I have real issues with the current economic system not accounting for external cost of pollution. It’s clear that lots of satellite has a cost in that it’s disturbing astronomers work. For satellite providers there is no cost for disturbing observations.
Other examples of not accounting external cost:
There is no cost of fishing all the fish in the ocean.
There is no cost of polluting the oceans.
There is no cost of cutting down rain forest
Space junk something that will eventually have a cost
There is an environmental flaw of external cost in the current capitalism economic system which we cannot afford to ignore.
Thus I argue in current capitalism system we do not pay for pollution it’s “free” but there is a real cost for others. Thus the system is fundamentally flawed and needs to be fixed! Ops engineer comment.
They'll be arranged in the amazon smile one day, so we cant look at the night sky and get a sense of our own place in the universe, just a sense of our place as amazon users.
Can we just flag these stories since there's only two opposing things to say
1. Little African Johnnie who's sister just died of dysentery because they couldn't call around for help from lack of infrastructure doesn't care that rich astronomers can't take pictures.
2. Capitalism is once again polluting our society.
So you've been so busy curing dysentery and tuberculosis that you haven't done it yet, but you were coincidentally going to start this week so Elon and Bezos can stop now?
If people find their humanity and build the alternative infrastructure the satellites will just fall out of the sky pretty quick due to their short lifespan and low orbit.
You've just done 2. and I replied 1. in a pointless conversation. QED
This is a fair point, once there is no longer a need for these satellites they will fall out of orbit, self-immolate in the atmosphere, and we can simply not replace them.
It's a worthwhile tradeoff, in my opinion, to inconvenience a branch of science that's unlikely in the near term to produce research that immediately benefits humanity. Conversely, projects like Starlink solve an immediate problem (access to communication infrastructure in underdeveloped areas) and are sufficiently designed to account for the eventuality of their purpose expiring. These satellites were never meant to be permanent fixtures in the sky.
Astronomers complaining about streaks in the sky seems a bit like a retiree complaining that the new hospital they're building across the lake ruins the view from his kitchen window.
I have real issues with the current economic system not accounting for external cost of pollution. It’s clear that lots of satellite has a cost in that it’s disturbing astronomers work. For satellite providers there is no cost for disturbing observations.
Other examples of not accounting external cost: There is no cost of fishing all the fish in the ocean. There is no cost of polluting the oceans. There is no cost of cutting down rain forest Space junk something that will eventually have a cost
There is an environmental flaw of external cost in the current capitalism economic system which we cannot afford to ignore.
Thus I argue in current capitalism system we do not pay for pollution it’s “free” but there is a real cost for others. Thus the system is fundamentally flawed and needs to be fixed! Ops engineer comment.
They'll be arranged in the amazon smile one day, so we cant look at the night sky and get a sense of our own place in the universe, just a sense of our place as amazon users.
Can we just flag these stories since there's only two opposing things to say
1. Little African Johnnie who's sister just died of dysentery because they couldn't call around for help from lack of infrastructure doesn't care that rich astronomers can't take pictures.
2. Capitalism is once again polluting our society.
Case closed, problem solved - next story please, we won't need to worry about this one again
> because they couldn't call around for help from lack of infrastructure
there are other places than low earth orbit for infrastructure
So you've been so busy curing dysentery and tuberculosis that you haven't done it yet, but you were coincidentally going to start this week so Elon and Bezos can stop now?
If people find their humanity and build the alternative infrastructure the satellites will just fall out of the sky pretty quick due to their short lifespan and low orbit.
You've just done 2. and I replied 1. in a pointless conversation. QED
This is a fair point, once there is no longer a need for these satellites they will fall out of orbit, self-immolate in the atmosphere, and we can simply not replace them.
It's a worthwhile tradeoff, in my opinion, to inconvenience a branch of science that's unlikely in the near term to produce research that immediately benefits humanity. Conversely, projects like Starlink solve an immediate problem (access to communication infrastructure in underdeveloped areas) and are sufficiently designed to account for the eventuality of their purpose expiring. These satellites were never meant to be permanent fixtures in the sky.
Astronomers complaining about streaks in the sky seems a bit like a retiree complaining that the new hospital they're building across the lake ruins the view from his kitchen window.
Site is garbage. Got my iPhone screen wrapped around in a banner can’t read shit.