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

LEDs’ potential to save our night skies

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 200 posts

Re: LEDs’ potential to save our night skies

#191

Post by fhdkweig »

arijun wrote: post #187
fch42 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

unfortunately they never are. Brightness-adjusted, that is. Everyone installing lighting fixtures these days believes they must be daylight-level bright. The only ghosts you see are afterimages if you happen to look straight at the streetlamp ... (I find it odd; dark-adapted eyes see a lot, including movement in shadows or low-contrast obstacles - after all, our bodies know how to see well at moonlight levels of illu…

Because 1) Humans night vision is significantly worse than your regular vision. Low light would cause more accidents, eg. 2) The elderly have pretty terrible night vision. Your idea would exclude them from half the day.

The elderly don't generally go to the park for a midnight stroll. Nighttime is the realm of the young.

Re: LEDs’ potential to save our night skies

#192

Post by arijun »

fhdkweig wrote: post #191
arijun wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 1) Humans night vision is significantly worse than your regular vision. Low light would cause more accidents, eg. 2) The elderly have pretty terrible night vision. Your idea would exclude them from half the day.

The elderly don't generally go to the park for a midnight stroll. Nighttime is the realm of the young.

What? When sunset is at 5pm you want to lock the elderly up in their homes? What about those that have trouble sleeping, like many do? Or those that wake up before sunrise?

This is the kind of thinking that leads to totally inaccessible cities.

Re: LEDs’ potential to save our night skies

#194

Post by fhdkweig »

arijun wrote: post #192
fhdkweig wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The elderly don't generally go to the park for a midnight stroll. Nighttime is the realm of the young.

What? When sunset is at 5pm you want to lock the elderly up in their homes? What about those that have trouble sleeping, like many do? Or those that wake up before sunrise? This is the kind of thinking that leads to totally inaccessible cities.

If you want to go for a walk in the park in the middle of the night and can't see without a light, BRING A FLASHLIGHT. That's just basic safety. You never know when a power outage will strike. If you are 100% dependent on artificial light, the safest thing to do is bring your own.

Re: LEDs’ potential to save our night skies

#195

Post by duskdozer »

arijun wrote: post #192
fhdkweig wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The elderly don't generally go to the park for a midnight stroll. Nighttime is the realm of the young.

What? When sunset is at 5pm you want to lock the elderly up in their homes? What about those that have trouble sleeping, like many do? Or those that wake up before sunrise? This is the kind of thinking that leads to totally inaccessible cities.

Excessively bright and excessively blue lighting can also be inaccessible.

Re: LEDs’ potential to save our night skies

#196

Post by kortilla »

wussboy wrote: post #89
kortilla wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> other internet providers dumping tens of thousands of satellites in orbit instead of building municipal internet Ah yes, that municipal internet in the Pacific Ocean. The municipal internet in the 1 person per square mile rural area. The municipal internet to mountain villages. The municipal internet running to airplanes. The municipal internet to the Antarctic research stations. Tell me you don’t know the point of…

Maybe it's okay for there to be places on the earth where high sped internet is not available?

Always easy to say as the person with internet on the internet where the people stuck in those locations can’t speak.

Maybe it’s okay for you to not have internet.

Re: LEDs’ potential to save our night skies

#197

Post by kortilla »

drdexebtjl wrote: post #90
kortilla wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> other internet providers dumping tens of thousands of satellites in orbit instead of building municipal internet Ah yes, that municipal internet in the Pacific Ocean. The municipal internet in the 1 person per square mile rural area. The municipal internet to mountain villages. The municipal internet running to airplanes. The municipal internet to the Antarctic research stations. Tell me you don’t know the point of…

> The municipal internet in the 1 person per square mile rural area. Yet that person can receive mail, is within a few miles of a major highway, and is likely connected to or close to the electric grid. Infrastructure is expensive. LEO Satellite internet is only cheaper because the environmental cost is not being accounted for.

It’s cheap to deliver mail and even then many of those places don’t get mail to their home. It’s to a shared mailbox.

> LEO Satellite internet is only cheaper because the environmental cost is not being accounted for.

Terrestrial wireless and wired had decades to do something and failed. Trenching fiber for 30km is insanely expensive and requires tons of time to get easements to do it.

Also, it’s a pretty old trope to say “X only works when cost Y I’ve invented and not even quantified is not imposed”. If you want to make the argument that Starlink should pay for something, do that. Otherwise it’s meaningless crap that can be used to argue against literally anything.

Re: LEDs’ potential to save our night skies

#198

Post by HappMacDonald »

dylan604 wrote: post #75
toast0 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course the dark side of the moon is illuminated by the sun at times. But it has minimal human illumination, so that's pretty nice.

human illumination is nothing compared to the giant fusion reactor that would be lighting it up for 2 weeks at a time. At least on terra firma, you can view the sky nightly.

Er.. on the moon you can also view the sky nightly.

It's just that both the days and the nights are a lot longer.

Re: LEDs’ potential to save our night skies

#199

Post by Hilliard_Ohiooo »

msie wrote: post #74
Hilliard_Ohiooo wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Really?

Yes, really. Narcissistic people act out little plays for themselves and others, like op here "sleeping under the stars"..., it's a performance they are putting on for themselves and social media.

Re: LEDs’ potential to save our night skies

#200

Post by Hilliard_Ohiooo »

pdpi wrote: post #174
rconti wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very true, but isn't that exactly what the parent is suggesting? That even a ship full of sailors given the opportunity to care, very few do? Or are you suggesting that by the time they are in the Navy, it's after the age where one might be most easily encouraged to care?

Mostly the latter. There's another aspect to it, though — parent was in a navy ship, surrounded by sailors. That's a very specific population, in a very specific situation, and it's not necessarily true that that's the right crowd or situation to care (though it baffles me how a sailor at sea might look up at the stars without being in awe of the thought "damn, my predecessors navigated based on those")

I'm just one experience but my view was aside from a passing comment on a shooting star no one cared. Much more inteted in playing PlayStation, porn and seeking liquor on board.
Post reply on HN