this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
1219 points (97.4% liked)

Microblog Memes

5778 readers
1739 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bstix@feddit.dk 239 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Fuckin space garbage is what it is.

Yes it was impressive that they landed a rocket again once, but the quantity of launches and satellites is doing nothing good for anyone. It should've been a stepping stone for better technology, but instead they're just mining money. Privately owned space engineering is a disgrace to humanity.

Space engineering used to unite even the worst opponents as with the international space station, but now those institutions are underfunded, while billionaire space-musk can shoot his loads into the atmosphere without any regard to the rest of the worlds population living inside said sphere.

Tax the asshole already.

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 59 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I was excited about starlink when it was announced, but already it's way too expensive, already bows to actual totalitarians and isn't affordable on the ocean and not available in remote places without a license.

And with more satellite constellations planned by amazon and others, it seems the kessler syndrome is just a question of time.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

On the Kessler point, Starlink birds fly at an altitude where they will deorbit in 4-8 years if they go dead, so that particular orbit will always be fairly clean, and if a Kessler event does happen, the debris will deorbit in a reasonable length of time.

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

A portion of the debris from collisions would enter elliptical orbits though so might need more time to de-orbit. But loosing all LEO satellites and even just 4-8 years without use of LEO would be an absolute catastrophe. You could still launch satellites to medium or geosynchronous orbit though.

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Where will they go after they deorbit? Do we get em back?

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

They burn up on re-entry, at least they're supposed to.

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Thanks, atmosphere 🙂❤️ that's interesting design! Will any of the debris reach the planet or is it designed to break apart in a particular fashion?

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago

Will any of the debris reach the planet

Not in a solid form. There may be some undesirable effects though at greater numbers, we don't really have good data. Here's a blog post by the European Space Agency talking about a couple studies on the effects of satellite reentry. Note that the satellites they simulated were significantly larger than the Starlink satellites.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

My understanding is they're designed to completely disintegrate.

[–] BrowseMan@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

And by doing so, aluminium in them is attacking the ozone layer that is already having a tough time...

[–] Sparky@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Wouldn't it be nice if those sattelites would work together instead of against eachother. What if Amazon worked together with starlink, and the other companies offering internet so there would be less sattelites in the sky. Why does every sat internet company need their own fleet of sattelites

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

Well presumably to make more money lol. The good thing is that there will at least be some competition to bring prices down and keep service quality up. A monopoly would be bad. But of course that leads to more satellites. This really shows how our capitalist system can't really make rational decisions that are for the benefit of humanity. Ideally we'd have a separate economic institution to regulate industry like this under direct democratic control.

[–] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

already bows to actual totalitarians

Care to elaborate?

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Turkey and Russia. It's clear that profit seeking corporations would bow, but then Elon screams bloody murder when reactionary forces in Brazil manipulating social media get censored.

[–] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I feel like that explanation is missing a verb or something.

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

To bow, or bow down or kneel for. But I'm not going to google that for you haha. The basic problem is that starlink theoretically has immense power so it becomes a political tool. He bows to those ones but not to legitimate democratic interests.

Especially once starlink and others can make landline based internet connections obsolete by pricing them out - which they are not currently doing though, but it seems only a matter of time with competition. Basically we could get to a situation where there are only like 2 or 3 internet provider practically controlling internet globally.

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They won't be able to price landline based connections out as long as they have to replace their satellites every 5 years. I wouldn't be surprised if they're running at a loss currently.

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

I'm pretty sure they ran the numbers for potential profits and determined it's a goldmine - in the long run. Maybe they'll need to increase the lifespan of satellites. Their internal launch costs are pretty low already. Amazon wants to build it's own constellation and is building new glen partially because they can't get launch slots from SpaceX. I'm sure you can find some numbers to do some napkin math.

Theoretically they can serve the whole world with internet without requiring only minimal land based infrastructure. That is a gigantic market they can reach. And incredibly power to wield for such a psycho.

Another strange case is high-frequency trading on stock exchanges - because light is faster in the vacuum of space compared to fiberglass they can trade on the stock exchanges around the world like nobody else can. Not sure how much money that makes.

[–] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

When I searched "Elon bows to Turkey" I got this story about Twitter censoring some tweets during the Turkish election... Is that what you're talking about?

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah. Which is in stark contrast to Musk's rhetoric in Brazil, which had a legal court order for censoring. Maybe Ukraine/Russia wasn't the best example. My point is that it's immense power. In the hands of a soulless corporation it's bad enough but an outright fascist like Musk is much worse.

[–] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What about Turkey and Russia? Starlink doesn't work in Russia.

[–] nomous@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Follow the news so we don't have to catch you up.

[–] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Replies like this from people like you is why social media sucks. Thanks for your contribution on keeping it so.

[–] Crampon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's extremely affordable on the ocean. What are you talking about?

Just until recently satellite internet was really expensive. Like only large corporations could afford it. And the bandwidth was shit. Also it was barely available in the deep northern and southern hemisphere. Sure it's considered expensive for the regular kayaking dude. But it's insanely more available than ever before.

The dudes an asshole. But don't invent arguments.

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yeah it's much cheaper, but still like $250 excessively expensive compared to $50 land based starlink. For no technical reason since there is vastly less utilization on ocean. It's price gauging because of lack of alternative and because rich cruisers can afford it. So poor people are still forced to use cell phone based internet (or starlink) only near the coast and nothing has changed. For me it's a disappointment. Of course that is just capitalism.

Theoretically the sea could be one of the cheapest places to live if you build and maintain your own solar powered electric boat. Or use kite power. No taxes, produce your own electricity, produce your own water, incinerating toilet and emit only grey water. The one thing that is missing is cheap internet.

[–] pg_jglr@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 month ago

This. I wish I had more than one up vote I could give for this comment.

[–] dubious@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

agreed. it's a technology we need but like everything meant to improve humanity, it should be publicly owned (no, not the stock market - truly public).

[–] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Enshittification happens to all things, sadly.

[–] FinalRemix@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

It happens really early with that fuckin' weasel in charge.

[–] leftytighty@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago

When people talk about taxing these horrible people I think of tax as being a euphamism

[–] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago

the quantity of launches and satellites is doing nothing good for anyone

Except for the millions of people accessing internet via Starlink to whom the alternative is either no internet, slow internet or extremely expensive internet.