RaskolnikovsAxe

joined 5 months ago
[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 28 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Oh please fuck right off with this apologist bullshit.

I don't care what people think, and it wouldn't matter if I did, as long as they keep their treasonous sympathies in their own head.

The moment they voice it or act on it, then it becomes expression. And freedom of expression does not extend to treasonous or seditious speech or action, as it's defined in the criminal code.

And anyway, where freedom of expression applies, it only protects against government suppression or legal repercussions. It has nothing to say about me making their lives miserable and making sure everyone knows they're treasonous Yank sympathizers and just generally untrustworthy pieces of shit. And these people know that which is why they rarely make their views known publicly.

Well that, and they know that if they out themselves they'll be the first up against the wall if shit gets ugly.

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 88 points 4 months ago (31 children)

The problem is that there is a not-insignificant number of people that want the US to annex Canada.

In the US, about 15% of Trump voters would support annexation of Canada, even if Canada didn't want it. That's about 1 in 7.

https://vancouversun.com/news/trump-51st-state-most-americans-have-no-interest-in-canada-annex

The disturbing thing is that about 18% of Canadian Conservatives would support annexation. That's almost 1 in 5. Most of us know five Conservatives, so chances are you know someone who is essentially a traitor. I think Conservative supporters need to be aware that this is the company they keep.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/article/large-majority-of-canadians-reject-trumps-annexation-overtures-poll-suggests/

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 months ago

Assuming your question is not rhetorical...

Some combustion products have climatic effects. For you to lean into this, the next step would be to calculate the relative effect of perhaps 80 tons of space junk burning up on reentry per year, versus perhaps 42 billion tons of CO2 emissions per year. You'll want to estimate the radiative forcing or climatic effects of the space junk combustion products to get there. I'll save you the effort and tell you that space junk burning up on reentry is likely to be several hundred thousand times less impactful than terrestrial GHG emmissions.

Which should not be surprising intuitively, just considering the volume of GHGs we produce globally each year.

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I think Kessler is rather less of a concern than global climate change.

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You use any of the launch providers, yes, including Arianspace.

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Correctamundo. You can't speed up light. For low latency you need LEO, and since they don't sit still for you (8km/s roughly) you need a bunch of them in some kind of formation or constellation, so that you generally have something to connect to at any given moment, or at least a chain that can relay to ground stations.

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago

I suggest you look up the solution that Telesat will use. I'm not involved in that project, but a quick glance shows me that the engineers involved have probably done their homework and have considered the customer base and their needs, including the need to service all regions of the country.

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Terrestrial solutions for remote areas typically have excessive build out and maintenance costs.

Engineers will do a tradeoff and select the most suitable solution given the criteria. It's very easy to underestimate costs, particularly over the entire lifetime of the system.

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago

Yes there are such solutions, but for remote regions without infrastructure and with high build out and operating/maintenance costs for terrestrial technology, I suspect that the most cost effective solution that we can achieve in a timely fashion is probably LEO, like Lightspeed or Starlink. Particularly since Canada has half a century of experience building satellite systems.

Managing LEO debris and congestion is not an insurmountable challenge.

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Buddy, I'm an aero eng. There are lots of ways to get satellites in polar orbits.

Why didn't you look at the actual Lightspeed site from Telesat? Why would you pick a random paper? The Telesat site explains how they get coverage in polar regions.

https://www.telesat.com/leo-satellites/

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 13 points 5 months ago (14 children)

Fibre is not going to get us up north.

view more: ‹ prev next ›