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. Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites!

Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites!

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
107 Posts 63 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

    @MatthewChat Amazingly, the US actually already has a policy against space advertising. But other countries don't.

    matthewchat@mstdn.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
    matthewchat@mstdn.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
    matthewchat@mstdn.social
    wrote last edited by
    #44

    @sundogplanets when I was a child in the USA, there were laws against doctors, lawyers, and pharmaceutical companies advertising. A few well placed millions of dollars changed that.

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

      Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites! (There are currently 10,296 Starlink sats in orbit)

      Don't worry, SpaceX said they'd get their satellites below magnitude 7! (They have not https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2025MNRAS.544L..15M/PUB_PDF)

      Don't worry, they won't actually start Kessler Syndrome! https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/

      Don't worry, they won't actually launch a million AI data centres into orbit!! https://theconversation.com/a-new-space-race-could-turn-our-atmosphere-into-a-crematorium-for-satellites-276366

      This is the fucking worst I-told-you-so https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

      ahimsa_pdx@disabled.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
      ahimsa_pdx@disabled.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
      ahimsa_pdx@disabled.social
      wrote last edited by
      #45

      @sundogplanets
      This image should be on the front page of major news outlets. So many folks don't know about this problem!

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • jackemled@furry.engineerJ jackemled@furry.engineer

        @guigsy @sundogplanets Why not do a long exposure instead? Aren't composite photos usually done to look at a specific object & using a special tripod to automatically move the camera & telescope to always point at it?

        Spinning the satellites would be a good way to make sure solar panels are regularly exposed to light if they're just mounted to the outside & not retractable, but then you can't aim the antenna. That's only good for those microsatellites people host BBSs on & communicate with using special equipment at very specific times.

        guigsy@mstdn.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
        guigsy@mstdn.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
        guigsy@mstdn.social
        wrote last edited by
        #46

        @jackemled @sundogplanets Starlinks have propulsion. I'm pretty confident they are fully stabilised. They are actively able to avoid colliding (provided there aren't multiple fails). And if they were spinning, they'd need even bigger solar. And they operate at many kilowatts continuously. They aren't microsatellite scale.

        jackemled@furry.engineerJ 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • guigsy@mstdn.socialG guigsy@mstdn.social

          @jackemled @sundogplanets Starlinks have propulsion. I'm pretty confident they are fully stabilised. They are actively able to avoid colliding (provided there aren't multiple fails). And if they were spinning, they'd need even bigger solar. And they operate at many kilowatts continuously. They aren't microsatellite scale.

          jackemled@furry.engineerJ This user is from outside of this forum
          jackemled@furry.engineerJ This user is from outside of this forum
          jackemled@furry.engineer
          wrote last edited by
          #47

          @guigsy @sundogplanets Yeah exactly, they're huge. I can't think of anything else that explains the gaps & makes sense though.

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

            Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites! (There are currently 10,296 Starlink sats in orbit)

            Don't worry, SpaceX said they'd get their satellites below magnitude 7! (They have not https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2025MNRAS.544L..15M/PUB_PDF)

            Don't worry, they won't actually start Kessler Syndrome! https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/

            Don't worry, they won't actually launch a million AI data centres into orbit!! https://theconversation.com/a-new-space-race-could-turn-our-atmosphere-into-a-crematorium-for-satellites-276366

            This is the fucking worst I-told-you-so https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

            q@social.quotequack.xyzQ This user is from outside of this forum
            q@social.quotequack.xyzQ This user is from outside of this forum
            q@social.quotequack.xyz
            wrote last edited by
            #48

            @sundogplanets unrelated but i would love if everyone added sources like þis

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

              Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites! (There are currently 10,296 Starlink sats in orbit)

              Don't worry, SpaceX said they'd get their satellites below magnitude 7! (They have not https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2025MNRAS.544L..15M/PUB_PDF)

              Don't worry, they won't actually start Kessler Syndrome! https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/

              Don't worry, they won't actually launch a million AI data centres into orbit!! https://theconversation.com/a-new-space-race-could-turn-our-atmosphere-into-a-crematorium-for-satellites-276366

              This is the fucking worst I-told-you-so https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

              papachiote@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
              papachiote@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
              papachiote@mastodon.social
              wrote last edited by
              #49

              @sundogplanets impressive! 25 years ago that was just fiction. Certainly that should pollute frequencies in many levels of life and to the planet

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • jackemled@furry.engineerJ jackemled@furry.engineer

                @guigsy @sundogplanets Why not do a long exposure instead? Aren't composite photos usually done to look at a specific object & using a special tripod to automatically move the camera & telescope to always point at it?

                Spinning the satellites would be a good way to make sure solar panels are regularly exposed to light if they're just mounted to the outside & not retractable, but then you can't aim the antenna. That's only good for those microsatellites people host BBSs on & communicate with using special equipment at very specific times.

