document_title: Daylight saving time

question_text: when does day light saving time end 2018

question_tokens: when does day light saving time end 2018

text: Daylight saving time

text: Rationale[edit]

text: Industrialized societies generally follow a clock-based schedule for daily activities that do not change throughout the course of the year. The time of day that individuals begin and end work or school, and the coordination of mass transit, for example, usually remain constant year-round. In contrast, an agrarian society's daily routines for work and personal conduct are more likely governed by the length of daylight hours[9][10] and by solar time, which change seasonally because of the Earth's axial tilt. North and south of the tropics daylight lasts longer in summer and shorter in winter, with the effect becoming greater the further one moves away from the tropics.

text: By synchronously resetting all clocks in a region to one hour ahead of standard time, individuals who follow such a year-round schedule will wake an hour earlier than they would have otherwise; they will begin and complete daily work routines an hour earlier, and they will have available to them an extra hour of daylight after their workday activities.[11][12] However, they will have one less hour of daylight at the start of each day, making the policy less practical during winter.[13][14]

text: While the times of sunrise and sunset change at roughly equal rates as the seasons change, proponents of Daylight Saving Time argue that most people prefer a greater increase in daylight hours after the typical "nine to five" workday.[15][16] Supporters have also argued that DST decreases energy consumption by reducing the need for lighting and heating, but the actual effect on overall energy use is heavily disputed.

text: The manipulation of time at higher latitudes (for example Iceland, Nunavut or Alaska) has little impact on daily life, because the length of day and night changes more extremely throughout the seasons (in comparison to other latitudes), and thus sunrise and sunset times are significantly out of phase with standard working hours regardless of manipulations of the clock.[17] DST is also of little use for locations near the equator, because these regions see only a small variation in daylight in the course of the year.[18] The effect also varies according to how far east or west the location is within its time zone, with locations farther east inside the time zone benefiting more from DST than locations farther west in the same time zone.[19]

text: History[edit]

text: Although they did not fix their schedules to the clock in the modern sense, ancient civilizations adjusted daily schedules to the sun more flexibly than DST does, often dividing daylight into twelve hours regardless of daytime, so that (for example) each daylight hour became progressively longer during spring and shorter during autumn.[20] For example, the Romans kept time with water clocks that had different scales for different months of the year: at Rome's latitude the third hour from sunrise, hora tertia, started by modern standards at 09:02 solar time and lasted 44 minutes at the winter solstice, but at the summer solstice it started at 06:58 and lasted 75 minutes.[21] After ancient times, equal-length civil hours eventually[when?] supplanted unequal ones, so civil time no longer varies by season. Unequal hours are still used in a few traditional settings, such as some monasteries of Mount Athos[22] and all Jewish ceremonies.[23]

text: During his time as an American envoy to France (1776-1785), Benjamin Franklin, publisher of the old English proverb "Early to bed, and early to rise, makes a man healthy, wealthy and wise",[24][25] anonymously published a letter suggesting that Parisians economize on candles by rising earlier to use morning sunlight.[26] This 1784 satire proposed taxing window shutters, rationing candles, and waking the public by ringing church bells and firing cannons at sunrise.[27] Despite common misconception, Franklin did not actually propose DST; 18th-century Europe did not even keep precise schedules. However, this soon changed as rail transport and communication networks came to require a standardization of time unknown in Franklin's day.[28]

text: The New Zealand entomologist George Hudson first proposed modern DST. Hudson's shift-work job gave him leisure time to collect insects and led him to value after-hours daylight.[4] In 1895 he presented a paper to the Wellington Philosophical Society proposing a two-hour daylight-saving shift,[11] and after considerable interest was expressed in Christchurch, he followed up with an 1898 paper.[29] Many publications credit DST proposal to the prominent English builder and outdoorsman William Willett,[30] who independently conceived DST in 1905 during a pre-breakfast ride, when he observed with dismay how many Londoners slept through a large part of a summer day.[16] An avid golfer, Willett also disliked cutting short his round at dusk.[31] His solution was to advance the clock during the summer months, a proposal he published two years later.[32] The Liberal Party member of parliament (MP) Robert Pearce took up Willett's proposal, introducing the first Daylight Saving Bill to the House of Commons on February 12, 1908.[33] A select committee was set up to examine the issue, but Pearce's bill did not become law, and several other bills failed in the following years. Willett lobbied for the proposal in the UK until his death in 1915.

text: William Sword Frost, mayor of Orillia, Ontario, introduced daylight saving time in the municipality during his tenure from 1911 to 1912.[34]

text: Starting on April 30, 1916, the German Empire and its World War I ally Austria-Hungary introduced DST (German: Sommerzeit) as a way to conserve coal during wartime. Britain, most of its allies, and many European neutrals soon followed suit. Russia and a few other countries waited until the next year, and the United States adopted daylight saving in 1918.

text: Broadly speaking, most jurisdictions abandoned daylight saving time in the years after the war ended in 1918 (with some notable exceptions including Canada, the UK, France, and Ireland). However, many different places adopted it for periods of time during the following decades and it became common during World War II. It became widely adopted, particularly in North America and Europe, starting in the 1970s as a result of the 1970s energy crisis.

text: Since then, the world has seen many enactments, adjustments, and repeals.[35] For specific details, see Daylight saving time by country.

text: Procedure[edit]

text: In the United States, a one-hour time shift occurs at 02:00 local time. In spring the clock jumps forward from the last instant of 01:59 standard time to 03:00 DST and that day has 23 hours. In autumn the clock jumps backward from the last instant of 01:59 DST to 01:00 standard time, repeating that hour, and that day has 25 hours.[36] A digital display of local time does not read 02:00 exactly at the shift to summer time, but instead jumps from 01:59:59.9 forward to 03:00:00.0.

text: Clock shifts are usually scheduled near a weekend midnight to lessen disruption to weekday schedules. A one-hour shift is customary.[37] Twenty-minute and two-hour shifts have been used in the past.

text: Coordination strategies differ when adjacent time zones shift clocks. The European Union shifts all zones at the same instant, at 01:00 Greenwich Mean Time[38] or 02:00 CET or 03:00 EET. The result of this procedure is that Eastern European Time is always one hour ahead of Central European Time, at the cost of the shift happening at different local times.[39] In contrast most of North America shifts at 02:00 local time, so its zones do not shift at the same instant; for example, Mountain Time is temporarily (for one hour) zero hours ahead of Pacific Time, instead of one hour ahead, in the autumn and two hours, instead of one, ahead of Pacific Time in the spring. In the past, Australian districts went even further and did not always agree on start and end dates; for example, in 2008 most DST-observing areas shifted clocks forward on October 5 but Western Australia shifted on October 26.[40] In some cases only part of a country shifts; for example, in the U.S., Hawaii and most of Arizona do not observe DST.[41][42]

text: Start and end dates vary with location and year. Since 1996, European Summer Time has been observed from the last Sunday in March to the last Sunday in October; previously the rules were not uniform across the European Union.[39] Starting in 2007, most of the United States and Canada observe DST from the second Sunday in March to the first Sunday in November, almost two-thirds of the year.[43] The 2007 U.S. change was part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005; previously, from 1987 through 2006, the start and end dates were the first Sunday in April and the last Sunday in October, and Congress retains the right to go back to the previous dates now that an energy-consumption study has been done.[44] Proponents for permanently retaining November as the month for ending DST point to Halloween as a reason to delay the change—to provide extra daylight on October 31.

text: Beginning and ending dates are roughly the reverse in the southern hemisphere. For example, mainland Chile observed DST from the second Saturday in October to the second Saturday in March, with transitions at 24:00 local time.[45]

text: As a result, time difference between two regions varies along the year because of DST. Central European Time is usually six hours later than North American Eastern Time, except a few weeks in March and October/November. Likewise, the United Kingdom and mainland Chile could be five hours apart during the northern summer, three hours during the southern summer, and four hours a few weeks per year because of mismatch of changing dates.

