167 points

Idk much about this company but I’m assuming $150,000 is nothing to them.

But I suppose it’s the precedent this sets, not the fine itself

permalink
report
reply
40 points

Without any context, anyone who sends things to space can easily pay $150k. For context though, they are worth $3.35 billion as of September. $150k is probably less than a days electric bill for their offices.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

sofa cushion money.

$150k fine to a company with ~ $17 billion in annual revenue is less than ninety cents for someone that earns $100k a year.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

The $150,000 fine represents a tiny proportion of Dish’s overall revenue, which was $16.7bn in 2022.

It’d probably cost $10M-$20M to launch a falcon 9 up to that altitude alone, not to mention the tech and equipment to change its trajectory without also causing more space debris.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Fines exist only to hurt the poor.

For the rich/big businesses they are just a rounding error.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Dish/DirectTV/whatevertheyarecalledthesedays won’t be long for this world. Eventually any amount of fine will be worth more than they have which will be $0. But for now, yeah, let’s ad another 0 to this fine AT LEAST!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

The $150,000 fine represents a tiny proportion of Dish’s overall revenue, which was $16.7bn in 2022.

It’d probably cost $10M-$20M to launch a falcon 9 up to that altitude alone, not to mention the tech and equipment to change its trajectory without also causing more space debris.

permalink
report
parent
reply
84 points

Should the fine not be the cost of a mission to move the satellite? It’s within our technology now.

permalink
report
reply
44 points

That would make sense - the fine should be enough to pay for the satellite’s disposal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

Over and over we’ve seen companies not be held responsible for the cleanup of their projects. A lot of parallels to the fossil fuel industry, where they often abandon their wells with little recourse for the people left to clean up the pieces.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

That would negatively impact future campaign contributions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

This is the real answer. This is both doing something and nothing at the same time. Pandering to both sides.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Article says the fine is for not moving the satellite far enough away from things still being used. Maybe all they have to do is send it a command to move itself further

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

The article says it ran out of fuel

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Oh rip, I missed that

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

As someone who owns an appartment complex I want to fine them for roof junk.

permalink
report
reply
23 points

The last apartment I was in had dozens of satellite dishes on the back of every building for a dozen apartments, they didn’t even bother to check if one was hooked up before screwing a new one into the wall

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I found that dish will screw giant lag bolts right through the shingles of your roof, right next to 3 other abandoned dishes. They are no longer allowed in our complex. I finally identified all the abandoned ones (alost all of them now as they are phased out), removed them and patched all the shingles. Filled an entire dump trailer. It was ridiculous. Had to repair ceilings from the leaks. Cable company is almost as bad. They leave all the old wires up, run new ones right over top. Putting nails through all the siding. But at least they aren’t destroying the roof.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Alright everyone, let’s get him

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

You own an apartment complex?

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

He can’t respond because he’s too busy painting over all the light fixtures and power outlets

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

This is true actually. But I had to work late because I accidentally got some on the wall.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

As someone who is an actual living human: give your shit away.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points
*

As an also actual living human, I rent strictly to seniors, our rent is $4-500 cheaper than anything else comparable in town because they live on fixed income and I am a paramedic/firefighter that works 3 jobs to survive. I am not one of the scumbags (I don’t think?) I don’t make much of a profit because I refuse to raise the rent on a bunch of widowed old ladies living on fixed incomes and I put my resources back into the units to maintain or improve their living conditions. Yeah, it increases the property value. So I’m not going to pretend it’s pure charity, it is a business. But I am not gouging my tenants while I very much can during the housing shortage like every other landlord in my small town.

If I gave it away it would just be bought up by the same monopoly that owns every other complex in my town. He has offered me 3 times what I paid and I refused to sell. Not because I wouldn’t LOVE the money, but because the tenants that are pretty much family, that have watched my kids grow up, that have gone to my wedding, would all immediately be out on their ass.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Cool, now lets issue one to Dillweed over at X for Starlink. There was literally a petition put out by the astronomers at ground-based observatories begging him not to do it. What had already been put up was making issues for ground-based telescopes, the full constellation will likely make the multimillion-dollar optical telescopes overpriced tourist attractions.

https://www.astronomy.com/science/starlink-satellites-disrupt-cosmic-studies/

permalink
report
reply
-6 points

I’ll bite the bait and ask you to explain how Starlink satellites contribute towards the space junk problem without having to reference astronomy or bringing up you-know-who’s name.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

the space junk problem without having to reference astronomy

But that’s like half the problem with it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Obviously some people don’t care about science. But yeah, the inability to properly observe space from Earth would be crushing - while the new space telescopes are goddamned awesome, they’re also ridiculously expensive and tiny compared to the massive surface-built structures we have on Earth.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Starlink adds a tremendous number of satellites to Low Earth Orbit. Like, Starlink is now something like 50 percent of all active satellites. That’s a lot of traffic up there. And in LEO, where orbits criss-cross in an endless complex dance, the risk of collisions is far higher than in Geosync. While the advantage of LEO is that everything has a lifetime measured in decades until the orbits decay and they burn up, the risk is Kessler Syndrome, where shrapnel from collisions creates an endless cascade of destruction that makes LEO completely unusable for several decades. That would be the end of all LEO satellites and all manned spaceflight for possibly the rest of our lives. You could still get ships through the Kessler debris layer safely for launching high-orbit and geosync satellites, but low orbit would be too hazardous to place anything in for long-term work, especially since it would risk prolonging the problem.

If Kessler starts, it will be impossible to stop - the shrapnel is too small for satellites to detect and avoid with their adjustment thrusters. A pandemic-style S-curve of destruction as all the satellites in LEO die. And we’d have to evacuate ISS.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Starlink is losing a crazy number of satellites. Are they burning up or becoming junk?

permalink
report
reply
39 points

Starlink sattelites operate in a low orbit that decays over time. They all fall back to earth eventually.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Specifically i think starlink satellites do not have any boosting thrusters, the reason important LEO satellites like the ISS don’t burn up unless intended is due to those

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

starlink satellites do not have any boosting thrusters

Starlink satellites actually do have Hall-effect ion thrusters, and can raise and lower their their own orbits. Though like any spacecraft, they still have a finite amount of fuel and will eventually deorbit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I heard they’re designed to burn up in the atmosphere. Probably not an eco-friendly move, but it beats taking a satellite to the head.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Probably not an eco-friendly move

Fine powder of metals strewn over a few km², there’s more coming from outer space via micrometeorites and dust. And that bit CO² in the Stratosphere…

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yeah but you also have to manufacture and send up the satellites into LEO.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 531K

    Comments