Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Trying to edit a stupid FCC comment on Yet Another Fucking Stupid Orbital Data Center (fuck you, Blue Origin) and I need to go outside and rage-scream for a while.

Trying to edit a stupid FCC comment on Yet Another Fucking Stupid Orbital Data Center (fuck you, Blue Origin) and I need to go outside and rage-scream for a while.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
babygoatcountdo
53 Posts 27 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

    Blue Origin wants 51,600 satellites, all in sun-synchronous orbits. That means they'll follow the terminator line around the Earth and be sunlit ALWAYS. They want to distribute them between 500-1,800 km altitude, which means some of them will be sunlit and visible all the time. Fanfuckingtastic.

    This is also the exact same set of orbits that both SpaceX and Starcloud want. Sun-synchronous orbits are about to get ridiculously crowded.

    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
    sundogplanets@mastodon.social
    wrote last edited by
    #12

    "BLUE ORIGIN BACKGROUND" a.k.a. the grandiose greenwashing section. Oh they named this Project Sunrise?! Project Sunrise sounds like a billion times worse than Reflect Orbital...

    Whatever it is, at least they didn't name it Project Sunshine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_SUNSHINE

    You just never fucking know with these techbro companies...

    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

      "BLUE ORIGIN BACKGROUND" a.k.a. the grandiose greenwashing section. Oh they named this Project Sunrise?! Project Sunrise sounds like a billion times worse than Reflect Orbital...

      Whatever it is, at least they didn't name it Project Sunshine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_SUNSHINE

      You just never fucking know with these techbro companies...

      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
      sundogplanets@mastodon.social
      wrote last edited by
      #13

      Oh my god the "PUBLIC INTEREST" section is a giant love fest over all the things that AI isn't actually doing. Don't worry guys, if you launch data centers into orbit, they are way greener! There's always solar power in space! Please just ignore all the rocket exhaust, ablation products, and shit hitting the ground... Also the fact that data centers in space are almost certainly physically impossible...

      gustavinobevilacqua@mastodon.cisti.orgG sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR gooba42@mastodon.socialG 4 Replies Last reply
      0
      • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

        Oh my god the "PUBLIC INTEREST" section is a giant love fest over all the things that AI isn't actually doing. Don't worry guys, if you launch data centers into orbit, they are way greener! There's always solar power in space! Please just ignore all the rocket exhaust, ablation products, and shit hitting the ground... Also the fact that data centers in space are almost certainly physically impossible...

        gustavinobevilacqua@mastodon.cisti.orgG This user is from outside of this forum
        gustavinobevilacqua@mastodon.cisti.orgG This user is from outside of this forum
        gustavinobevilacqua@mastodon.cisti.org
        wrote last edited by
        #14

        @sundogplanets

        IMHO there are other better ways to create some thousands of jobs.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

          Oh my god the "PUBLIC INTEREST" section is a giant love fest over all the things that AI isn't actually doing. Don't worry guys, if you launch data centers into orbit, they are way greener! There's always solar power in space! Please just ignore all the rocket exhaust, ablation products, and shit hitting the ground... Also the fact that data centers in space are almost certainly physically impossible...

          sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
          sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
          sundogplanets@mastodon.social
          wrote last edited by
          #15

          The shitweasels are also asking for waivers! Because the few rules that are left are just too much.

          Please don't ask Jeff Bezos to pay a measly million dollar bond in case they don't launch 50% of their sats within 6 years. That would be unfair! Also please don't worry about what radio spectrum we'll use, because we totally promise not to have any interference at all, even though we provide absolutely zero information about how our satellites work!

          michael_w_busch@mastodon.onlineM sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

            Blue Origin wants 51,600 satellites, all in sun-synchronous orbits. That means they'll follow the terminator line around the Earth and be sunlit ALWAYS. They want to distribute them between 500-1,800 km altitude, which means some of them will be sunlit and visible all the time. Fanfuckingtastic.

            This is also the exact same set of orbits that both SpaceX and Starcloud want. Sun-synchronous orbits are about to get ridiculously crowded.

