this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2026
299 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

85553 readers
5316 users here now

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


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
all 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] architect@thelemmy.club 20 points 5 days ago

Less talky more doey

[–] shittydwarf@piefed.ca 99 points 6 days ago

Elon too pls

[–] uberdroog@lemmy.world 18 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Oh no, so anyway tRump raped children.

[–] tackleberry@thelemmy.club 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

and Epstein did not kill himself

[–] Quexotic@infosec.pub 4 points 5 days ago

So did they actually eat kids or not? I'm still not sure about that one.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 59 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Gonna be hard to sleep tonight with this raging erection.

[–] liuther9@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

I am with you on that

[–] turdburglar@piefed.social 10 points 5 days ago

do it.

fuck elon.

[–] EvergreenGuru@lemmy.world 39 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Starlink has been criticized for filling the sky with satellites, which will become space trash. Iran is clearing space of future garbage.

[–] cardfire@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

I'm under the impression all the stuff we send up, for the last 20 years, had an obligation to have scheduled deorbit so that we don't Wall-E ourselves.

Was that just for spacecraft, not their payloads?

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

If I remember correctly there is a graveyard orbit where they send out of order satellites to. Some satellites are too far away to completely de-orbit back to earth.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 6 days ago (4 children)

As fun it would be, it would pollute so much spaceflight could become impossible for years.

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

The most optimal route would be a cyberattack that causes all of the satellites to de-orbit, but that would honestly be a bigger challenge than STUXNET lol.

[–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Aren't these low enough that they would just burn up pretty quickly?

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Not if they're hit with a missile or another satellite. Debris could pretty easily be rocketed up into a higher orbit from a military strike.

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Those orbits will be elliptical thus they will still go trough LEO on one side of the orbit and thus lose energy. You need two boosts to create a circular orbit. With one boost only one side goes to a higher orbit height but the other side will stay at the original orbit height. The bigger problem is that they can hit other stuff when they pass trough higher orbits.

[–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 days ago

Wouldn't that end up in a highly elliptical trajectory? I don't think that would be much worse TBH.

[–] iocase@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

The only good news is any debris you generate has some part of its orbit extremely low due to starlink satellites being so low themselves. That'll stop being true once debris finds something else to hit higher up but it's easier to deorbit stuff this low since there's really quite a bit of atmospheric drag at periapse.

Edit: I should clarify that even after a collision debris has to have an orbit that crosses through the altitude the impact happened at unless some more energy is added higher up in its new elliptical orbit

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 days ago (2 children)

That seems reasonable. Is there some risk that parts that entered other parts will throw things up in a much higher orbit or would that be improbable? Like a broken part smashing into another satellite at top speed.

[–] LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 4 points 5 days ago

Anything thrown up just creates a more elliptical orbit, not a higher orbit. There would have to be a second thrust at the top to bring it into an actual higher orbit.

It would still deorbit fairly quickly because the lowest part of that ellipse would still degrade quickly.

[–] iocase@lemmy.zip 4 points 5 days ago

I'm prefacing this by saying my background is playing KSP and inadvertantly making my own Kessler syndrome when running out of fuel braking during a station rendezvous 😅

Yeah you're fundamentally trading energy. It depends on how the impact happens but orbital scientists think in terms of the average velocity of a collision event and their likely angle. 30⁰ head on at 7km/s is roughly normal I think?

A head on collision means that you have the full kinetic energy of both satellites to work with. Some parts get thrown up into massive orbits even up into medium earth orbit. Others deorbit due to hitting at the right angle to lose enough kinetic energy that their orbit drops.

Overall your debris ends up in a plume heading in the direction of both satellites, shaped like a flat cone. In the case of starlink they might have to deorbit the entire constellation while they still have control over them since that cone is invariably going to shotgun blast one or more satellites on the next orbital string

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 34 points 6 days ago
[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago

Musk = POS Nazi.

[–] Zexks@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

That will really fuck over Ukraine

[–] minorkeys@sh.itjust.works 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)
[–] Quexotic@infosec.pub 3 points 5 days ago

And still killed 30,000 protestors. They're not good guys.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 14 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I'm not surprised. It is the reason why companies like SpaceX don't want to be dual use if they don't have to.

[–] Quokka@quokk.au 25 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

No one made SpaceX create Starshield, it was the $1.8B contract provided by Bidens government that made them want to do so. They are happy to participate in military affairs as that's where the big money is.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 days ago

No, that was elon simping for putin, no more no less.

lol dual use.

Space-X and Starlink have always been military projects the civil side of it was just to fool the world into thinking it wasnt.

Good, hope they target Felon Mu$k as well.

[–] synae@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 6 days ago
[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

What is this feeling? Like Stockholm syndrome?

[–] rapchee@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

Kessler syndrome?

[–] cardfire@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

Low-key relieved that the business relocated and was incorporated in the One Star State, juuuuust in case Iran happens to figure out ICBM's.