[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/g/ - Technology

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


>barely releases beta
>5% of satellite already failed
>destroys astronomy
>create massive space debris
Starlink will be the biggest meme
>>
>>78821092
t. comcast shill
>>
starlink shitting up the low earth orbit is terrifying
>>
OP is a fag.

>>78822360
and so are you
>>
>>78821092
>>78822360
Kessler syndrome is a very real concern. But does it affect low Earth orbit?
>>
>>78822479
It takes about 8 years to deorbit debris at the altitude of starlink. Thats a very long time
>>
>>78821092
>barely releases beta
That is how betas work.
>5% of satellite already failed
Weren't the first 60 the old design that were deorbited because they weren't compatible with the new ones?
>destroys astronomy
The impact does suck but you can't industrialize space and keep the skies clear, it's one or the other.
>create massive space debris
I would like to see a Kessler simulation of the complete constellation, depending on the outcome maybe Starlink is a bad idea. Honestly my biggest concern is multiple ISPs putting up their own constellations leading to way more shit that is needed for global internet, the solution would be to force Starlink to sell bandwidth to competitors at a reasonable price.
>>
>>78822625
Miss me with that commie shit
>>
>>78821092
>5% of satellite already failed
Pretty sure some were deorbited as they were the Alpha for the beta just seeing if the damn thing worked
>destroys astronomy
Not really most know how to avoid it, retards with long term exposure lenses are fucked
>>
>>78822650
Ok, you are right. Lets just have every developed nation launch 5 constellations each in the name of competition.
I'm sure nothing could possibly go wrong.
>>
>>78822625
>>78822664
>Weren't the first 60 the old design that were deorbited because they weren't compatible with the new ones?
>Pretty sure some were deorbited as they were the Alpha for the beta just seeing if the damn thing worked
WRONG it's still in orbit. They completely lost contact with it and their trajectory is unpredictable at this point.

https://phys.org/news/2020-10-starlink-satellites.html
>>
>>78822650
>doesn't know what communism is
He didn't mention anything about a state seizing private property and distributing it equally to all civilians you mutt lard that can barely breathe through all his fat
>>
>>78822718
>WRONG it's still in orbit. They completely lost contact with it and their trajectory is unpredictable at this point.
They are in a degrading orbit regardless, their failsafe is to burn up
>>
>>78822718
>and 3% is relatively low as failure rates go.
>>
>>78822837
>>78822849
360 UNRESPONSIVE SATTIELETE THAT WILL TAKE 5-8 YEARS TO FALL BACK AND BURN UP. THEY ARE UNRESPONSIVE, THEY CAN'T KEEP THIER TREGORY WITHOUT GROUND COMMUNICATIONS MEANING IT'S HARD TO PREDICT WHERE IT'S GOING TO GO
>>
>>78822734
the definition of communism doesn't involve the latter part of what you said you starving slav, just the state seizing industry
which is by definition what they'd be doing by telling Starlink what to do with their satellites
stay cucked fag fuck
>>
>>78822908
All sats deployed are in a retrograde orbit, there is no reason to care
>>
File: 1602989878538.png (264 KB, 340x491)
264 KB
264 KB PNG
>>78822849
>why yes, I am more qualified to launch satellites into fucking orbit than StarLink and know better
>>
>>78822908
>THEY CAN'T KEEP THIER TREGORY WITHOUT GROUND COMMUNICATIONS MEANING IT'S HARD TO PREDICT WHERE IT'S GOING TO GO
Kinda wrong.
They can be actively tracked from the ground, which is why that guy could work out how many and which ones had failed.
Predicting where they'll be in three years is difficult, but predicting where they'll be the next day or next week is trivial.

>>78823026
I merely quoted the article writer. Satellites do fail with moderate frequency, it's just more obvious with Starlink because it's a single constellation of hundreds of satellites while many other satellite operators only have a handful or so, are lower profile and less controversial.
>>
>>78822679
Nah, we’ll just shoot the non FAGMAN ones out the sky.
>>
>>78821092
>>78822360
You guys seriously have no idea how fucking HUGE space is
>>
File: 342342423423.png (279 KB, 500x500)
279 KB
279 KB PNG
>>78823437
>>
>>78823437
You seriously don’t understand how fucking FAST this is moving
>>
>>78822625
>The impact does suck but you can't industrialize space and keep the skies clear, it's one or the other.
Then don't fucking industrialize space. Is it really that hard?
The industrial revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
>>
>>78823525
A predictable speed.
>>
>>78822908
is there a reason you are writing in all caps or is this your first time on the internet?
>>
>>78823572
It only takes 2 broken satellite traveling a very fast speed to create 1000 debris traveling at fast speed. Starlink now has 360 broken satellites that can’t be maneuvered
>>
>>78823635
Where did you get the 360 number from?
They've only launched 895 and 3% have failed.

Anyway. While that is true enough, there's no real risk of Starlink satellites colliding with each other, because they're in fucking orbits. The orbits will decay, but they're not crossing paths with other Starlink satellites.
There is the possibility that one will degrade into the path of another satellite, but because we can still track the broken satellites then the other satellite could slightly alter its orbit to avoid a collision. This is something that is already routinely done.
The last possibility is that it will cross paths with another, already broken satellite while the orbit decays. There's not much we can do about that, but that would be exceedingly unlikely.
>>
File: unnamed.png (126 KB, 512x379)
126 KB
126 KB PNG
>>78821092
HAPS will destroy most of Starlink's target market. Works with any existing LTE/5G device instead of needing a steerable cable TV style satellite dishes or expensive phased array equivalent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toe8L5Di3vY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMRY0b3EZ3c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxWODb6Uqgs
>>
>>78823422
Based and zuck-pilled
>>
space is at least 3-4 times bigger than all the oceans combined
don't think there's any chance any dead satellite will hit another satellite
>>
>>78823422
>>78822679
Can't wait until we shoot down every last chink, thirdy and eurofaggot satellite so we can declare that all of space belongs to the USA forever.
>>
>>78821092
>5% of satellite already failed
What they won't tell you on Ars Technica is that the satellites are disposable. The mission involves manipulating the Van Allen Belt to prevent access to space from FAANG competitors and other grassroots launch efforts.
>>
File: DanielQuinn_Ishmael.jpg (14 KB, 252x400)
14 KB
14 KB JPG
>>78823541
Opinion discarded
>>
>>78822650
read about the Gilded Age sometime
>>
File: 1467098362831.jpg (49 KB, 300x392)
49 KB
49 KB JPG
>>78822941
>muh communism
>>
>complaining the beta isn't worldwide
>first gen sats have died oh no
>noooo you can't go into space but my free loading ass should get unrivalled access to the skies
>space debris
>all low orbit
>will all burn up
>now it's an issue
>>
>>78821092
>destroys astronomy
fuck off with this shit. Earth based telescopes are not the future of astronomy.
I'd much prefer a world where it's trivial to launch micro sats and ground based astronomy is relegated to hobbyist tier
We need to be investing in more advanced space telescopes so we have the ability to image all of our surroundings constantly
>>
>>78821092
>>destroys astronomy
we have already gotten everything from what you can on earth lol, there is limitations with the atmosphere anyway

and what reason do they get more precedence over starlink? not like starlink is breaking the law
>>
>>78822543
>Thats a very long time
Meanwhile mickey dees wrapper takes 1000 years to decompose, go fucking hang yourself
>>
>>78822543
it's 5 years tops with boosting to keep it up, less than 3 years if they don't boost to correct it
>>
>MUH HECKING SPACERINO
>NOT THE DEBRINO !!
Faggot ass tree hugging twink elf
>>
File: 1590159688092.jpg (7 KB, 249x202)
7 KB
7 KB JPG
Faggot I dont care, I have like 20 tops years left to live, at least I will live them with decent intwerwebs
>>
>>78821092
>>destroys astronomy
Good, fuck astroniggers
>>
>>78823903
Doubt it.

