Crazy how simple and obvious that seems after you see it, but I never would have suspected it if someone did it right in front of me.

So we just shouldn’t have high speed sattelite internet for people in rural areas or disaster areas because some people make money from it?

Or they should only be there if a government runs the sattelite? Because that wouldn’t change the effect they have on telescopes.

This is the kind of comment I was talking about.

That’s what scientists have wanted anyway, even without the occasional satellite there is a lot of interference. I wouldn’t be surprised if they leveraged this to try to get more funding for more of them they wouldn’t get otherwise.

I do wonder how much the average people commenting would care if musk had nothing to do with this.

It’s an issue, but it’s an issue scientists knew was coming for decades now. Starlink isn’t the only company putting satellites into low earth orbit. They aren’t the first and the amount of them will just keep coming.

What we need is regulations and requirements for how many, what purpose, how they’ll be dealt with if something goes wrong and when they’re no longer needed, etc. Getting people to share satellites that are already there (when possible) and not putting up satellites that are redundant or don’t provide that much benefit versus non-satellite options or further orbit options will be important.

But all these mindless circlejerkers only talking about musk and wanting starlink “taken down” are really polluting the topic with meaningless bullshit. It’s unfortunate people are bringing these mindless circlejerks over from reddit.