3 ms·

How, exactly, did this ignoring an overreach of FCC authority endanger humanity? Not generalizations, but this specific case. When you look at the details of t

How, exactly, did this ignoring an overreach of FCC authority endanger humanity? Not generalizations, but this specific case. When you look at the details of this case, it really doesn't paint a picture in the way you're interpreting it. Edit: Explaining for the down-votes. The orbit these things are in are easily managed and outside of major space traffic zones. The size of the satellites means they will all burn up on re-entry. Also, see my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17953257 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17953257

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> an overreach of FCC authority endanger humanity? One, it isn't overreach. Certifying and registering satellites is the FCC's legal duty. The threat comes from untracked satellites becoming untracked orbital debris. This is the same reason we register flight paths. > something that FCC doesn't do and doesn't have any insight into assessing The international organization that deals with orbital registration and regulation is the ITU [1]. The FCC is charge with managing our interactions with the ITU because, historically, all satellites were communications satellites. The FAA clears launches (not satellites). (Air Force supervises launches. USSPACECOM hasn't really existed since it was merged into USSTRATCOM in 2002.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Telecommunication_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Telecommunicatio...
- garmaine 8y ago
  Of geosynchronous satellites. The distinction is very important.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > Of geosynchronous satellites What is limited to geosynchronous satellites? ITU jurisdiction covers low-earth orbits because the risk from orbital debris and radio interference is not limited to GEO. Partly as a result, FCC jurisdiction is not limited to GEO.
ygjb 8y ago
Yep. You're correct. For these limited number of satellites in this limited orbit, it's not a huge issue. Neither were ride share services when they first rolled out, and yet there is at least one study showing that ride shares are actually increasing traffic congestion. Traffic congestion in orbit is going to be a huge challenge, and orbital debris is already a concern for the various space agencies around the world. Regulation of LEO is very important not because of how bad things are, but how bad things will become if it is left unregulated.
hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
The original FCC rejection was based on the fear that the satellites would be too small to track. Now, the company has evidence to say this isn't the case, and if so, fine, they should present that evidence to the FCC and let them evaluate it. The bigger risk now is that, after completely ignoring the FCC's rejection, other companies decide "we don't have to worry about the FCC at all because even in egregious cases, the penalties are light."
- garmaine 8y ago
  Or they ignore the FCC on issues the FCC has no jurisdiction over.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

JumpCrisscross 8y ago

> an overreach of FCC authority endanger humanity? One, it isn't overreach. Certifying and registering satellites is the FCC's legal duty. The threat comes from untracked satellites becoming untracked orbital debris. This is the same reason we register flight paths. > something that FCC doesn't do and doesn't have any insight into assessing The international organization that deals with orbital registration and regulation is the ITU [1]. The FCC is charge with managing our interactions with the ITU because, historically, all satellites were communications satellites. The FAA clears launches (not satellites). (Air Force supervises launches. USSPACECOM hasn't really existed since it was merged into USSTRATCOM in 2002.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Telecommunication_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Telecommunicatio...

garmaine 8y ago
Of geosynchronous satellites. The distinction is very important.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > Of geosynchronous satellites What is limited to geosynchronous satellites? ITU jurisdiction covers low-earth orbits because the risk from orbital debris and radio interference is not limited to GEO. Partly as a result, FCC jurisdiction is not limited to GEO.

ygjb 8y ago

Yep. You're correct. For these limited number of satellites in this limited orbit, it's not a huge issue. Neither were ride share services when they first rolled out, and yet there is at least one study showing that ride shares are actually increasing traffic congestion. Traffic congestion in orbit is going to be a huge challenge, and orbital debris is already a concern for the various space agencies around the world. Regulation of LEO is very important not because of how bad things are, but how bad things will become if it is left unregulated.

hn_throwaway_99 8y ago

The original FCC rejection was based on the fear that the satellites would be too small to track. Now, the company has evidence to say this isn't the case, and if so, fine, they should present that evidence to the FCC and let them evaluate it. The bigger risk now is that, after completely ignoring the FCC's rejection, other companies decide "we don't have to worry about the FCC at all because even in egregious cases, the penalties are light."

garmaine 8y ago
Or they ignore the FCC on issues the FCC has no jurisdiction over.