>>78824377
>we have already gotten everything from what you can on earth lol
No, but we can mitigate the problem that satellites cause.
>>
>>78822679
Space is literally infinite
>>
>>78824790
>No

Yes
>Newer ground-based telescopes are using technological advances such as adaptive optics to try to correct or limit atmospheric distortion, but there's no way to see the wavelengths that the atmosphere blocks from reaching Earth
>>
>>78824915
That's true and all, but you specifically said that "we have already gotten everything from what you can on earth".
Which is fucking bullshit. We are getting new stuff constantly from ground based observatories.
>>
>>78825020
>We are getting new stuff constantly from ground based observatories.

link 5 in the last 2 years
>>
File: soijack.jpg (101 KB, 785x731)
101 KB
101 KB JPG
NOOOO I CAN'T GET ANY MORE GRANTS TO LOOK AT STUPID STARS AND TELL YOU WHAT COLOR THEY ARE NOOOO
>>
>>78824837
And spots in earth orbit are not you stupid faggot.
>>
>>78825123
https://www.sciencedaily.com/news/space_time/astronomy/
Almost everything here, especially the radio stuff.
>>
>>78825152
>radio stuff
LOL

over half of this shit isn't a discovery just theories/talk

>Mining Rocks in Orbit Could Aid Deep Space Exploration
>>
>>78825190
Yeah, but there's like hundreds of articles there from this year alone.
I'm not going to bother finding 5 you'll accept.
>>
>>78821092
starlink is so incredibly based and I hope it works out so I can move in Alaska and shitpost just as well
>>
>>78825246
>noooo i can't prove it
>>
>>78825305
Look, faggot, I've played enough evidence whack-a-mole that I know how pointless and time consuming this shit is.
Fact is you don't want your mind to be changed, because you're a fucking retard.
>>
>>78825394
>makes claim
>can't prove
>lol you're idiot
>>
>>78822664
What's a long exposure lens?
>>
>>78824377
>we have already gotten everything from what you can on earth lol, there is limitations with the atmosphere anyway
not even close
>>
>>78825693
oh you wanna join this retard too?

>>78825394
>>
>>78825699
He's not a retard, you're just defending a fucking stupid position. Did you get your education on /r/ifuckinglovescience or something?
>>
>>78825712
>He's not a retard
lol same fag
>>
File: psyduck.png (39 KB, 250x250)
39 KB
39 KB PNG
>>78825720
>dear diary, today someone samefagged 1087 times, making fun of my opinions
>>
Don't trust statistics from mainstream media. 5% is fkae news shit. You have most of the old v0.9 sats deorbited. First v1 60 sat had 3% failure rate. The next 700+ had 0.03% failure rate.

Failure rate is a non-issue.
>>
>>78825123
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_Large_Telescope#Scientific_results
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectro-Polarimetric_High-Contrast_Exoplanet_Research#Science_results
Black Hole imaging
Betelgeuse fading and shit was imaged by ground telescopes
Just outside the 2 year window, but the first Kilonova detected and observed was mostly done with ground based telescopes at first, and the spectrograms that revealed the materials released were taken from ground based telescopes.
You can also just go to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:2018_in_space
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:2019_in_space
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:2020_in_space
>>
>>78825888
none of those are land based
>>
File: 1507113750621.jpg (27 KB, 400x400)
27 KB
27 KB JPG
>>78825942
>>
Who gives a shit about Kessler syndrome, telescopes are already becoming inoperable because of the massive shining pieces of sky shit
FUCK STARLINK
FUCK ELON
I will never give any of his companies a single shekel
>>
File: 1475624631298.png (24 KB, 240x240)
24 KB
24 KB PNG
>>78825942
This is why I said >>78825394
>>
File: 1522201804169.jpg (55 KB, 599x398)
55 KB
55 KB JPG
>>78826065
>>
>>78826056
You can always get 1 month free trial of simulated space in VR with your new Tesla
>>
>>78824837
No
>>
>the best theory scientists can come up with to keep their paychecks is that everything exploded from some gas and formed dinosaurs
>>
>>78826133
Yeah unless it's a cosmology research simulation I'm not interested
>>
>>78821092
>create massive space debris
>>78822625
it's a bit of a stretch to even call LEO space. It's just stuff flying very fast at very high altitude, but there's still enough atmosphere up there to make things slow down and fall if not corrected every now and then.
>>
I wish there was a bigger hook for ole musky in order to get his 40k sats into orbit.
Like you can do it - but you have to make starlink available for free to anyone for super low speed emergency comms applications.
>>
File: EaeJidhUwAAfS1C.jpg (150 KB, 800x1137)
150 KB
150 KB JPG
>>78826114
VLT is literally a ground based telescope.
SPHERE is an instrument on VLT.
Ground based telescopes were used for the black hole imaging.
Ground based telescopes are used in imaging Betelgeuse (specifically VLT and the SPHERE instrument).

The fact you claimed that NONE of them are land based shows you don't care about reality.
You don't give a fuck about being correct. You just want to believe what you believe.
So you can fuck right off to >>>/trash/
>>
>>78826171
>and fall if not corrected every now and then.

everything in orbit falls

even the space station is falling
>>
>>78826171
There is some earth atmosphere even beyond moon and spaceships there feel atmospheric drag as well.
>>
>>78826183
Technically, yes.
But like he said
>but there's still enough atmosphere up there to make things slow down
The ISS is within that range.
And the Moon is actually drifting away from Earth, so while he was specifically talking about stuff coming back down to Earth, there are things in orbit that, left to their own devices, won't come back down, which you seem to be arguing against, like a retard.
>>
>>78826217
>which you seem to be arguing against

no that's your autistic brain making a conclusion in your head you dumb fuck

he just said it's not even space and it's going to fall. i mentioned the ISS is what everyone would consider space and is falling too

never said nothing stays in orbit forever cunt
>>
>>78826231
>everything in orbit falls
>>
>>78826246
>But objects in orbit are in a free fall and the only force acting on the objects is the gravitational attraction of the Earth.
>>
>>78826246
>still can't read
>>
>>78821092
Time to connect to the bio-antennas.
>>
File: space.jpg (13 KB, 197x256)
13 KB
13 KB JPG
>>78824357
So much this. The future is (high) orbit and far-side of the moon telescopes. Compared to what 30 years old Hubble can do, most earth-based observatories have almost hobbyist-tier results. Too bad new orbital projects get constantly delayed. JWST is the closest thing but not a real replacement since it's an infrared telescope.

