this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
342 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

59174 readers
3103 users here now

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


Our Rules


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

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 55 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (6 children)

out of lethal range

Would they not be?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 53 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

Awww poor Musk. Maybe stop helping Russia by giving them access while denying Ukraine. Also fuck you for ruining Twitter .

Edit - apparently coverage on the Crimean coast was never activated. Still dickish for helping Russia. They're sanctioned up the wazoo and this might come back to bite him. Starlink is a recipient of US Federal Assistance and that can easily be leveraged.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Twitter was never good, it was just popular.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (14 children)

I like that you can follow scientists and authors directly at the source though.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago

It was by no means perfect, but it did become the defacto town square. The Arab Spring was facilitated in part through Twitter and George Floyd related protests were arranged, amplified and shared through Twitter.

There's plenty of incompetence in Musk, but a significant part of this "effort" was deliberate, as a favor to other like minded billionaires upset and frightened that the people had a working, maturing megaphone. They needed that to be broken, if not fully silenced, and musk was the pathetic piece of shit with daddy issues that the other old money billionaires could convince to do the work here as an attempt to gain their favor.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Like fast food.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Thank you. I actually wasn't aware.

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

That's the problem with media today.

I truly don't blame you for not knowing. There were huge headlines for the initial story, and then smaller headlines on the retraction. Then even after the retraction people that KNOW it was retracted still spread it because Issacson must be lying.

Its not just Elon, this happens everywhere.

Get the big headlines, and bury the corrections or clarifications.

Granted, in this case I don't think Issacson was malicious in his original reporting, but it really often is malicious

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (5 children)

He denied the request by Ukraine to enable starlink in crimea because "it would make SpaceX explicitly implicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation" it would also have been illegal for him to do so because US sanctions prohibits it. The original claim about him disabling it is false and has been debunked. It wasn't enabled in the first place. He also later added that had the US government asked him to enable it he would have but they didn't.

I also find it hilarious that Russia being able to obtain a limited amount of terminals is somehow proof that Elon is helping Russia but at the same time you're conveniently ignoring the fact that there's thousands of terminals in use on the Ukrainian side which SpaceX sent there for free when the invasion happened. It's not Russia he sent those to but Ukraine.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (3 children)

He didn't send them all for free, they were also funded by the U.S. government. Sanctions say sales of such would be illegal in Russia. So yes, people in Ukraine can legally purchase and use Starlink and people in Russia legally should not be able too.

So any of his terminals being used illegally are in fact his responsibility. They are using his companies satellites which are included in the sanctions.... It doesn't seem very confusing to me

What part of that is confusing

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Good call. Being crashed into with a 16km/s closing speed probably would be a hindrance.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago

"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. Starlink currently has nearly 6000 satellites orbiting at around 550 kilometers"

Fun fact: Tiāngōng, the Chinese Space Station currently in orbit, operates as high as 450km up (its currently at 360km). So its even closer to the Starlink constellation that the ISS is.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The ISS is planned to deorbit in 2031: https://www.nasa.gov/faqs-the-international-space-station-transition-plan/

Wonder if the FCC ruling will change after it comes down?

That's still a lot of satellites floating around that can get in the way. And it doesn't even include the other LEO providers like Project Kuiper spooling up.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

At some point there will be more satellites than is feasible to manage.

If they aren't already, will we start treating them like telephone poles or cell towers?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It's already a bit of a mess to manage, especially if you include the debris. Back in 2007 China blew up a satellite, and as of a few years ago that represented almost a third of all tracked space debris.. (it has its own wikipedia page) If these jokers ever start deliberately blowing up each others' satellites, we could end up in a situation where space becomes inaccessible.

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

If these jokers ever start deliberately blowing up each others' satellites, we could end up in a situation where space becomes inaccessible.

We don't know who struck first, us or them, but we know that it was us that scorched the sky. At the time, they were dependent on solar power and it was believed that they would be unable to survive without an energy source as abundant as the sun.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Nope, everyone knows that the best source of power is humans.

Mobius even admits like two lines later that the machines even have fusion power, and then no one ever talks about that ever again. The whole movie makes no real sense when you think about it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago

Well for starters they wanted to use us for computing power not energy. But it didn't test well because your average movie goer didn't understand.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›