danger/u/
This thread is permanently archived
SpaceX and Starlink

| What do you all think about it? Is it a great idea to connect more people to the world, or will the internet just be flooded with more dumb people? Is it good to give people more access to information, or do you fear governments would just use it to spy on citizens? Are you worried that this project will flood the sky with more space debris and affect astronomical observations, or do you not care?


| >>675810
>Is it a great idea to connect more people to the world, or will the internet just be flooded with more dumb people?

What kind of asshat opening statement is this?


| >>675834 What you mean, br/u/?


| I do care a lot, but not at all about the aspects you've mentioned.
Astronomical observations should be made from way up out there where space debris are no concern.
"Dumb people" doesn't qualify as a formal demographic group.
Actively spying on citizens is costly in time and resources, not mentioning it's most likely very much useless and inefficient.
Information control also doesn't work the same at all scales. There's more to it than just Starlink or SpaceX.


| >>675810
Yeah bruh it's not really interesting to engage in a topic that OP himself is 100% ignorant of...


| >>675903
There's a reason why there's a concern regarding ground observatories being obsolete. Satellite telescopes are harder to upkeep and information feedback isn't the same as if astronomers can physically interact with their instruments. Although there'll be many more to come, eventually I think that they'll ascend high enough that it'll be less of an issue. Newer satellites are also being coated with vanta black on parts of it's body to prevent reflection of sunlight too.


| >>675934
For anything that's not filtered out anyway by the atmosphere I can understand this concern.


| 'Dumb people' well enough qualifies. A part of it may be that we were not aware of them when free flowing data was not a thing, but it definitely also gave science-deniers and all kinds of -ists and -phobes to spread their ideology online. A good number of people are like this, and I want to discuss whether the rewards of giving more access to places like Africa or the Middle-East would outweigh the consequences.


| >>675936 Ground observatories are more powerful than you think.


| >>675903 Authoritarian regimes do not care about the costs of keeping themselves in power. Admittedly I don't know much about information control, but I do know that this is a tool that can also be used to further oppress the people rather than help them gain a higher quality of life.


| >>675939
>Authoritarian regimes do not care about the costs of keeping themselves in power.
A̵u̵t̵h̵o̵r̵i̵t̵a̵r̵i̵a̵n̵ ̵r̵e̵g̵i̵m̵e̵s̵ Any authorities don't care about the costs of keeping themselves in power. Also those in officially non-"authoritarian regimes". Power corrupts, total power corrupts total. Dividing the world in good "free" and bad "authoritarian" regimes denies massive dependency relations and general autocratic tendencies in the reality of todays globalized world.


| >>676245 Yeah, sure, so are you worried?


| >>676257
No.


| >>676303 Either you agree that corrupt authorities will use it on you or you disagree. Pick one.


| >>676306
*sigh* Authorities are characterized by possessing power and as stated in >>676245 power corrupts. And this leads to the conclusion that corruption is inherent to any kind of authority. Economical authorities systematically bypass and soften democratical control mechanisms by lobby work, offshoring, individualizing, pathologizing and dividing people into superficial, vague and even entirely made up categories.


| >>676306
Finally those authorities will tell you they need more power in order to solve the problems caused by them.

But back to topic:
The only thing we can expect from private owned space development is that we will be "informed" with how great and healthy some aromatized dishwater with tons of sugar is with giantic projections in the sky. Not to forget the trailer for the new movie "ass", which will be the only thing you see watching it.


| >>676343 I do not care about semantics. Whatever you think constitutes being corrupt and being a figure of authority is not what's being discussed in this thread. It seems nobody really wants to talk about the tech and it's implications on society and would far prefer to derail the topic into trying to bring attention to where they stand morally or politically. I think I'm going to stop replying.


| >>676344 Ah, so you are interested.

Advertisements in the sky? You mean like blimps? I don't see them around much. How does that relate to Starlink anyways? What companies advertise and the service provided by Starlink satellites do not correlate.


| >>676345
>talk about tech and it's implications on society
>trying to bring attention to where they stand morally or politically.
Well, you could at least admit that those things somehow have to do with each other. You can hardly expect people discussing about technology, society and ignoring the political dimensions.

