No, I’m pretty sure it’s that shorter wavelengths kill less stuff because it can penetrate less. My understanding is this research is about finding crossover points where it’s still deadly to microorganisms, but safe for more complex organisms.

I'd be worried about my eyes even more than my skin tbh..

It may very well be safe but I'll need more convincing than "yeah your dead skin cells will protect you, don't worry about it bro".

The idea is apparently that the wet layer on your eyes is enough to protect your cornea.

See my comment here for sourcing: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30829785

Hmmm so if I don't blink for too long I expose it?

I don't know, I'm not worried about corona anymore but much more about this :)

I wonder if turning it on for five minutes every half hour or so would be a good compromise risk-wise (assuming it's more dangerous than the article wants to believe).

Put it inside duct work

Yup, you don’t need to worry about tuning the UV. Just stick broad spectrum UV (excluding the 100-200nm only) in the duct work.

Is this uncommon? I had UV disinfectant bulbs installed as part of my HVAC installation in my house, seemed pretty common.

Two challenges with making this work well. 1) Not destroying plastic and rubber components exposed to the light. 2) Ensuring whatever is passing through the light receives enough exposure. Often they're better at keeping evaporator coils clean than cleaning the air.

Oh? It makes sense, but I hadn't heard that. Have your read about that somewhere?

In new installations, but I think it’s only been common for less than a decade. All older systems will not have them unless they were specifically added.

I have a rather serious photosensitivity disorder, so this sort of thing is vaguely terrifying.