What you describe is the inevitable result of women being empowered through having their own careers and being able to own property independently. Used to be that they needed a man and the clock was ticking, so they had to settle. Now a relationship is something they can take or leave, so they have higher standards and expectations.

Men who don't understand that tend to think of women as bitches and uppity.

Or we could rework out economies to not require an ever growing population.

It's going to need a bit more than cheaper baby supplies. For example, a lot of people can't afford to buy a family sized home.

Maybe in one of the agent categories? It seems poorer there. But under the category "Best Text Models", it's crushingly in the lead.

Dimming them not only directly saves power, but also dramatically increases their longevity, and also increases their efficiency (saving even more power). :)

So "not that different" translates to "less than half" by the time you finished the paragraph?

Did you miss the phrase "raw bulb efficiencies", or were you under the impression that streetlamps are raw bulbs and nothing more?

It's the "fights back", particularly combined with "back", that makes it seem incorrect. The "back", to me, implies more than just reduction or elimination. Maybe I'm wrong.

You're talking about PEPC uptake of bicarbonate and CO2 in soil moisture. It's only like 1-2%, and it's not "soil carbon", it's CO2 from the atmosphere dissolved in water. Same uptake whether the soil is humus-rich or bare sand.

How do you plan to handle achieving 1000W/m2 of lighting *before* losses?

I think realistically you'd need orbital mirrors for that.

Also, someone keeps stealing my water. I'll leave a glass of water out overnight, and the next time I check it, it's lower. I swear I'm not making it up, it's happened multiple times.

I was wondering why street lights don't have motion sensors. Maybe it's because the range of the sensors is too low. Typical PIR stuff won't work very well at that distance. Or maybe the lights going on and off all the time would be distracting or annoying for residents.

It was a decision that weighed up the pros and cons.

Pros:
- Broader spectrum light has better colour rendering, i.e. you can see things like road markings and hazards better with it. Sodium is very narrow spectrum.
- CCTV can see a lot better with broad spectrum.
- Whiter light appears brighter to humans even when the light output is lower than redder light.
- LEDs are more efficient at higher colour temperatures, although the difference is small now.

Cons:
- Can mess up the natural day/night cycle for living things, from insects to humans.
- Some people prefer orange.

If it is bothering you then contact your council. They can install a shield that stops it shining into your bedroom.

The funny thing is there's not that much difference in the raw bulb efficiencies - LPS is slightly lower, but not dramatically. But LPS have more fixture losses (the bulbs are omnidirectional), ballast losses, inefficient dimming (and only to slight degrees) for morning/evening, and so on. LED's high CRI (vs. LPS's virtually nonexistent CRI) can sometimes mean you can use less light, too. In practice, you can use something like 30-40% the electricity with LED streetlamps as with LPS, despite the raw bulb figures not being very different.

But no question that LED is much worse for astronomy. LPS was almost a pure spectral line, very easy to exclude. White LEDs use phosphors and deliver a broad spectrum white (apart from the source's blue peak). Pretty much the worst spectrum you could have apart from incandescent. : It kind of sucks that we have to use phosphors in the first place, as they're wasteful - but unfortunately, LEDs have a "green gap"; in the green spectrum, existing tech has a dramatic drop in output and efficiency (and corresponding increase in price) - while green is what our eyes see best. There's still ongoing work to fill it, but it's been a slog. If we could skip the phosphor and just have a mix of different coloured LEDs, the fixtures would be even more efficient, and it would be much easier for astronomers to filter (esp. if the frequencies were standardized)

It says "combat" and "fight back", but it seems like it just protects the user and does nothing to retaliate.

I think anyone how serves a cat probably knows that AI doesn't need to be particularly complex or intelligent to take over the world. Cats don't have object permanence or the ability to reason, and they still easily get humans to work for them for free.