News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Professional astronomers are calculating the cost of the ... by Robotbeat on Sunday May 26, 2019 @01:08PM (#20015978)
The night sky is impacted far more by blinking airplane lights and city light pollution than a few satellites.

This has been a thing since the dawn of space travel. These at least provide a service that most people would benefit from, either directly through service or indirectly through increased competition.

Honestly, I think more people enjoy watching Iridium satellites than are perturbed by them.

We’re not talking about pollution in the sense of significant changes in the brightness of the night sky (as we are with true light pollution from cities). We’re talking about the fact that they’re detectable with the naked eye.

Re:Professional astronomers are calculating the cost of the ... by manicdee on Sunday May 26, 2019 @02:13PM (#20016436)
The thing with Iridium watchers is that there were a small number of them. Seeing one was exciting.

If all the Starlink satellites are this bright, the night sky will have more Starlink satellites than visible stars.

Re:Professional astronomers are calculating the cost of the ... by TeMPOraL on Sunday May 26, 2019 @02:58PM (#20016715)
Iridium satellites were causing flares because of a design issue - their main antennas were essentially large mirrors. New generation of Iridium satellites fixed that issue (to my and other flare catchers' disappointment). I don't recall Starlink satellites to be designed to cause flares.
Re:Professional astronomers are calculating the cost of the ... by Robotbeat on Sunday May 26, 2019 @09:31PM (#20018798)
Someone has been doing calculations very wrong. That's not even close. https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1132672683974549505?re...