            T This user is from outside of this forum
            T This user is from outside of this forum
            tadbithuman@mastodon.social
            wrote last edited by
            #16

            @sundogplanets Aren't there treaties that limit what can be put up there? Why not?

            dstndstn@hachyderm.ioD 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

              The shitweasels are also asking for waivers! Because the few rules that are left are just too much.

              Please don't ask Jeff Bezos to pay a measly million dollar bond in case they don't launch 50% of their sats within 6 years. That would be unfair! Also please don't worry about what radio spectrum we'll use, because we totally promise not to have any interference at all, even though we provide absolutely zero information about how our satellites work!

              michael_w_busch@mastodon.onlineM This user is from outside of this forum
              michael_w_busch@mastodon.onlineM This user is from outside of this forum
              michael_w_busch@mastodon.online
              wrote last edited by
              #17

              @sundogplanets

              Thank you for reading through this mess so that the rest of us do not have to.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                The shitweasels are also asking for waivers! Because the few rules that are left are just too much.

                Please don't ask Jeff Bezos to pay a measly million dollar bond in case they don't launch 50% of their sats within 6 years. That would be unfair! Also please don't worry about what radio spectrum we'll use, because we totally promise not to have any interference at all, even though we provide absolutely zero information about how our satellites work!

                sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                wrote last edited by
                #18

                Oh another one too: Please don't ask us about our debris mitigation plan because the "satellite design is currently being matured" (in other words, they have no fucking clue what the satellites will actually look like or how they will work).

                Oh yet another: we totally can't upload our orbital parameter date because the FCC's web form is too crappy! (This part I actually believe. The FCC's website blows.) But come on guys, no orbits?

                Oh yeah, didn't submit to the ITU yet either. Of course.

                sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS trenchworms@eldritch.cafeT aetios@sns.minovsky.spaceA 3 Replies Last reply
                0
                • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                  Blue Origin wants 51,600 satellites, all in sun-synchronous orbits. That means they'll follow the terminator line around the Earth and be sunlit ALWAYS. They want to distribute them between 500-1,800 km altitude, which means some of them will be sunlit and visible all the time. Fanfuckingtastic.

                  This is also the exact same set of orbits that both SpaceX and Starcloud want. Sun-synchronous orbits are about to get ridiculously crowded.

                  martinvermeer@fediscience.orgM This user is from outside of this forum
                  martinvermeer@fediscience.orgM This user is from outside of this forum
                  martinvermeer@fediscience.org
                  wrote last edited by
                  #19

                  @sundogplanets

                  > Sun-synchronous orbits are about to get ridiculously crowded.

                  True, but there is good news. I know you want to hear good news, right? The _relative_ velocities between all these sun-synchronous satellites will be small, so the intra-orbit contribution to the Kessler syndrome will be close to zero. Won't help a lot, because of all those satellites in other orbits...

                  martinvermeer@fediscience.orgM 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                    Oh my god the "PUBLIC INTEREST" section is a giant love fest over all the things that AI isn't actually doing. Don't worry guys, if you launch data centers into orbit, they are way greener! There's always solar power in space! Please just ignore all the rocket exhaust, ablation products, and shit hitting the ground... Also the fact that data centers in space are almost certainly physically impossible...

                    raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                    raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                    raymaccarthy@mastodon.ie
                    wrote last edited by
                    #20

                    @sundogplanets
                    No-one knows how to cool a 100kW satellite, much less one that's 1 MW.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                      Oh another one too: Please don't ask us about our debris mitigation plan because the "satellite design is currently being matured" (in other words, they have no fucking clue what the satellites will actually look like or how they will work).

                      Oh yet another: we totally can't upload our orbital parameter date because the FCC's web form is too crappy! (This part I actually believe. The FCC's website blows.) But come on guys, no orbits?

                      Oh yeah, didn't submit to the ITU yet either. Of course.

                      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                      sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #21

                      That was the Narrative, now on to the Technical Annex. Whoopee.

