5 ms·
Change is inevitable. I love seeing artificial objects in space, because it shows that we, humanity, are finally getting there. Elon doesn't own space, he just
by tgsovlerkhgsel 3mo ago
Change is inevitable. I love seeing artificial objects in space, because it shows that we, humanity, are finally getting there.
Elon doesn't own space, he just happens to be the one who is currently best at making it reachable. There is plenty of space for everyone else, and others will get there, eventually.
I could eat myself up with envy over the money he's making from it... or be glad that it's at least someone getting rewarded for moving humanity forward (while also being an asshole), rather than someone who is starting wars to profit from insider trading...
- sevenzero 3mo agoYea but it introduces a lot of issues for space travel and other satellites. The useful space in space we have is extremely limited. A single company shouldn't be able to just clutter space at will.
- tticvs 3mo ago1. That's not true. 2. It's not "at will" if you actually read the article you're commenting under you'd see it is about them _applying for a license_ to do something.
- taotau 3mo agoTaken literally you are technically correct, but... 1. Space is big, but LEO is not that big and if a single company clutters it enough, other organisations might start bumping into issues like 'if i don't get sign off from starlink corp, i might hit one of their satelites on the way up and my insurance wont cover that so I cant afford to launch given the risks of being sued by elon'. 2. Applying for a licence in this context, mostly means greasing the right palms (preferably the pudgy bruised ones).
- tticvs 3mo agoIt introduces no issues for space travel. And what exactly do you want to happen here? LEO to stay empty because no one else is able to fill it and for spacex to not to try to expand because the regulatory process isn't perfect according to your standards?
- sevenzero 3mo ago[dead]
- SirHackalot 3mo agoYes.
- inigyou 3mo agoThe best way to create change is to create the conditions where change is necessary. If Elon causes Kessler syndrome in low earth orbit, it will quickly be illegal to launch satellites without permits.
- bdangubic 3mo agodid you read the article? it is already illegal to launch satellites without permission, hence the article (above the fold in the summary) is stating SpaceX applied for permission :)
- k12sosse 3mo agoAsking permission from whom? The entire world or just the corrupt bonkers folks?
- lowkey_ 3mo agoSomeone said it would "quickly be illegal to launch satellites without permits", then you/they found out that is already illegal, and you nitpicked about who you need permission from. It feels like there's no feasible solution here that would please you guys. Should we all democratically vote on every satellite launched into space individually? It's already our elected representatives that approve it.
- parineum 3mo agoKessler syndrome isn't possible in the StarLink orbit.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 3mo agoDoes it really? Every time I heard the "we'll run out of space" FUD argument it was followed by a drastic increase of satellites in orbit with no issue...
- hnhg 3mo agoWe're also facing a climate and pollutant crisis as a species so we seem only capable of thinking in the short term. We're not doing that well right now after only a brief period of industrialisation.
- tticvs 3mo agoWe're doing extremely well compared to an unimaginably long period of pre-industrialization.
- BurningFrog 3mo agoThere is nothing more abundant than the extra room there is in space! Earth orbit is more constrained, but it's very far from full. Geostationary orbits are about 20% full, but the rest is practically empty still.
- jneaty 3mo agoI wonder what you mean by "moving humanity forward". Just technological advancements without other considerations? In my opinion it should at least require reducing human suffering, and if ao he has done more harm than good
- rowanG077 3mo agoI agree with this. But imo its pretty clear that cheap and easy access to the internet on the entire globe is a clear win.
- JKCalhoun 3mo agoThe brief history of the internet suggests to me that this is not a clear win.
- protimewaster 3mo agoThe guy in charge of it has demonstrated that he'll cut people off from accessing it on a whim, though, so it's not really cheap and easy access for the entire globe. It's access for the selected people.
- rowanG077 3mo agoDoesn't that hold for all internet providers? I'm not familiar with SpaceX cutting people of, but that doesn't sound out of line compared to industry.
- zorak8me 3mo agoOther Internet providers at least have true boards of directors, shareholders with decision power, etc. One person doesn’t have the power to snap their fingers and make decisions based on how much ketamine they’re on at the time.
- rowanG077 3mo agoI'm sorry that I don't agree with you that a out of touch board of directors or shareholders are better from the get go than Musk.