The real HST replacement, ATLAST or whatever it's called now, is still in early concept stage, with launch planned in 20 years, and judging by JWST delays, we're talking more like 30-40 years...
>>
File: Image_50c65d0.jpg (55 KB, 460x460)
55 KB
55 KB JPG
>>78826273
Yes, that's why I said "Technically, yes".
This is a problem with language. He was clearly using the word "fall" to mean come back down to Earth.
You used it more ambiguously, because the ISS, without boosting, will come back down to Earth, but everything in orbit is "technically falling".
Because you decided to use it ambiguously in response to him it makes you look like fucking retard, because you're a fucking retard.
>>
>>78823635
even 1,000,000 debris the size of the satellites themselves would still be virtually impossible to collide with, even on purpose.
also they'd fall and burn up quickly
>>
>>78826311
? JWST is launching next year
>>
>>78823635
>2 sats just speed up or slow down or move out of orbit which requires a lot of energy because they're broken
>then collide with everything
>>
>>78826337
Maybe. If it isn't delayed again.

>>78826311
There's just a huge problem of hauling larger mirrors into space, as JWST is proving.
>>
>>78826337
Yes, so? JWST is not a HST successor, it's observing different wavelengths.

ATLAST/LUVOIR which will be the actual HST successor is proposed to launch in 2039, which realistically will be pushed by 10-20 more years, judging - as I said - by JWST delays. JWST was originally supposed to launch in 2007, and what year is next year? Yeah, definitely not 2007. And the next year launch date is not even final either.

Realistically, by 2007 they didn't even start BUILDING the thing. They should just stop giving estimated time altogether.
>>
Dumb question, but would constantly sending signals to a satellite displace it's predicted orbit by a miniscule amount?
>>
>>78826422
Yeah, I suppose it would.
Absolutely miniscule, but it would.
>>
>>78826422
Yes. But by an immesurable amount. The effect of the sun and solar wind is enough to affect orbits and is part of the prediction calculations which is why the shape and orientation is required for them.

t.ex-satellite simulation engineer
>>
>>78826455
>t.ex-satellite simulation engineer
That's a fancy way to say "kerbal space program" player.
>>
>>78826464
KSP is fun but no I used a ITAR controlled simulator.
>>
>>78825626
Point an open aperture at a single point allows more light and thus more detail/darker objects become visible. Issue is that bright fast moving objects leave streaks in the image.
This is mostly countered by putting a telescope in space, but that is expensive and has maintenance and mass limits so most major optical telescopes are on mountains, which are sadly still effected by satellites.
>>
>>78826409
>JWST is not a HST successor

>JWST is the formal successor to the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), and since its primary emphasis is on infrared observation
>which will allow it to observe high redshift objects that are too old and too distant for Hubble to observe.

>noooo it's better it's not officially a successor
>>
File: lubesmith.jpg (6 KB, 250x187)
6 KB
6 KB JPG
t.
>>
>>78826337
>? JWST is launching next year
Hahaha
>>
File: download (22).jpg (11 KB, 401x126)
11 KB
11 KB JPG
>>78823437
LEO isn't that huge: it's just a few hundred kilometers thick.
And it is very crowded.

Fortunately there is enough atmosphere there to make everything deorbit in a matter of decades.
>>
>>78821092
The fact that some american corporation can unilaterally occupy the skies of the entire world is disgusting. You Zog-bots will burn in the coming tech war.
>>
>astronomy
Who gives a shit?
>Muh dark matter
>Muh dark energy
>Muh gravity
>Muh extraterrestrial life
Go fuck yourself
>>
>>78826904
>The fact that some american corporation can unilaterally occupy the skies of the entire world is disgusting.

>nooo stop being a super power
>wait what consumer companies are launching too!

india in shambles
>>
File: 1600262547054.jpg (16 KB, 447x446)
16 KB
16 KB JPG
>>78821092
>destroys astronomy
I can already look up at any given time in the night and spot multiple satellites. The night sky is already ruined.
>noooo, but muh heckin spectrum analysis won't work anymore so we can't find planets 8 billion light years away that are totally like earth
lol who gives a shit
>>
File: download (23).jpg (6 KB, 225x225)
6 KB
6 KB JPG
>>78826311
>Compared to what 30 years old Hubble can do, most earth-based observatories have almost hobbyist-tier results.
Most observatories are owned by amateur hobbyists.

Big modern PROFESSIONAL telescopes are better than Hubble.
And they're currently building even bigger ones.
Not only do they have higher resolution, you can also equip them with a huge array of different (custom) instruments.

30 years ago ground based telescopes were kinda shitty because the atmosphere caused distortions.
But this issue has been fixed with adaptive optics.
Infrared still gets fucked by the atmosphere, so JWST makes perfect sense, but optical light telescopes belong on the ground now.
>>
>>78827020
>Big modern PROFESSIONAL telescopes are better than Hubble.
absolutely not

they can barely see through the atmosphere and can't do IR

>Newer ground-based telescopes are using technological advances such as adaptive optics to try to correct or limit atmospheric distortion, but there's no way to see the wavelengths that the atmosphere blocks from reaching Earth
>>
>>78826974
>who gives a shit
People with IQ's above 120.
You won't understand.
>>
>>78827037
Read the rest of my post:
>Infrared still gets fucked by the atmosphere, so JWST makes perfect sense, but optical light telescopes belong on the ground now.


>Infrared still gets fucked by the atmosphere, so JWST makes perfect sense, but optical light telescopes belong on the ground now.


>Infrared still gets fucked by the atmosphere, so JWST makes perfect sense, but optical light telescopes belong on the ground now.


>Infrared still gets fucked by the atmosphere, so JWST makes perfect sense, but optical light telescopes belong on the ground now.


see?
>>
>>78827065
>optical light telescopes belong on the ground now.
ground telescopes are not king
>>
>>78827074
Aperture is king.
Which means ground based because there is no way they're going to put a 40 meter telescope in space any time soon.
>>
>>78827046
Lol, you won't be exploring space anyway, you fucking retard. Astronomy is literally just a glorified hobby akin to birdwatching.
>>
>>78827093
>a 40 meter telescope
none are that big
>>
>>78827113
Yes, smart people need complex hobbies.
We aren't as easily entertained as you.
>>
>>78827134
>spend 10k on telescope
>go to distant mountain for no light pollution
>see speck in sky
>i'm so complex
>>
>>78827126
39.3 meters, don't be anal.
>>
>>78827134
Good, so we agree that it's a useless passtime.
>>
>>78827145
>can't link it
>>
>>78827141
Like I said: you won't understand.
>>
>>78827152
Jesus christ.
HERE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_Large_Telescope
>>
>>78827176
>currently under construction.
>The facility is expected to take 11 years to construct
>Construction work on the ELT site started in June 2014
>not even 1 single piece mirror
>>
>>78827236
I have no idea what point you're trying to make, if there is one at all.
Bye
>>
>>78827283
it doesn't exist and it's lots of 1.4m mirrors
>>
>>78826891
>it's just a few hundred kilometers thick.
That's still very big.
Like, the tallest building on Earth is about 1km tall. Think of everything on the Earth within that 1km area. Now LEO starts at about 200km above the surface, so you have to add 200km to the radius of the Earth and then start that again.
That's a huge area. Tiny in proportion to the solar system, but still huge.
>>
>>78824403
A plastic cup doesn't cause runaway catastrophic loss of infrastructure and prevent future construction
>>
>>78827309
>catastrophic loss of infrastructure and prevent future construction

