4 ms·
Motion activated lights would be far more distracting. It's easy to become accustomed to a constant lighting, but if lights were going on and off every 1-2 hou
by khawkins 7y ago
Motion activated lights would be far more distracting. It's easy to become accustomed to a constant lighting, but if lights were going on and off every 1-2 hours through the night, it would be unnerving for anyone triggering them or positioned to see the light.
The innovation is living in the countryside on your own land or vacationing in those areas. Being away from people and their lights is a privilege, especially when lights improve safety.
- clmul 7y agoI don't think the bright lighting which is rampant in cities improves safety in general, (most) people are perfectly able to see in the dark, and city lights merely make it (because of interfering with the adaptation of the eyes) impossible to see in the spots left without lighting.
- briefcomment 7y agoTrue to your first point, but a compromise like having lights be dim and having them increase to full brightness for approaching traffic may help. Selective darkness is certainly a luxury, but there's no reason we can't innovate away our currently clumsy solutions.