3 ms·

Am I the only one who thinks that it’s extremely messed up this is even happening? Private companies, operating on their own initiative and without any serious

Am I the only one who thinks that it’s extremely messed up this is even happening? Private companies, operating on their own initiative and without any serious oversight, are slowly and irrevocably degrading the night sky, a precious and irreplaceable resource. How are governments allowing it?

maximus-decimus 5y ago
What does the average person gets from a night sky? nothing. What will the average person gain from the private companies? Access to fast internet where it was only a dream before. I think it's pretty easy to see why at least some people would prefer internet over nicer pictures when using a telescope.
- hulitu 5y ago
  Access to fast internet has nothing to do with night sky. You only need competition and less greed.
  - maximus-decimus 5y ago
    Providing fast land internet to the middle of nowhere is just expensive. For there to be competition, there must be something to compete over. Internet companies would probably not even serve a lot of areas if they were not obligated to simply because it's just not worth it to them. Having a network of low-orbit satellite that provide fast internet is a way to make it economically viable. The downside is they make the nightsky worse (to telescopes anyway). So I disagree with your statement that both have nothing to do with each other.
- verdverm 5y ago
  Or satellites that can detect polluters who are breaking regulations and making climate change worse? In reality, the professional astronomers largely don't see the satellites as a problem for their work. There are an overly loud and enraged minority that the "news" uses to get clicks
  - sohkamyung 5y ago
    From the article: >To study and mitigate the damage to astronomy and beyond, scientists and industry representatives met this July for SATCON2, with astronomers having just released their official reports from that workshop. The report PDF [1] is written by people from the Lowell Observatory, Vera C Rubin Observatory, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Astronomical Society, etc. So I don't quite understand why you believe that "professional astronomers largely don't see the satellites as a problem for their work" when professional astronomers are the one who written the report and are studying the problem. [1] https://noirlab.edu/public/media/archives/techdocs/pdf/techdoc031.pdf https://noirlab.edu/public/media/archives/techdocs/pdf/techd...
    - verdverm 5y ago
      What percentage of the professionals agrees with this? I didn't say all, in fact I said a vocal minority As to why, because there are others saying differently and in today's climate, the voices in news are rarely the voice of the majority
aaron695 5y ago
[dead]

maximus-decimus 5y ago

What does the average person gets from a night sky? nothing. What will the average person gain from the private companies? Access to fast internet where it was only a dream before. I think it's pretty easy to see why at least some people would prefer internet over nicer pictures when using a telescope.

hulitu 5y ago
Access to fast internet has nothing to do with night sky. You only need competition and less greed.
- maximus-decimus 5y ago
  Providing fast land internet to the middle of nowhere is just expensive. For there to be competition, there must be something to compete over. Internet companies would probably not even serve a lot of areas if they were not obligated to simply because it's just not worth it to them. Having a network of low-orbit satellite that provide fast internet is a way to make it economically viable. The downside is they make the nightsky worse (to telescopes anyway). So I disagree with your statement that both have nothing to do with each other.
verdverm 5y ago
Or satellites that can detect polluters who are breaking regulations and making climate change worse? In reality, the professional astronomers largely don't see the satellites as a problem for their work. There are an overly loud and enraged minority that the "news" uses to get clicks
- sohkamyung 5y ago
  From the article: >To study and mitigate the damage to astronomy and beyond, scientists and industry representatives met this July for SATCON2, with astronomers having just released their official reports from that workshop. The report PDF [1] is written by people from the Lowell Observatory, Vera C Rubin Observatory, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Astronomical Society, etc. So I don't quite understand why you believe that "professional astronomers largely don't see the satellites as a problem for their work" when professional astronomers are the one who written the report and are studying the problem. [1] https://noirlab.edu/public/media/archives/techdocs/pdf/techdoc031.pdf https://noirlab.edu/public/media/archives/techdocs/pdf/techd...
  - verdverm 5y ago
    What percentage of the professionals agrees with this? I didn't say all, in fact I said a vocal minority As to why, because there are others saying differently and in today's climate, the voices in news are rarely the voice of the majority

aaron695 5y ago

[dead]