this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
402 points (98.1% liked)
Space
8341 readers
1 users here now
Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions.
- Share relevant content.
- Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
- Use appropriate language and tone.
- Report violations.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Picture of the Day
The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula
Related Communities
🔭 Science
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sadly I blame everyone but starlink. It provides internet to rural areas that otherwise don’t have any viable high speed internet. Feds and states should have done anything to make sure these areas were being served. They weren’t and as a result $120/mo internet is reasonable.
You speak about the US but it fucked the sky up for the entire planet, for all of us.
That's the main issue I see here, too. If you can provide this without the side effect, per-country, sure. Go ahead. Cool service.
Fucked up the sky for all of us? Who is "all of us"? Most of "us" live in mega cities with so much light pollution it blots out the night sky. Everyone in these horrid concrete jungles has high speed internet and absolutely no connection to the stars. Many of these people have never even seen the stars.
The ones living outside of these cities are the minority, and now they have internet. An internet they have been promised to the tune of countless billions for a very long time. They see the stars every night. Starlink has not impacted their connection with the stars at all.
So I am genuinely curious. Who, exactly, is the "us" you refer to?
And why are you not rallying against the light pollution that has denied billions access to the stars for at least generations?
What I meant was everybody who has access to the sky. If you live in the city, you can travel a relatively short distance from it to see the sky, but you can’t avoid starlink satellites no matter where you are.
Mainly, I meant us who go out at night with their telescopes and adapters for DSLR cameras to take stacked long exposures of all the cool things we can see from our pale blue dot.
The lights you refer to are millions of different municipalities ordering street lights designed with zero consideration for the light pollution they might produce. It’s a huge problem with no easy fix on a global level while starlink is literally just one company launching a shitload of satellites. What exactly makes you believe I’m not “rallying” against light pollution?
And yes, I’m aware our space pollution is already insane but people wouldn’t complain this much if starlinks didn’t travel at a much closer distance to us (and thus and block more view) and if they weren’t launched in such huge numbers in a short amount of time.
Now that I think about it, what the fuck are you even saying? That this is good and we should launch more starlink satellites? That the situation is already that bad that we shoudn’t give a shit?
Yes, starlink giving poor communities in the Amazon access to the rest of the world is good.
Yes, starlink giving internet to rural people who have been duped, manipulated, lied to, and cheated about getting internet for decades is good.
Yea, starlink undercutting greedy, corrupt ISPs with a service they had deemed "technologically impossible" and "financially infeasible" is good.
Yes, innovation is good.
Yes, internet access is good.
I am sad that people with telescopes are slightly inconvenienced and have to add in dynamic filtering to correct for minor anomalies of satellites moving by every 10 minutes. It is so sad.
But hey, look on the bright side? For your minor inconvenience, millions more people are now connected. They can get help when something goes wrong. They can participate in the modern economy and get access to more food and medicine. They can share their culture and learn from other's. Remote workers can be among them and bolster their lifestyles.
So at the cost of a small inconvenience that can easily be corrected, the lives of millions are improved. I could write all day to this tune but if you can't see such an obvious thing, there is not much I can say to you. I can just hope any lurkers reading feel seen and heard, cause I am really tired reading the nonsense against such a powerful gift to humanity.
They never mentioned the US. Starlink serves the entire globe. Right above your comment is someone in the UK that uses Starlink.
Rural UK here. Tiny country in comparison to the US. Our village has no mobile signal. Our landline internet maxes out at 1mbit up and 10mbit down. We are 3miles from a town with 15k people. Why is there no infrastructure? I’m completely dependent on Starlink.
This is such a shitty take.
He's kinda right though...
Remember when the US govt. provided incentives for major ISPs to upgrade\expand their service and they just kinda pocketed the money and did nothing? Imagine if they didn't. We may not have had a need for starlink.
Imagine 7.700.000.000 people not living in the US
Starlink has customers in 99 countries as of March. It's a global service.
well maybe your right, maybe slowing down research and impeding the scientific progress of the human race is a small price to pay for getting Grandma in Bumfuck, Montana onto Facebook, and maybe these so called scientists should stop poking around the universe anyway, right ?
Isn't Starlink a major player in getting high speed Internet to developing nations? I'm as mad as you about ruining the sky, but it's not just Grandma it's also entire villages in the global south.