LOL
>nooo we need isps running fibre it's vital to out nation
>ignores space jobs
>giving more internet options
>>
>>78821092
Calm yourself, Laurence.
>>
File: soysaka.png (594 KB, 910x1280)
594 KB
594 KB PNG
>>78827141
>>
File: TeslaFagsBTFO.jpg (54 KB, 576x382)
54 KB
54 KB JPG
>>78826133
>>
That "biggest meme" is already the best internet available in many rural areas. Seethe more.
>>
>>78827141
I mean, what's good in observing the sky anyway, are you an idiot? Better get shitfaced with your friends, lol amirite?
>>
>>78821092
imagine: 30000 guided 250 kg-heavy kinetic weapons in orbit. over virtually every one of earth's big cities. fully under elon musk's control.
it's called "star link", because it will guarantee independence of musk's martian habitats and further developments in space.
>>
>>78827454
They literally burn up in the atmosphere
Meds now
>>
>>78827454
Are you aware what happens to things travelling at reentry speeds once they start going through the atmosphere?
>>
>>78827470
>>78827488
shielding or dense core that will survive reentry. have you actually looked into one of those satellites? are you sure what's in there?
>>
>>78827536
>heat shield
>satellite
>dense heavy cores for some reason

loooolll
>>
>>78827454
>Every day, Earth is bombarded with more than 100 tons of dust and sand-sized particles.
That's like 75 days worth of mass.
>>
>>78827536
The big problem with your doomsday ideas is that orbital velocity isn't fast enough.
>>
>>78827536
They don't have powerful enough thrusters to be effective kinetic weapons. They would typically slow down just enough to start to dip into the atmosphere, where they will burn up high above. But if they didn't burn up, they would slow down to typical terminal velocity before they hit the ground. So about 250mph or something like that. Might as well just fly a plane over your targets and drop anvils on them.
>>
>>78821092
>>barely releases beta
No
>>5% of satellite already failed
Substantiate your claim
>>destroys astronomy
No
>>create massive space debris
No
>Starlink will be the biggest meme
We'll see about that
>>
>>78827454
You remember that Chelyabinsk meteor from about 7 years ago?
That was about 11,000 tons and going at 19m/s.
The Starlink sats are going around 8m/s
250kg "kinetic weapons" in orbit are practically nothing.
>>
>>78827020
This.
>>
>>78827602
>Chelyabinsk meteor
actually
19166 m/s
>Starlink
closer to
1805 m/s
>>
>>78821092
Satellite internet has been around for quite some time, this is just the same mediocre technology on a bigger scale sold to 1) dumbasses who don't know what latency is 2) the unlucky people living in regions where ISP monopoly is a thing. Some people will benefit from this, most won't.
>>
>>78827645
Satalite internet has always been from geostationary orbit. Thus you suffer from bad latency and poor bandwidth.

Starlink in LEO, which fixes both issues but requires a large fleet at sats.
>>
>>78827634
Oops, I should have used km/s.
Anyway, Starlink should be around 8km/s.
>>
>>78827685
quite right. i messed up my numbers.
>>
Jesus christ /g/ is fucking dumb. We are on /v/ or /int/ level retarded.
Starlink sats won't cause Kessler syndrome because it will eventually enter back into upper atmosphere and burn up after it starts to lose speed. It was built this way.
>>
>>78827743
I don't entirely agree. The problem is if a cascading collision event begins in LEO, it is more likely to result in full Kessler syndrome because there are so many more satellites in LEO starlink to contribute to it. It's not a huge deal, but it's not nothing.
>>
>>78827743
>>78827791
A Starlink Kessler would only last a few years but still being locked out of space for ~3 years would suck.
>>
>>78827791
>The problem is if a cascading collision event begins in LEO
You have no idea how space or planetary orbits work do you?
>>
>>78827826
I think what he is getting at is that a degrading satellite would cross lower orbit satellites/debris. If one collided then you'd get a debris cloud which is now spread over a wider area.
Smaller debris doesn't decay as fast as larger objects, so the debris cloud is now occupying a larger area and decaying slower, which increases the chance of it encountering another object.
This happening once is very unlikely. Happening multiple times is extremely unlikely. But it's a non-zero chance that they're trying to avoid by deorbiting purposefully when possible.
>>
>>78827802
There is no "star link kessler". Once kessler starts all LEO is polluted for quite awhile.

>>78827826
I do. That's why I'm correct.
>>
>>78823437
Well the satellites that are out are already ruining astronomy from earth
>>
>>78827968
>Once kessler starts all LEO is polluted for quite awhile.
While a collision could potentially cause a higher apogee and a more elipitcal orbit starlink is very low even by LEO standards.
Currently they are ~1500km and they are talking about dropping it to ~500km which would be better for lag and potential kessler.
>>
>>78824046
Written like a true amerigolem
>>
>>78828015
>Currently they are ~1500km
Na, na, na. They're all currently 550km.
The second shell they got permission for is 1100km, but they're not launching those until after the first 1400 and they're requesting regulatory approval to change those orbits to around 550km as well.
The third shell is lower, around 350.
>>
>>78828080
In that case a collision in a lower layer shouldn't produce enough delta-v to throw frag at the next layer up.
Of course a higher layer collision would take out everything below it as it decayed.
>>
>>78822650
>Beneficial to the consumer = commie shit
Ah, you must be American.

My country has similar "Commie" shit. ISPs are obligated to sell bandwidth on their network if they want to keep their license.
Our ministry of communications now wants to remove this obligation. Every single ISP is against this decision, and one ISP might shutdown entirely.
But sure, keep licking boots and enjoy your shitty internet.
>>
>>78826911
All cultures looked up at the stars.
>>
>>78827291
And yet, theyre putting it on earth rather than launching it to space? Really makes you think.
>>
>>78822543
>8 years
>that's a very long time
You need to be over 18 years old to post on this site
>>
>>78824837
LEO is not.
>>
As someone legit ignorant, what advances has the field of astronomy brought to the table?
>>
File: d31.png (37 KB, 600x687)
37 KB
37 KB PNG
>>78821092
>muh starlink
>muh elon musk
this shit, if affordable, or god forbid free, would bring even more nigerian kangz and pajeets online
if that's what /g/ wants then i think that says a lot about the demographics here
>>
>>78828488
The nature of gravity was derived from astronomical observations by newton.
Einstein verified general relativity from predicting how light would bend around the sun.
Both of these allowed us to build artificial satellites, and all the benefits we get from those. Gravity also let us understand the tides.
We figures out there was such thing as the speed of light based on observations of the planets, and what that speed was.

