[dang]

> you're almost a parody of "entitled, dismissive urbanite".

> you do your argument zero favors by trying to hand wave it away (unless you just mean to rant to no constructive end)

Personal attacks and name-calling are not ok here, regardless of how right you are or feel you are. Please omit such swipes when posting to HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[xoa]

I genuinely did not consider those to be personal attacks or name calling, but constructive criticism of the argument given. Dismissing development of universal rural focused broadband because in "most of Europe and SE Asia you can get gigabit broadband" is an implied dismissal of the worth of everyone outside of those privileged locations. It is indicative of a real bubbled perspective, and that's not helpful in convincing other people. And it does indeed to the argument zero favors to ignore it, because compromise is absolutely possible! This doesn't need to be total zero-sum scenario. As well as continued albedo reductions, it's possible to imagine other measures like a tiny tax on large constellation satellite internet specifically for astronomers to help fund space telescopes or other measures. Turning it purely into "this versus that" is a bad idea when "that" will overwhelmingly win. I think most people could understand a reasonable charge to help mitigate an externality.

Nevertheless I accept judgement of you and community here and will try to more carefully consider replies down the road.

[gioscarab]

IMHO the privileged point of view is yours, we are not the only inhabitants of earth looking up to the sky in the night, many animals rely on it to navigate/migrate. Many humans still don't know what is the internet and enjoy to look at the sky for pleasure and necessity. For sure when someone thinks it is ok to change the earth's night sky, just to be able to work from home, avoid to go to the bank, to see cat videos, memes and fake news, is by definition a privileged lazy guy.