>The thing about the legacy sensor might be true for some places where cost/efficiency is paramount. But most light arrays (on roads and highways are all turning on together at the exact same time. Such a sensor would have to be fine calibrated to a certain level for that to happen, which is technically not impossible but goes against the above mentioned cost limitation. I knew this would come up. Yes, that is the modern behavior for many municipal street light systems, but the answer is perfectly in line with my pointing out the cost optimized engineering of the sensor. You can wire street lights to use one master sensor for an array of lamps on the same circuit. The problem with that method though, is the sensors can sometimes be forced into the "off" state when a stray car headlamp shines enough lights on them briefly. That would knock out a number of street lamps if there is a master sensor for them, but the solution to that problem is again low-tech. When a single sensor is used to control multiple lights, the sensor has an all analog component timer built into them (e.g. a resistor/capacitor discharge timer). The photocell would need to be illuminated above the light level threshold for a few seconds to exceed the timer's ability to keep the sense voltage above the switching threshold instead of it being nearly instant as the old versions were. This adds very little to the cost and gives you the ability to safely illuminate a string of lamps with just one sensor. But, I will add this, the newer and/or chinese street lamps might do it differently for their own purposes/optimizations, but the standard old "twist on" sensors that have been used for decades must do things in a way that is compatible with all standard street lamps. The light in the video does clearly show the standard "twist on" type sensor form factor. >The newer streetlights run in network and get remotely powered on all at the exact same time, regardless of the dusk/dawn. Yes, see above. But the standard in the US has been according to what I described for a very long time. That may be changing and I have been out of the power industry for decades, but we didn't have LED stuff back then and we never had to worry about them turning purple either (which, btw, is the failure of the phosphor coating on the blue/violet LEDs that change the blue wavelengths of light into white light). It's likely there are new and more high tech methods being used, but I guarantee you they are still cost optimized heavily and don't include things that electrical engineers wouldn't notice. :) >It’s still concerning that they would use a very similar code for two completely different things. This is the problem with so many people looking to connect dots. If you work at it enough, anything can be linked to anything else if you want. Some things are truly nefarious and there are demonstrable (and sometimes evil) links between them, but this street lamp to a protein found in brewer's yeast is a stretch. I read the source of the protein information from the video and to an untrained eye the whole thing sounds scary because it has words like mRNA and transferase in it. But after reading it myself, it's pretty innocuous information that concerns the lifecycle of a yeast species that many of us consume on the daily in cans or bottles or draft. Information and knowledge are very important but all too many people with an ocean of knowledge that is only one inch deep are connecting dots based on a complete misunderstanding of the content they are trying to associate together. I see this everyday and it saddens me that they get more traction with their false positive correlations than actual fact gets. If we were to go about following these false connections, all numbers would be linked to evil. All colors, shapes, planet names, many common words, symbols and designs would also be the work of satan when those who coined or created them had no such intention whatsoever. Hell, if someone wanted to work on it enough, I'm sure they could find some satanic/jewish link to the name/design of Poal or any other site because maybe there's three sixes or the number 33 is embedded somewhere in the CSS or the logo can be overlaid with a crudely drawn (((star of remphan))) or whatever. I know that you wouldn't want that because you didn't intend any such connection, but that's why we have to be careful with the dots we connect and more so with whom the dots are being connected by. :D But back to the similar code part...humans like simple and easily handled concepts. The world of electronic components has so many part numbers and naming conventions. If you ever try searching for a part number for a component that you are replacing and have nothing else to work with to describe the part, you will be surprised how many other non-related things come up in your search results. It's infuriating that you have to sift through the bad search hits for motorcycle parts, telecom connectors, industrial sewing machines and cleaning products when you're looking to find a datasheet for a quad comparator in a SOIC-16 package that is house numbered. None of those things are connected directly, but naming conventions have no rules across industries and there are always going to be overlaps. That's a human thing.