Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dark Sky Lighting

savingourstars.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 58 posts

Re: Dark Sky Lighting

#31

Post by Zak »

RIMR wrote: post #16
tetris11 wrote: post #14

The safety argument for street lighting makes me sad. I'd prefer if people just used their phone torches at night. I used to cycle home in pitch black, watching the stars. Never had any incidents, others would notice me or I them before anything happened

There are lots of safety arguments for street lighting. For one, as a city dweller, I would be absolutely terrified walking around at night, having to rely on a flashlight to see anything. Not just a "scared of the dark" thing, but good outdoor lighting discourages things like robberies and assaults. And sure, cars could just use their headlights, but still, visibility in populated areas would be very bad, and safety…

The site links a couple studies coming to a different conclusion about crime. Feeling safer doesn't necessarily mean you are safer.

As for pedestrian safety, button-activated lights over crosswalks are one potential alternative to always-on outdoor lighting. It might lead to a considerable safety improvement once people got used to the light being an indication that pedestrians are likely present.

Re: Dark Sky Lighting

#32

Post by esikich »

functionmouse wrote: post #15

> Too much light ... makes us less safe by creating harsh shadows and giving criminals a place to hide. LMAO

Used to use this to great effect for capture the flag when I was a kid. We used to do it across the whole neighborhood. We realized that standing in shadows cast near street lights were excellent places to just stand and watch the other team. The bright light makes your eyes adjust and the shadows from nearby tree trunks become black voids.

Re: Dark Sky Lighting

#33

Post by estearum »

zamadatix wrote: post #23
estearum wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feature not a bug Simply existing in a city should not compel you or other creatures to stay awake If a person wants to stay awake at night then they can take that upon themselves

There is no "person A's sky only receives light from lamp A and person B's sky only receives light from lamp B" repeated 500,000 times. Both will make their own "simply existing in a city should not..." and "they can take that upon themselves" arguments about it and the problem that it's about what should be done with public space rather than the inside of their homes will still remain. The article would be a lot sho…

Your argument is that someone stating "night time should be night time" has the same standing as someone stating "night time should be day time," just because neither person owns night time?

No, they don't actually.

Re: Dark Sky Lighting

#34

Post by linkregister »

I'm convinced, but then all the links to actually acquiring the bulbs are broken or for wholesalers.

The city of Flagstaff page says the following: Though it is still generally true that any LED product described as “Amber” will have lower impacts, as of early 2024 we cannot recommend any particular product as the quality control of the consumer-grade product lines is not providing products with consistent spectra.

It looks like this is still a nascent product line for residential lighting.

Re: Dark Sky Lighting

#35

Post by zamadatix »

estearum wrote: post #33
zamadatix wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "person A's sky only receives light from lamp A and person B's sky only receives light from lamp B" repeated 500,000 times. Both will make their own "simply existing in a city should not..." and "they can take that upon themselves" arguments about it and the problem that it's about what should be done with public space rather than the inside of their homes will still remain. The article would be a lot sho…

Your argument is that someone stating "night time should be night time" has the same standing as someone stating "night time should be day time," just because neither person owns night time? No, they don't actually.

People feel their perspective about outdoor light is the obviously principled one which is uncontestably based on obvious realities everyone should agree of until they start talking at the bar about which hour offset the local clock should be in winter.

The posted page goes through great effort to frame the problem from every perspective it possibly can precisely because it has spent enough time on the topic to understand how people won't agree it does/doesn't make obvious sense for a city to be dark because the sun went down. It's not because the author forgot to think of using a 3 line comment declaring it obvious instead, they know many people have many different angles they consider the important reasons it should be light/dark.

Re: Dark Sky Lighting

#36

Post by kakacik »

tetris11 wrote: post #14

The safety argument for street lighting makes me sad. I'd prefer if people just used their phone torches at night. I used to cycle home in pitch black, watching the stars. Never had any incidents, others would notice me or I them before anything happened

I love my evening walks in the vineyards around our place, wine growers have these 4m wide tarmac access roads that criss-cross hills with vineyards for easier access, but nobody is there during late evening/night (sans infrequent dog walkers).

I never have to use any light, light form stars, moon and glow from nearby villages is enough to see the road, it doesn't contain any potholes or other tricks. Watching big 100km lake, villages and towns on its shores, with alps in the distance.

All that being said, its a terrible idea to expect whole villages or cities should work like that. Paired with cyclists is much worse, is it really that hard to imagine why? Even for cars, there are many things my head lamps reveal a bit too late compared to seeing people or obstacles well ahead, ie unlit clueless cyclists like you would be one strong category.

Re: Dark Sky Lighting

#37

Post by swiftcoder »

kazinator wrote: post #10

I've not seen a streetlight anywhere that wasn't collimated downward. Traditional neons are amber. So we had it right well over half century ago as far as street lighting went.

Our new ones are extremely bright arrays of white LEDs, pointed down at a 45 degree angle. They may technically be collimated downwards, but it's bright as day underneath, and there is considerable reflected light going upwards.

Re: Dark Sky Lighting

#39

Post by duskdozer »

functionmouse wrote: post #15

> Too much light ... makes us less safe by creating harsh shadows and giving criminals a place to hide. LMAO

This is an issue driving the mistaken belief that we need more and more light, especially bright blue LEDs. The LEDs have a hard cutoff between light and dark zones, and both the blue tint and the excessive brightness of the lights decrease your night vision and make your eyes become more unable to see anything outside of these small lit zones.
Post reply on HN