7 ms·

It was lost because, during the storm, it was flying too low. If the jet had been flying at a higher altitude, the storm would have still happen and the jet wou

It was lost because, during the storm, it was flying too low. If the jet had been flying at a higher altitude, the storm would have still happen and the jet would have been fine. So the storm is not the direct and only cause of the crash. It is important here because one could assume, only reading the title, that the satellite were lost due to electronic disturbances caused by the storm. Which is not what happened (if my understanding is correct).

nefitty 5y ago
Right. I imagined some solar flare or something. From my understanding, they are the biggest existential risk to modern humanity, slightly ahead of rogue AI. From that context, whether misguided or otherwise, you can imagine that my heart skipped a beat when I read the link title.
- IngoBlechschmid 5y ago
  Out of curiosity, where would you rank the climate crisis on this list? It has already irrevocably caused the extinction of lots of species, and while certainly humans will continue to live, "modern humanity" will be replaced by something else.
  - nefitty 5y ago
    My list: 1. Solar flares 2. Rogue AI 3. World war 3. Water scarcity (tied to war above) 5. Pandemic 6. Climate disasters My naive perception heavily weighs future possible technological progress. Solar flare collapse is basically unmitigable due to a combination of unpredictability and deep systemic interdependence and dependence on susceptible technologies. Some governments paid lip service to this risk in the past, allegedly pushing to plan for this risk. Ultimately, only some organizations will have the resources to sustain the acute impact of a solar flare, but what good is Google if they're the only ones with working computers? With climate, I'm very optimistic about the innovation that will result from economic and social pressures. I think 10 years ago I would have rated it at #2. Edit: What are the chances. As I wrote this, JET started live-streaming an announcement about fusion energy...
    - bcrl 5y ago
      Solar flares should be a lot lower on the list, as the bulk of the risk can actually be mitigated in the electric grid. Every few years the IEEE publishes an article on the risk solar flares pose to the electric grid, and how it can be mitigated by installing capacitors on the multi-ground neutral. Remember: solar flares induce current in long wires, not short ones, so the risk is not so great to individual electric devices were the electric grid protected. Of course we're human and have a tendency to ignore large scale risks that haven't occurred in recent history as evidenced by the fact that no major electric grids have implemented this kind of protection. If we do get an 1894 level solar flare, many of the high voltage transformers will be fried. Some of them take months to build, so it would take years to recover from that kind of damage.
      - ortusdux 5y ago
        I'm a big proponent of the DOE's suggestion for a national strategic transformer reserve. They estimate $500mil (2017) would cover buying enough redundant transformers to resuscitate the power grid after a nationwide failure. Pre-covid, the typical lead time for a full scale transformer was ~2 years. I'm assuming it would take even longer now. I can't imagine how long it would take to replace our transformers if ~1/4 of the world also needed to do the same. In my opinion, the reserve is cheap at 3x the price. $500mil is 7 F35 raptors, and we are buying ~130/year at this point. There are plenty of defense spending justifications for establishing the reserve - it would protect against EMPs and small targeted attacks. We are already seeing small arms attacks on high energy transformers, and last year someone tried to use a drone to take out a substation. Not surprisingly, the biggest hurdles identified in the report were the needed land acquisitions and the logistics of transporting the large transformers. https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/04/f34/Strategic%20Transformer%20Reserve%20Report%20-%20FINAL.pdf https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/04/f34/Strategic%20... https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R43604.html https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R43604.html https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43015/likely-drone-attack-on-u-s-power-grid-revealed-in-new-intelligence-report https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43015/likely-drone-att...
        5y ago
brazzledazzle 5y ago
The difference is also important because if it’s an issue with altitude under certain conditions they may be able to take preventive measures with future storms. Whereas torm-related electronic disturbances could lead to satellite design changes.
- mupuff1234 5y ago
  Preventive measures could also lead to design changes.
RustyConsul 5y ago
well, at the end of the day they deorbitted because they ran out of fuel. I know Elon is screaming at his engineers right now to increase the amount of krypton in each and if this happens again, they're fired. - i used to work at tesla.

nefitty 5y ago

Right. I imagined some solar flare or something. From my understanding, they are the biggest existential risk to modern humanity, slightly ahead of rogue AI. From that context, whether misguided or otherwise, you can imagine that my heart skipped a beat when I read the link title.

IngoBlechschmid 5y ago
Out of curiosity, where would you rank the climate crisis on this list? It has already irrevocably caused the extinction of lots of species, and while certainly humans will continue to live, "modern humanity" will be replaced by something else.
- nefitty 5y ago
  My list: 1. Solar flares 2. Rogue AI 3. World war 3. Water scarcity (tied to war above) 5. Pandemic 6. Climate disasters My naive perception heavily weighs future possible technological progress. Solar flare collapse is basically unmitigable due to a combination of unpredictability and deep systemic interdependence and dependence on susceptible technologies. Some governments paid lip service to this risk in the past, allegedly pushing to plan for this risk. Ultimately, only some organizations will have the resources to sustain the acute impact of a solar flare, but what good is Google if they're the only ones with working computers? With climate, I'm very optimistic about the innovation that will result from economic and social pressures. I think 10 years ago I would have rated it at #2. Edit: What are the chances. As I wrote this, JET started live-streaming an announcement about fusion energy...
  - bcrl 5y ago
    Solar flares should be a lot lower on the list, as the bulk of the risk can actually be mitigated in the electric grid. Every few years the IEEE publishes an article on the risk solar flares pose to the electric grid, and how it can be mitigated by installing capacitors on the multi-ground neutral. Remember: solar flares induce current in long wires, not short ones, so the risk is not so great to individual electric devices were the electric grid protected. Of course we're human and have a tendency to ignore large scale risks that haven't occurred in recent history as evidenced by the fact that no major electric grids have implemented this kind of protection. If we do get an 1894 level solar flare, many of the high voltage transformers will be fried. Some of them take months to build, so it would take years to recover from that kind of damage.
    - ortusdux 5y ago
      I'm a big proponent of the DOE's suggestion for a national strategic transformer reserve. They estimate $500mil (2017) would cover buying enough redundant transformers to resuscitate the power grid after a nationwide failure. Pre-covid, the typical lead time for a full scale transformer was ~2 years. I'm assuming it would take even longer now. I can't imagine how long it would take to replace our transformers if ~1/4 of the world also needed to do the same. In my opinion, the reserve is cheap at 3x the price. $500mil is 7 F35 raptors, and we are buying ~130/year at this point. There are plenty of defense spending justifications for establishing the reserve - it would protect against EMPs and small targeted attacks. We are already seeing small arms attacks on high energy transformers, and last year someone tried to use a drone to take out a substation. Not surprisingly, the biggest hurdles identified in the report were the needed land acquisitions and the logistics of transporting the large transformers. https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/04/f34/Strategic%20Transformer%20Reserve%20Report%20-%20FINAL.pdf https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/04/f34/Strategic%20... https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R43604.html https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R43604.html https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43015/likely-drone-attack-on-u-s-power-grid-revealed-in-new-intelligence-report https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43015/likely-drone-att...
      - 5y ago

brazzledazzle 5y ago

The difference is also important because if it’s an issue with altitude under certain conditions they may be able to take preventive measures with future storms. Whereas torm-related electronic disturbances could lead to satellite design changes.

mupuff1234 5y ago
Preventive measures could also lead to design changes.

RustyConsul 5y ago

well, at the end of the day they deorbitted because they ran out of fuel. I know Elon is screaming at his engineers right now to increase the amount of krypton in each and if this happens again, they're fired. - i used to work at tesla.