text: Politics[edit]

text: Daylight saving has caused controversy since it began.[3] Winston Churchill argued that it enlarges "the opportunities for the pursuit of health and happiness among the millions of people who live in this country"[46] and pundits have dubbed it "Daylight Slaving Time".[47] Historically, retailing, sports, and tourism interests have favored daylight saving, while agricultural and evening entertainment interests have opposed it, and its initial adoption had been prompted by energy crises and war.[48]

text: The fate of Willett's 1907 proposal illustrates several political issues involved. The proposal attracted many supporters, including Arthur Balfour, Churchill, David Lloyd George, Ramsay MacDonald, Edward VII (who used half-hour DST at Sandringham or "Sandringham time"), the managing director of Harrods, and the manager of the National Bank. However, the opposition was stronger: it included Prime Minister H. H. Asquith, Christie (the Astronomer Royal), George Darwin, Napier Shaw (director of the Meteorological Office), many agricultural organizations, and theatre owners. After many hearings the proposal was narrowly defeated in a parliamentary committee vote in 1909. Willett's allies introduced similar bills every year from 1911 through 1914, to no avail.[49] The U.S. was even more skeptical: Andrew Peters introduced a DST bill to the United States House of Representatives in May 1909, but it soon died in committee.[50]

text: After Germany led the way with starting DST (German: Sommerzeit) during World War I on April 30, 1916 together with its allies to alleviate hardships from wartime coal shortages and air raid blackouts, the political equation changed in other countries; the United Kingdom used DST first on May 21, 1916.[51] U.S. retailing and manufacturing interests led by Pittsburgh industrialist Robert Garland soon began lobbying for DST, but were opposed by railroads. The U.S.'s 1917 entry to the war overcame objections, and DST was established in 1918.[52]

text: The war's end swung the pendulum back. Farmers continued to dislike DST, and many countries repealed it after the war. Britain was an exception: it retained DST nationwide but over the years adjusted transition dates for several reasons, including special rules during the 1920s and 1930s to avoid clock shifts on Easter mornings. Now under a European Community directive summer time begins annually on the last Sunday in March, which may be Easter Sunday (as in 2016).[39] The U.S. was more typical: Congress repealed DST after 1919. President Woodrow Wilson, like Willett an avid golfer, vetoed the repeal twice but his second veto was overridden.[53] Only a few U.S. cities retained DST locally thereafter,[54] including New York so that its financial exchanges could maintain an hour of arbitrage trading with London, and Chicago and Cleveland to keep pace with New York.[55] Wilson's successor Warren G. Harding opposed DST as a "deception". Reasoning that people should instead get up and go to work earlier in the summer, he ordered District of Columbia federal employees to start work at 08:00 rather than 09:00 during summer 1922. Some businesses followed suit though many others did not; the experiment was not repeated.[12]

text: Since Germany's adoption in 1916, the world has seen many enactments, adjustments, and repeals of DST, with similar politics involved.[56]

text: The history of time in the United States includes DST during both world wars, but no standardization of peacetime DST until 1966.[57][58] In May 1965, for two weeks, St. Paul, Minnesota and Minneapolis, Minnesota were on different times, when the capital city decided to join most of the nation by starting Daylight Saving Time while Minneapolis opted to follow the later date set by state law.[59] In the mid-1980s, Clorox (parent of Kingsford Charcoal) and 7-Eleven provided the primary funding for the Daylight Saving Time Coalition behind the 1987 extension to U.S. DST, and both Idaho senators voted for it based on the premise that during DST fast-food restaurants sell more French fries, which are made from Idaho potatoes.[60]

text: In 1992, after a three-year trial of daylight saving in Queensland, Australia, a referendum on daylight saving was held and defeated with a 54.5% 'no' vote – with regional and rural areas strongly opposed, while those in the metropolitan south-east were in favor.[61] In 2005, the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association and the National Association of Convenience Stores successfully lobbied for the 2007 extension to U.S. DST.[62] In December 2008, the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland (DS4SEQ) political party was officially registered in Queensland, advocating the implementation of a dual-time zone arrangement for daylight saving in South East Queensland while the rest of the state maintains standard time.[63] DS4SEQ contested the March 2009 Queensland state election with 32 candidates and received one percent of the statewide primary vote, equating to around 2.5% across the 32 electorates contested.[64] After a three-year trial, more than 55% of Western Australians voted against DST in 2009, with rural areas strongly opposed.[65] On April 14, 2010, after being approached by the DS4SEQ political party, Queensland Independent member Peter Wellington, introduced the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill 2010 into the Queensland parliament, calling for a referendum at the next state election on the introduction of daylight saving into South East Queensland under a dual-time zone arrangement.[66] The Bill was defeated in the Queensland parliament on June 15, 2011.[67]

text: In the UK the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents supports a proposal to observe SDST's additional hour year-round, but is opposed in some industries, such as postal workers and farmers, and particularly by those living in the northern regions of the UK.[10]

text: In some Muslim countries, DST is temporarily abandoned during Ramadan (the month when no food should be eaten between sunrise and sunset), since the DST would delay the evening dinner. Ramadan took place in July and August in 2012. This concerns at least Morocco,[68][69] although Iran keeps DST during Ramadan.[70] Most Muslim countries do not use DST, partially for this reason.

text: The 2011 declaration by Russia that it would stay in DST all year long was subsequently followed by a similar declaration from Belarus.[71] Russia's plan generated widespread complaints due to the dark of wintertime morning, and thus was abandoned in 2014.[72] The country changed its clocks to Standard Time on October 26, 2014 and intends to stay there permanently.[73]

text: Dispute over benefits and drawbacks[edit]

text: Proponents of DST generally argue that it saves energy, promotes outdoor leisure activity in the evening (in summer), and is therefore good for physical and psychological health, reduces traffic accidents, reduces crime or is good for business. Groups that tend to support DST are urban workers, retail businesses, outdoor sports enthusiasts and businesses, tourism operators, and others who benefit from having more hours of light after the end of a typical workday in the warmer months.

text: Opponents argue that actual energy savings are inconclusive,[75] that DST increases health risks such as heart attack,[75] that DST can disrupt morning activities, and that the act of changing clocks twice a year is economically and socially disruptive and cancels out any benefit. Farmers have tended to oppose DST.[76][77]

text: Having a common agreement about the day's layout or schedule confers so many advantages that a standard schedule over whole countries or large areas has generally been chosen over ad hoc efforts in which some people get up earlier and others do not.[78] The advantages of coordination are so great that many people ignore whether DST is in effect by altering their nominal work schedules to coordinate with television broadcasts or daylight.[79] DST is commonly not observed during most of winter, because the days are shorter then; workers may have no sunlit leisure time, and students may need to leave for school in the dark.[13] Since DST is applied to many varying communities, its effects may be very different depending on their culture, light levels, geography, and climate. Because of this variation, it is hard to make generalized conclusions about the absolute effects of the practice. The costs and benefits may differ from place to place. Some areas may adopt DST simply as a matter of coordination with others rather than for any direct benefits.

text: Energy use[edit]

text: A 2017 meta-analysis of 44 studies found that DST leads to electricity savings of only 0.34% during the days when DST applies.[80][81] The meta-analysis furthermore found that "electricity savings are larger for countries farther away from the equator, while subtropical regions consume more electricity because of DST."[80][81] This means that DST may conserve electricity in some countries, such as Canada and the United Kingdom, but be wasteful in other places, such as Mexico, the southern United States, and northern Africa. The savings in electricity may also be offset by extra use of other types of energy, such as heating fuel.

text: The period of Daylight Saving Time before the longest day is shorter than the period after, in several countries including the United States and Europe. This unequal split is an energy-saving measure.[citation needed] For example, in the U.S. the period of Daylight Saving Time is defined by the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The period for Daylight Saving Time was extended by changing the start date from the first Sunday of April to the second Sunday of March, and the end date from the last Sunday in October to the first Sunday in November.