That's a few anyhow.
>>
>>78828667
Great, more people to blue pill into becoming Biden and BLM supporters. Can't wait! #drumphbtfo
>>
File: RAY.jpg (51 KB, 638x470)
51 KB
51 KB JPG
>>78826180
VLT?
>>
>>78823635
Something people forget is that a fair amount of debris created by a serious collision will go in a direction that won't keep it in orbit for very long - hell, some of it will just go into burn-up territory almost immediately.
>>
File: e0a.gif (1.18 MB, 2952x3047)
1.18 MB
1.18 MB GIF
>>78821092
>kike monopoly ISPs too cheap to run cables to rural areas
>government too busy handing out gibs to minorities and women to subsidize cable runs
>free market solution is $10 billion+ R&D/deployment which pollutes atmosphere with satellites
>performance still barely acceptable

really does make you think
>>
>>78828720
that really true? There would need to be a lot of deltav to seriously push significant bits of debris into significantly low orbits.

I expect a lot of stuff to just slowly spread out from the original objects, spreading tiny bits of shit all over the place slowly over a few days and weeks, basically at the same altitude.
>>
File: a.jpg (104 KB, 768x474)
104 KB
104 KB JPG
>>78823437
You guys seriously have no idea how fucking HUGE the ocean is
yes, pollute your immediate environment for the benefit of CONSOOMERISM, you dumb fucking nigger.
>>
>>78827454
He's not a Bond villain, calm down.
>>
>>78827323
>nooo we need isps running fibre it's vital to out nation
unironically yes
>black fiber cost nothing
>niggers won't steal it
>1Gb fiber can be upgraded to 40Gb and maybe more
>can go miles without amplifying signal
>people can reliably work from home
>no electromagnetic disturbances
>harder to cut in case of attack without plans unlike satellites (for obvious reasons)
>will outlive every single satellite
>does not force pretty much every fucking one on this planet to execute dodging maneuvers because musk and bezos don't give a shit about space garbages and fucking with other nations satellites because in their minds they own space anyways
>won't hinder communication with higher altitude sattelites and space capsules (see boeing failure because of this)

there is NOT a single upside of satellites internet, it's utter garbage no matter how you compare it to fiber, it's also VERY easy to install gigabits antennas and to send the signal wherever the fuck we want
in case of starlink it's public money wasted for a failure of a project
no amount of reddit shlling with change this fact
>ignores space jobs
the fuck are you talking about, there are shittons of job in aerospace and it's not this shitty project that will change anything
>giving more internet options
I'd rather take the better option = fiber into sfp/ethernet or wifi is you're a woman
also it's american so it falls under american laws ie no privacy, censorship and crowd control
what's the point of this shitty tech when only americans will use it and they could profit way more from a better fiber network, it's literally a solution looking for a problem
yet another case of money spent poorly in the west while china is getting stronger each day...
>>
>>78827302
Buildings are static idiot, things in LEO aren't. Think of it as trying to cross a large roundabouts when there are a thousand cars zooming round it.
>>
>>78828781
>there is NOT a single upside of satellites internet
p r i c e
>>
>>78828805
if you pay more than $50 for fiber then they're scamming you
the US is a massive cattle farm anyways, only an handful of people is actually living while the vast majority is getting the bbc up their asses on a daily basis
>>
>>78828781
Wait, why wouldn't Mr SpaceX care about space debris? A lot of his publicity hinges on the space tech side of things
>>
>>78828805
you have no idea what the actual price is, moron. you're seeing an introductory $100/month price. you have no idea how they are calculating this price and how this price will change as the service model matures. how does the pricing model change as subscribers increase or decrease, as bandwidth demands increase, as their satellite infrastructure ages or fails, etc. look at the foundation of their service, launching a satellite into space. this is extremely expensive. this $100/month price is undoubtedly some sort of "penetration pricing" model where they will undoubtedly jack up the prices once market share is reached, probably raising the price in first world countries so sub saharan niggers can use normiebook for $10 a month.
>>
>>78828854
>Wait, why wouldn't Mr SpaceX care about space debris? A lot of his publicity hinges on the space tech side of things
because he's a fucking idiot: an archetypal egomaniac/psychopathic executive driven to succeed at all costs, a devotee to what ted kaczynski would call surrogate activities. you've fallen into the NPC fallacy of MONEY = SMART.
>>
>>78828850
You'll get that if you live in a city. It's probably not available at all if your in the country side or a small town.

>>78828867
They won't raise the price past the point where it's not a good deal for people. That would be self defeating. The can offer a cheaper product than fibre for many people because not everywhere can gain economical access to fibre.
>>
>>78828883
If you're smarter than he is why aren't you rich too?

QED
>>
>>78828883
>driven to succeed at all costs
Yes you retard that's what I mean, his selling of the Mars thing depends on being able to launch safely and regularly in the first place
>>
>>78828884
>You'll get that if you live in a city. It's probably not available at all if your in the country side or a small town.
that's the point, fiber cost near nothing to deploy and require less maintainance than copper, many secluded communities could get a 1Gbps fiber and distribute it around many houses but last time I check ti's illegal in the US...
>>
>>78827157
people with an iq of 100 know that you're a joke,
you wouldn't understand.
>>
>>78828921
>fiber cost near nothing to deploy
yeah, rolling out 30 miles of high grade fibre optic so you can service a shithole town with 40 house holds is real cheap. That's why everyone has it already right?
>>
>>78828884
>They won't raise the price past the point where it's not a good deal for people.
false conjecture. and again you're considering the introductory pricing like a niggerbrain. and you're not even considering the more important aspects of this technology (which is nothing but a cope, an inferior solution to superior wired connections like fiber.) that is, CONSIDER THE LONG TERM IMPLICATIONS OF TECHNOLOGY WHICH POLLUTES OUR ATMOSPHERE AND OBSCURES OUR VISION OF SPACE.
>>
Is this the new 5G is bad meme?
>>
>>78828953
>you're considering the introductory pricing like a niggerbrain.
I never mentioned the introductory price

>CONSIDER THE LONG TERM IMPLICATIONS OF TECHNOLOGY WHICH POLLUTES OUR ATMOSPHERE AND OBSCURES OUR VISION OF SPACE.
It's fine.
>>
>>78828945
>yeah, rolling out 30 miles of high grade fibre optic so you can service a shithole town with 40 house holds is real cheap.
Yes
>That's why everyone has it already right?
it's not as profitable as in towns but it's definitely not a loss
>>
>>78829014
not a loss when you charge through the nose for it. That's why it doesn't exist. There's waaaay too much work to roll out that much cable for rural country side. That's why Starlink is a thing in the first place.

In any case, that fibre doesn't even exist in the country side if it ever will. Starlink will be operational quite soon.
>>
>>78828333
And all of them dead.
>>
>>78823903
>Softbank

They are seriously going to go bankrupt in 5 years at this rate of investing into fraud startups.
>>
>>78828854
Here they bundle fiber with cable TV. You can't have one without the other, and it starts at 100$ for 100mbit/s down. And it has a 12 month binding. I get my TV through aerial and use an unlimited cellphone plan for all my internet devices with individual sim cards in every device and one in a usb modem cabled to my smart TV. Costs about the same but at least I can take everything with me if I move.
>>
>>78826487
Real astronomers have software that detects satellite light trails and edits it out automatically.
>>
>>78825942
>VLT
>not land based
KYS retard
>>
>>78822625
>>destroys astronomy
>The impact does suck but you can't industrialize space and keep the skies clear, it's one or the other.
remind me again, how do i benefit from having satellite internet available to rural areas?
>>
>>78829220
Hobbyists have the same software, but in both cases it requires "stacking". You can't simply remove a defect from a single exposure, so instead you take multiple exposures and layer them on top of each other.

