This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
I was a space kid, followed every space shot since 1965, was a super fan of Apollo 11, I had a subscription to Nat Geo growing up, just for the Space photos.
So I can't believe I'm saying this: Maybe we've gone far enough for now, and we should have a moratorium on space for the next 50 years.
We should concentrate on Earth for awhile, dontcha think?
Who needs the night sky when you can download the old night sky via satellite internet with gig speed downloads in vr? /s
Elon Musk is such a goddamned literal supervillain that he managed to make the theme of Firefly wrong.
Apparently, they can take the sky from you.
Ads on the fucking moon are going to do it for me.
Billionaires don't give a fuck about anyone but themselves, not even their kids. And, we've all agreed to let billionaires run the world, it seems.
They might put a million satellites into orbit, but they're certainly not going to be orbital data centers. At least not as we currently understand data centers. The idea that space is cold and therefore a great place to put data centers that get hot is the idea of a stoned moron talking out of their ass. Space is a vacuum, you know what else is a vacuum, the part of your portable coffee mug that keeps your beverage warm or cold for ages, because vacuum is a crazy good insulator. Just because space is cold doesn't mean the heat from an orbital data center can dissipate into it. This dumb idea is never going to happen unless data canter technology improves to the point where they aren't environmental disasters anymore.
It's either data centres in space or giant mirrors to reflect sunlight.
Presumably his engineers have explained this to him but he didn't listen
To cool the iss they're exchanging heat into water pumping to ammonia exchangers then radiated through infrared. The radiators for a space data center would need to be prohibitively massive as I understand it.
Night as a Service
Welcome to SpaceX where we provide a garenteed night sky view that is simply to die for. Subscribe now to enjoy your favorite night sky. Subscribe now for a lower price than normal. Remember, Subscription to SpaceX's night sky is mandated by USA law. Those who don't subscribe will be executed as Traitors and Terrorists. SpaceX's Night Sky experience normally costs $399 per day but if you subscribe in the next 30 seconds using the following code (insert code here) you can enjoy SpaceX's Night Sky for just $99.99 a day. subscribe now. Terms and conditions apply. SpaceX is not responsible for any propery damage, injuries, and/or deaths related to SpaceX satellites falling from orbit. Prices scale based on your race and gender with White men receiving a 100% discount.
everything the tech bros touch, dies
Literally the plot of Horizon
He never respected his fellow man, why start now?
While this very well might fuck up land-based stuff looking at space, people are often overlooking what this would mean to stellar photography from space.
If they can truly launch these million data center sats profitably, that means starship works. That means payload to space is relatively cheap.
That means we could also send large quantities of large telescopes into space on the cheap, and avoid the crazy expensive cant fail telescopes because the cost to get them up there isnt prohibitive and a technical failure in the telescope isnt a disaster.
Things very well might change, but it will also open up possibilities in the same area.
Elon will not make it cheap. Falcon 9 prices keep rising. He's an exploiter and will enshitify his service once enough people are hooked on it.
Theoretically, even if we assume SpaceX is overshooting, that's an interesting thought:
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-cost-of-space-flight/
In practice? I'm more concerned about interest in funding astronomy in the first place.
That, and big fat telescopes are fundamentally expensive. And (at least for the optical variety) "swarming" them with a bunch of cheaper units isn't as effective as building a big one.
I'd love to be wrong though. There are some interesting papers on swarms of optical telescopes for a larger effective aperture, but I'm not qualified to assess them.
Oh, I wasn't thinking swarms the same way these million sats will be, I was thinking just using the whole payload diameter of around 9m for the lens/mirror (minus any housing) but they could potentially just buy the whole starship and be cheaper than past options and that is the housing.
James Webb cost billions because of it's complexity and launch costs, none of which is needed when there's 9meters to work with without any complexity at all.
If you wanted, you could make a super crazy expensive satellite that worked just like James Webb and have a massive mirror as well, but that's a bit different than my large quantity of cheaper telecopes in space. I wonder how big you could get the mirror if you did it James Webb style in starship.
I wonder how big you could get the mirror if you did it James Webb style in starship.
Presumably 7x ~8m hexagons folded up?
That is a good point though. And if one were to design a "budget" 9m space telescope, they could amortize the R&D dramatically by launching the same design many times, perhaps with different sensors for different purposes? Amortization is why the Falcon Heavy and such are so cheap, and why the Space Shuttle and JWST are obscenely expensive.
Okay, you've sold me. I hope this does happen.
Ya, that would get costs down further if they were able to amortize it over a larger quantity.
We could also get them pretty far out with starship refuelling, but refuelling a starship back to full capacity to then go somewhere would raise the cost a lot. But imagine a 7x 8m folded hexagon one sent out into deep space. That would be super expensive though, we wouldn't get a lot of those haha.
This is all a massive big IF though. Starship being fully reusable like they think is still very far from a given, so none of this might come true in our lifetimes.
There are roughly 15,000 total at the moment ? I wonder what that will do to animals and insects lives.
is already so bad. i do astro timelapses and it's all you see anymore. they stand out so much now, if the quantity gets 100x'd it'll be a nightmare.
it will blot out the stars...
exactly nothing as most animals and insects can't even see the stars; their sense of vision isn't good enough for that.
There aren’t many animals or insects in low-earth orbit though, thankfully.
Yeah but they use the light to navigate too. They use this planet too.
I think local illumination is probably going to be more of a problem than reflected light of a satellite.
Well that wannabe nazi took everything else, so why not the sky?
I thought they couldn't take the sky from me!
We haven't even finished burning the sky and boiling the sea!
And serenity is nowhere to be found.
Down with the space clankers
