Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. On first glance (pre-caffeine) it looks like there are a bunch of mansplainers doing math to defend Reflect Orbital in my mentions.

On first glance (pre-caffeine) it looks like there are a bunch of mansplainers doing math to defend Reflect Orbital in my mentions.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
78 Indlæg 56 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • gooba42@mastodon.socialG gooba42@mastodon.social

    @sundogplanets If Congress has any say, they'll just put warning labels on telescopes and ban amateur astronomy.

    etchedpixels@mastodon.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
    etchedpixels@mastodon.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
    etchedpixels@mastodon.social
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #52

    @gooba42 @sundogplanets This product is known to the state of California to cause blindness

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • mcnado@mstdn.socialM mcnado@mstdn.social

      @sundogplanets buncha dicks with dicks being dicks, as the prophecies foretold. But seriously, why guys? Piles of reflective shit in LEO is a bad idea, regardless of the reason for it, and beaming sunlight down from orbit is absurd.

      mrose@universeodon.comM This user is from outside of this forum
      mrose@universeodon.comM This user is from outside of this forum
      mrose@universeodon.com
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #53

      @mcnado @sundogplanets

      Grift. Pure and simple. Watch out, there's a pump and dump coming your way.

      Someone in RO is connected to the administration, either directly or indirectly. maybe through bitcoin.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • hannorein@mastodon.socialH hannorein@mastodon.social

        @knud @sundogplanets @Legit_Spaghetti It should be at least reciprocal. If they can shine light at me destroying my telescope, I can shine light at them destroying their satellite.

        joshsusser@autistics.lifeJ This user is from outside of this forum
        joshsusser@autistics.lifeJ This user is from outside of this forum
        joshsusser@autistics.life
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #54

        @hannorein @knud @sundogplanets @Legit_Spaghetti if you just set up a mirror on the ground that happens to reflect the orbital mirror's light back at it, who could complain?

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • http_error_418@hachyderm.ioH http_error_418@hachyderm.io

          @sundogplanets ah regrettably they say they would only be able to find something that's public, and this info wouldn't be something that's public. However, they tell me it's entirely possible - even probable - Reflect wouldn't yet have bought third party liability insurance, given they've only just received approval. They would have to have it prior to launch yes, but not required before getting approval.

          http_error_418@hachyderm.ioH This user is from outside of this forum
          http_error_418@hachyderm.ioH This user is from outside of this forum
          http_error_418@hachyderm.io
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #55

          @sundogplanets they also say different parts of the operation are likely to have different insurers. Payload and TPL insurance likely won't be from the same place

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

            On a more serious note, does anyone know how to find out who is insuring Reflect Orbital? Seems like they might want to know the company they're insuring admitted in an official FCC document that they could cause permanent eye damage to people who look at their satellite through a telescope...

            simonbp@social.linux.pizzaS This user is from outside of this forum
            simonbp@social.linux.pizzaS This user is from outside of this forum
            simonbp@social.linux.pizza
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #56

            @sundogplanets REALLY good question.

            Insurers have historically kept a rein on more sketchy launch companies, since a rocket going wrong has some rather obvious externalities. I have a feeling RO's insurer will learn about their externalities very quickly.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

              On a more serious note, does anyone know how to find out who is insuring Reflect Orbital? Seems like they might want to know the company they're insuring admitted in an official FCC document that they could cause permanent eye damage to people who look at their satellite through a telescope...

              jawarajabbi@mastodon.onlineJ This user is from outside of this forum
              jawarajabbi@mastodon.onlineJ This user is from outside of this forum
              jawarajabbi@mastodon.online
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #57

              @sundogplanets

              Excellent thought.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD davemwilburn@infosec.exchange

                @sundogplanets

                Please forgive the ignorant question: Are we sure that Reflect Orbital or their insurers would even be liable under current statutes and treaties?

                lynnd@cosocial.caL This user is from outside of this forum
                lynnd@cosocial.caL This user is from outside of this forum
                lynnd@cosocial.ca
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #58