                      Ok, so they want 300-1,000 satellites per plane, separated by 5-10km, ranging from 500-1,800km altitude. All in sun-synchronous. Like I said, super crowded.

                      There's a bunch of info about spectrum use, I will leave this to my radio colleagues to interpret. (dBW/m^2/MHz units... flux, I guess? Eeek.) It's probably bad.

                      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                        Oh my god the "PUBLIC INTEREST" section is a giant love fest over all the things that AI isn't actually doing. Don't worry guys, if you launch data centers into orbit, they are way greener! There's always solar power in space! Please just ignore all the rocket exhaust, ablation products, and shit hitting the ground... Also the fact that data centers in space are almost certainly physically impossible...

                        gooba42@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                        gooba42@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                        gooba42@mastodon.social
                        wrote last edited by
                        #22

                        @sundogplanets The only spaceship with the resources to run a data center is the one we all live on and we're not even very good at it here where there's easy maintenance, somewhere to put the heat, ready power supply and bandwidth.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • T tadbithuman@mastodon.social

                          @sundogplanets Aren't there treaties that limit what can be put up there? Why not?

                          dstndstn@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                          dstndstn@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                          dstndstn@hachyderm.io
                          wrote last edited by
                          #23

                          @tadbithuman @sundogplanets
                          the Outer Space Treaty (1967) is the closest thing; and because negotiating international treaties is hard

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                            That was the Narrative, now on to the Technical Annex. Whoopee.

                            Ok, so they want 300-1,000 satellites per plane, separated by 5-10km, ranging from 500-1,800km altitude. All in sun-synchronous. Like I said, super crowded.

                            There's a bunch of info about spectrum use, I will leave this to my radio colleagues to interpret. (dBW/m^2/MHz units... flux, I guess? Eeek.) It's probably bad.

                            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                            sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                            wrote last edited by
                            #24

                            ORBITAL DEBRIS MITIGATION this part will be the most "fun"

                            But a reminder that they asked for a waiver for their debris plan, so I guess that this is just... for funsies?

                            Here's the first and only information I've seen about the satellite sizes. They will be bigger than 10cm, so they will be easily tracked! No shit!! A fucking data center needs to be bigger than 10cm! What useful information!!

                            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS rbmath@mathstodon.xyzR oldclumsy_nowmad@mastodon.socialO 3 Replies Last reply
                            0
                            • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                              Blue Origin wants 51,600 satellites, all in sun-synchronous orbits. That means they'll follow the terminator line around the Earth and be sunlit ALWAYS. They want to distribute them between 500-1,800 km altitude, which means some of them will be sunlit and visible all the time. Fanfuckingtastic.

                              This is also the exact same set of orbits that both SpaceX and Starcloud want. Sun-synchronous orbits are about to get ridiculously crowded.

                              dstndstn@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                              dstndstn@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                              dstndstn@hachyderm.io
                              wrote last edited by
                              #25

                              @sundogplanets
                              some of my favourite satellites use(d) that orbit (WISE; SPHEREx) - it's great for surveyors

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • martinvermeer@fediscience.orgM martinvermeer@fediscience.org

                                @sundogplanets

                                > Sun-synchronous orbits are about to get ridiculously crowded.

                                True, but there is good news. I know you want to hear good news, right? The _relative_ velocities between all these sun-synchronous satellites will be small, so the intra-orbit contribution to the Kessler syndrome will be close to zero. Won't help a lot, because of all those satellites in other orbits...

                                martinvermeer@fediscience.orgM This user is from outside of this forum
                                martinvermeer@fediscience.orgM This user is from outside of this forum
                                martinvermeer@fediscience.org
                                wrote last edited by
                                #26

                                @sundogplanets BTW do the documents address the cooling problem?

                                sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                  ORBITAL DEBRIS MITIGATION this part will be the most "fun"

                                  But a reminder that they asked for a waiver for their debris plan, so I guess that this is just... for funsies?