text: DST's potential to save energy comes primarily from its effects on residential lighting, which consumes about 3.5% of electricity in the United States and Canada.[82] Delaying the nominal time of sunset and sunrise reduces the use of artificial light in the evening and increases it in the morning. As Franklin's 1784 satire pointed out, lighting costs are reduced if the evening reduction outweighs the morning increase, as in high-latitude summer when most people wake up well after sunrise. An early goal of DST was to reduce evening usage of incandescent lighting, once a primary use of electricity.[83] Although energy conservation remains an important goal,[84] energy usage patterns have greatly changed since then. Electricity use is greatly affected by geography, climate, and economics, so the results of a study conducted in one place may not be relevant to another country or climate.[82]

text:
In the United States, high-quality research indicates that DST reduces residential lighting costs but usually increases total energy consumption, especially when non-electricity sources of energy consumption are considered.[85][86] These non-electricity sources of energy consumption include extra heating fuel on the colder, darker mornings and extra gasoline used to drive to shopping and sporting activities. In some cases, DST increases residential electricity consumption, such as when people use more air conditioning in the longer, hotter evenings.[87]
A 2007 study estimated that winter daylight saving would prevent a 2% increase in average daily electricity consumption in Great Britain.[88] This paper was revised in October 2009.[89]
In 2000, when parts of Australia began DST in late winter, overall electricity consumption did not change, but the morning peak load and prices increased.[90] The overall consumption was the same because people used more electricity in the dark mornings, and correspondingly less electricity in the brighter evenings. In Western Australia during summer 2006–2007, DST increased electricity consumption during hotter days and decreased it during cooler days, with consumption rising 0.6% overall.[91]
Although a 2007 study estimated that introducing DST to Japan would reduce household lighting energy consumption,[92] a 2007 simulation estimated that DST would increase overall energy use in Osaka residences by 0.13%, with a 0.02% decrease due to less lighting more than outweighed by a 0.15% increase due to extra cooling; neither study examined non-residential energy use.[93] This is probably because DST's effect on lighting energy use is mainly noticeable in residences.[82]

text: Several studies have suggested that DST increases motor fuel consumption.[82] The 2008 DOE report found no significant increase in motor gasoline consumption due to the 2007 United States extension of DST.[94]

text: Economic effects[edit]

text: The undisputed winners of DST are the retailers, sporting goods makers, and other businesses that benefit from extra afternoon sunlight.[85] Having more hours of sunlight in between the end of the typical workday and bedtime induces customers to shop and to participate in outdoor afternoon sports.[95] People are more likely to stop by a store on their way home from work if the sun is still up.[85] In 1984, Fortune magazine estimated that a seven-week extension of DST would yield an additional $30 million for 7-Eleven stores, and the National Golf Foundation estimated the extension would increase golf industry revenues $200 million to $300 million.[96] A 1999 study estimated that DST increases the revenue of the European Union's leisure sector by about 3%.[82]

text: Conversely, DST can harm some farmers,[75][97] young children, who have difficulty getting enough sleep at night when the evenings are bright,[75] and others whose hours are set by the sun.[98] One reason why farmers oppose DST is that grain is best harvested after dew evaporates, so when field hands arrive and leave earlier in summer, their labor is less valuable.[9] Dairy farmers are another group who complain of the change. Their cows are sensitive to the timing of milking, so delivering milk earlier disrupts their systems.[77][99] Today some farmers' groups are in favor of DST.[100]

text: DST also hurts prime-time television broadcast ratings,[101][75] drive-ins and other theaters.[102]

text: Changing clocks and DST rules has a direct economic cost, entailing extra work to support remote meetings, computer applications and the like. For example, a 2007 North American rule change cost an estimated $500 million to $1 billion,[103] and Utah State University economist William F. Shughart II has estimated the lost opportunity cost at around US$1.7 billion.[75] Although it has been argued that clock shifts correlate with decreased economic efficiency, and that in 2000 the daylight-saving effect implied an estimated one-day loss of $31 billion on U.S. stock exchanges,[104] the estimated numbers depend on the methodology.[105] The results have been disputed,[106] and the original authors have refuted the points raised by disputers.[107]

text: Public safety[edit]

text: In 1975 the U.S. DOT conservatively identified a 0.7% reduction in traffic fatalities during DST, and estimated the real reduction at 1.5% to 2%,[108] but the 1976 NBS review of the DOT study found no differences in traffic fatalities.[13] In 1995 the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety estimated a reduction of 1.2%, including a 5% reduction in crashes fatal to pedestrians.[109] Others have found similar reductions.[110] Single/Double Summer Time (SDST), a variant where clocks are one hour ahead of the sun in winter and two in summer, has been projected to reduce traffic fatalities by 3% to 4% in the UK, compared to ordinary DST.[111] However, accidents do increase by as much as 11% during the two weeks that follow the end of British Summer Time.[112] It is not clear whether sleep disruption contributes to fatal accidents immediately after the spring clock shifts.[113] A correlation between clock shifts and traffic accidents has been observed in North America and the UK but not in Finland or Sweden. If this effect exists, it is far smaller than the overall reduction in traffic fatalities.[114] A 2009 U.S. study found that on Mondays after the switch to DST, workers sleep an average of 40 minutes less, and are injured at work more often and more severely.[115]

text: DST likely reduces some kinds of crime, such as robbery and sexual assault, as fewer potential victims are outdoors after dusk.[116][86] Artificial outdoor lighting has a marginal and sometimes even contradictory influence on crime and fear of crime.[117]

text: In several countries, fire safety officials encourage citizens to use the two annual clock shifts as reminders to replace batteries in smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, particularly in autumn, just before the heating and candle season causes an increase in home fires. Similar twice-yearly tasks include reviewing and practicing fire escape and family disaster plans, inspecting vehicle lights, checking storage areas for hazardous materials, reprogramming thermostats, and seasonal vaccinations.[118] Locations without DST can instead use the first days of spring and autumn as reminders.[119]

text: A 2017 study in the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics estimated that "the transition into DST caused over 30 deaths at a social cost of $275 million annually," primarily by increasing sleep deprivation.[120]

text: Health[edit]

text: DST has mixed effects on health. In societies with fixed work schedules it provides more afternoon sunlight for outdoor exercise.[122] It alters sunlight exposure; whether this is beneficial depends on one's location and daily schedule, as sunlight triggers vitamin D synthesis in the skin, but overexposure can lead to skin cancer.[123] DST may help in depression by causing individuals to rise earlier,[124] but some argue the reverse.[125] The Retinitis Pigmentosa Foundation Fighting Blindness, chaired by blind sports magnate Gordon Gund, successfully lobbied in 1985 and 2005 for U.S. DST extensions.[60][62] DST shifts are associated with higher rates of ischemic stroke in the first two days after the shift, though not in the week thereafter.[126]

text: Clock shifts were found to increase the risk of heart attack by 10 percent,[75] and to disrupt sleep and reduce its efficiency.[7] Effects on seasonal adaptation of the circadian rhythm can be severe and last for weeks.[127] A 2008 study found that although male suicide rates rise in the weeks after the spring transition, the relationship weakened greatly after adjusting for season.[128] A 2008 Swedish study found that heart attacks were significantly more common the first three weekdays after the spring transition, and significantly less common the first weekday after the autumn transition.[129] A 2013 review found little evidence that people slept more on the night after the fall DST shift, even though it is often described as allowing people to sleep for an hour longer than normal. The same review stated that the lost hour of sleep resulting from the spring shift appears to result in sleep loss for at least a week afterward.[130] In 2015, two psychologists recommended that DST be abolished, citing its disruptive effects on sleep as one reason for this recommendation.[131]

text: The government of Kazakhstan cited health complications due to clock shifts as a reason for abolishing DST in 2005.[132] In March 2011, Dmitri Medvedev, president of Russia, claimed that "stress of changing clocks" was the motivation for Russia to stay in DST all year long. Officials at the time talked about an annual increase in suicides.[133]

text: An unexpected adverse effect of daylight saving time may lie in the fact that an extra part of morning rush hour traffic occurs before dawn and traffic emissions then cause higher air pollution than during daylight hours.[134]

text: In 2017, researchers at the University of Washington and the University of Virginia reported that judges who experienced sleep deprivation as a result of DST tended to issue longer sentences.[135]

text: Complexity and Disadvantages[edit]

text: DST's clock shifts have the obvious disadvantage of complexity. People must remember to change their clocks; this can be time-consuming, particularly for mechanical clocks that cannot be moved backward safely.[136] People who work across time zone boundaries need to keep track of multiple DST rules, as not all locations observe DST or observe it the same way. The length of the calendar day becomes variable; it is no longer always 24 hours. Disruption to meetings, travel, broadcasts, billing systems, and records management is common, and can be expensive.[137] During an autumn transition from 02:00 to 01:00, a clock reads times from 01:00:00 through 01:59:59 twice, possibly leading to confusion.[138]

text: Damage to a German steel facility occurred during a DST transition in 1993, when a computer timing system linked to a radio time synchronization signal allowed molten steel to cool for one hour less than the required duration, resulting in spattering of molten steel when it was poured.[6] Medical devices may generate adverse events that could harm patients, without being obvious to clinicians responsible for care.[139] These problems are compounded when the DST rules themselves change; software developers must test and perhaps modify many programs, and users must install updates and restart applications. Consumers must update devices such as programmable thermostats with the correct DST rules or manually adjust the devices' clocks.[8] A common strategy to resolve these problems in computer systems is to express time using the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) rather than the local time zone. For example, Unix-based computer systems use the UTC-based Unix time internally.

