FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK NOOOOO

[ameliasbrain@mstdn.ca]

@sundogplanets Respect to the author/editors at PCMag for that headline, though. "FCC Approves Reflect Orbital's Giant Mirror Satellite That Astronomers Hate"
Really gets the main point across.

(Although they maybe could have also included how the powering solar panels proposal is completely unrealistic.)

[dtauvdiodr@c.im]

And the billionaires push the Earth closer and closer to Trantor.

[spam@infosec.exchange]

@sundogplanets

[pakowitsch@ruhr.social]

@sundogplanets
Mmhh, the Name oft the satellite is from Lord oft the rings. Is Peter Thiel involved in this shit?

[phil_stevens@mastodon.nz]

@sundogplanets We could band together to aim lasers at these....

[kkarhan@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets I hope this thing gets shot down with some ASAT Rocket by the #Chinese or #Russia, if the #EU doesn't have the balls and this thing isn't in a GSO over the #USA!

[kkarhan@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets I just hope some folks hack it and deorbit it!

[c_reider@sonomu.club]

@sundogplanets wow that sucks total ass

[rjblaskiewicz@mstdn.social]

@sundogplanets

What's wrong with everyone? Jesus.

[iagondiscord@wetdry.world]

@sundogplanets destroying everyone's natural circadian rhythms for slightly better Q4 profits
Surely this won't have any repercussions!

[blizzarda@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets assume they are only licensed to reflect back to USA??

[hub@cosocial.ca]

@sundogplanets and of course it’s named after something from JRR Tolkien….

[iagondiscord@wetdry.world]

@sundogplanets also, space is hard
I would say it would be more practical to just put solar panels around the world and have them supply energy for the entire world, but that would actually require international cooperation and the geopolitical climate just isn't stable enough to handle that
Three guesses on whose fault that is
Point being, this is a perfectly logical idea if you're a liberal, and completely absurd if you aren't

[netux@mastodon.sdf.org]

@sundogplanets how the fuck is this under the fcc's purview?

[msbellows@c.im]

@ai6yr @sundogplanets Look, man, it's only 50,000 mirrors each illuminating 3 mi of the planet's surface. Not like it would be disruptive to the environment or astronomy or culture or anything.

[bersl2@furry.engineer]

@sundogplanets I would never endorse someone going full Contact on this thing's launch vehicle once fully stacked. That would be a terrible and illegal thing to do, and such a waste of life.

[outfrost@mastodon.social]

@kkarhan @sundogplanets or fry it with a focused beam of something it doesn't reflect

[kkarhan@mastodon.social]

@outfrost @sundogplanets this ain't the Space Satellite from #DieAnotherDay…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMxVBY70dPU

[fustiki_scuria@mastodon.octofriends.garden]

@sundogplanets Ok, back of the napkin-style math time. According to NASA, the moon's surface area is roughly (rounded up) 40×10^6 km², or 40×10^12m². These sattelites are 18m×18m or roughly (rounded up) 400m^2. The moon only shows us half of it's surface area, which is half-illuminated on average (the actual amount of light we receive from the moon is a bit less than that due to the moon being present for less of the night when nearer to a full moon, but I'll ignore that for now). So we've got 40e12/40e1/2/2 or 2.5e10, unitless. If we assume the moon reflects 20% as well as those mirrors (this is generous towards the mirrors), we end up with 5e9, or five billion. That's approximately the amount of these mirrors we'd need to build to reflect as much light back to the earth as the moon. Due to the very approximate nature of these only the order of magnitude really matters, but it is still a ridiculous amount and not worth it. After all, adding a second moon to power solar panels would probably not give ROI within the lifespan of the sun.

What are they even trying to do???

[0x56@tech.lgbt]

@sundogplanets most of the reporting focuses on the nighttime solar farm use case and misses the bigger plan

Reflect are marketing this to all kinds of customers:
- emergency responders (they're using the Venezuela earthquakes in particular as a talking point, to claim how beneficial this is to humanity in a way that makes opponents of the plan sound like assholes)
- industrial sites to allow nighttime work (pretty sure we've had work lighting for a while...)
- agricultural (possibly eke out some more crop growth? i'm sure there are no downsides to this)
- municipalities (quoting them, "replace streetlights, reduce light pollution" ...um, how exactly are you reducing light pollution by BEAMING IN THE SUN?!)
- defense (ah, here we go... rake in those government contracts, while cementing yourself as a critical military asset so no one can shut you down)
- festivals and events ("unforgettable nighttime experiences" except they're not really nighttime experiences if it's bright as shit, are they?)