                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
                #50

                @jackemled @guigsy

                As @sundogplanets wrote, the gaps in the satellite trails are just from when the camera stopped taking data to read out between each of the exposures used to make the image.

                This is done because if exposed for too long; the brightest things in an image saturate the detector in the camera.

                jackemled@furry.engineerJ 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • michael_w_busch@mastodon.onlineM michael_w_busch@mastodon.online

                  @jackemled @guigsy

                  As @sundogplanets wrote, the gaps in the satellite trails are just from when the camera stopped taking data to read out between each of the exposures used to make the image.

                  This is done because if exposed for too long; the brightest things in an image saturate the detector in the camera.

                  jackemled@furry.engineerJ This user is from outside of this forum
                  jackemled@furry.engineerJ This user is from outside of this forum
                  jackemled@furry.engineer
                  wrote last edited by
                  #51

                  @michael_w_busch @guigsy @sundogplanets Thank you! I understand now.

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

                    Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites! (There are currently 10,296 Starlink sats in orbit)

                    Don't worry, SpaceX said they'd get their satellites below magnitude 7! (They have not https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2025MNRAS.544L..15M/PUB_PDF)

                    Don't worry, they won't actually start Kessler Syndrome! https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/

                    Don't worry, they won't actually launch a million AI data centres into orbit!! https://theconversation.com/a-new-space-race-could-turn-our-atmosphere-into-a-crematorium-for-satellites-276366

                    This is the fucking worst I-told-you-so https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

                    rogue_cells@chaos.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                    rogue_cells@chaos.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                    rogue_cells@chaos.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #52

                    @sundogplanets I know this sucks badly for science and spaceflight... but the picture also kinda looks cool as fuck, tbh. You can really visualize the orbit and see how the trajectories of those satellites curve around the planet.

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

                      Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites! (There are currently 10,296 Starlink sats in orbit)

                      Don't worry, SpaceX said they'd get their satellites below magnitude 7! (They have not https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2025MNRAS.544L..15M/PUB_PDF)

                      Don't worry, they won't actually start Kessler Syndrome! https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/

                      Don't worry, they won't actually launch a million AI data centres into orbit!! https://theconversation.com/a-new-space-race-could-turn-our-atmosphere-into-a-crematorium-for-satellites-276366

                      This is the fucking worst I-told-you-so https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

                      wizarro@social.vivaldi.netW This user is from outside of this forum
                      wizarro@social.vivaldi.netW This user is from outside of this forum
                      wizarro@social.vivaldi.net
                      wrote last edited by
                      #53

                      @sundogplanets and they fall out of the sky! Isn’t close-minded for-extreme-profit expansionism grand!

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • brokar@mastodon.socialB brokar@mastodon.social

                        @sundogplanets @wraptile

                        Well, you can also spy with the satellites. Can't do that with a cell tower (not that effective) and destroying one satellite does nothing to the system.

                        I really wish China would launch their own 10.000 satellites and program them on a collision course with the Starlink ones, forcing all of them to enter the atmosphere and burn out.

                        I would personally thank Xi for making astronomy possible again 😉

                        S This user is from outside of this forum
                        S This user is from outside of this forum
                        savera@mastodon.sdf.org
                        wrote last edited by
                        #54

                        @Brokar @sundogplanets @wraptile I’ll have you know that I’m not the malicious type.

                        I wonder if these sats are protected against laser mischief makers. You know like they used to do with airplanes.

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

                          Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites! (There are currently 10,296 Starlink sats in orbit)

                          Don't worry, SpaceX said they'd get their satellites below magnitude 7! (They have not https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2025MNRAS.544L..15M/PUB_PDF)

                          Don't worry, they won't actually start Kessler Syndrome! https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/

                          Don't worry, they won't actually launch a million AI data centres into orbit!! https://theconversation.com/a-new-space-race-could-turn-our-atmosphere-into-a-crematorium-for-satellites-276366

                          This is the fucking worst I-told-you-so https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

                          troschunk@mamamaci.onlineT This user is from outside of this forum
                          troschunk@mamamaci.onlineT This user is from outside of this forum
                          troschunk@mamamaci.online
                          wrote last edited by
                          #55

                          @sundogplanets I saw it in my computer desktop today (i have it configured to change everyday with nasa's pic of the day). And I wondered wtf was that. Now I have a new thing to be afraid of 😞

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • wallabra@bark.lgbtW This user is from outside of this forum
                            wallabra@bark.lgbtW This user is from outside of this forum
                            wallabra@bark.lgbt
                            wrote last edited by
                            #56

                            @macronencer @sundogplanets Wait, what's the image for?

