Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Scientist: These new SpaceX Starlink satellites are farking up my astronomy and such   (news.yahoo.com) divider line
    More: Facepalm, Satellite, Sky, Astronomy, Astronomer, Orbit, Telescope, launching batches of dozens of satellites, Spacecraft  
•       •       •

1357 clicks; posted to Fandom » on 08 Aug 2020 at 7:35 AM (15 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

 
2020-08-08 12:07:02 PM  
4 votes:

drjekel_mrhyde: Sorry to the guys here, but Elon still won't let you suck his dick.


See, you don't KNOW that
 
2020-08-08 11:29:22 AM  
3 votes:
Sorry to the guys here, but Elon still won't let you suck his dick.
 
2020-08-08 10:10:28 AM  
2 votes:

pup.socket: Destructor: Astronomers, your telescopes need to be in space. Lean on Musk to get them up there for you.

This is your leverage.

Building and operating a telescope in space is enormously expensive. Is Musk going to foot the bill? Nope, like every other PoS "capitalist", he's happy to free ride on a public resource as long as the government that is in his pocket lets him to, but he'll oppose paying the true cost of his "enterprise" with all the money he can spare.


Maybe he will with his vast fortune of Mars rubies.

Also, why are Space Telescopes so expensive. I mean, it's just a system of lenses and mirrors, a guidance system, some sort of station keeping system, and that's pretty much it. Stop thinking "NASA" where every gyroscope needs parts from the 50 states for political reasons. And start thinking "SpaceX".

/Long live Musk!
 
2020-08-08 9:57:07 AM  
2 votes:

way south: MurphyMurphy: I find it hilarious we're going to destroy the night sky

Because that's EASIER TO ACCOMPLISH  than fixing our stagnate and corrupt cable/telecom fiefdoms.

Light pollution has already destroyed the night sky for the vast majority of the population.
Unfortunately they don't care about seeing stars so much as they care about seeing the freeway they're driving on.

Even if we solved the telecom problem and allowed people to build towers and run cables anywhere (destroying the landscape in the process), there are many places you can't easily reach with a landline.
Where I live it's an archipelago of small islands and tiny populations.  Even if we wanted to run the cables it would mean digging miles of trenches and dropping cables all over the sea for a few thousand people living here or there. It's not really practical and we sure as hell cant afford it.

Satellite bypasses that problem entirely. It comes with the risk of polluting orbit but we were already willing to run bulldozers all over the place for data.


Digging a trench and running a cable is nothing. I know a thing or two about transport.

Yeah, its hard. So is providing electricity. Natural gas. But it's an easy task for a civilization such as ours.

And for areas more remote than that? Existing higher orbit sats work. Have a good friend that's used one as his only solution for decades. He torrents, uses steam. Not perfect but he's the one that wants to be separated from civilization.

Billions. Enough to run the cables many times over, are vacuumed up by the investor class. Fueled by grants from your tax dollars, insulated by politics.

I don't see any wisdom in calling the night sky lost. Nor in "hurr all telescopes just go to moon duh"

You've been screwed so long, when thinking how to fix your problem, you dont even consider the possibility of one pen stroke vs launching thousands of satellites.
 
2020-08-08 9:30:53 AM  
2 votes:
Can't wait for the coal industry's solution to solar power

Fark user imageView Full Size

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-08-08 8:19:42 AM  
2 votes:

GoldSpider: A LOT of science is done by amateur astronomers, and they sure as shiat aren't going to just put telescopes into space.


When starship was pitched I recall they said the individual ride rice per starlink satellite could be as low as $4000.
Through the magic of ride share, mass production, and knowing A guy who owns a rocket factory and also owes you a favor, You very possibly can...

Fark user imageView Full Size



/this article pops up every starlink launch.
/problems overblown, most amateur astronomers don't have equipment sensitive enough to be affected.
 
2020-08-08 8:17:42 AM  
2 votes:

Destructor: Astronomers, your telescopes need to be in space. Lean on Musk to get them up there for you.

This is your leverage.


