XPost: rec.arts.comics.strips
From: petertrei@gmail.com
On 10/16/2025 9:52 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Your Name writes:
>> On 2025-10-16 15:01:53 +0000, Cryptoengineer said:
>>
>>> On 10/16/2025 1:22 AM, Your Name wrote:
>>>> On 2025-10-16 01:52:22 +0000, Cryptoengineer said:
>
>>>>> I don't know why people are so skeptical that it will be possible.
>>>>> I realize Musk isn't popular, but assuming everything his companies
>>>>> build are bad as a result, is just silly.
>>>>
>>>> Mainly because everything his companies build *is* bad and
>>>> unsurprisingly never match the lunatic Muskrat's claims.
>>>
>>> Really? Starlink isn't hooking up people to the Internet all over the
>>> world?
>>
>> And many of those satelittes are failing.
>
> There are about 4500 operational starlink satellites.
>
> About 1000 have been deorbited, or are in decaying
> orbits. Most of these are first generation.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Launches
>
> Deorbited satellites burn up in the atmosphere, in theory.
>
> A larger concern is related to collisions and the consequential
> orbital debris. The satellites have made more than 10
> thousand propulsive maneuvers to avoid debris, mostly from
> the Russian anti-satellite weapons test.
Starlink satellites are in relatively low orbits, and will naturally
decay in about 5 years. They are low to reduce latency, and deorbiting
is part of the system design. They are designed to burn up completely,
though I've heard recent concerns about adding that much aluminum
vapor to the upper atmosphere.
They're low enough that they shouldn't contribute much to a Kessler
syndrome situation - even if smashed in an impact, the fragments will
themselves de orbit fairly quickly.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Increased_risk_of_satellite_collision
>
> There are also impacts on observational earth-based astronomy.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Impact_on_astronomy
That is a problem. SpaceX has worked on reducing the satellites
visibility, but needs to do better. There's also impacts on
radio astronomy.
>>> SpaceX isn't providing the cheapest space launches, and is so popular
>>> it is now the miles-ahead launch provider in the world, with more than
>>> half of total launches worldwide?
>>
>> And many of those launches fail, often spectacularly.
>
> Not a single launch of operational Starlink satellites has
> failed. You seem to be conflating the Starship test launch
> failures with Starlink. The starlink satellites to date
> have been launched from the Falcon 9 rocket, which has
> an outstanding launch success record.
>
>
>>> Tesla cars don't continue to rack up awards?
>>
>> Nope, they don't. In fact, they are complained about by almost everyone
>> for all sorts of idiotic decisions Tesla have made - including stupid
>> things like charing extra for a real steering wheel or turn indicator,
>> doors that can't be opened after a crash, etc.
>
> Do you complain when GMC does the same for a gas pickup truck? They
> do, you know, charge for upgrades and extras.
>
> The door handles are a design problem, to be sure.
The models S&X (the oldest models, still sold in low numbers) have flush
mounted exterior handles which pop out when you approach the car, either
sensing your phone or an RFID card. They are problematic in an
emergency, since if they don't pop out, the door can't be opened from
the outside. But that's true of most cars, if the doors are locked.
The far more popular models Y & 3 also have flush exterior handles,
but they are entirely mechanical.
Opening from the inside is normally done by pressing a button. This
unlatches the door after pulling the window down a fraction of an
inch - the frameless windows could damage the trim of the windows
if it didn't.
There's also a manual opener that's mechanical, but
it should only be used in an emergency.
pt
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
