this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026
928 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

83295 readers
5320 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

While this very well might fuck up land-based stuff looking at space, people are often overlooking what this would mean to stellar photography from space.

If they can truly launch these million data center sats profitably, that means starship works. That means payload to space is relatively cheap.

That means we could also send large quantities of large telescopes into space on the cheap, and avoid the crazy expensive cant fail telescopes because the cost to get them up there isnt prohibitive and a technical failure in the telescope isnt a disaster.

Things very well might change, but it will also open up possibilities in the same area.

[–] Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It might be super cheap in the future to launch them but it will be into a field of fast moving garbage. The cost effectiveness of throwing more and more telescope up into space to try and get pictures before they get knocked out by the debris of the past will be a losing proposition.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nah, everything at super low orbits like these constellations decay quite quickly. Even in cases of total loss of all satellites (eg Kessler Cascade), they would all reenter within a couple years.

You could relatively easily just put your space telescopes above that orbit and they’d be just fine.

[–] Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ok so they would orbit above the field of space junk, would they by any chance have to fly through that field of space garbage to get up to that higher orbit?

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Generally no. The proposed orbit for these datacenter satellites (which is still a ridiculous idea for oodles of reasons) puts them all in sun synchronous orbit, leaving nigh infinite safe paths to send a space telescope up through.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Doubtful.

This is just a way for SpaceX to try further integrate itself into the spheres of government and public funding, and thus, make it easier to justify government bailouts.

[–] chahn.chris@piefed.social 2 points 1 week ago

Who needs the night sky when you can download the old night sky via satellite internet with gig speed downloads in vr? /s

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

Monty Burns approves.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›