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

Starlink Satellites Tracker

findstarlink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 147 posts

Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker

#81

Post by Dah00n »

yreg wrote: post #75
DataJunkie wrote: post #67

While I won't subscribe (I have fiber), I am excited about what this might mean for the future. It would amazing to improve the technology enough to replace 4G/5G dongles. It sounds like the technology relies on being in a somewhat fixed position though.

One obvious synergy that comes to mind (if the base stations won't have to be geographically fixed) is to stream raw video from all cameras from all Teslas. Both for sentry mode (antitheft) and autonomy training. Of course it would be regulatory nightmare.

And the end of privacy.

Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker

#82

Post by Dah00n »

fighterpilot wrote: post #45
gambiting wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about?? Here in Poland(which isn't a poor country!) You can't even buy Starlink here, our astronomical organisations are already complaining about the pollution of the sky, but how can Poland tax an American corporation polluting our sky???? So the question should be - how can an American corporation deprive other countries of accessible view of the sky for profit and get away with it? Because it…

It's the same argument as for a carbon tax. It's imperfect, because the benefit only flows to the local government (when the commons is globally shared, as you point out), but it's the best practical solution since it broadly aligns incentives with that of the commons. Your solution to simply deprive rural communities/poor countries of internet access is a non-starter . What you're ignoring is that the positive exter…

I'm interested in what your opinion is of the exact same thing with poor countries burning lots of coal and polluting the oceans to lift their population out of poverty. Is it okay for China and India to have their time doing industrial era style pollution today or should we try to apply our modern anti-pollution rules on them?

Because when the rich western countries have launched lots and lots of satellits then poor countries do of course have the right to launch just as many, with no further caution than we use today at launch and positioning, when it's their turn to shine on the night shy.

I'm sure my opinion of Starlink is clear..

Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker

#83

Post by gpm »

8jy89hui wrote: post #28
tectonic wrote: post #6

We also have a coverage map for Starlink: https://orbitalindex.com/feature/starlink-coverage/

I like this map, I just wish it didn't start with auto-rotate on. Auto-rotate just makes it hard to see as the satellites travel around the world.

Original author here, my fault.

I think it made more sense when there were less satellites, but this was a pretty common opinion from the start.

Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker

#84

Post by Dylan16807 »

syedkarim wrote: post #71
antonzabirko wrote: post #47

Soon only the super rich will have sunlight, with satellite networks blocking out the sky in other areas.

Come on, why the down votes? This was legitimately amusing.

It's an extreme tangent and exaggerated by a million million times. That means it has no connection to the story at all.

Maybe I'm wrong to not find it funny, but I'm not a buzzkill in general, I just think this joke doesn't work and needs to be workshopped.

And if we did get up to the ridiculous scale to block even half a percent of sunlight I'm pretty sure that would actually be a good thing.

Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker

#85

Post by Dylan16807 »

gambiting wrote: post #76
fighterpilot wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> selling internet to people in wealthy countries in areas without good local internet options Even if I grant you that it's not going to be about supplying internet to poorer countries, this reason alone is sufficient. Depriving rural communities of internet over such a small negative externality is a non-starter. > literally no one else except for Americans has any say in it Poland emits significant amounts of carb…

Well, you make some good points, but obviously there has to be a line somewhere, right? GPS and Weather sattelites are very different because of their positioning in space and there's far fewer of them. It's just the sheer scale of Starlink that's concerning - 42k satellites in maximum configuration! So of course it isn't about not allowing any global externalities - but this one feels incredibly lopsided. GPS benefi…

Why do you say absolutely huge externalities? I like the theoretical idea of taxing for light pollution, and a huge majority of that tax would go to cities and suburbs using overkill lights. Starlink doesn't even stop you from observing the stars the way normal light pollution does.

Also it's not just the subscribers. The existence of starlink as a competitor will probably have a significant positive impact on millions of people.

Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker

#86

Post by BenjiWiebe »

dawnerd wrote: post #17
gambiting wrote: post #15

I honestly can't believe Starlink is allowed to do this. It's an absolute travesty, polluting the view of the sky for ALL people on Earth to an absolutely unprecedented degree, for profit of an American corporation. Absolutely despise it, wish all countries of the world came together and demanded the deployments to stop.

I'm be more upset about light pollution than tiny satellites.

Exactly. Some friends of mine are taking of going out of town so they can see a starlink train in a nice dark(er) sky.

Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker

#87

Post by Alupis »

fighterpilot wrote: post #25
gambiting wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink is polluting the sky for people who cannot buy its services, and who don't appreciate yet another American corporation invading into their lives, this time taking the very view of the night sky.

Then tax SpaceX for the light-pollution externality until they fix it (which they say they're going to do). I don't think depriving rural communities and poor countries of access to the internet is really the best solution to such a non-problem.

>Then tax SpaceX for the light-pollution externality until they fix it

Can Mongolia tax SpaceX? What about Chad?

Or is this just some American corporation doing whatever it wants, to hell with the consequences for the rest of the world?

Oh... but we're bringing internet to the world! Just buy this $2,000 USD base unit and subscribe for $100 USD monthly so that your Yurt in the middle of no-where-ville has high-speed internet... What? You have no shoes and only one pair of clothes? Just buy new ones on Amazon and get next day delivery!

--

Bringing internet to the world is a noble goal, particularly if it's not brought to the world by the likes of Facebook, Google or Amazon with their clear ulterior motives. Unlocking access to the world's knowledge is critical for the future of all people... but we shouldn't achieve that goal through force, which is what is happening now with these massive multi-thousand satellite constellations against the protest of nations and people alike. The whole "get over it" attitude is staggeringly in bad taste.

I also highly doubt these mega-constellations + launch costs are cheaper than putting up PTP and PTMP radio dishes in regions that desire the internet. We can push multiple gigabits through these dishes now for backhaul "lines" and there's been great organizations installing these systems throughout Africa and other places for more than two decades. These folks just need more funding... but radio dishes aren't sexy - instead we're putting these satellites up in space where they impact every human being on the planet, instead of just those who are using them.

Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker

#88

Post by mlindner »

User23 wrote: post #12
Diederich wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go outside this evening if the sky is clear. If you're anywhere between 30 degrees and 60 degrees, there are multiple starlink satellites in your line of sight all the time. Can you point them out? No, they're invisible at their operational altitude.

That depends on how dark the area is. I heard that in a Bortle 5 or lower area they are naked eye visible, which really sucks for stargazers. Especially since some of the more interesting naked eye observations have to be done using peripheral vision.

In what location can you see naked eye visibility down to 6th magnitude? You must have really good eyes.

Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker

#89

Post by dheera »

If they want to cover the entire Earth with internet access, how is it that I see them come and go in bunches rather than just a steady stream all night such that there is always at least one overhead? Having a bunch show up and disappear doesn't sound like very continuous internet access

Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker

#90

Post by mlindner »

alphaoverlord wrote: post #72
mlindner wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that time they'll also have a launch vehicle capable of launching around 300 satellites in a single launch. Additionally, 42,000 was a worst case for the number needed and only if things go exceedingly well with the service. I think people quote that number too much when in reality there's likely to be under 5000 (from SpaceX at least).

I think number of launches was used as a proxy for number of satellites launched in the last month - more satellites/launch shouldn't impact it that much.

I think it would as the satellites would be closer together with fewer launches so as a percentage of sky the issue would be reduced.
Post reply on HN