text: Some clock-shift problems could be avoided by adjusting clocks continuously[140] or at least more gradually[141]—for example, Willett at first suggested weekly 20-minute transitions—but this would add complexity and has never been implemented.

text: DST inherits and can magnify the disadvantages of standard time. For example, when reading a sundial, one must compensate for it along with time zone and natural discrepancies.[142] Also, sun-exposure guidelines such as avoiding the sun within two hours of noon become less accurate when DST is in effect.[143]

text: Terminology[edit]

text: As explained by Richard Meade in the English Journal of the (American) National Council of Teachers of English, the form daylight savings time (with an "s") was already in 1978 much more common than the older form daylight saving time in American English ("the change has been virtually accomplished"). Nevertheless, even dictionaries such as Merriam-Webster's, American Heritage, and Oxford, which describe actual usage instead of prescribing outdated usage (and therefore also list the newer form), still list the older form first. This is because the older form is still very common in print and preferred by many editors. ("Although daylight saving time is considered correct, daylight savings time (with an "s") is commonly used.")[144] The first two words are sometimes hyphenated (daylight-saving(s) time). Merriam-Webster's also lists the forms daylight saving (without "time"), daylight savings (without "time"), and daylight time.[2]

text: In Britain, Willett's 1907 proposal[32] used the term daylight saving, but by 1911 the term summer time replaced daylight saving time in draft legislation.[74] The same or similar expressions are used in many other languages: Sommerzeit in German, zomertijd in Dutch, kesäaika in Finnish, horario de verano or hora de verano in Spanish, and heure d'été in French.[51]

text: The name of local time typically changes when DST is observed. American English replaces standard with daylight: for example, Pacific Standard Time (PST) becomes Pacific Daylight Time (PDT). In the United Kingdom, the standard term for UK time when advanced by one hour is British Summer Time (BST), and British English typically inserts summer into other time zone names, e.g. Central European Time (CET) becomes Central European Summer Time (CEST).

text: The North American English mnemonic "spring forward, fall back" (also "spring ahead ...", "spring up ...", and "... fall behind") helps people remember which direction to shift clocks.[3]

text: Computing[edit]

text: Changes to DST rules cause problems in existing computer installations. For example, the 2007 change to DST rules in North America required that many computer systems be upgraded, with the greatest impact on e-mail and calendar programs. The upgrades required a significant effort by corporate information technologists.[145]

text: Some applications standardize on UTC to avoid problems with clock shifts and time zone differences.[146] Likewise, most modern operating systems internally handle and store all times as UTC and only convert to local time for display.[147][148]

text: However, even if UTC is used internally, the systems still require external leap second updates and time zone information to correctly calculate local time as needed. Many systems in use today base their date/time calculations from data derived from the tz database also known as zoneinfo.

text: IANA time zone database[edit]

text: The tz database maps a name to the named location's historical and predicted clock shifts. This database is used by many computer software systems, including most Unix-like operating systems, Java, and the Oracle RDBMS;[149] HP's "tztab" database is similar but incompatible.[150] When temporal authorities change DST rules, zoneinfo updates are installed as part of ordinary system maintenance. In Unix-like systems the TZ environment variable specifies the location name, as in TZ=':America/New_York'. In many of those systems there is also a system-wide setting that is applied if the TZ environment variable is not set: this setting is controlled by the contents of the /etc/localtime file, which is usually a symbolic link or hard link to one of the zoneinfo files. Internal time is stored in timezone-independent epoch time; the TZ is used by each of potentially many simultaneous users and processes to independently localize time display.

text: Older or stripped-down systems may support only the TZ values required by POSIX, which specify at most one start and end rule explicitly in the value. For example, TZ='EST5EDT,M3.2.0/02:00,M11.1.0/02:00' specifies time for the eastern United States starting in 2007. Such a TZ value must be changed whenever DST rules change, and the new value applies to all years, mishandling some older timestamps.[151]

text: Microsoft Windows[edit]

text: As with zoneinfo, a user of Microsoft Windows configures DST by specifying the name of a location, and the operating system then consults a table of rule sets that must be updated when DST rules change. Procedures for specifying the name and updating the table vary with release. Updates are not issued for older versions of Microsoft Windows.[152] Windows Vista supports at most two start and end rules per time zone setting. In a Canadian location observing DST, a single Vista setting supports both 1987–2006 and post-2006 time stamps, but mishandles some older time stamps. Older Microsoft Windows systems usually store only a single start and end rule for each zone, so that the same Canadian setting reliably supports only post-2006 time stamps.[153]

text: These limitations have caused problems. For example, before 2005, DST in Israel varied each year and was skipped some years. Windows 95 used rules correct for 1995 only, causing problems in later years. In Windows 98, Microsoft marked Israel as not having DST, forcing Israeli users to shift their computer clocks manually twice a year. The 2005 Israeli Daylight Saving Law established predictable rules using the Jewish calendar but Windows zone files could not represent the rules' dates in a year-independent way. Partial workarounds, which mishandled older time stamps, included manually switching zone files every year[154] and a Microsoft tool that switches zones automatically.[155] In 2013, Israel standardized its daylight saving time according to the Gregorian calendar.[156]

text: Microsoft Windows keeps the system real-time clock in local time. This causes several problems, including compatibility when multi booting with operating systems that set the clock to UTC, and double-adjusting the clock when multi booting different Windows versions, such as with a rescue boot disk. This approach is a problem even in Windows-only systems: there is no support for per-user timezone settings, only a single system-wide setting. In 2008 Microsoft hinted that future versions of Windows will partially support a Windows registry entry RealTimeIsUniversal that had been introduced many years earlier, when Windows NT supported RISC machines with UTC clocks, but had not been maintained.[157] Since then at least two fixes related to this feature have been published by Microsoft.[158][159]

text: The NTFS file system used by recent versions of Windows stores the file with a UTC time stamp, but displays it corrected to local—or seasonal—time. However, the FAT filesystem commonly used on removable devices stores only the local time. Consequently, when a file is copied from the hard disk onto separate media, its time will be set to the current local time. If the time adjustment is changed, the timestamps of the original file and the copy will be different. The same effect can be observed when compressing and uncompressing files with some file archivers. It is the NTFS file that changes seen time. This effect should be kept in mind when trying to determine if a file is a duplicate of another, although there are other methods of comparing files for equality (such as using a checksum algorithm). A ready clue is if the time stamps differ by precisely 1 hour.

text: Permanent daylight saving time[edit]

text: A move to "permanent daylight saving time" (staying on summer hours all year with no time shifts) is sometimes advocated, and in fact is currently implemented in some jurisdictions such as Belarus,[77] some parts of Russia (e.g. Novosibirsk), Turkey, Namibia, and São Tomé and Príncipe. It could be a result of following the timezone of a neighbouring region, political will or other causes. Advocates cite the same advantages as normal DST without the problems associated with the twice yearly time shifts. However, many remain unconvinced of the benefits, citing the same problems and the relatively late sunrises, particularly in winter, that year-round DST entails.[14]

text: Russia switched to permanent DST from 2011 to 2014, but the move proved unpopular because of the late sunrises in winter, so the country switched permanently back to "standard" or "winter" time in 2014 for the whole Russian Federation.[160] The United Kingdom and Ireland also experimented with year-round summer time between 1968 and 1971, and put clocks forward by an extra hour during World War II.[161]

text: In the IANA time zone database, permanent daylight saving time is considered standard time that has been added by an hour.

