[comfypotato]

These scientists need to get over it and work around it.

This article frames the problem as if the value proposition of the science and the satellites is remotely similar. This couldn’t be farther from the truth. Satellite telecommunication is greatly improving life on earth. Astrophysics, not so much. Just last week there was a front page HN article about how satellites may replace undersea cables for niche use cases. Starlink is just a major player in the space. This article is trying to utilize Musk’s negative reputation to its own end. The truth of the article would have been much clearer if it simply mentioned Starlink as an example.

There’s something to be said for satellites making true immersion in “natural beauty” impossible. Making that out to be negative is a matter of perspective. Frankly, I think it’s selfish to wish to hinder the massive gains in utility for humanity satellites bring.

[serf]

>This article frames the problem as if the value proposition of the science and the satellites is remotely similar. This couldn’t be farther from the truth

these kind of world-consequence decisions are supposed to be weighed and judged by The People In Power, rather than justified after the fact.

Yes, telecoms is important; they could have justified that importance before a tribunal of people affected by the installation of the fleet.

What happened instead?

They did what they want, were hit with complaints, and justified the existence afterwards by A) minimizing the impact of the science (absolutely unknown and unpredictable, by the way), much like what you're doing, and B) expounded on the absolute importance of global telecom coverage (a little bit more know-able.)

That's not an appropriate order of events for something that could have prolonged effects on an entire sector of research.

[rowanG077]

Correct me if I'm wrong but SpaceX did have to get approval. You can't just fire off rockets with payloads willy nilly.

[willdr]

They got approval to pollute the LEO of planet Earth? Who could you possibly go to for approval for that?

[laverya]

Bluntly, the people with the power to stop you from doing so. For SpaceX, that means the US government via the FCC.

[rowanG077]

Yes, granted by the FCC.

[c-hendricks]

The FCC is the LEO authority for the whole planet?

[rowanG077]

There is no LEO authority over the entire world. In fact, and this may shock you, there are hardly any global authorities. Except for the sanctions and war China, for example, could decide to poison all oceans.

[wmf]

They're the authority for anything that launches from the US and that transmits on RF. If Starlink interferes with US science the FCC definitely takes that into consideration.

[Dylan16807]

Your mention of satellite value gives me a thought: If spacex had to pay for the launch of 1 telescope for every 20 batches of starlink, how much use would that have compared to their interference?

> Just last week there was a front page HN article about how satellites may replace undersea cables for niche use cases.

They won't, that article was stupid.

Edit: Or, well, you added "niche" and the article very much didn't. It's true that a tiny fraction of data might use satellites instead, but there's going to be no meaningful "replacement".

[tommykins]

I think it's worth reading the article mate, it's talking about how they observed that satellite emissions and the effect it could have on their research and the things they do.

[JumpCrisscross]

> article frames the problem as if the value proposition of the science and the satellites is remotely similar. This couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Agree. They mention “SKAO are now in discussion with Starlink about what can be done about the interference caused by its satellites,” but fail to mention specifics. It’s obvious we aren’t going to ban LEO for this field. What can be done to mitigate the damage? Is it nontrivial? Does that require a regulatory mechanism to help pay for an enforce?

Put another way, when China starts doing the same thing, what design precautions will we want them to have deployed, and how can we set the example as the first movers?