4 ms·
You shouldn't be worried about it, these satellites are in Low Earth Orbits that readily decay if the satellites don't regularly reboost themselves using their
by mikkupikku 7mo ago
You shouldn't be worried about it, these satellites are in Low Earth Orbits that readily decay if the satellites don't regularly reboost themselves using their electric thrusters. And performing collision avoidance maneuvers is just part of how they're designed to work. Note that its 300,000 avoidances, not collisions. These are more like ballerinas than careening billiard balls.
- user32489318 7mo agoTrue, but at scale of 10k, chances of collision due to malfunction are not 0.
- madaxe_again 7mo agoAnd so what if they collide? This isn’t Kessler syndrome territory, it’s low enough orbit that debris would re-enter and burn up rapidly. You’d lose the colliding satellites, and that’s likely all. Not that there has been a single starlink collision, but y’know.
- jacquesm 7mo ago> Not that there has been a single starlink collision How sure are you that that would be made public? Would it be always observed and caught outside of SpaceX? If not, is that proof that if there such collisions they don't matter?
- madaxe_again 7mo agoThere are a great many eyes on the sky, and you can’t hide stuff up there - even every secret military satellite is known and tracked - so something as substantial as a collision would likely be known about before it even happens, as ephemera don’t change without an input.
- jacquesm 7mo agoThank you for the answer. I'm aware of the degree of coverage over land but I was wondering about the ocean side of things as well.
- karlgkk 7mo ago> How sure are you that that would be made public? Extremely sure. There are both numerous private, academic, and governmental agencies that are constantly searching for both collision paths, and collision debris. The debris cloud alone would generate an extremely visible signature. > Would it be always observed and caught outside of SpaceX? Yes.
- jacquesm 7mo agoThank you for the answer.
- LightBug1 7mo agoWait until multiple, non-coordinated copy-cat constellations are sent up there ...
- mikkupikku 7mo agoLarge operators like SpaceX and OneWeb do coordinate with each other. Ground based radar tracking data from the government is also made available to operators, and SpaceX has developed their own optical space-based detection system (Stargaze) which makes data available to other operators as well. There's a lot of money in this stuff, lot's of planning. It's being managed by competent people who give a shit.
- mikkupikku 7mo agoNobody says the chance of a collisions is zero. That's why it being in LEO is relevant. Internet fools who just get scared by the big number without considering the details of the situation always get this wrong.
- rob74 7mo agoSo, because the 10,000+ Starlinks launched so far (and the countless future satellites Bezos and others want to launch for their own constellations) are in LEO, nothing bad can happen (it can only good happen)? That is, if you disregard the following quote from the article: > Each re-entry deposits about 30 kg of aluminum oxide into the upper atmosphere--an uncontrolled chemistry experiment on a planetary scale.
- mikkupikku 7mo agoThe bad that can happen is limited by it being in LEO. If these were MEO sats but 50x fewer (Bezos sats BTW) you wouldn't be whining about it even though the potential debris would last thousands of years instead of less than ten. And appealing to the fear of the unknown is little more than motivated reasoning, the amount of rocks and rock dust entering the atmosphere dwarfs Starlink reentries.
- krunck 7mo agoRock dust ≠ AlO "Aluminum oxide compounds generated by the entire population of satellites reentering the atmosphere in 2022 are estimated at around 17 metric tons. Reentry scenarios involving mega-constellations point to over 360 metric tons of aluminum oxide compounds per year, which can lead to significant ozone depletion." https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280 https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL10...
- homebrewer 7mo agoIt's an LLM spambot, it is incapable of worrying. I'm much more worried about another instance of nobody noticing what they're replying to.
- ohyoutravel 7mo agoNo no their profile says “software dev.”
- 21asdffdsa12 7mo agoSoftware decentralized evolved version ?
- birdsongs 7mo agoCan I ask how you're so certain? The first two sentences reads human-typed to me.
- jampekka 7mo agoE.g. gowinston.ai gives 98% probability that the comment is human written. LLM detectors of course aren't always correct, but generally their detection performance for pure LLM text can be high (accuracy % in high 90s). Do you have some specific techniques or strategies for LLM text detection? Have you validated them?