text: On March 23, 2018 Florida Governor Rick Scott signed legislation asking Congress to approve year-round daylight saving time in Florida.[162][163]

text: By country and region[edit]

text:
Daylight saving time by country
Africa
Asia
Europe
North and South America
Oceania


document_title: Man Booker International Prize

question_text: who won the 2017 man booker international prize

root

text: Man Booker International Prize

text: Prizes[edit]

text: Whereas the Man Booker Prize was open only to writers from the Commonwealth, Ireland and Zimbabwe, the International Prize was open to all nationalities.[5] The award was worth £60,000 and an author could win only once.[3] The Man Booker International prize also allowed for a separate award for translation. The winning author could choose a translator of his or her work into English to receive a prize sum of £15,000.[6]

tag: p

text: On 7 July 2015, the Booker Prize Foundation announced that from 2016 onwards the Man Booker International Prize was to be a prize for fiction in translation. Its aim is to encourage publishing and reading of quality works in translation and to highlight the work of translators. The award is now given annually to a book in English translation, with a £50,000 prize for the winning title, to be shared equally between author and translator. Each shortlisted author and translator receives £1,000. This brings the total prize fund to £62,000 per year, compared to the previous £37,500 for the Man Booker International Prize. Judges select a longlist of 12 or 13 books in March, followed by a shortlist of six in April, with the winner announced in May.[7]

text: History[edit]

text: The inaugural winner was Albanian writer Ismail Kadare. He was followed by Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 2007, and two years later the Canadian writer Alice Munro won the award. In 2011 the prize was awarded to American Philip Roth. Praising its concerted judgement, the journalist Hephzibah Anderson noted that the Man Booker International Prize was "fast becoming the more significant award, appearing an ever more competent alternative to the Nobel".[8]

text: In 2015 it was announced that the Independent Foreign Fiction Prize would be disbanded.[4] The prize money from that award would be folded into the Man Booker International Prize, and the latter would become what the Independent prize used to be: a yearly book award for English translations, with the prize split between author and translator.[9]

text: Award winners[edit]

text:
Year
Name
Work
Translator
Country
Language(s)
Literary tradition

2005
Ismail Kadare

 Albania
Albanian
Albanian literature

2007
Chinua Achebe

n/a
 Nigeria
English
Nigerian literature

2009
Alice Munro

n/a
 Canada
English
Canadian literature

2011
Philip Roth

n/a
 United States
English
American literature

2013
Lydia Davis

n/a
 United States
English
American literature

2015
László Krasznahorkai

George Szirtes and Ottilie Mulzet
 Hungary
Hungarian
Hungarian literature

2016
Han Kang
The Vegetarian
Deborah Smith
 South Korea
Korean
Korean literature, South Korean literature

2017
David Grossman
A Horse Walks Into a Bar
Jessica Cohen
 Israel
Hebrew
Israeli literature

tag: table

text: Nominations[edit]

text: Ismail Kadare

tag: ul

text: Albanian novelist Ismail Kadare was named the inaugural International Prize winner in 2005.[10] Head judge, Professor John Carey said Kadare is "a universal writer in the tradition of storytelling that goes back to Homer."[10] Kadare said he was "deeply honoured" at being awarded the prize.[10] Kadare was also able to select a translator to receive an additional prize of £15,000.[10] The writer received his award in Edinburgh on 27 June.[10]

text:
John Carey (Chair)[10]
Alberto Manguel[1]
Azar Nafisi[1]

text:
Margaret Atwood (Canada)
Saul Bellow (US)
Gabriel García Márquez (Colombia)
Günter Grass (Germany)
Ismail Kadare (Albania)
Milan Kundera (Czech Republic)

Stanisław Lem (Poland)
Doris Lessing (UK)
Ian McEwan (UK)
Naguib Mahfouz (Egypt)
Tomas Eloy Martinez (Argentina)
Kenzaburō Ōe (Japan)

Cynthia Ozick (US)
Philip Roth (US)
Muriel Spark (UK)
Antonio Tabucchi (Italy)
John Updike (US)
A.B. Yehoshua (Israel)

text: The nominees for the inaugural Man Booker International Prize were announced on 2 June 2005 at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.[3]

text: Chinua Achebe

text: Nigerian author Chinua Achebe was awarded the International Prize for his literary career in 2007.[11] Judge Nadine Gordimer said Achebe was "the father of modern African literature" and that he was "integral" to world literature.[11] Achebe received his award on 28 June in Oxford.[11]

text:
Elaine Showalter[5]
Nadine Gordimer[5]
Colm Tóibin[5]

text:
Chinua Achebe (Nigeria)
Margaret Atwood (Canada)
John Banville (Ireland)
Peter Carey (Australia)
Don DeLillo (US)

Carlos Fuentes (Mexico)
Doris Lessing (UK)
Ian McEwan (UK)
Harry Mulisch (Netherlands)
Alice Munro (Canada)

Michael Ondaatje (Sri Lanka/Canada)
Amos Oz (Israel)
Philip Roth (US)
Salman Rushdie (India/UK)
Michel Tournier (France)

text: The nominees for the second Man Booker International Prize were announced on 12 April 2007 at Massey College in Toronto.[5]

text: Alice Munro

text: Canadian short story writer Munro was named the winner of the prize in 2009 for her lifetime body of work.[12] Judge Jane Smiley said picking a winner had been "a challenge", but Munro had won the panel over.[12] On Munro's work, Smiley said "Her work is practically perfect. Any writer has to gawk when reading her because her work is very subtle and precise. Her thoughtfulness about every subject is so concentrated."[12] Munro, who said she was "totally amazed and delighted" at her win, received the award at Trinity College, Dublin on 25 June.[2][12]

text:
Jane Smiley (Chair)[12]
Amit Chaudhuri[12]
Andrey Kurkov[2]

text:
Peter Carey (Australia)
Evan S. Connell (US)
Mahasweta Devi (India)
E. L. Doctorow (US)
James Kelman (UK)[13]

Mario Vargas Llosa (Peru)
Arnošt Lustig (Czech Republic)
Alice Munro (Canada)
V. S. Naipaul (Trinidad/UK)
Joyce Carol Oates (US)

Antonio Tabucchi (Italy)
Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o (Kenya)[14]
Dubravka Ugrešić (Croatia)
Lyudmila Ulitskaya (Russia)

text: The nominees for the third Man Booker International Prize were announced on 18 March 2009 at The New York Public Library.[15]

text: Philip Roth

text: American novelist Roth was announced as the winner on 18 May 2011 at the Sydney Writers' Festival.[16] Of his win, Roth said "This is a great honour and I'm delighted to receive it."[16] The writer said he hoped the prize would bring him to the attention of readers around the world who are not currently familiar with his body of work.[16] Roth received his award in London on 28 June; however, he was unable to attend in person due to ill health, so he sent a short video instead.[16][17]

text:
Rick Gekoski (Chair)[18]
Carmen Callil (withdrew in protest over choice of winner)[18]
Justin Cartwright[18]

text: After Roth was announced as the winner, Carmen Callil withdrew from the judging panel, saying "I don't rate him as a writer at all... in 20 years' time will anyone read him?" Callil later wrote an editorial in The Guardian explaining her position and why she chose to leave the panel.[6][19]

text:
Wang Anyi (China)
Juan Goytisolo (Spain)
James Kelman (UK)
John le Carré (UK)
Amin Maalouf (Lebanon)

David Malouf (Australia)
Dacia Maraini (Italy)
Rohinton Mistry (India/Canada)
Philip Pullman (UK)
Marilynne Robinson (US)

