> You state this as a fact, but this is far from settled. It wasn't intended as a fact, but there's an implied "IMO" at the end of that sentence. :) You're fin

> You state this as a fact, but this is far from settled. It wasn't intended as a fact, but there's an implied "IMO" at the end of that sentence. :) You're fine to disagree with it, but at the same time, those of us who don't like this trend have no say in the matter. It is being imposed on everyone, whether we like it or not. > Also you already have to. We have the ISS which is frequently visible as a fast moving bright dot, then you also have the Iridium flares. Then of course you have airplanes, which are equally easy to confuse with natural object. The amount of airplanes in the sky visible at once don't come close to the amount of planned satellites Starlink and other corporations plan to launch in the near future. We're talking about several of orders of magnitude less. And while I also dislike seeing airplanes, at least air transportation is a general public good. We already have pretty good worldwide internet connectivity by ground. Increasing space junk globally so that remote villages without access to water can get online, or for rich people to have slightly better and cheaper connections from their yachts, sounds like a bad deal to me. And this is besides the fact that most of these satellites won't be used for providing internet access, but for the traditionally benevolent agendas of governments and large corporations.