                @DaveMWilburn not only RO, but the regulator that approved them because they know about the possibility of the eye damage. It will be interesting to see how many other countries file for injunctions based on the because presumably, this stupid thing will cause eye damage all over the world 🍿@sundogplanets

                davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • http_error_418@hachyderm.ioH http_error_418@hachyderm.io

                  @sundogplanets ah regrettably they say they would only be able to find something that's public, and this info wouldn't be something that's public. However, they tell me it's entirely possible - even probable - Reflect wouldn't yet have bought third party liability insurance, given they've only just received approval. They would have to have it prior to launch yes, but not required before getting approval.

                  mburtonkelly@scholar.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                  mburtonkelly@scholar.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                  mburtonkelly@scholar.social
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #59

                  @http_error_418 would they at least need to have an insurance quote to support any financials or regulations required as part of the approval process? (Asking because I have seen this enumerated in CO2 storage permits, not because I know anything about space.)

                  @sundogplanets

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                    On first glance (pre-caffeine) it looks like there are a bunch of mansplainers doing math to defend Reflect Orbital in my mentions. FANTASTIC.

                    (Editing to add that reading more carefully, I think most of it is actually well-intentioned discussion trying to understand how the hell RO thinks they have any kind of business case. But I am extra grumpy because it's hot. No blocking needed.)

                    Good morning to everyone except the people defending or funding Reflect Orbital.

                    cassandra_complex@beige.partyC This user is from outside of this forum
                    cassandra_complex@beige.partyC This user is from outside of this forum
                    cassandra_complex@beige.party
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #60

                    @sundogplanets
                    I'm going to laugh if Earth gets nuked by aliens after the blinding device is mistaken for a weapon.

                    Yes, I know this isn't an exceptionally intelligent thought or post. But it did make me chuckle a little at the idea.

                    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD davemwilburn@infosec.exchange

                      @michael_w_busch @sundogplanets

                      The central challenge here is that space might be different in statutes and treaty. My (possibly mistaken) impression is that companies aren't liable for damages from space debris under international treaties. But I don't know how that would impact liability for non-debris-related damage from space-based equipment malfunctions. Maybe the company is liable, or maybe you have to fight the United States Government, or maybe this stupid company can just blind people from space and there's nothing you can do about it. I just don't know.

                      djstreethawk@mastodon.scotD This user is from outside of this forum
                      djstreethawk@mastodon.scotD This user is from outside of this forum
                      djstreethawk@mastodon.scot
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #61

                      @DaveMWilburn @michael_w_busch @sundogplanets there's a significant difference between accidental debris and deliberate negligence

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • nofollownoindex@mastodon.trueten.deN nofollownoindex@mastodon.trueten.de

                        @sundogplanets I am wondering: is space sabotage already a thing? If not, these reflectors really ask for it.

                        lovingfalloutlondon1954@mastodon.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                        lovingfalloutlondon1954@mastodon.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                        lovingfalloutlondon1954@mastodon.social
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #62

                        @nofollownoindex @sundogplanets

                        What happens WHEN (not if) the Russian hackers take control of the panels and aim all of them at Washington. This assuming that we have an administration at a future date that is no longer a Russian asset.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD davemwilburn@infosec.exchange

                          @sundogplanets

                          Please forgive the ignorant question: Are we sure that Reflect Orbital or their insurers would even be liable under current statutes and treaties?

                          djstreethawk@mastodon.scotD This user is from outside of this forum
                          djstreethawk@mastodon.scotD This user is from outside of this forum
                          djstreethawk@mastodon.scot
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #63

                          @DaveMWilburn @sundogplanets 150+ legal systems. Pick one.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • cassandra_complex@beige.partyC cassandra_complex@beige.party

                            @sundogplanets
                            I'm going to laugh if Earth gets nuked by aliens after the blinding device is mistaken for a weapon.

                            Yes, I know this isn't an exceptionally intelligent thought or post. But it did make me chuckle a little at the idea.

