How do we stop/prevent cubesat advertising? It's outlawed in the US, but there is no international law against it.
shoot it down with an anti-satellite missile
>>10557367shoot it down, it's fair game.
imagine being an uncontacted rainforest tribe and you look up in the sky and see an advertisement for mcdonalds
>>10557427>>10557467>inb4 Coke and Pepsi restart the Cola Wars in space.
>>10557427>>10557467Then you'd make a bunch of orbital debris
>>10557473I'd sacrifice a virgin to the mcdonalds gods if I saw that shit
>>10557473Once it starts, the entire fucking sky would be littered with hundreds of brand advertisements.
Neat idea would be to enhance the actual night sky with fake stars. Could make living in high light polluted areas better.
>>10557367Elon will get rich-guy-high and pay for a goatse satellite
>>10557367Soon the skies will be filled with the image of the supreme dear leader.
>>10557367Shoot 'em with lasers.
>>10557367You don't, let the free market rule. This is the future whether you like it or not. China will jump on this. The more you restrict technology like this the more the West will be economically impeded. If you really care that much maybe get informed and restrict or limit holographic and spatial based advertising to certain spaces and locations. This actually looks like very cool technology that can benefit everyone.
>>10557522less chances for further orbital advertisement then.
>>10558154>t. corporate shillPlease explain to us how they would benefit us, in a way, a less invasive technology couldn't?
What's stopping giant space obscenity? What if I were to project hardcore pornography from orbit so that millions could see it?
>>10558231If you disallow cubsat advertising completely, in theory you wipe out any and all job creation, any resulting benefit from that technology, in this case, cubsats. You *could* of had complementary jobs to such technology for example, this is how jobs are creating in history and cyclical development of technology. Note I'm not arguing for this entirely libertarian free reign of corporations or anyone to implement this technology. It obviously has its limits or places that it belongs.
>>10558253>>10558231*this is how jobs are created in history and cyclical development of technology.my main point is this: this is always going to happen in development of technology in one way or another, its something that will have perceived negative impacts on society. Its not the wisest thing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Technology is job creation and economic development, what you really need are informed people to have a reasonable discourse with.The only thing you can do is inform yourself and create a discourse for reasonable limitation and regulation on such technology.
>>10558129>>10557367Carve penises on them with high powered lasers.
>>10558154>Implying anyone would ever live their virtual worlds in the future.Reality is boring.
>>10558253While we're talking economics, consider the negative effects of advertisement semi-permanently affixed in the sky.I for one am not going to buy a house from which my backyard view includes "ASIAN SINGLES IN YOUR AREA" I can imagine this harming the property values where it is most prevalentAlso the thought of people recognizing seasonal changes by which ad they see in the sky is pretty clown world tier
>>10558253>It obviously has its limits or places that it belongsYes, giant floating advertisements branded onto the night sky is absofuckinglutely one of those limits. >Oh no muh cubesat advertising jerbsWoop de fuck, plenty of other shit to be commercialised that isn't this cancerous.
>>10558253>If you disallow clubbing baby seals completely, in theory you wipe out any and all job creation, any resulting benefit from that industry, in this case, baby seal fur.Creating jobs doesn't justify all means. And there's a million other options to use cubesats in useful ways.
>>10557367You move to a place where there's no point advertising.
>>10558353Won't that shit be visible from the entire hemisphere at night?
>>10558353>Have to move to Alaska to avoid glowing McDonald's adverts in the night skyI want off this ride
>>10558347And so this is you and your personal preferences nitpicking things and technology that you dont like, and thats fine, because it doesnt represent how things actually play out ! im sure youve evaluated all the negative and positive impacts of this technology and others, im sure youre an expert >>10558350creating jobs or ultimately technology that brings wealth to a particular society or economy certainly justifies it. Don't you want less income inequality ? Don't you want more wealth for yourself ? Those million of other uses for cubsats anyways, its all something that at the end of the day contributes to one economy or another in some way....
>>10558366Okay at this point I'm fairly certain you're just trolling. Either way, just please stop wasting precious oxygen, that would be great for the economy.
>>10558371This is your response because you know I'm right, youre not an expert, and its your personal preference, which isn't how the real world or marketplace works. Face the facts faggot. Same goes for technology leading to wealth. These are basic economic concepts that seem to escape you.
>>10558401Nah, I'm not any of the guys that have been calling you a faggot but I'm with them. This kind of pervasive advertising is an utterly tasteless blight that no civilized society should partake in, who gives a single fuck if it makes a few people wealthier.
>>10558414so long as you live in a democracy and people agree with you, this might be the case. I do not predict this to be the case with say, a society like Authoritarian Communist-Capitalist China.
>>10558422If China wants to let sleazy corporations clutter and lock them out of their own geosynchronous orbital space with trashy advertisements, they're welcome to do that, but luckily not all of the world has to engage in mindless market-worship.
>>10557367By having cia niggers suicide any ceo foolish enough to clutter up the usas orbital space
>>10557367Whoever thought this in the first place should die in hell
>>10558467Orbital billboards don't have to go in geosynchronous orbit
>>10558839Nope, but that's pretty much the only place they'll likely be allowed. I'm sure as fuck not letting propaganda and shit that doesn't even concern me pollute my sky. That would be an international nightmare.
>>10557367in the 1970's Coca-Cola floated the idea of their logo on the moon. Aside from the fact that this could never happen because it would violate Space Law, which is based on the Law of the Sea Treaty, there was a HUGE public backlash to the idea.People saw it as extremely distasteful.Same thing would happen now, I suspect.
