I hate T-Mobile, but I really hate Elon Musk. So while I'm not happy for T-Mobile, I do enjoy watching Musk suffer in any way whatsoever.
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2025
374 points (98.4% liked)
Technology
73232 readers
4025 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
In a fight between Elon Musk and traditional telecoms, I'm cheering for the fight
Musk yes, but there are quite a few Ukrainian servicemen not happy, I think.
Starlinks are in too low an orbit to cause Kessler Syndrome.
All they can do is pollute the atmosphere we sometimes breath in even more.
Is that accurate though? Assume a satellite is in a decaying orbit (thus too low to contribute to Kessler syndrome on its own) and another satellite is in a different orbit eccentricity-wise but they both collide. Are we certain that none of the pieces from the collision would acquire enough speed to become boloids that contribute to Kessler syndrome?
Time to go down the rabbit hole that is orbital mechanics for me again. Byeeee lol
Edit: looks like the lowest orbit for starlink's first shell is at 550km which is very much above VLEO and would definitely be a factor in Kessler Syndrome.
Most starlink satellites are set to deorbit themselves upon failure to avoid this. However the de orbiting could still fail and then it should take about a year or so to deorbit itself?
So it looks like there is a low possibility of it initiating Kessler syndrome. But it's not negligible.
For your question, no. There's no way for an object to have an orbit that doesn't intersect the same altitude where an impulse happened. They could be knocked into an eccentric orbit, but it at least has to have the lowest point at the highest point of the Starlink network.
This is not to say it can't hit something else after that changes the perigee at a later point in it's orbit, thus lifting it higher. For a single collusion though, no, at least with the collision alone.
A year is actually quite a short time (in terms of deorbiting).
As for your previous question yes a collision at starlink orbit could send some shrapnel to higher orbit planes however a majority would be in highly eccentric orbits that would decay quickly on the low end.
The issue would be a starlink collision then hitting something in a higher orbit causing Kessler syndrome in that orbit. The odds of this are still next to zero but never zero.
but they pollute the night sky visually and that's nearly as bad.
I mean... it's not. One problem solves itself over time if not touched, the other is permanent and prevents us from leaving the planet.
I mean, no it's not.
Kessler syndrome is about a chain reaction that destroys everything in orbit and keeps us from accessing space for years.
Ruining your view is not "nearly as bad". That makes you sound like one of those folks on Martha's Vineyard, opposing offshore wind turbines that local communities desperately need, because they'll "ruin the view".
The night sky is also polluted by your home's lighting and car headlights but that doesn't seem to be a problem for most people.
yeah, you can't turn off your home's lighting, additionally everyone lives in cities anyway, so it's moot!
Okay, try turning your lights off tonight and report back with how many additional stars you can see.
Learn something new every day, thanks!
Dang, I was hoping there was a competitor. I'm boycotting Musk companies as best I can
I invite you to join me in rural Australia, and choose from the many options available. /s
Yeah, sadly SpaceX and Tesla are both very promising companies primarily held back by Elon Musk.
SpaceX sure but Tesla has been in decline for so long that I wouldn’t be surprised if by the end of the decade it’s either irrelevant or sold off / taken from Musk.
Tesla cars have always been overpriced, low quality, unsafe toys with a shiny case around them.
The first few iterations were good, when they went mass market they let quality go.
Iris2 and Eutselsat OneWeb are currently massively expanding their network - for European coverage first,though, but with the explicit goal to be a Musk alternative.
Oh, so that's why my internet went out for 4 hours yesterday. RIP.
I'll upvote anything bad happening to musk.
This makes me think that the Starlink system is very poorly designed. I know there are hundreds of satellites, and a large number of base stations.
Even if a large chunk of the satellites were taken out and a few base stations failed, shouldn't the system keep working, just over a different path?
This sounds very much not like a hardware failure, but more like somebody fucked up.
You’re off ten fold. They have thousands. Around 5000 with a planned 12k after gen 3 has been fully deployed. It’s definitely a “let the intern push to prod” type of scenario by numbers alone.
They probably dorked up a bgp route or something. It was down globally.
That would do it!
Did you even read the article? It clearly states a core SOFTWARE component. Not hardware.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›