Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

satellitemap.space

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 241 posts

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#181

Post by edgyquant »

crispinb wrote: post #74
tenpies wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem like we need a term for a civilisation that decides that serving internet is more important than its ability to observe the universe. Then, in that pursuit, they completely miss an otherwise easily detectable near earth object and become extinct, but the satellites will continue happily beaming internet to a user base that no longer exists. Then again, it's probably a non-issue. Not because the satellite…

> a civilisation that decides that serving internet is more important than its ability to observe the universe It's slightly worse than that. Starlink is only viable because of huge gaps in planned provision of what is now a basic utility (even government services in many parts of the world are hard to access without the internet). We're actually giving up our inalienable and multimillenial rights to a real night sky…

This is such a bad take. How would you get internet to the deep Amazon or the middle of the ocean without satellite?

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#182

Post by edgyquant »

newZWhoDis wrote: post #161
crispinb wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

People like you said the same thing when we built roads, bridges, steam ships, aircraft, and now spacecraft. Instead of bothering those who are building the future, you’re welcome to run off in the woods and LARP as ted kaczynski. It’s certainly preferable to moaning on the internet about how others are “denatured”.

I disagree with that poster as well, but this is a bit of an immature response. People are welcome to have worries about this stuff and it’s better to argue for their arguments being misguided than tell them to go live in the woods if they don’t like it.

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#183

Post by la64710 »

modeless wrote: post #7

Frequently Commented Questions: Yes, space looks crowded in these visualizations. But the size of the satellites is exaggerated here by thousands of times. Space is huge and the collision risk is extremely low. If displayed at their true size the satellites would not be visible, and indeed the vast majority are not visible in the real life night sky. The exception is recently launched satellites that are still in tra…

But the question is who gave this one guy right to surround our earth like this? As the power of individuals grow is there going to be any oversight to ensure a consensus is reached collectively before someone decide to do something like this? I agree that technically it may not be as bad as it looks but just in principle one cannot fathom the level of reach that modern civilization allows to just one person that this map demonstrates.

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#184

Post by Jon_Lowtek »

ck2 wrote: post #64
modeless wrote: post #7

Frequently Commented Questions: Yes, space looks crowded in these visualizations. But the size of the satellites is exaggerated here by thousands of times. Space is huge and the collision risk is extremely low. If displayed at their true size the satellites would not be visible, and indeed the vast majority are not visible in the real life night sky. The exception is recently launched satellites that are still in tra…

There's several more startups filing to launch their own 10,000+ satellites. The sky is going to be trashed like the scooters littered across every major city's sidewalks, seemed like an acceptable idea on paper by the eager governments beforehand but in reality it just makes an absolute mess that no-one seems to take responsibility for or ever fixes.

> no-one seems to take responsibility

No profit oriented corporation will ever take responsibility for downsides of their business that can be pushed onto others as externalities. The answer is to force them with regulations.

(This is the general rule, exceptions do exist like brands or product lines that cater to the niche of people especially conscious of a particular issue. The food sector is a good example. Note how those who do tend to create self-regulation with certifiable standards and that, strictly speaking, they can not externalise that specific issue so they don't)

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#185

Post by caskstrength »

hungryforcodes wrote: post #99

No one in Asia or Africa or India seem to be using it. Are we just polluting LEO for the sake of a handful of Americans? I feel like in the US it's not even widely used...

> Are we just polluting LEO for the sake of a handful of Americans? I feel like in the US it's not even widely used...

It is quite popular in Ukraine. Granted, Ukraine is neither in Asia nor in Africa.

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#186

Post by oh_sigh »

la64710 wrote: post #183
modeless wrote: post #7

Frequently Commented Questions: Yes, space looks crowded in these visualizations. But the size of the satellites is exaggerated here by thousands of times. Space is huge and the collision risk is extremely low. If displayed at their true size the satellites would not be visible, and indeed the vast majority are not visible in the real life night sky. The exception is recently launched satellites that are still in tra…

But the question is who gave this one guy right to surround our earth like this? As the power of individuals grow is there going to be any oversight to ensure a consensus is reached collectively before someone decide to do something like this? I agree that technically it may not be as bad as it looks but just in principle one cannot fathom the level of reach that modern civilization allows to just one person that thi…

Do you think China or Russia would ever agree to a global satellite internet connectivity initiative that allows anyone to easily bypass their information control mechanisms?

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#187

Post by oh_sigh »

crispinb wrote: post #124
wkat4242 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink sats don't stick around for multiple millennia. Their orbit degrades quite fast. You need much higher orbits for such longevity.

No wasn't suspecting nuisance-satellite of being near-eternal! I mean we have had a real night sky for millenia, and now a handful of men are being permitted, with hardly any communal discussion or decision, to expunge it. Many won't notice, of course, having been denatured by suburbia.

You can't see the satellites with the naked eye when they are in their target orbit.

You can occasionally see them as they are advancing to their orbit, and they look no different than an airplane at night looks. Except cooler.

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#189

Post by ianburrell »

ricksunny wrote: post #134
walrus01 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was this way until very recently, google "starlink lasers". The newer satellites have satellite-to-satellite laser links which can form a chain until they reach a satellite that is presently overhead of an earth station. SpaceX has now started selling the global ocean maritime product version of starlink which specifically advertises full ocean coverage worldwide. I recently saw a person's first hand experience of…

Is the Starlink service geofenced to cutoff where Starlink doesn't have a telco license? Like if the maritime product finds itself sailing within the EEZ of a country that hasn't issued a telco operator license, will the service shut off?

There is Starlink Residential which only works in approved countries and can’t move. There is Starlink Roam which works anywhere on land. They supposedly restrict it far from land but not sure if acutally limit it.

Re: Live Starlink Satellite and Coverage Map

#190

Post by ghaff »

TinkersW wrote: post #160
randomcarbloke wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I guess "it's not meant for high population density areas" argument would work if rurals didn't also have garbage service on Starlink.

I have used it regularly in a rural area, it works amazingly better than what was available prior, and keeps improving as more satellites are launched.

If nothing other than 1 Gbit fiber will satisfy you I guess Starlink isn't that great. But, honestly, my wired broadband 50 miles outside of one of the largest cities in the Northeast isn't 100% reliable and near-infinitely fast either.

As in your case, my brother's house basically didn't really have Internet before though was finally get able to get a Verizon hotspot which "worked" but you couldn't really stream video, for example, because of data costs. Now, it's completely practical to work from there as well as have access to Internet entertainment etc. options which simply wasn't the case before.

Post reply on HN