And in my opinion SpaceX and Starlink is much less about "connecting people" and much more about privatizing outer space infrastructure development.


| God way then they complain I ruin threads


| Sure, there are no ads projected in the sky (yet). I just wanted to illustrate what we can expect from those projects on the long term. You could also look on how the internet developed from a public science and education (and yes I know, also military) driven platform into a fully commercialiced 1984+brave-new-world frakenstein nightmare.

Also this threads initial texts questions just make some implications about the topic that are wrong.


| I still think humans weren't ready for internet and especially social midia, imagine starlink.


| >>676370 >>675810
>Is it a great idea to connect more people
Yes, but I'm sure that's not the primary motivation of SpaceX and Starlink.
>Will the internet just be flooded with more dumb people
I don't think people are inherently dumb. It depends much on how the society they live in is organized.


| >>676370 >>675810
>Is it good to give people more access to information
Depends on how this access on information is organized. Is it free (as in free speech) to everyone or controlled/published or even owned by a few?
>do you fear governments would just use it to spy on citizens?
Yes, but not only governments but also (big) companies.
>Are you worried that this project will flood the sky with more space debris and affect astronomical observations?
I'm sure it will.


| >>675888
It's misanthropic and it could also be understood quite racist (even thought potentially unintentional) concerning the global digital gap.


| Space polution is not really a problem, because its space, but I agree with the rest


| >>676365 That's fine. This is a board about cyberpunk, cyberpunk is about dystopias, and dystopias are inherently political. I just want discussion to stay on topic.

>>676370 Ah, then that's the reason I made this thread in the first place, to have people talk about what to expect from this.


| I don't think whatever current corporations may have planned will be any worse than it is in this age, and either way it's still going to be very useful for those who otherwise never would've had access, but I suppose in the far future the danger of Starlink not just having a national monopoly on being an ISP, but globally too could be very worrying.


| >>676380 Again, maybe it isn't, but it's still a nice bonus.

Have you seen Twitter? I would think that that site is being used by people from 'organized' countries, yet they don't seem very much to be. What of those not from such countries?

>>676381 I'd assume that the service itself should be free flowing, so things being published won't be a problem. What's of note is how they will cave to the demands of differing nations with differing laws.


| >>676538
What about Twitter? With 319 million active users and an estimated 15% being bots (at least 48 million bots) I doubt you have browsed the site enough to accurately rate the median intelligence of the site.

Stupid and controversial statements tend to stand out. Don't make the mistake of assuming that these people represents the common man.


| >>6dcf63 Hullo gurl who ruins threads.

I agree, and I abhor to see what may be brought forth from these new denizens of the internet. But then again, maybe the internet only seems stupid because those who have the privelige to access it now are just so bored that everything just becomes a big deal.

Space debris is a problem. It might knock other satellites off course and damage them. Worst case scenerio, the collision pushes them towards Earth and it doesn't burn in re-entry.


| >>676540 And yet it is the loud ones that people hear about the most after all. And if people can hear then someone will eventually listen to them. And despite the common man seemingly outnumbering them manyfold, the radicals always seem to be the bigger presence.


| Sorry if I said something especially stupid somewhere here. I'm really sleepy right now.


| >>676542 gurl who ruins threads here again, I think the radicalized folk has gets attention because most people who are normal dont get attention, so it seems that everyone there is a radical freak, but in reallity there is a silent majority that just want to be left alone :p


| >>676634 That's the thing though, the silent majority will only be just that. Most understandably don't want to deal with things and just want to go about their days how they've always been. But as much as we may laugh at the loud minority as clowns, they're the ones out there being at least somewhat active doing their stuff.


| >>676715 and this is how the world will become a raical cyberpunk distopia :^(


| >>676715
This is obviously not true. Outside of a few fringe interests like comics and videogames the loud minority doesn't seem to be able to change anything.

Please prove me wrong with examples if you have any, but I haven't seen the Twitter-crowd making any radical changes to any society/topic.


| Blm and chaz want to know the location of >>676802


| >>676802
Well many rulers that once were seen as "god chosen" ended up being lynched by the crowd they controlled before. New rulers replaced them soon thought - but at least in the beginning they did not appeal to supernatural powers. Now they make us bow to the ominous miraculous powers and mechanisms of markets, which is nothing but a symptom of an outdated and dying system.

Total number of posts: 39, last modified on: Sun Jan 1 00:00:00 1594146930

This thread is permanently archived