I think cities are great, but it's nice to leave the city. And with more intelligent lights, we can have lighting when and where we need it. And with lower air pollution, enjoy breathing better and see more stars in the sky.
> Give me a sky full of moving points of light any night.
But at what point does that just become noise? A shooting star is magic. Seeing the ISS float by is a novelty. But a crisscrossing streams of satellites... I'm sure that would get old quick.
And arguably slower. I see a bright star, I look it up, it's so-and-so in the constellation of something-or-other. I see a bright satellite, I look it up, it has a story.
I don't think I made any claim about their actual speed, but I would have thought if they're not geostationary (like the ISS) they are crossing our sky much faster, which is all that matters to this discussion.
> I see a bright satellite, I look it up, it has a story.
It's very subjective I guess, but in stars and nebula I see the history of the universe as a mysterious story in itself. A story that compelled us to explore space in the first place.
I meant it wouldn't become noise any faster than the stars themselves.
Personally, I want us to colonize space more than explore it. I view the stars mostly as, to quote, "enormous heaps of valuable raw materials that had unfortunately caught fire and needed to be scattered and put out", in a Kardashevian, "wake up the universe" sense.
I think cities are great, but it's nice to leave the city. And with more intelligent lights, we can have lighting when and where we need it. And with lower air pollution, enjoy breathing better and see more stars in the sky.
> Give me a sky full of moving points of light any night.
But at what point does that just become noise? A shooting star is magic. Seeing the ISS float by is a novelty. But a crisscrossing streams of satellites... I'm sure that would get old quick.