I realize this is off topic, but why do people use Claude of all models to write these, when its style is so obvious and so grating? I just immediately hit Back on the first Claudism.
Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies
51–60 of 92 posts
Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
An endowment isn't free money and launching a telescope into space remains a costlier venture than plopping a few arrays on mountains like Mauna Kea or atop the Chilean Andes. Contrary to your imagination, radio telescopes aren't that cheap either. The Smithsonian and NASA fund most of the construction, operation, and maintenance of Harvard's telescopes rather than the university. Suffice it to say, it's unlikely an…
Sure, sure. The endowment generates revenue which is then spent on stuff. Harvard spends billions every year on stuff. A small slice of that spending over the last decade could have gotten them a huge scientific and prestige boon: the first major private telescope in space. (Cubesats don’t count.) Government subsidies might explain it though. Why should Harvard spend their own money when they can spend mine?
What you call "the endowment " doesn't exist in any monolithic sense. "The endowment" is a disparate collection of donations from alumni such as scholarships, artwork, buildings, etc., governed by their respective, specifically-worded contracts. Many of these gifts aren't easily convertible to cash. In fact, a large cash gift is rarely offered at all and rarer still would any such gift come unconditionally.
> Government subsidies might explain it though. Why should Harvard spend their own money when they can spend mine?
The government's justification has historically been that the research value gained by putting the brightest minds to work at the frontier of academic science is worth the allocation of necessary monies. Whether that is (or has been) true is obviously debatable.
Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty sure we achieved that level of coverage here in the US a decade or more earlier than that. A lot of those same rural customers still rely on the telephone system for Internet access. They might be able to get DSL now, but the speeds are going to be low; often just a few hundred kilobits per second.
So pull modern fibre; as should be done.
And who pays for those miles of fiber? That one customer, because he chose to live there?
I assume you understand that it that's the case, Starlink is a much better option as it won't cost them 5 figures upfront
Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies
#54Another example of billionaire wait trillionaire power capture. It’s really tough for democracy when one man has all that power. Hah Elon is lex luthor.
Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies
#55maybe Internet for people on earth matters more than astronomy
The two aren't mutually exclusive, as long as aluminum foil is within a trillionaire's budget.
Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies
#56There is some evidence that little engineering effort has been put into mitigating this problem. I think if someone actually tried really hard we could make these birds a lot quieter.
> We compared the detected power flux densities of this UEMR to that emitted by the first generation v1.0 and v1.5 Starlink satellites. When correcting for the observed satellite distances, we find that the second-generation satellites emit UEMR that is up to a factor of 32 stronger compared to the first generation.
https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/abs/2024/09/aa51856-24/aa5...
Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies
#57I realize this is off topic, but why do people use Claude of all models to write these, when its style is so obvious and so grating? I just immediately hit Back on the first Claudism.
Did you care about the writing style of Rex Edison before and now you are disappointed?
That page is not the New Yorker.
And don't get me wrong, but the writing of normal newspaper became shit through the internet not due to claude. You have the clickbait header, than you have the subtext which repeats the clickbait header, then you had the first paragraph which repeats the subheader, than you had the second paragraph giving you some random 'background infos' and then you got the gist of the story in the 3 or 4th paragraph.
Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies
#58While I pine for a dark sky, it makes sense that these operations should move in the same way century old optical telescopes in cities are no longer used for cutting edge science. The far side of the moon seems like an increasingly viable option.
So because 10 Million people want to have internet, 8 Billion people no longer get acccess to that resource?
That sounds like a nice attitude from you.
Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies
#59maybe Internet for people on earth matters more than astronomy
Maybe but people already had plenty of internet before Starlink.
Everyone i know who is using starlink doesn't use starlink because htey need starlink for internet.
Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies
#60No problem, Starlink will sell us sattelite telescopes to solve that. /s