我意识到糟糕的照明正在悄无声息地损害生产力（而且没人去衡量它）
4 分•作者: emmasuntech•10 天前
我们花很多时间优化工具：键盘、显示器、IDE、延迟、人体工程学。<p>但最近我注意到一件奇怪的事——照明几乎从未得到同等的重视，尽管它直接影响着专注力、疲劳程度和决策制定。<p>我在长时间工作时做了一个小小的个人实验：<p>移除了主要的头顶灯<p>使用了更少、强度更低、间接的光源<p>有意让一些区域保持黑暗<p>结果不仅仅是“更舒适”——我的工作行为也发生了改变：<p>深夜眼睛疲劳感减轻<p>更长时间的专注工作时段<p>冲动切换任务的次数减少<p>令我惊讶的是，大多数关于生产力的建议都假设“能见度越高越好”，而人类的感知似乎恰恰相反：对比度、阴影和克制反而能提高清晰度。<p>这让我不禁思考：<p>为什么我们不把照明像对待排版或 UI 层次结构一样对待？<p>为什么几乎没有工具可以测量工作场所的照明质量，除了原始的勒克斯（lux）值？<p>照明是否是初创公司正在忽略的、影响生产力的一个隐形变量？<p>好奇这里其他人是否也注意到了类似的效果——或者这只是我正在陷入的安慰剂效应。
查看原文
We spend a lot of time optimizing tools: keyboards, monitors, IDEs, latency, ergonomics.<p>But recently I noticed something odd — lighting almost never gets the same level of attention, even though it directly affects focus, fatigue, and decision-making.<p>I ran a small personal experiment while working long hours:<p>Removed the main overhead light<p>Used fewer, lower-intensity, indirect light sources<p>Let some areas stay intentionally dark<p>The result wasn’t just “more comfortable” — my working behavior changed:<p>Less eye fatigue late at night<p>Longer uninterrupted focus blocks<p>Fewer impulsive context switches<p>What surprised me is that most productivity advice assumes “more visibility = better”, while human perception seems to work the opposite way: contrast, shadow, and restraint improve clarity.<p>It made me wonder:<p>Why don’t we treat lighting like we treat typography or UI hierarchy?<p>Why are there almost no tools that measure lighting quality for work, beyond raw lux?<p>Is lighting an invisible variable in productivity that startups are ignoring?<p>Curious if others here have noticed similar effects — or if this is just a placebo I’m falling for.