Philip Roth (US)
Su Tong (China)
Anne Tyler (US)

text: The nominees for the fourth Man Booker International Prize were announced on 30 March 2011 at a ceremony in Sydney, Australia.[20] John le Carré asked to be removed from consideration, saying he was "flattered", but that he does not compete for literary prizes.[21] However, judge Dr Rick Gekoski said although he was disappointed that le Carré wanted to withdraw, his name would remain on the list.[21]

text: Lydia Davis[22]

text: Lydia Davis, best known as a short story writer, was announced as the winner of the 2013 prize on 22 May at a ceremony at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London.[22] The official announcement of Davis' award on the Man Booker Prize website described her work as having "the brevity and precision of poetry." Judging panel chair Christopher Ricks commented that "There is vigilance to her stories, and great imaginative attention. Vigilance as how to realise things down to the very word or syllable; vigilance as to everybody's impure motives and illusions of feeling."[23]

text:
Christopher Ricks (Chair)[24]
Elif Batuman[24]
Aminatta Forna[24]
Yiyun Li[24]
Tim Parks[24]

text:
U R Ananthamurthy (India)
Aharon Appelfeld (Israel)
Lydia Davis (US)
Intizar Hussain (Pakistan)
Yan Lianke (China)

Marie NDiaye (France)
Josip Novakovich (Canada)
Marilynne Robinson (US)
Vladimir Sorokin (Russia)
Peter Stamm (Switzerland)

text: The nominees for the fifth Man Booker International Prize were announced on 24 January 2013.[25] Marilynne Robinson was the only writer out of the ten nominees who had been nominated for the prize before.[25]

text: László Krasznahorkai[26]

text: László Krasznahorkai became the first author from Hungary to receive the Man Booker award in 2015. The prize was given to recognise his "achievement in fiction on the world stage". British author Marina Warner, who chaired the panel of judges that selected Krasznahorkai for the award, compared his writing to Kafka and Beckett. Krasznahorkai's translators, George Szirtes and Ottilie Mulzet, shared the £15,000 translators' prize.[27]

text:
Marina Warner (Chair)[28]
Nadeem Aslam
Elleke Boehmer
Edwin Frank
Wen-chin Ouyang

text:
César Aira (Argentina)
Hoda Barakat (Lebanon)
Maryse Condé (Guadeloupe)
Mia Couto (Mozambique)
Amitav Ghosh (India)

Fanny Howe (U.S.A.)
Ibrahim al-Koni (Libya)
László Krasznahorkai (Hungary)
Alain Mabanckou (Republic of the Congo)
Marlene van Niekerk (South Africa)

text: The nominees for the sixth Man Booker International Prize were announced on 24 March 2015.[28]

text: Han Kang (South Korea), Deborah Smith (translator), for The Vegetarian

text: Han became the first Korean author to win the prize and, under the new format for 2016, Smith became the first translator to share the prize. British journalist Boyd Tonkin, who chaired the judging panel, said that the decision was unanimous. He also said of the book "in a style both lyrical and lacerating, it reveals the impact of this great refusal both on the heroine herself and on those around her. This compact, exquisite and disturbing book will linger long in the minds, and maybe the dreams, of its readers."[29]

text:
Boyd Tonkin (Chair)
Tahmima Anam
David Bellos
Daniel Medin
Ruth Padel

text:
José Eduardo Agualusa (Angola), Daniel Hahn (translator), for A General Theory of Oblivion
Elena Ferrante (Italy), Ann Goldstein (translator), for The Story of the Lost Child
Yan Lianke (China), Carlos Rojas (translator), for The Four Books
Orhan Pamuk (Turkey), Ekin Oklap (translator), for A Strangeness in My Mind
Robert Seethaler (Austria), Charlotte Collins (translator), for A Whole Life

text:
Maylis de Kerangal (France), Jessica Moore (translator), for Mend the Living
Eka Kurniawan (Indonesia), Labodalih Sembiring (translator), for Man Tiger
Fiston Mwanza Mujila (Democratic Republic of Congo), Roland Glasser (translator), for Tram 83
Raduan Nassar (Brazil), Stefan Tobler (translator), for A Cup of Rage
Marie NDiaye (France), Jordan Stump (translator), for Ladivine
Kenzaburō Ōe (Japan), Deborah Boliver Boehm (translator), for Death by Water
Aki Ollikainen (Finland), Emily Jeremiah & Fleur Jeremiah (translator), for White Hunger

text: The nominees for the seventh Man Booker International Prize were announced on 14 April 2016.[31] The six nominees were chosen from a longlist of thirteen.[30][32]

text: David Grossman (Israel), Jessica Cohen (translator), for A Horse Walks Into a Bar[33]

text: Grossman became the first Israeli author to win the prize, sharing the £50,000 award with Cohen. The chair of the judging panel, Nick Barley, who is the director of the Edinburgh International Book Festival, described the book as "an ambitious high-wire act of a novel [that] shines a spotlight on the effects of grief, without any hint of sentimentality. The central character is challenging and flawed, but completely compelling." The novel won over 126 other contenders.[34]

text:
Nick Barley (Chair)
Daniel Hahn
Helen Mort
Elif Shafak
Chika Unigwe

text:
Mathias Énard (France), Charlotte Mandell (translator), for Compass
David Grossman (Israel), Jessica Cohen (translator), for A Horse Walks Into a Bar
Roy Jacobsen (Norway), Don Bartlett and Don Shaw (translators), for The Unseen
Dorthe Nors (Denmark), Misha Hoekstra (translator), for Mirror, Shoulder, Signal
Amos Oz (Israel), Nicholas de Lange (translator), for Judas
Samanta Schweblin (Argentina), Megan McDowell (translator), for Fever Dream

text:
Wioletta Greg (Poland), Eliza Marciniak (translator), for Swallowing Mercury
Stefan Hertmans (Belgium), David McKay (translator), for War and Turpentine
Ismail Kadare (Albania), John Hodgson (translator), for The Traitor's Niche
Jón Kalman Stefánsson (Iceland), Phil Roughton (translator), for Fish Have No Feet
Yan Lianke (China), Carlos Rojas (translator), for The Explosion Chronicles
Alain Mabanckou (France), Helen Stevenson (translator), for Black Moses
Clemens Meyer (Germany), Katy Derbyshire (translator), for Bricks and Mortar

text: The longlist for the eighth Man Booker International Prize was announced on 14 March 2017, and the shortlist on 20 April 2017. The winner was announced on 14 June 2017.[35][36]


document_title: War Machine (film)

question_text: who is brad pitt playing in war machine

question_tokens: who is brad pitt playing in war machine

text: War Machine (film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: In the summer of 2009, Four-star General Glen McMahon (Brad Pitt), having won renown for his effective leadership in Iraq, is sent to Afghanistan to prepare an assessment so that the government can end the ongoing war.[4][5] He is given wide latitudes to write it, on the sole condition that he not request more troops. McMahon and his staff, particularly his right hand man Major General Greg Pulver (Anthony Michael Hall), are united in their belief that the war can be won, and decide to recommend that President Obama authorize a surge of 40,000 additional troops to secure Helmand province in order to stabilize the country. However, the Secretary of State (Sian Thomas) informs McMahon that his report will not be reviewed until after the upcoming presidential election.

text: Captain Badi Basim (Aymen Hamdouchi), a member of the ANA, joins McMahon's staff as a "representative" of the Afghan people. He arrives, however, in civilian clothes as he would rather not wear his uniform, which he has in a bag, outside the compound near his home as he walked. Meanwhile, McMahon is informed that, due to alleged irregularities in the counting of votes, a runoff election will have to be held, delaying the review of the assessment further. Fed up, McMahon secretly leaks the assessment to the Washington Post and organizes an interview with 60 Minutes, during which he reveals that, in the last seventy days, he has only been granted one meeting with the president. In response, the government announces that they will send 30,000 troops to Afghanistan, and that all US and coalition forces in the country will leave in 18 months. To gather the remaining 10,000 troops needed for his strategy to work, McMahon and his men head to Paris to negotiate with the other coalition nations.

