4 ms·

Yes, but that's a system problem, not a user problem. The comment I replied to posited that a specific user would collect 5% less data. If you add ~5% to your

• schiffern 2y ago
  >As for the system problem, that is solved by building 5% more observing capacity. If this is to somehow come from existing funding sources, I'll need a moment to pick myself up off the floor laughing. ;D Obviously those sources are already at their budget appetite. Or maybe this an Efficient Market / Pigouvian suggestion, where megaconstellaton operators pay (and pass on to their customers) into an Astronomical Reparation Fund worth ~5% of current global astronomy funding, to be distributed to astronomical grants and construction of new observatories? Because sure, that seems fair. If you truly believe (as do I) that we value internet access more than the loss of scientific data, then you'll agree the internet users can easily reimburse scientists for the damage and still come out ahead. "You broke it, you buy it." > If you add ~5% to your grant proposal ..then I'll add 10% to mine! It's a race to the bottom. Eventually folks get sick of it, so they enact rules and enforcement mechanisms to prevent padding. In the end all we accomplish is transforming an efficient & high-trust system into an overhead-laden, low-trust system.