The problem is that single-exposure was still an entirely valid method of astrophotography, but Starlink is forcing it to become obsolete.
>>
>>78828743
This but unironically
>>
>>78827454
sounds like gujdam, based zelon musk
>>
>>78824622
Why 20? I hope to live until I'm 100 to see all the technogical progression
>>
>>78825888
you're being mendacious as fuck. the only reason we use surface systems is because institutions and individuals can't afford to build in space yet, not because land based has any observatonal advantages. we do this shit because we have no choice. exo-atmosphere is far and away superior but your broke nerd ass can't afford it, faggot, and nasa and the geeks can't either. it's only been the privatization of space that will even make it a possibility. so for shit to change stuff like starlink needs to happen so go and fucking cry about m-m-muh astronomy as the chad privateers open up a world for you that you could never have created yourself, astrofaggot.
>>
>>78828743
Yea i'll keep polluting, so future generations can suffer, not my job to look out for the future faggots kek
>>
>>78822947
Why is that?
>>
>>78821092
>>78822442
>>78822625
Ajit Pai debunked starlink and the latency is shit
>>
>>78828676
used to test theory, christ can you not into the english language you fucking sperg.

it's an incredibly expensive way to do it. my problem with you is that you can't see the wood for the trees. the issue is not that ground based is so amazing it has to be preserved at all cost, which is quite literally what you are saying because you are a fucking fool and probably your dream career relies on it, it's that it's currently the only real alternative due to cost. because you're a fucking idiot you don't see that they only way beyond this is shit like starlink bringing cost down for everyone, including the institutions you want to work for. when that happens no motherfucker is going to be sitting in hawaii with their dick in their hands waiting for windows, everything will be moved off surface wholesale for dramatic increases in performance.

that you refuse to admit this makes you either dumb as fuck or dishonest as fuck.

earth surface is shit. it's just that you can't do anything else right now.
>>
>>78828883
space debries will literally stop his business ventures. it's a risk that must be mitigated in order to profit. maybe these people just have a better conception of it that your hysterical bedwetting faggotry.
>>
>>78828953
>OBSCURES OUR VISION OF SPACE.

only from the surface you fucking luddite.
>>
Is this shit the thing indeed or just useless atm? Should be good for shitposting from Syberia or Kamchatka in case it works.
>>
>>78828953
You're a fucking faggot. I have to pay $60 a month for fiber, 10mbs download, 5 upload. No fucking other option. Once Gaylink is available in my area, I can pay $30 more for at least 50+mbps download and whatever the fuck upload. Fiber ISPs are straight up SCAMMERS and i'd rather put my money on some satellite shit than the bullshit i'm dealing with. I know i'm not the only one. West U.S fag here. Starlink will be a godsend
>>
>>78831796
>at least 50+mbps download and whatever the fuck upload
Yep in case it is fucking cold winter.
>>
>>78831796
Don't forget about 499 bucks for modem
>>
>>78829914
if you're not benefiting from improved internet access in rural areas it's doubtful you can do any kind of meaningful astronomy either.
>>
File: brokefag.png (26 KB, 576x532)
26 KB
26 KB PNG
>>78831825
I don't live in a tranny city. I live farthest away from those. 50+ is enough.
>>78831871
OooOooOoo 500 dollarinos. Poor faggot, i'm a homeowner. That's absolutely nothing. I'll pay whatever the costs for better internet as long it is not from my local ISP scammers.
>>
>>78831684
Pipedreams.
There are currently zero plans for a large space telescope.
Meanwhile several record breaking ground based telescopes are being build as we speak.

I get that Elon Musk is your hero and you want to defend everything he does.
But he is causing real problems for astronomy no matter how hard you deny it.
>>
>>78822360
Anything that keeps humans on earth is a positive.
>>
>>78831796
Your shitty internet is caused by politics, not technology.
You don't need a new method of accessing the internet, you just need to break the monopoly.
>>
File: 1599277165719.png (19 KB, 497x617)
19 KB
19 KB PNG
>>78832007
>you just need to break the monopoly
Please, tell me more, tell me fucking how. You're a faggot retard. This is why Starlink will put out all these ISPs out of business in my area because absolutely NO ONE is regulating them. Retarded idiot
>>
>>78832061
Easy: stop voting for right-wing politicians.
Don't make your personal problems world problems.
>>
File: 1546229351143.jpg (78 KB, 492x559)
78 KB
78 KB JPG
>>78832076
>t.
Sage yourself you dumbass troll.
>>
File: 1599276138488.jpg (126 KB, 780x749)
126 KB
126 KB JPG
>>78832076
>vote for tranny wing politics that has absolutely done nothing for ISP providers, despite living in a blue state
You're a retard
>>
>>78832097
Stay mad Amerifat.
>>
>>78832132
>t. 3rd world fag
Go fix your crooked teeth or tooth.
>>
>>78832146
>can't even get decent internet
>calls others 3rd world
HAHAHA
I'll bet you even still have overhead power lines.
>>
>>78832126
>vote for tranny fucking right wingers instead who have done nothing for ISPs either
wingcucks i swear to fuck. as long you put a cock that has more power than them. they will suck it
>>
>>78832187
Elon Musk has that cock and they will suck it dry.
You just know he's going to charge them out of their asses because they have no other options. - Starlink is a business not a charity.
>>
File: 20201018_165244.jpg (214 KB, 654x634)
214 KB
214 KB JPG
>>78832179
>t. I live in a place where my neighbors shit in the street & provide a better ISP
Yup, that's corrupt America. Still can't provide decent internet in rural areas in the year 2020. At least i can get my teeth straightend without having to fly out of country. Seethe
>>
Here is my suggestion for a space elevator:

>mainly made of wire, no thicker or heavier than what is used in regular elevators
>wire is attached to the ground and attached to a space station/satellite in the sky which is in stationary orbit
>at several points throughout the wire, from the ground to space, airships/balloons filled with hydrogen keeps the wire up
>If one balloon holding the wire up fails, all the other balloons are going to keep the wire up until a balloon can be replaced, making it a fairly safe system.
>an airship/balloon is attached to the wire which moves up and down the wire and transports people and goods to the space station
>>
>>78823725
Black swan. "Exceedingly unlikely" shit happens all day every day. That's the trick with constantly evolving systems.
>>
https://youtu.be/cU2y-QmQfXY
holy shit starlink SUCKS
>110 WATTS OF POWER
>SHITTY TRIPOD, BETTER HOPE THE WIND DOESN'T BLOW
>>
>>78821092
>boomers fuck up the planet
>gen y fucks up the sky
>millenials fuck up the internet
>zoomers tbd
>>
>>78831731
That's not how this works. You do retarded shit and by the time the consequences start to manifest you're long gone, with some dipshit in your place. You get off scot-free, "investor interests, best option, everybody was doing it, consequences of progress, unforeseeable events, six-sigma..."
>>
>>78832453
Did you even calculate how heavy a 22000 mile (yes, thats 3 zeros) cable would weight?
We dont even have the materials for this yet.
>>
>>78827454
>>78827536
Ok and how much the fabled shielding or "dense core" weights? Lets just assume, for memes sake it weights 250kg. It orbits at 340km.
So it has terminal velocity of...~230 meters per second? So kinetic energy of 6.728 MJ?
That's like, not even 2kg of TNT? I'm not a mathfag or physfag someone correct me if i'm wrong.
>>
>>78828797
there are billions of cars on earth with no problem, a few thousand satellites is nothing
>>
>>78831953
anything that brings more pajeets online is a negative
>>
>>78832691
That depends entirely on how many balloons you use to hold it up. Could have one balloon per mile for example. It's easy to construct as well since everything can be done at ground level, and one balloon can be filled at a time lifting each piece of the wire one mile at a time. The wire doesn't have to be particularly strong either, it functions more as a guide to the space station.