                                  Here's the first and only information I've seen about the satellite sizes. They will be bigger than 10cm, so they will be easily tracked! No shit!! A fucking data center needs to be bigger than 10cm! What useful information!!

                                  sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                  sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                  sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #27

                                  To nobody's surprise, they will burn all their satellites up in the atmosphere, because that's what all the cool kids do. They don't actually say their operating lifetimes anywhere. But if they're 5 years like Starlink, then that's a bit more than one satellite burned up per hour.

                                  And will they burn up completely? Well, they say they'll use the same NASA debris model to assess that said that the SpaceX Crew Dragon trunk would burn up. So I'm not worried at all!!

                                  sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS saja@mstdn.socialS diekehrseite@mastodon.socialD mikemccaffrey@wandering.shopM 4 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                    Oh another one too: Please don't ask us about our debris mitigation plan because the "satellite design is currently being matured" (in other words, they have no fucking clue what the satellites will actually look like or how they will work).

                                    Oh yet another: we totally can't upload our orbital parameter date because the FCC's web form is too crappy! (This part I actually believe. The FCC's website blows.) But come on guys, no orbits?

                                    Oh yeah, didn't submit to the ITU yet either. Of course.

                                    trenchworms@eldritch.cafeT This user is from outside of this forum
                                    trenchworms@eldritch.cafeT This user is from outside of this forum
                                    trenchworms@eldritch.cafe
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #28

                                    @sundogplanets my "please don't ask me about my debris mitigation plan" shirt is raising a lot of questions i had hoped would be avoided by wearing the shirt

                                    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                      To nobody's surprise, they will burn all their satellites up in the atmosphere, because that's what all the cool kids do. They don't actually say their operating lifetimes anywhere. But if they're 5 years like Starlink, then that's a bit more than one satellite burned up per hour.

                                      And will they burn up completely? Well, they say they'll use the same NASA debris model to assess that said that the SpaceX Crew Dragon trunk would burn up. So I'm not worried at all!!

                                      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                      sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #29

                                      "Blue Origin will take all feasible steps to reduce the probability of collision by at least 1.5 orders of magnitude for any collision risk above a threshold which will be no higher than 1E-5" I'm an orbital debris expert and I'm not sure I can parse this sentence. But I'm sure it'll be fine!!

                                      They say they'll get the collision prob down to 1 in 1000 for any periods of non-maneuverability. With 51,000 sats and a million more from SpaceX, these are great odds! (...of a collision)

                                      aetios@sns.minovsky.spaceA sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS adamshostack@infosec.exchangeA ve2uwy@mastodon.radioV 5 Replies Last reply
                                      0
                                      • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                        Oh another one too: Please don't ask us about our debris mitigation plan because the "satellite design is currently being matured" (in other words, they have no fucking clue what the satellites will actually look like or how they will work).

                                        Oh yet another: we totally can't upload our orbital parameter date because the FCC's web form is too crappy! (This part I actually believe. The FCC's website blows.) But come on guys, no orbits?

                                        Oh yeah, didn't submit to the ITU yet either. Of course.

                                        aetios@sns.minovsky.spaceA This user is from outside of this forum
                                        aetios@sns.minovsky.spaceA This user is from outside of this forum
                                        aetios@sns.minovsky.space
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #30
                                        @sundogplanets This reads suspiciously as 'we have no plan, so please give us permission for this epic idea'.
                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                          "Blue Origin will take all feasible steps to reduce the probability of collision by at least 1.5 orders of magnitude for any collision risk above a threshold which will be no higher than 1E-5" I'm an orbital debris expert and I'm not sure I can parse this sentence. But I'm sure it'll be fine!!

                                          They say they'll get the collision prob down to 1 in 1000 for any periods of non-maneuverability. With 51,000 sats and a million more from SpaceX, these are great odds! (...of a collision)

                                          aetios@sns.minovsky.spaceA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          aetios@sns.minovsky.spaceA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          aetios@sns.minovsky.space
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #31
                                          @sundogplanets 51 collisions! Let's go!
                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups