Here is a more nuanced Technology Connections video on the matter:
The cartel tested their bulbs and fined manufacturers for bulbs that lasted more than 1,000 hours. A 1929 table listed the amount of Swiss francs paid that depended on the exceeding hours of lifetime.[11] Anton Philips, head of Philips, said to another cartel executive, "After the very strenuous efforts we made to emerge from a period of long life lamps, it is of the greatest importance that we do not sink back into the same mire by paying no attention to voltages and supplying lamps that will have a very prolonged life."[6]
So, yeah that looks exactly like the evil actions of a cartel unless maybe you're claiming this isn't factual. If so, I'd be very interested in your source of information.
The cartel was more of a marketing self-regulation conspiracy so that one manufacturer can't make claims that their bulbs are more cost-efficient when they're just plain dimmer.
First, I assume you mean half as bright. Half as dim seems like the opposite of what you mean, or a very strange way to phrase it.
Second, you're saying that bulb lifetime scales linearly with brightness?
Looks pretty close to it
Dubious. Most people would not rewire a room in their house to install a new ceiling light because a new bulb was half as bright as the old, because the new bulb would probably still be adequately bright and the new light level is something they could adjust to (much easier than rewiring their ceiling.)
In other words, there isn't a linear relationship between bulb brightness and the number of bulbs people use. The number of bulbs people use is relatively unresponsive to bulb brightness because bulbs need fixtures and changing fixtures is a pain in the ass.
Imagine you sold a 2000 hr bulb that has two filaments in it, in parallel. It would fit the same fixture and make the same light as the equivalent 1000 hr bulb, but it would consume more because it runs at lower current and temperature.
You would make more money: almost all of the cost is the same as for the 1-filament version, but you could sell it for a higher price because it lasts twice as long. The buyer would pay for it slowly in the electricity bill, and ultimately be screwed.
Higher current (hot filament): 1000 lumen, 100 W, 10 lumen/watt, 1000 hour lifetime
Lower current (colder filament): 333 lumen, 50 W, 6.66 lumen/watt, 3000 hour lifetime.
To emit 1000 lumen for 3000 hours you'll use 3 of the former lightbulbs (one after another) and consume 300 kWh, 100 per lightbulb.
And you'll also use 3 of the latter lightbulbs (in parallel) but you'll spend 450 kWh, 150 per lightbulb.
Remember, an incandescent light bulb is primarily a heater -- even in the very best case, most of the energy input becomes heat.
This heater just happens to be so hot that it glows white and produces usable light.
[1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Black_bo...
What does that translate into in practical terms for a lightbulb manufacturer?
If that matches the meaning of "evil conspiracy" isn't something that people will settle on.