[monadic2]

> However, even though I love the work astronomers do and the view of a clear sky into the stars, I must say I prefer global Internet availability over making astronomers clean their data from satelite datapoints.

That’s great because apparently nobody but SpaceX has any say in what happens.

[dtparr]

Are you unaware of the federal licenses required for these satellites to be deployed, or do you just mean they were granted without taking astronomers' wishes into account?

Edit: This is a sincere question. Several comments on this story indicate people don't believe there's any regulation as to what happens in space.

Edit 2: While I'm editing things, here's the FCC Record for the original Starlink proposal in case you're curious what some of the objections brought up during the original comment period were. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-18-38A1.pdf Mostly it looks like other satellite operators worried about interference, orbital debris concerns, and there was a note about potential impacts on radio astronomy.

[Alupis]

> Are you unaware of the federal licenses required for these satellites to be deployed

Astronomers are in other countries besides the US... and these satellites are going to span the globe impacting everyone everywhere.

[dtparr]

To be clear, I'm not actually saying this is all the fine. I think there are discussions to be had about the obviously worldwide impact. However, the point that I'm making was that "nobody but SpaceX has any say in what happens" is not true.

Certainly people can complain that current international treaties, federal regulations and so on aren't sufficient, that the decisions reached by regulatory bodies were incorrect, or ill informed, etc. But first they should be aware those decisions existed and did take into account input from a variety of sources, and it's not just 'if you can get it to space, do whatever you want'.

[shaklee3]

Not sure if you're aware, but it's widely publicized that SpaceX was granted licenses, waivers, and extensions that other companies were not, nor have been in the past. So yes, they have licenses, but it seems lobbying and Elon's fame has far more to do with this than anything.

[monadic2]

Evidently the federal licenses didn’t work. It seems like you can simply buy approval and override public interest.

Secondly, the problem is not just in federal air space.

[manicdee]

Radio astronomers were all over it well before the first Tintin test satellites launched.

The optical astronomers weren’t in the habit of commenting on satellite launch licensing and got caught on the back foot. Now the media campaign is basically optical astronomers complaining that “there is no process” because they didn’t get involved in the process in time.

[monadic2]

What process might you have used as someone with no money or political clout and to what end?

[manicdee]

The same process the other people use: respond to the applications while they are open for comment. Just write a letter with pen on paper if that’s the level of funding you have.

https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/ib/forms/repor...