The 2nd generation of starlink satellites is worse than the first one: they leak radio spectrum energy at a massively higher level than the 1st generation.
Why have sympathy for anyone trying to do something stupid? Why do we need autonomous taxis? What problem is this solving, other than helping the already richer get a bit richer?
IMO the Starlink interference problem is being overblown to spite Elon for political reasons. In any case, satellites have long existed and other countries are going to build their own version of Starlink with the same problems. If they don't have the same problems then presumably Starlink will learn from them. There are other satellites made to observe stuff from space, and maybe the new SpaceX rockets will facilitate radioastronomy stations built on the dark side of the moon (if that's even important enough to build).
I actually don't want autonomous taxis or autonomous vehicles in general but some people do. When new technology is developed, usually most people experience benefits. It makes sense for some of the spoils to go to investors. Stop hating on people who make money. They are what funds everyone's pensions after all.
> Stop hating on people who make money. They are what funds everyone's pensions after all.
I was the 2nd employee at Amazon. It's not like I hate people who make money. And people making money is not what funds everyone's pensions, other than in some glib 8th grade sort of way.
Do feel free to continue on with your defense of incredibly rich people who don't actually give a damn about any of the things you do and do not need your assistance.
> IMO the Starlink interference problem is being overblown to spite Elon for political reasons.
That's your opinion. It's wrong.
There is a list of papers as long as an arm going back to the start of Starlink that measure the noise spectrum and point out exactly why it's a real problem for pre existing programs that have had billions invested in new science programs.
There are proposed work arounds which have been ignored.
Unless you are actively working on this issue I will consider your opinion no more valid than mine. There may be papers about the issue but that does not in itself prove how bad the issue is. I don't have time to find and read "a list of papers as long as an arm" anyway and I would bet good money that you didn't read them either.
>There are proposed work arounds which have been ignored.
Do you know if there is a legitimate technical reason why those might not have been implemented? Will any of those billions going to radio astronomy go toward reengineering the technical marvel that is Starlink? Doesn't the FCC inspect and approve all of our privately-owned satellites?
I'm not an astronomer or a rocket scientist but it seems to me that emitting continuous "noise" aka a radio signal is fundamental to the operation of satellite internet on such a scale. You don't have to respond with another pompous "Nah uh" because I don't care anymore.
Why have sympathy for anyone trying to do something stupid? Why do we need autonomous taxis? What problem is this solving, other than helping the already richer get a bit richer?