling anything across a date boundary is odd. No one thinks of 1am as "tomorrow" but instead as "later tonight").
I used to like the idea of asynchronous messaging and thought it was the future of telephony/voip. But honestly, async is pretty annoying, because you have to wait ;). I guess what I'm trying to say is, synchronous things are easier for us. It's pretty gard for me to keep track of all the async text conversations I've got going on Facebook. Async is useful for some things, but it makes talking feel like work.
I guess CPS-based humans would be more suited for a networked world...