Building and operating a telescope in space is enormously expensive. Is Musk going to foot the bill? Nope, like every other PoS "capitalist", he's happy to free ride on a public resource as long as the government that is in his pocket lets him to, but he'll oppose paying the true cost of his "enterprise" with all the money he can spare.
 
2020-08-08 8:04:38 AM  
2 votes:
Really, we should just be doing astronomy from the Moon. Moon. astronomers. That's a nice big arrays plopped up there.

No whalers allowed.
 
2020-08-08 7:43:45 AM  
2 votes:

Destructor: Astronomers, your telescopes need to be in space. Lean on Musk to get them up there for you.

This is your leverage.


But then he'll have to take their money in exchange!

...Wait a minute.
 
2020-08-08 6:57:21 AM  
2 votes:
Astronomers, your telescopes need to be in space. Lean on Musk to get them up there for you.

This is your leverage.
 
2020-08-08 11:55:16 PM  
1 vote:
It's alright guys, the validity of astrology remains unaffected.
 
2020-08-08 7:53:49 PM  
1 vote:

maxheck: Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: On the other hand, good luck destroying the enemy's internet and communications in a war, as that war instead becomes about controlling the cloud of internet satellites.  You just won't be able to bring enough anti-satellite weapons into play to do otherwise until you bring large numbers of high power lasers on line.
Or a few 55-gallon drums full of sand and a stick of dynamite launched into the right orbital plane.


Wait--so how much would something like that cost, anyway? Just hypothetically.
 
2020-08-08 4:12:10 PM  
1 vote:

johnny_vegas: Destructor: Astronomers, your telescopes need to be in space. Lean on Musk to get them up there for you.

This is your leverage.

As Webb taught us, that's easy!


You are looking at this the wrong way. Instead of one colossal telescope we can have 10,000 small ones.  Throw in accurate positioning and some clever software and we can do wonders.

A system like that would need  amateurs doing much of the actual observation just because of the shear volume of data.
 
2020-08-08 12:26:14 PM  
1 vote:

New Farkin User Name: I'm still not sure why this impacts astronomers that much? Amateurs aren't doing very sensitive observations where a bright object passing between them and their target will ruin everything; for stuff like asteroid observations I don't think it'd matter at all. And professions who are doing sophisticated observations are probably using sophisticated software which you should be able to mod with a way to digitally filter out satellites. You can predict their path and their magnitude, or have the telescope do it for you, and then screen it if possible or just remove that second from the data if it's too bright and overloads the sensitivity threshold. I'd be surprised if technology like this doesn't exist already.

//no, I didn't read Yahoo


You can't just filter out missing data, starlink trajectories are not predictable, and the ultimate goal is to have tens of thousands of these kinds of satellites in orbit in order to provide the necessary coverage. Musk was boasting just the other day that he hasnt met anyone who knows where all the Starlinks are, which is a big part of the problem.
 
2020-08-08 11:23:12 AM  
1 vote:

MurphyMurphy: way south: MurphyMurphy: way south: MurphyMurphy: I find it hilarious we're going to destroy the night sky

Because that's EASIER TO ACCOMPLISH  than fixing our stagnate and corrupt cable/telecom fiefdoms.

Light pollution has already destroyed the night sky for the vast majority of the population.
Unfortunately they don't care about seeing stars so much as they care about seeing the freeway they're driving on.

Even if we solved the telecom problem and allowed people to build towers and run cables anywhere (destroying the landscape in the process), there are many places you can't easily reach with a landline.
Where I live it's an archipelago of small islands and tiny populations.  Even if we wanted to run the cables it would mean digging miles of trenches and dropping cables all over the sea for a few thousand people living here or there. It's not really practical and we sure as hell cant afford it.

Satellite bypasses that problem entirely. It comes with the risk of polluting orbit but we were already willing to run bulldozers all over the place for data.

Digging a trench and running a cable is nothing. I know a thing or two about transport.

Yeah, its hard. So is providing electricity. Natural gas. But it's an easy task for a civilization such as ours.

And for areas more remote than that? Existing higher orbit sats work. Have a good friend that's used one as his only solution for decades. He torrents, uses steam. Not perfect but he's the one that wants to be separated from civilization.

Billions. Enough to run the cables many times over, are vacuumed up by the investor class. Fueled by grants from your tax dollars, insulated by politics.

I don't see any wisdom in calling the night sky lost. Nor in "hurr all telescopes just go to moon duh"

You've been screwed so long, when thinking how to fix your problem, you dont even consider the possibility of one pen stroke vs launching thousands of satellites.

I'm not saying the sky is lost. I'm saying we are willing t ...


I'm gonna compare it to solar because we've already started doing experiments in space solar power. I can see a near future where we start talking about wrapping the planet in dyson dots to do some very large scale work. Work that no longer requires ripping up the lanscape.

On one hand we're weighting the ability to control the climate and bring unlimited power and data to every human on earth, regardless of where they live or which tribe they belong to. On the other we're talking about a specific level of hobby level astronomy that rises above back yard stuff yet still can't afford the workarounds needed to peer through satellite constellations.

It's predictable which argument will lose if push comes to shove. It would make more sense to give each hobbyist their own personal Hubble than to stand in the way of that.
If launch costs are falling, which they will need to do in order to loft these constellations, then increasingly large space telescopes are not out of the question. Spacex and other launch companies are more prone to pay it back than way than to put off plans for massively profitable global progress.
 
2020-08-08 10:39:53 AM  
1 vote:

way south: MurphyMurphy: way south: MurphyMurphy: I find it hilarious we're going to destroy the night sky

Because that's EASIER TO ACCOMPLISH  than fixing our stagnate and corrupt cable/telecom fiefdoms.

Light pollution has already destroyed the night sky for the vast majority of the population.
Unfortunately they don't care about seeing stars so much as they care about seeing the freeway they're driving on.

Even if we solved the telecom problem and allowed people to build towers and run cables anywhere (destroying the landscape in the process), there are many places you can't easily reach with a landline.
Where I live it's an archipelago of small islands and tiny populations.  Even if we wanted to run the cables it would mean digging miles of trenches and dropping cables all over the sea for a few thousand people living here or there. It's not really practical and we sure as hell cant afford it.

Satellite bypasses that problem entirely. It comes with the risk of polluting orbit but we were already willing to run bulldozers all over the place for data.

Digging a trench and running a cable is nothing. I know a thing or two about transport.

Yeah, its hard. So is providing electricity. Natural gas. But it's an easy task for a civilization such as ours.

And for areas more remote than that? Existing higher orbit sats work. Have a good friend that's used one as his only solution for decades. He torrents, uses steam. Not perfect but he's the one that wants to be separated from civilization.

Billions. Enough to run the cables many times over, are vacuumed up by the investor class. Fueled by grants from your tax dollars, insulated by politics.

I don't see any wisdom in calling the night sky lost. Nor in "hurr all telescopes just go to moon duh"

You've been screwed so long, when thinking how to fix your problem, you dont even consider the possibility of one pen stroke vs launching thousands of satellites.

I'm not saying the sky is lost. I'm saying we are willing to trade som ...


Yay, Broadband to the loonies, i mean, boonies.
Their facebook and netflix will stream faster!

I guess we'll just have to thoroughly disagree on the cost/benefit ratio here.

I think it's utter madness to compare low orbit sats the equivalent of someone using a solar panel.
And think the same about comparing the launching thousands of satellites vs making people/orgs share lines and bandwidth on the terrestrial solutions we have perfected over many generations.
 
2020-08-08 10:05:56 AM  
1 vote:

Destructor: Astronomers, your telescopes need to be in space. Lean on Musk to get them up there for you.

This is your leverage.


As Webb taught us, that's easy!
 
2020-08-08 10:02:46 AM  
1 vote:
You'll get over it.
 
2020-08-08 8:12:57 AM  
1 vote:
What, letting a billionaire do whatever stupid idea he pays his engineers to come up with, with no oversight, might have negative consequences? Who saw that coming?

Next you'll be telling me that a guy who bought his way into every 'success' he's ever had ISN'T some kind of bootstrappy genius, or that the fact that his businesses have taken billions upon billions of dollars in government handouts DOESN'T make him look like a massive, out-of-touch hypocrite when he rails against 'socialism'.
 
Displayed 19 of 19 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.