>>10559051>I'm sure as fuck not letting propaganda and shit that doesn't even concern me pollute my sky.This.It is everyone's sky and claiming it with ads would be to very, very aggressively deprive people of an extremely important piece of their freedom and their dreams.If it ever happened people would live with their heads down, assaulted on all fronts with garbage. It would official be a hell-scape.
>>10557367Is this even feasible? How would you even see the advert in a city? Seems to me like this would be more expensive than just paying a popular YouTuber to wear your ad. Not to mention not very many companies would be able to afford this type of advertisement.
>>10557522So you're saying it would be extremely effective.
>>10559070I remember an old joke about it.The Soviets had landed on the moon and were painting it red. Instead of trying to stop them, the Americans wait until they're finished and just write "Coca-Cola" over it.
>>10559051There's no international law preventing space billboards in non geosynchronous orbits.
>>10560165Never said there was, that doesn't mean people will be okay with foreign entities plastering their skies with tasteless, garish advertisements without any consequences.
>>10561452and what would those consequences be?
>>10561491Dunno, we've discussed some possibilities ITT such as shooting them out of orbit, but it probably won't ever grow beyond strongly worded statements and mild diplomatic squabbles.I could see pretty shit PR for any global corporation who tries it consistently beyond a few controversial stunts to get publicity, and for more domestically focused advertisers, really, why would you *not* want to be in a geosynchronous orbit anyway? Going through the effort to launch an advertisement only relevant to a particular country or region that won't even spend a majority of its time within eyesight of that region is just a waste of money.Whatever the case, I still don't see how this makes it okay or desirable to do. There are many more lucrative and rewarding opportunities in space than putting your trashy logo all over it.
>>10561515Shooting down another satellite operated by another party makes the party doing the shooting liable to litigation. It's illegal by the outerspace treaty to do that.>>geosynchronous orbitis very high up, meaning the billboard you'd have to launch would be much much bigger than what could fit in a cubesat.
You could not totally prevent it. Fortunately it does not work.
>>10558365and when you finally make it out there, having sold all your possessions and left your loved ones behind to try to make it in the last desolate place you can find, you look up and see, written by specialized ion producing satellites in the Aurora Borealis "It might be cold up here but our Big Macs are always hot" Gotta capture that tourist market, they're easy pickins
>>10561601And likewise litigation will undoubtedly be an option against someone shitting up your night sky with obnoxious and unavoidable advertising without you or your government's consent. Besides, how do ground-based lasers and missiles violate the outer space treaty?>is very high up, meaning the billboard you'd have to launch would be much much bigger than what could fit in a cubesat.That's true, which only serves to underscore how wasteful and dumb it is.
I think you guys are understating how much this goes against not only governments, but also other commercial endeavors in space. The entire telecom system would be against it and that's a fucking enormous industry with plenty of pull.
>>10561609Yet. The challenge is deploying mirrors and formation flight. Once you can do both, it shouldn't be too hard to spell out words using each mirror as a dot. It doesn't need to be very high resolution if you can make them bright enough. NOSS triads already do formation flight and tend to cause UFO sightings.>>10561624>>without your governments consentgovernments don't own spacehttp://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/introouterspacetreaty.html>>lasers and missilesfrom the treaty:>>States shall be liable for damage caused by their space objectsand:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Liability_ConventionBecause the nation that launch the billboard maintains jurisdiction over it, attacking the billboard is also an act of war. It's harder to prove that the billboard does damage>>10561643bullshit. Ever heard of iridium flares? Iridium satellites have big antennas on them that act like a mirror and can reflect sunlight in such a way as to be very bright. Astronomers don't like this. Telecom companies would be against regulations that make them redesign their satellites.
>>10561663>governments don't own spaceDoesn't matter, it's still plenty of grounds for litigation. Besides, let's not pretend these outdated laws are immutable. A lot of change is bound to come when a reason for it presents itself.>Because the nation that launch the billboard maintains jurisdiction over it, attacking the billboard is also an act of war.Who's going to war over a couple cheap privately owned cubesats being blasted out of orbit with no human casualties? As you initially implied yourself, what would those consequences really be?
>>10561886For litigation to occur there must be damages. It's hard to argue that the billboard causes any damage, especially since the precedent of iridium satellite flaring. I don't like it either, but there are currently no laws against orbital billboards. An act of war is still an act of war. The country that owns the cubesats might escalate things just because it is an attack on property under their jurisdiction and they don't want to set a precedent.
>>10561886Under the space liability treaty the consequences would be that the billboard company could file claim for damages rendered. IE they could claim to be reimbursed for the launch costs, satellite costs, and other costs. There is no precedent for this.
imagine if you had an entire orbit filled with them so it was just like a news ticker from horizon to horizon
Inb4 India saves us all from this abomination
>muh litigation>muh treaties>muh strongly worded lettersLet's be real, if some Chinese company decides they want one these then you are just gonna have to deal with it.
I want to get off Mr bones wild ride.
>>10557367fuck my genetic line, Im ready to go
>>10557367I've never thought about this before. That is a horrible prospect.
>>10557367Don't even joke about that shit man. We've already got enough space junk floating around in orbit as is. Orbital ads would be a stargazers nightmare.
>>10558154I would rather the human race be exterminated than ever see your future. Die
>>10562423I wish I was just joking. https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/startup-wants-put-huge-ads-space-not-everyone-board-idea-ncna960296
>>10557689>add light pollution to space so that city rats can see through the light pollution they're pumping out>neat ideajesus fuck.