The biggest issue is going to be the wind pulling on the balloons and the wire, which pulls on the space station that is trying to maintain stationary orbit. However, there may be suitable places on earth where wind forces are fairly weak, or where wind forces collide, nulling each other out.
>>
>>78832473
dumbass.
the starlink beta hardware wasn't meant to be mobile at all. they even ship it with lag bolts and a roof mount.
>>
>>78823026
>no you can't just disagree with the authority figures that's heckin racist
>>
>>78833062
and?
what's that have to do with anything I posted, dipshit..
>>
>>78823903
What a disgusting cancer.
>>
>>78833126
>110 watts of power
>tripod issues in wind

paneer can't even red his own post
>>
>>78832473
>>78833126
So you don't know how to use screws/roads to secure a dish? Sub 60 IQ?
>>
>>78821092
Not looking forward to this shitting up the sky when the only problem with internet is monopolies and a total lack of real infrastructure projects.
>>
>>78833062
>they even ship it with lag bolts and a roof mount
not true, but they do sell a roof mount and lag bolts for $35 CAD. otherwise you only have a tripod.
>>
>>78822543
Just shoot them down. NBD.
>>
>>78821092
>>destroys astronomy
Imagine being this poor
>>
>>78821092
don't care, won't affect me
>>
>>78833645
>Imagine being this poor
Go ahead and post your space telescope. In astophography, even a cheap setup is a few grand.
>>
>>78831747
boy it's a good thing we don't use surface based sensors in our everyday lives like GPS, you literal fucking nigger retard. or any number of scientific instruments which probe space from the ground because it's far cheaper to build and deploy sensors on earth than loading them on a rocket and launching them into space at the cost of mills and millions of dollars, YOU DUMB NIGGER APE.
>>
>>78833864
How does starlink affect gps?
>>
>>78821092

Who exactly owns "space"? And at what distance will say a country like North Korea shoot down anything orbiting within its borders?
>>
>>78833890
There’s treaties that mean satalites flying to over other countries are okay. North Korea doesn’t really follow any rules anyways. Shooting down a satalite is not a simple feat.
>>
>>78833881
Not the guy you're responding to, but Starlink can augment GPS and offer cm accurate GPS much faster than traditional GPS alone unit.
>>
>>78832061
>no one is regulating them
The problem stems from regulation. A lot of these companies have agreements with local governments to be the only isp in the region, or to divide the land between isps. It's pretty much impossible to start your own. Google has been trying to become an isp, but regulations have held them back, and sometimes caused them to abandon certain cities.
>>
>>78834019
Source on this? I heard speculation on this, but would like some evidence.
>>
>>78834032
Good regulations are needed. Not bad ones. Burgers struggle terribly with this.
>>
>>78834076
What would good regulations be? If you get rid of the current regulations, the monopolies will end because competition will become legal.
>>
>>78834051
https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.12334

Forgot to mention that it will also make GPS jamming much harder for nation actors.
>>
>>78834076
All bad regulations were once good regulations. No one makes bad regulations out of bad faith. Its just regulations get old and outdated and never updated/removed.
>>
>>78834107
Exclusive regional agreements should be illegal or only allowed under exception circumstances. Basically just copy Europe.
>>
>>78834129
>No one makes bad regulations out of bad faith.
Imagine being this naive. This is why the US is such a shithole.
>>
>>78834173
No ones out to get ya dumb shitter.
>>
>>78834178
Yeah, there’s no such thing as bad people. Open borders and all that. Have fun destroying your country out of sheer laziness.
>>
>>78834213
Only bad people are in your mind.
>>
>>78833541
>>78833493
that's a lot of power, and there's wind all over when you aren't in your faggot city neighborhood, loser.
>>
>>78824403
>mickey dees
the what now?
>>
>>78831796
dunno what you are on about but you need to call your local governor and start doing something. I have a GB connection for 20 dollars and it's partly because of my activities
>>
>>78834114
It's an interesting concept but it's only a proposed theory from someone who doesn't even seem to be associated with Starlink.
>>
>>78834129
>No one makes bad regulations out of bad faith.
What is lobbying?
>>
>>78834385
Right but if the theory is there and math works out, then there's 0 reason why the US military/Starlink team would not try to explore the use of Starlink to augment military/GPS use for consumers/etc. The work suggests it will consume only a very small amount of extra power usage which may or may not be available, that only Starlink/SpaceX can know.
>>
>>78834173
Americans are the most skeptical towards government regulation of any western country.
So the fact that the US is so shitty isn't a good argument to be this skeptical.