text: In Paris, McMahon learns that the president is passing through, and wishes to meet with him. The ambassador to Afghanistan (Alan Ruck) warns McMahon that he needs to understand his position: if he continues to anger the president, he will be fired for insubordination. The president, however, merely shakes his hand as he climbs aboard Air Force One due to time constraints, and McMahon and his staff attend a dinner in McMahon's honor, accompanied by Rolling Stone writer Sean Cullen (Scoot McNairy), who intends to write a feature story about his performance for an upcoming issue. The next day, during their anniversary dinner, McMahon's wife Jeanie confronts him about how much time he's spending fighting abroad instead of being with his family back home.

text: While on route to Berlin with McMahon's staff to continue negotiations, Cullen observes their behavior and concludes that they are arrogant and seem to care little about the growing public perception that the war is costly and wasteful. At a conference to discuss his strategy, McMahon is confronted by a German official (Tilda Swinton) who is skeptical of his approach and suggests that McMahon's plans would only lead to more losses. Nevertheless, both the Germans and the French agree to furnish the troops needed for his planned offensive, codenamed "Operation Moshtarak", to begin, with Afghan President Hamid Karzai's (Ben Kingsley) approval.

text: The operation launches, but soon runs into trouble when several civilians are accidentally killed against McMahon's instructions. When he holds a public meeting to explain the incident, the crowd grows hostile and demands that he and his troops leave. Worse, McMahon learns that Cullen's article has been published, and paints a negative picture of him and his staff as openly speaking against the president and mishandling the war effort. Knowing that he will be fired for his actions, McMahon returns to Washington and later takes a job as a civilian consultant.

text: In the aftermath, Cullen ponders the consequences of his article, noting that he wished the fall of McMahon would finally convince the government to stop invading foreign countries and end the war in Afghanistan. Instead, however, the government simply assigns a new general to replace McMahon: General Bob White (Russell Crowe).

text: Cast[edit]

text: McMahon's Entourage

text:
Brad Pitt as General Glen McMahon,[6] a character based on General Stanley McChrystal.[7] He is portrayed as an accomplished general with degrees from West Point and Yale[8] brought in to bring a resolution to the conflict in Afghanistan.
Anthony Hayes[9] as Lieutenant Commander Pete Duckman, a Navy SEAL and member of McMahon's staff, possibly based on Navy SEAL David Silverman.
Emory Cohen[10] as Sgt. Willy Dunne, General McMahon's body man.
RJ Cyler as USAF Tech Sgt. Andy Moon, information technology support assistant.[11]
Daniel Betts as USN Rear Admiral Simon Ball, McMahon's Senior Public Affairs Officer.
Topher Grace as Matt Little, a former lobbyist turned McMahon's civilian media adviser.[12]
Anthony Michael Hall as Major General Greg Pulver, ISAF Director of Intelligence,[13] loosely based on Lt. General Michael Flynn.
John Magaro as Colonel Cory Staggart, an Army Ranger and General McMahon's executive officer.[14]
Aymen Hamdouchi as Captain Badi Basim, a scholarly Afghan National Army officer who becomes General McMahon's aide-de-camp.
Scoot McNairy[15] as Sean Cullen, a cynical journalist for Rolling Stone who accompanies McMahon and his staff and acts as narrator throughout the film, loosely based on author Michael Hastings.
Meg Tilly as Jeanie McMahon,[16] McMahon's wife.

text: US Diplomats

text:
Sian Thomas as United States Secretary of State Edith May, based on Hillary Rodham Clinton
Alan Ruck as Pat McKinnon, United States Ambassador to Afghanistan loosely based on Karl Eikenberry.
Nicholas Jones as Dick Waddle, loosely based on Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke.
Griffin Dunne as Ray Canucci, a United States Department of State senior official.

text: Politicians

text:
Ben Kingsley as President Hamid Karzai[17]
Reggie Brown as President Barack Obama
Tilda Swinton as a German politician

text: Combat Marines

text:
Will Poulter as Sgt. Ricky Ortega, a Marine Corps infantry squad leader.[18]
Lakeith Stanfield as Cpl. Billy Cole, a disillusioned Marine and member of Ortega's squad.[19]
Josh Stewart as Captain Dick North, a Marine Corps officer.

text: Other

text:
Georgina Rylance as Lydia Cunningham, 60 Minutes journalist.
Russell Crowe[20] as General Bob White (uncredited), General Glen McMahon's replacement similar to David Petraeus.

text: Production[edit]

text: On April 27, 2012, it was announced that New Regency and Plan B Entertainment had acquired the film adaptation rights to the 2011 best seller non-fiction book The Operators by Michael Hastings.[21] On April 14, 2014, David Michôd was hired to write and direct the film based on the war in Afghanistan.[7] Brad Pitt was attached to star as General Stanley McChrystal and produce the film along with his Plan B partners Dede Gardner and Jeremy Kleiner, while the film would be financed by New Regency and RatPac Entertainment.[7]

text: On June 8, 2015, Netflix acquired the distribution rights to the film which was re-titled War Machine, while Ian Bryce also came on board to produce the film along with others.[22] On June 17, The Hollywood Reporter revealed that there had been a budget issue between New Regency and RatPac with producers of Plan B, and thus Netflix had stepped in to buy the distribution rights for $60 million.[1]

text: On August 4, 2015, Emory Cohen was cast in the film to play a member of Gen. McChrystal's staff.[10] On August 10, 2015, Topher Grace joined the film to play Gen. Stanley McChrystal's civilian press adviser.[12] On August 11, 2015, John Magaro signed on to play Cory Burger, a special ops soldier and close advisor to General McMahon.[14] On August 14, 2015, Scoot McNairy joined the cast of the film.[15] On August 19, 2015, Anthony Michael Hall was added to the cast to play General Hank Pulver, loosely based on General Mike Flynn.[13] On August 20, 2015, Keith Stanfield signed on to the film.[19] The same day, Will Poulter also joined the cast for an unspecified role.[18] On August 25, Anthony Hayes joined the film.[9] On October 23, 2015, TheWrap revealed that RJ Cyler had also joined the film.[11] Alan Ruck was spotted filming.[23] Meg Tilly was also spotted but her casting was not then officially confirmed.[16] It was later reported Ben Kingsley and Tilda Swinton had been cast.[24]

text: Filming[edit]

text: Principal photography on the film began in mid-October 2015 in London.[25][26][27] Later on October 19, filming began in Abu Dhabi, the city was transformed into Kabul, streets into a military fortress, an old building as an American Embassy in Kabul, and a street as a Palestinian border crossing.[28][29] Filming also took place at the Abu Dhabi International Airport in November.[29] Some scenes were also filmed at the Dunsfold Aerodrome in Surrey, England.[23] In mid-November 2015, while final scenes were being shot, actors were spotted filming in Ras al-Khaimah and the city's old neighborhood was transformed into Pakistani villages and a military base-camp.[30]

text: Release[edit]

text: The film was released on Netflix on May 26, 2017.[31]

text: Marketing[edit]

text: Brad Pitt visited Mumbai to promote the film and attended a special screening at PVR High Street Phoenix on May 24, 2017.[32] He also met Indian superstar Shah Rukh Khan to promote War Machine.

text: Critical response[edit]

text: On review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 54% based on 73 reviews, and an average rating of 5.8/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "War Machine's uneven execution keeps its fact-based story from cleanly hitting its targets, but those flaws are frequently offset by sharp wit and solid acting."[33] On Metacritic, which assigns a normalized rating, the film has a 56 out of 100 score, based on 30 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews".[34]


document_title: Marriage license

question_text: when were marriage certificates first issued in england

text: Marriage license

text: History[edit]

text: For most of Western history, marriage was a private contract between two families. Until the 16th century, Christian churches accepted the validity of a marriage on the basis of a couple’s declarations. If two people claimed that they had exchanged marital vows—even without witnesses—the Catholic Church accepted that they were validly married[citation needed].

text: Some states in the US hold that public cohabitation can be sufficient evidence of a valid marriage. Marriage license application records from government authorities are widely available starting from the mid-19th century. Some are available dating from the 17th century in colonial America.[2] Marriage licenses have been required since 1639 in Massachusetts, with their use gradually expanding to other jurisdictions.[3]

text: United Kingdom[edit]

text: England & Wales[edit]

text: A requirement for banns of marriage was introduced to England and Wales by the Church in 1215. This required a public announcement of a forthcoming marriage, in the couple's parish church, for three Sundays prior to the wedding and gave an opportunity for any objections to the marriage to be voiced (for example, that one of the parties was already married or that the couple was related within a prohibited degree), but a failure to call banns did not affect the validity of the marriage.

