> When I was in the military, a key tactic of camouflage was to never, under any circumstances, expose yourself on a hilltop or similar, where your silhouette could be easily identified. A dark blob on a light background is far easier for the human eye to see, than the reverse.
This is absurd. You know what's EASIEST to see? A shining light bulb against a background of darkness.
I am skeptical about this suggestion of evolutionary reasons to explain computer screen settings. Obviously any vision task is influenced by our evolutionary history, but we did not evolve to read text at all.
Independent of that, there are at least two parameters that I can control, usually much more easily than light/dark. I can adjust text size, per application, and I can adjust screen brightness, per machine. These things allow fine control of 1) ease of reading, 2) total light output. Any study that considers the binary light/dark setting and ignores anything more fine-grained is completely missing the point.
This is absurd. You know what's EASIEST to see? A shining light bulb against a background of darkness.
I am skeptical about this suggestion of evolutionary reasons to explain computer screen settings. Obviously any vision task is influenced by our evolutionary history, but we did not evolve to read text at all.
Independent of that, there are at least two parameters that I can control, usually much more easily than light/dark. I can adjust text size, per application, and I can adjust screen brightness, per machine. These things allow fine control of 1) ease of reading, 2) total light output. Any study that considers the binary light/dark setting and ignores anything more fine-grained is completely missing the point.