It's just because people tend to put the "original" result in the first place and the "improved" result in the second place in many scientific studies. LLM and humans are learning that and assume that the second one is the better one.
You are very lucky. In China, virtually all websites are required by law to use your phone number (verified by SMS) to register and/or to use. And all numbers must be linked to your ID.
The word "local" is strange. There are almost no real "local" people as to local to that region. As to the other Chilean people, they can go to any other major Chilean city and build whatever they want there instead of building it right at Atacama. Nobody is stopping that.
The best solution is to reduce the global population. Don't call me crazy. It's already happening in almost all developed countries. It's reasonable to predict that the remaining countries will follow in like 50 years. With a decline of population, the places that need to be lit up would also gradually reduce. More space for nature, for astronomy, for everything.
The problem is that the industrial project will attract more people to the site, and a new town would be built with families living there. So even in the imagined best scenario, when you shut down this project, lots of people would lose their jobs. They would have to do some other businesses to support themselves. The light pollution won't be eliminated.
Actually, in my imagined best scenario, we would develop better means of producing energy that make a solar farm in the middle of the desert less attractive, causing working there to become less lucrative and encouraging people to find new jobs. The megaproject winds down naturally due to that changing economic landscape (like how I expect the town where I grew up in Texas to die when the oilfield workers no longer frequent it), and the dark zone is reclaimed for astronomy or whatever.