text: Marriage licences were introduced in the 14th century, to allow the usual notice period under banns to be waived, on payment of a fee and accompanied by a sworn declaration, that there was no canonical impediment to the marriage. Licences were usually granted by an archbishop, bishop or archdeacon. There could be a number of reasons for a couple to obtain a licence: they might wish to marry quickly (and avoid the three weeks' delay by the calling of banns); they might wish to marry in a parish away from their home parish; or, because a licence required a higher payment than banns, they might choose to obtain one as a status symbol.

text: There were two kinds of marriage licences that could be issued: the usual was known as a common licence and named one or two parishes where the wedding could take place, within the jurisdiction of the person who issued the licence. The other was the special licence, which could only be granted by the Archbishop of Canterbury or his officials and allowed the marriage to take place in any church.

text: To obtain a marriage licence, the couple, or more usually the bridegroom, had to swear that there was no just cause or impediment why they should not marry. This was the marriage allegation. A bond was also lodged with the church authorities for a sum of money to be paid if it turned out that the marriage was contrary to Canon Law. The bishop kept the allegation and bond and issued the licence to the groom, who then gave it to the vicar of the church where they were to get married. There was no obligation for the vicar to keep the licence and many were simply destroyed. Hence, few historical examples of marriage licences, in England and Wales, survive. However, the allegations and bonds were usually retained and are an important source for English genealogy.

text: Hardwicke's Marriage Act 1753 affirmed this existing ecclesiastical law and built it into statutory law. From this date, a marriage was only legally valid, if it followed the calling of banns in church or the obtaining of a licence —the only exceptions being Jewish and Quaker marriages, whose legality was also recognised. From the date of Lord Hardwicke's Marriage Act up to 1837, the ceremony was required to be performed in a consecrated building.

text: Since 1 July 1837, civil marriages have been a legal alternative to church marriages under the Marriage Act 1836, which provided the statutory basis for regulating and recording marriages. So, today, a couple has a choice between being married in the Anglican Church, after the calling of banns or obtaining a licence or else, they can give "Notice of Marriage" to a civil registrar. In this latter case, the notice is publicly posted for 15 days, after which a civil marriage can take place. Marriages may take place in churches other than Anglican churches, but these are governed by civil marriage law and notice must be given to the civil registrar in the same way. The marriage may then take place without a registrar being present if the church itself is registered for marriages and the minister or priest is an Authorised Person for marriages.

text: The licence does not record the marriage itself, only the permission for a marriage to take place. Since 1837, the proof of a marriage has been by a marriage certificate, issued at the ceremony; before then, it was by the recording of the marriage in a parish register.

text: The provisions on civil marriage in the 1836 Act were repealed by the Marriage Act 1949. The Marriage Act 1949 re-enacted and re-stated the law on marriage in England and Wales.

text: Scotland[edit]

text:
Marriage law and practice in Scotland differs from that in England and Wales. Historically, it was always considered legal and binding for a couple to marry by making public promises, without a formal ceremony but this form has not been available since 1940. More recently "marriage by cohabitation with repute" has also been abolished for any relationship commenced since 2006. Church marriages "without proclamation" are somewhat analogous to the English "marriages by licence", although the permission to perform them is not a church matter. Religious marriages in Scotland have never had a restriction on the place in which they are performed.
Marriages in Scotland normally require between 2 and 6 weeks’ notice to the district registrar depending on the previous marital status and other procedural matters usually involving the country of residence and the nationality of the parties. Marriages with less than the normal amount of notice require the permission of the Registrar General.

text: United States[edit]

text: In the United States, until the mid-19th century, common-law marriages were recognized as valid, but thereafter some states began to invalidate common-law marriages. Common-law marriages, if recognized[by whom?], are valid, notwithstanding the absence of a marriage license. North Carolina and Tennessee (which was originally western North Carolina) never recognized marriage at the common law as valid without a license unless entered into in other states. They have always recognized otherwise valid marriages (except bigamous, polygamous, interracial, or same-sex) entered into in conformity with the law of other states, territories and nations.[citation needed]

text: The specifications for obtaining a marriage license vary between states. In general, however, both parties must appear in person at the time the license is obtained; be of marriageable age (i.e., over 18 years; lower in some states with the consent of a parent); present proper identification (typically a driver's license, state ID card, birth certificate or passport; more documentation may be required for those born outside of the United States); and neither must be married to anyone else (proof of spouse's death or divorce may be required for someone who had been previously married in some states).

text: The US states of Florida, Connecticut, Wisconsin, Indiana, Oklahoma, Massachusetts, Mississippi, California, New York,[4][5] and the District of Columbia once required blood tests before issuing a marriage license, but such requirements have since been abolished. The tests were mainly used to check for previous or current bouts of syphilis and rubella (German measles); other diseases that have been screened for before marriage in some cases have included tuberculosis, gonorrhea, and HIV, the last of which is the only one of those three that is detectable using a blood test.[4]

text: Many states require 1 to 6 days to pass between the granting of the license and the marriage ceremony. After the marriage ceremony, both spouses and the officiant sign the marriage license (some states also require one or two witnesses). The officiant or couple then files for a certified copy of the marriage license and a marriage certificate with the appropriate authority. Some states also have a requirement that a license be filed within a certain time after its issuance, typically 30 or 60 days, following which a new license must be obtained.

text: Marriage licenses in the United States fall under the jurisdiction of the state in which the ceremony is performed; however, the marriage is generally recognized across the country. The state in which they are married holds the record of that marriage. Traditionally, working with law enforcement was the only means of searching and accessing marriage license information across state lines.[6]

text: Controversy in the U.S.[edit]

text:
Some groups and individuals believe that the requirement to obtain a marriage license is unnecessary or immoral. The Libertarian Party, for instance, believes that marriage should be a matter of personal liberty, not requiring permission from the state.[7][8]
Individuals who align with this libertarian stance argue that marriage is a right, and that by allowing the state to exercise control over marriage, it falsely presupposes that we merely have the privilege, not the right, to marry. As an example of a right (as opposed to a privilege), those that are born in the US receive a birth certificate (certifying that they have been born), not a birth license (which would give them license so they could be born). Some Christian groups also argue that a marriage is a contract between a man and a woman presided over by God, so no authorization from the state is required. Some US states have started citing the state specifically as a party in the marriage contract[9] which is seen by some as an infringement.[10]

text: Marriage licenses have also been the subject of controversy for affected minority groups. California's Proposition 8 has been the subject of heavy criticism by advocates of same-sex marriage,[11] including the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community whose ability to marry is often limited by the aforementioned state intervention. This changed on June 26, 2015, with the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. However, the state and federal intervention still continues to limit the ability of members of other minority religious groups from marrying according to the dictates of their religious tenets, as is the case with Islamic polygamy, for example. Polyamorous and polyandrous marriages are, likewise, still prohibited.[12]

text: In October 2009, Keith Bardwell, a Louisiana justice of the peace, refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple, prompting civil liberties groups, such as the NAACP and ACLU, to call for his resignation or firing.[13][14] Bardwell resigned his office on November 3.[15]

text: In the state of Pennsylvania, self-uniting marriage licenses are available which require only the signatures of the bride and groom and witnesses. Although this is an accommodation for a Quaker wedding, any couple is able to apply for it.

text: The Netherlands and Belgium[edit]

text: In the Netherlands and Belgium, couples intending to marry are required to register their intention beforehand, a process called "ondertrouw".

text: Mexico[edit]

text: In Mexico, only civil marriage is recognized as legal. Persons wishing to do so may also have a religious ceremony, but it has no legal effect and does not replace in any way the legal binding civil marriage. A civil wedding in Mexico is fully valid for legal purpose in the U.S. The Mexican civil registry does not issue marriage licences, it issues marriage certificates, because under Latin law, marriage is a legal right, not requiring a permit,  marriages are performed without charge at the premises of the "Registro Civil" at the municipality hall of most counties and state houses in Mexico.[16]