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

                              Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites! (There are currently 10,296 Starlink sats in orbit)

                              Don't worry, SpaceX said they'd get their satellites below magnitude 7! (They have not https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2025MNRAS.544L..15M/PUB_PDF)

                              Don't worry, they won't actually start Kessler Syndrome! https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/

                              Don't worry, they won't actually launch a million AI data centres into orbit!! https://theconversation.com/a-new-space-race-could-turn-our-atmosphere-into-a-crematorium-for-satellites-276366

                              This is the fucking worst I-told-you-so https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

                              maussagenlogik@chaos.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                              maussagenlogik@chaos.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                              maussagenlogik@chaos.social
                              wrote last edited by
                              #57

                              @sundogplanets I'm trying to figure out with friends how many of the visible satellites in that image are Starlink. Maybe you could give a rough estimate?

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

                                Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites! (There are currently 10,296 Starlink sats in orbit)

                                Don't worry, SpaceX said they'd get their satellites below magnitude 7! (They have not https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2025MNRAS.544L..15M/PUB_PDF)

                                Don't worry, they won't actually start Kessler Syndrome! https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/

                                Don't worry, they won't actually launch a million AI data centres into orbit!! https://theconversation.com/a-new-space-race-could-turn-our-atmosphere-into-a-crematorium-for-satellites-276366

                                This is the fucking worst I-told-you-so https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

                                mattmoose@mastodon.worldM This user is from outside of this forum
                                mattmoose@mastodon.worldM This user is from outside of this forum
                                mattmoose@mastodon.world
                                wrote last edited by
                                #58

                                @sundogplanets

                                Bastards. Total failure of policy and regulatory enforcement.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • maussagenlogik@chaos.socialM maussagenlogik@chaos.social

                                  @sundogplanets I'm trying to figure out with friends how many of the visible satellites in that image are Starlink. Maybe you could give a rough estimate?

                                  maussagenlogik@chaos.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                  maussagenlogik@chaos.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                  maussagenlogik@chaos.social
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #59

                                  @sundogplanets We're pretty sure a majority must be Starlink, but is it more like ⅔ or 99% of those lines?

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • wraptile@fosstodon.orgW wraptile@fosstodon.org

                                    @sundogplanets and for what?

                                    I did some napkin math some time ago: all these satellites cost around 10-15B usd to deploy. This would be equivalent of 0.5 - 1 million cell towers at 10-20k usd (yeah that cheap).
                                    There are currently 7 million cell towers worldwide most of which are old and under-performing. With 1 million NEW cell towers with economies of scale we could have probably covered the same actual reach with better latency, access and affordability.

                                    Low orbit internet is a joke.

                                    stuartyeates@cloudisland.nzS This user is from outside of this forum
                                    stuartyeates@cloudisland.nzS This user is from outside of this forum
                                    stuartyeates@cloudisland.nz
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #60

                                    @wraptile @sundogplanets

                                    Yeah, but a single EMP can't take out a million cell towers because the cell towers have the mass to have slightly decent insulation.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • wallabra@bark.lgbtW This user is from outside of this forum
                                      wallabra@bark.lgbtW This user is from outside of this forum
                                      wallabra@bark.lgbt
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #61

                                      @macronencer Ohh, right, yeah, that argument. I had forgotten about it.

                                      Yeah, it's bollocks. Ukraine still has Internet infrastructure. It's not as hard to destroy internet connectivity in a war precisely because of the distributive nature of routable networks.

                                      In other words, Starlink is completely unnecessary. Ukraine's gonna be fine... at least internet wise.

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

                                        Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites! (There are currently 10,296 Starlink sats in orbit)

                                        Don't worry, SpaceX said they'd get their satellites below magnitude 7! (They have not https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2025MNRAS.544L..15M/PUB_PDF)

                                        Don't worry, they won't actually start Kessler Syndrome! https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/

                                        Don't worry, they won't actually launch a million AI data centres into orbit!! https://theconversation.com/a-new-space-race-could-turn-our-atmosphere-into-a-crematorium-for-satellites-276366

                                        This is the fucking worst I-told-you-so https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

                                        mrundkvist@archaeo.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                        mrundkvist@archaeo.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                        mrundkvist@archaeo.social
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #62

                                        @sundogplanets
                                        I don't even know what service those satellites are intended to provide. We've already got cell phone towers everywhere, thank you very much.

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

                                          Don't worry, Sam, SpaceX won't ACTUALLY launch 7,000 satellites! (There are currently 10,296 Starlink sats in orbit)

                                          Don't worry, SpaceX said they'd get their satellites below magnitude 7! (They have not https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2025MNRAS.544L..15M/PUB_PDF)

                                          Don't worry, they won't actually start Kessler Syndrome! https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/

                                          Don't worry, they won't actually launch a million AI data centres into orbit!! https://theconversation.com/a-new-space-race-could-turn-our-atmosphere-into-a-crematorium-for-satellites-276366

                                          This is the fucking worst I-told-you-so https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

                                          regguy@mstdn.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                          regguy@mstdn.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                          regguy@mstdn.social
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #63

                                          @sundogplanets This is why there shouldn't be any billionaires. If Musk didn't have so much darn money, he couldn't waste it on a useless polluting constellation of satellites like this.

                                          What a mess.

                                          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