Technology

59174 readers

2122 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

342

FCC Denies Starlink Low-Orbit Bid for Lower Latency (spectrum.ieee.org)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

89 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 55 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Keep your thousands of space crap out of lethal range please.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

out of lethal range

Would they not be?

[+] [email protected] -12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Please try reading the article before commenting. This is the very first paragraph.

The FCC has once again rejected a Starlink plan to deploy thousands of internet satellites in very low earth orbits (VLEO) ranging from 340 to 360 kilometers. In an order published last week, the FCC wrote: “SpaceX may not deploy any satellites designed for operational altitudes below the International Space Station,” whose orbit can range as low as 370 kilometers.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago (2 children)

That doesn't say anything about lethal range. It just says they won't allow it to be lower than the ISS's orbit. It could be because of "lethal range" or it could be that they want as little crap in the way of routes to and from the ISS.

I looked over the article (albeit very quickly) just in case you didn't quote enough of the article on accident and I didn't see anything about lethality. I could have missed it or I'm not reading between the lines (maybe missing their meaning in the article).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

There's less than 10 kilometers between them and SpaceX has been known to have some go out of their designed orbit. So it has the potential to be and they determined the risk is not worth it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

In general, these things are zipping around the earth at 17,000 mph. There's 5,504 of them. Space is already dangerous with all of the space garbage in orbit. If these were to collide it could easily make getting things into orbit due to the debris and the chain reaction if the debris caused more debris from impact even more dangerous. Space garbage really is something we don't have a solution for.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

This is a pretty ignorant take and borderline disinformation. Yes they travel fast. Yes there are a lot of them. No they don't pose any risk of blocking space travel even if they all exploded because they're not in a stable orbit where they can just stay up there forever. They're low enough that they're facing a constant pull back into earth.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

Just for others, they'd all burn up in the atmosphere in a few years.

So it may disrupt things temporarily but not long term.