Europeans aren't "naïve" for demanding good infrastructure.
Most of Europe has excellent internet even poor Eastern European countries like Moldova and Romania.
It really is just a matter of getting your government to listen to you and not to some corporations.
>>
>>78834129
>No one makes bad regulations out of bad faith
Is this a joke? There are plenty of regulations that were intended to benefit one party, to the detriment of everyone else. A good example is the 25 year rule for importing cars into the US. This law exists entirely due to lobbying done by Mercedes, who wanted to prevent the import of cheaper models sold overseas.
>>
>>78831470
>the only reason we use surface systems is because institutions and individuals can't afford to build in space yet
So we still need them.
I never claimed that Earth based telescopes would be better than the same telescopes in space.
The reality is that we can't launch a bunch of 4m or wider telescopes into space right now. Even Hubbles mirror was 2.4m and that required the fucking Space Shuttle, and as we learned with Hubble and JWST, space based telescopes are a pain in the ass.
We need ground based telescopes now because they are useful now.
And I'm not even against Starlink. I have no problems with Starlink. I'm not arguing against Starlink at all. I'm arguing against your stupid ass idea that ground based telescopes aren't needed anymore. Fucking retard.
>>
>>78834540
>There are plenty of regulations that were intended to benefit one party, to the detriment of everyone else
Isn't that how it works? There are no regulations pleasing everyone. You think oil gas lobbies are doing it because they're evil? No. They're lobbying hard for gas subsidies because everyone else in the US will benefit from cheaper gas, running economy, etc.
>>
>>78834494
Except that the distrust of regulation usually goes unheard due to lobbying. The two big parties love big government and do almost nothing to reduce regulations or make good ones. Trump got rid of some environmental regulations, that was about it, and those are the ones that are actually somewhat beneficial.
>>
>>78834540
>>78834872
And 25 year rule isn't just cause Mercedes was evil. Its to protect consumers from fraudulent car sales from overseas actors.
>>
>>78834872
>because everyone else in the US will benefit
This is exactly why I used the 25 year auto import rule as an example. Mercedes got to benefit, while the entire US population continues to lose. This isn't about a greater good or pleasing a majority; one corporate entity's goals took precedence over the entire rest of the country.
>>
>>78834872
I don't think most people think corporations are evil, they just want to make more money. If they wanted cheaper gas, they would try to remove gas taxes. Gas subsidies allow gas companies to lower their quality, while keeping the same price. Why would they reduce the price just because they got subsidies?
>>
>>78832463
Life is a calculated risk.
>>
>>78834958
Gas subsidies allow gas prices to remain predictable. Why do you think we wage wars in middle east? To control gas lines and steady the oil supplies..
>>
>>78834978
>Gas subsidies allow gas prices to remain predictable
Why? The company will always charge as much as they can for gas. Subsidies just steal your money and give it to the gas company, you get nothing in return.
>>
>>78834945
>Its to protect consumers
It's to protect Mercedes, or was. All it does is deprive the average consumer of affordable cars sold due to strict overseas regulation (such as those exported from Japan), and deprive enthusiasts of desirable low-volume vehicles for decades. Believing this sort of law is for your benefit is the very definition of "useful idiot"
>>
>>78834978
>Why do you think we wage wars in middle east?
If you honestly think this, you're retarded.
>>
>>78835137
Why else would we? It's always for either gas or Israel.
>>
>>78834969
It's not calculated at all. Series of random events.
>>
>>78835137
Its always gas/oil politics dictating middle east policies.
>>
>>78826180
Damn, you really told him
>>
>>78835080
You get predictable prices so you dont panic and lose your job.
>>
>>78835185
>>78835222
Take a look at US oil production, in particular shale oil. Then look at US oil imports and exports. There is no reliance on middle east oil.
>>
File: eshedhedherh.png (1.26 MB, 831x718)
1.26 MB
1.26 MB PNG
>>78822348
fpbp
>>
>>78835243
Low IQ. Shale Oil is to counter act the Russian oil. US corrdinated with saudis to fuck with Russian oil exported economy.
>>
>/g/ isn't very good with computers anymore
>/g/ believes in big government
>also spouts every left-wing talking point
This place is worse than plebbit now
>>
>>78835278
Its plebbit leaking into. Crosssite posters are cancers.
>>
>>78835261
Attribute whatever motivation or goal you want. The point is, the numbers prove no need for, or reliance on, foreign oil imports.
>>
>>78835233
Why do subsidies create predictable prices?
>>78835243
The mess in Syria happened because we wanted a $10 billion oil pipeline, but Assad would not let it happen.
>>
>>78828743
Don't blame first world countries for Chinese, Indian and African problems. 3rd world is the issue, they don't deserve civilization and the excess wealth/medicine being pumped in by NGOs is artificially boosting their fertility numbers past natural sustainable levels thus destroying more ecosystems and causing more pollution. They should be stripped of civilization and left to their own devices like the sentinelese. Let star link be launched first before criticizing it. The kinks will be worked out or they won't still too early to tell.
>>
>>78835300
>The point is, the numbers prove no need for, or reliance on, foreign oil imports.
Thats not how markets work.
>>
>>78835369
Subsidies offset spikes and cushions against erratic global/short term manipulations of the market.
>>
>>78835520
How? The way I see it, they are pointless because the gas company will always charge as much as they can get away with.
>>
>>78835562
>How?
Because companies want to offer consumers the best prices out of the goodness of their hearts. So if there's a spike in the cost of a raw commodity, such as crude, the gas company will take a hit for a little while to keep the price the same. This is why the price you pay at the pump is the same from day-to-day.
>>
>>78835261
Other way around, if anything SA and Russia was coordinating against US who had established themselves as a net exporter and was capable of crushing prices as a side effect of having large domestic production and being one of if not the largest oil-consumer markets in the world. SA oil is highly accessible and they can pump at a substantially smaller cost compared to the US. More importantly their economy is solely dependent on oil exports, and they have a vested interest in eliminating as much competition from the market as possible, as, according to their forecasts the demand for oil will plummet over the next 20 years. You can read SA as OPEC+ as they're all equally interested in amputating as many competing forces as possible

By depressing prices they forced well closures in the US, in many cases that means re-drilling entirely new wells, and at a point which it may not be economically viable which in turn disrupts capex, which limits production capacity which turns into a positive feedback loop, until all the small drillers default and get consolidated into the big players or simply dissolve. That's the hypothesis, I suppose. Quite probable with the Keynsians in power that they'll just print oil into existence until there is no more blood in the rock.
>>
>>78831778
Good speed, shit ping. Slightly better version of the current satellite internet.
>>
>>78827454
You know what, the martians deserve their independence from earth.
>>
>>78831953
>t. ayy lamo
>>
>>78822543
They need to be boosted every couple months, so no it isn't 8 years. They're out of orbit almost as soon as they fail.
>>
>>78822718
>They completely lost contact with it and their trajectory is unpredictable
That's not how orbits work you retard

That's like saying if you throw a baseball up in the air the trajectory is completely unpredictable - no actually it's worse because wind and shit can blow the ball around, which doesn't happen with a satellite

where the fuck do you braindead niggers come from?
>>
>>78823339
Starlink is unironically going to be great for the satellite industry looking for well-tested parts with more certain failure rates.
>>
>>78825693
Satellites already exist, astornomers already have methods of dealing with satellites occluding their view. Satellites take up a very very vanishingly small portion of the night sky for small amounts of time. They are not an actual issue for astronomy.

Most of the bullshit FUD being thrown around by people like this - you can tell just by the almost at random straw grasping over anything and everything - is coming from oversocialized individuals being programmed to dislike starlink and elon musk's other ventures by online marketing aimed at doing this to them.

>Hurts astronomy
It doesn't

>Takes years to deorbit
It doesn't

>3% failure rate
Of a beta test

>only available in a few areas
Because of how orbits work

etc. etc.

The people spreading FUD on this are close to being flat earth tier
>>
>>78825131
lmao this tbqh
>>
>>78831951
There's at least 1 plan for a large space telescope, although it's not meant to actually fly and is instead meant to waste money forever.

Most likely some small research organization will buy and pay for their own satellite and have it flown up on a muskrocket for a few million dollars and start getting actual research and results within a year of doing so.
>>
>>78838364
>They are not an actual issue for astronomy
They are, for astrophotography.
>>
>>78838260
They need to be boosted because they want to maintain the positions, not because they will suddenly deorbit if they don't.
>>
>>78838465
You can subtract them.
>>
>>78838660
Only if you're stacking. Satellites ruin long exposure work.
>>
>>78838680
Stacking is used a lot, even in long exposure work.
>>
>>78828781
Based
>>
>>78822360
>12,000+ satellites are a problem for a surface area multiple times larger than earth
Stop taking tech news as gospel. Most of the writers/reporters failed math.
>>
File: 1601272965215.png (108 KB, 600x800)
108 KB
108 KB PNG
>believing in (((space)))
yikes
>>
>>78831932
>OooOooOoo 500 dollarinos. Poor faggot, i'm a homeowner. That's absolutely nothing
Man, I've just mentioned you shouldn't forget about it… Seems you are insecure with your income level.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.