                            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                            sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #64

                            @Cassandra_Complex I'd read that scifi book

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • lynnd@cosocial.caL lynnd@cosocial.ca

                              @DaveMWilburn not only RO, but the regulator that approved them because they know about the possibility of the eye damage. It will be interesting to see how many other countries file for injunctions based on the because presumably, this stupid thing will cause eye damage all over the world 🍿@sundogplanets

                              davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                              davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                              davemwilburn@infosec.exchange
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #65

                              @LynnD @sundogplanets I'm not sure this specific regulator in question, the FCC, has jurisdiction over visual spectrum space-based blinding, just RF spectrum. I don't know that we have a regulator governing that.

                              davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                On a more serious note, does anyone know how to find out who is insuring Reflect Orbital? Seems like they might want to know the company they're insuring admitted in an official FCC document that they could cause permanent eye damage to people who look at their satellite through a telescope...

                                mistermadge@universeodon.comM This user is from outside of this forum
                                mistermadge@universeodon.comM This user is from outside of this forum
                                mistermadge@universeodon.com
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #66

                                @sundogplanets
                                Me trying to get away from the space sun beam after ratio'ing a tech bro.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD davemwilburn@infosec.exchange

                                  @LynnD @sundogplanets I'm not sure this specific regulator in question, the FCC, has jurisdiction over visual spectrum space-based blinding, just RF spectrum. I don't know that we have a regulator governing that.

                                  davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                                  davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                                  davemwilburn@infosec.exchange
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #67

                                  @LynnD @sundogplanets

                                  N.B., I'm not defending or excusing the absolute bullshit that's happening here.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                    On first glance (pre-caffeine) it looks like there are a bunch of mansplainers doing math to defend Reflect Orbital in my mentions. FANTASTIC.

                                    (Editing to add that reading more carefully, I think most of it is actually well-intentioned discussion trying to understand how the hell RO thinks they have any kind of business case. But I am extra grumpy because it's hot. No blocking needed.)

                                    Good morning to everyone except the people defending or funding Reflect Orbital.

                                    nuintari@mastodon.bsd.cafeN This user is from outside of this forum
                                    nuintari@mastodon.bsd.cafeN This user is from outside of this forum
                                    nuintari@mastodon.bsd.cafe
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #68

                                    @sundogplanets How _does_ RO intend to make money?

                                    I highly suspect this is a fine example of the underpants gnomes.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                      On a more serious note, does anyone know how to find out who is insuring Reflect Orbital? Seems like they might want to know the company they're insuring admitted in an official FCC document that they could cause permanent eye damage to people who look at their satellite through a telescope...

                                      wtl@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                                      wtl@mastodon.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                                      wtl@mastodon.social
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #69

                                      @sundogplanets It's a question worth asking in interviews too; and not just eye damage (which is of course worse!); a lot of expensive gear is pointed at the sky and they could damage all of it as well.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                        On a more serious note, does anyone know how to find out who is insuring Reflect Orbital? Seems like they might want to know the company they're insuring admitted in an official FCC document that they could cause permanent eye damage to people who look at their satellite through a telescope...

                                        lumiworx@mastodon.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                                        lumiworx@mastodon.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                                        lumiworx@mastodon.social
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #70

                                        @sundogplanets

                                        Seems like there's not much in the way of published details, but I found one article that offers an overview of risk assessments, and they mention several possible carriers in the 'Space Mission' category type...

                                        "... with underwriters, including AXA XL, Munich Re, and Chubb, maintaining specialized aerospace liability teams."

                                        https://dataintelo.com/report/space-mission-insurance-brokerage-market

                                        I assume launch insurance is mandatory, but is there a possibility that some types might be optional or even 'self-insured'?

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD davemwilburn@infosec.exchange

                                          @sundogplanets

                                          Please forgive the ignorant question: Are we sure that Reflect Orbital or their insurers would even be liable under current statutes and treaties?

                                          dianshuo@mstdn.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                                          dianshuo@mstdn.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                                          dianshuo@mstdn.io
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #71

                                          @DaveMWilburn @sundogplanets would only US law apply as it was launched from their territory?

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper