I still think that's a test of how much we're willing to tolerate. Since there is no uproar (outside of niche communities like amateur astronomy) I imagine they'll keep pushing the envelope.

Don't be surprised when in a few years we'll have ads plastered across the sky (day and night) via drones or novel projection technologies; it's not like you're gonna see the stars beyond the Starlink junk field anyway...

Such a huge percentage of people these days live in urban sprawl with so much light pollution they can barely see any stars at all, so it makes sense there isn’t much backlash.

Taking people who’ve spent their entire lives in populated areas into the backcountry and spending a couple of hours with them just staring up at the sky as their eyes adjust and the shapes and colors of the Milky Way appear is kind of a mystical experience.

FWIW, SpaceX has been actively working to make the Starlink satellites darker --- painting them black, adding a sun visor, working with the International Astronomical Union, etc --- so it is a bit disingenuous to suggest that they are "pushing the envelope" in the other direction.

Naturally, I do wish that they were even darker and less obtrusive but oh well.

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-starlink-internet-sat...

Correction: they tried colouring satellites darker, but that caused heat radiation difficulties, so they've gone back to reflective satellites. Doesn't sound like they tried very hard. Plus the satellites have gotten larger (= still more reflectivity.)

The new satellites are 18% as reflective as the original ones despite being bigger.

Really? According to whom? I've been reading comments from astronomers that would indicate differently.

When is this expected to happen?

Probably never because every generation of Starlink satellite has been dimmer than the last. Despite being significantly bigger, the v2 minis are only 19% as bright as the original satellites.

Honestly, I can see why astronomers are pissed (they need to use software to delete satellite streaks from long exposures), but they really aren’t particularly visible except at dusk and dawn. They reflect the sun as they rise/set on the horizon, but that’s about it.

I live in an area where we can just barely still see the milky way, but light pollution is encroaching steadily.

The main problem is all the empty office buildings decided they need to leave their lights on 24/7. (Check out a light pollution map of Silicon Valley to see which megacorps are the worst offenders).

LED lights are probably a bigger problem though. They’re free to run, so people leave them on all night. Global light pollution has been growing exponentially in the last decade (faster than the population).

> LED lights are probably a bigger problem though

Yeah white lights can't be filtered out whereas sodium vapor lamps' narrow emission spectrum can be easily blocked by special filters.

That's part of it. Part of it is that sodium bulbs are power hungry, so they tend to be provisioned to be dimmer.

Also, many LEDs have reflectors on top that prevent them from shooting light into the sky. These aren't required by building codes from what I've seen. Similarly, I don't think buildings are designed with this in mind.

Office buildings with massive glass atriums / skylights tend to be particularly bad offenders, since indoor lighting is often designed to bounce light off the ceiling.

Why isn’t there some group of people who make it their mission to get into empty office buildings and turn off all the lights?

They're not abandoned; just unused in the middle of the night.

I'd love to watch a satire where eco-terrorists in cat suits attempt to do what you're suggesting though.

Yeah, it's going to look pretty neat.

Hoping for Kessler syndrome :)

If I understand correctly, generally not from Starlink. Its orbit is too low; the satellites and their debris tend to end up pushed into the atmosphere eventually.

a guy can dream

I would watch this or a simulation thereof for a few minutes...