- watwut 3mo ago> or be glad that it's at least someone getting rewarded for moving humanity forward Forward back to fascism. No thanks. He already caused astonishing harm.
- newaccountman2 3mo ago> I love seeing artificial objects in space, Kind of fucked up lol > rather than someone who is starting wars to profit from insider trading... Your moral and ethical bar is Trump?
- ThrowawayTestr 3mo agoDo you like looking at city skylines? I'm not a misanthrope so I like seeing humanity's progress.
- SirHackalot 3mo ago[flagged]
- newaccountman2 3mo agoI do happen to be a misanthrope, but I suspect a lot of people who aren't also have distaste for your expression of joy at seeing the night sky full of satellites. I do like big cities and their skylines though, sure.
- yodsanklai 3mo ago> I love seeing artificial objects in space, because it shows that we, humanity, are finally getting there. The problem is that nobody asked the other 8.3 billions people what they think about seeing stuff in the sky. For the benefit of 1/1000th of humanity (~10 million starlink users).
- smrtinsert 3mo agoWho is envious of his trillions? I'm certainly not. I am very annoyed at someone who buys elections, literally promising a million dollars for a vote, and then running in and gutting key portions of the US government, and playing fast and loose with our data - at a bare minimum. We will be investigating him for decades and he deserves every second of it.
- potatototoo99 3mo agoHe is not a trillionaire anymore, though.
- glitchcrab 3mo agoI think you're missing the wood for the trees. He's still insanely wealthy.
- rglullis 3mo agoWe don't need to have space literally transformed into junkyards to make progress, and there is nothing going wrong with going a lower pace if it means reduced impact on the rest of society.
- ilikehurdles 3mo agoYour focus should be on junkyards on earth, which are exponentially greater in number on a surface area that is a fraction of the surface area of observable space. You’re complaining about a potentially artificial speck of light in the sky while plastic litters the highway you commute on, and India produces literal rivers of trash.
- rglullis 3mo agoOrthogonal issues. Will the trash on earth be reduced if we start littering low orbit with junk?
- rayiner 3mo agoEvery year that you delay Africa and south asia getting to western levels of development equals tens of thousands of under-5 deaths that could have been avoided.
- rlt 3mo agoJunkyard? Starlink satellites are deorbited at the end of their lifespan.
- xandrius 3mo agoChange is inevitable but not all changes are.
- bmitc 3mo agoGetting where, exactly?
- bluegatty 3mo agoNo, this is not really moving forward, it's just a traffic jam and pollution in an otherwise pristine space - for money. It's just the money. If we were actually going to Mars, then yes, but somehow he made himself the 'First Trillionaire' - without even so much as getting out of Earth's orbit. This is NFT progress, in that, there is some plausible economic value in NFTs, but in reality, it's just a hustle.
- beanjuiceII 3mo agohey mom wants you to get off the couch and come for dinner, meatloaf is ready
- bluegatty 3mo agoOk ... but you have to at least try be funny!
- paulddraper 3mo ago> It's just the money. Money is a materialization of human desire.
- bluegatty 3mo agoNo - money it's a materialization of the expression of power. Desire is a subset of that. The 'power' part is one of the most important things to understand. In our every day lives, we see regular people 'creating value by working' and 'collecting money' and then 'spending according to their needs and desires'. We see things like groceries, fuel, food - it all seems like relatively open and mostly kind of fair system - and it is, at that level. But significant amount of wealth is accumulated into structure and by individuals that have power totally disproportinate to their value creation. Kings of England didn't rule 'arbitrarily' - they owned most of the land - that was their power. If you own all the land, the serfs can't escape your taxation - however you think you can create value, it will be taxed away. Corporations have incredible economies of scale and leverage through division of labour that individuals could ever have - and - they are even 'limited liability. We set individual up to compete against goliaths, and then give those goliaths special advantages. 'Parts of the Economy' are relatively fair, just, open etc. but much/most of it is not, it's a game of power leverage and accumulation, as it always has been. It's that part that people don't have a strong instinct for.
- digitaltrees 3mo agoI didn’t say I am against change. I said I am against one man owning a monopoly on a common good. If technological progress requires monopolies and the road toward serfdom is that really a path we want?
- electriclove 3mo agoThere are other companies who have also begun and there will other countries doing it as well.
- digitaltrees 3mo agoThat’s good. But we are a long way from a competitive market.