this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2025
172 points (98.3% liked)

Canada

8706 readers
1492 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Canada desperately needs a national strategic internet constellation.

Edit to fix link.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 31 points 2 days ago (26 children)

We do not need a constellation. We do not need more space junk.

We need fibre everywhere.

[–] alsimoneau@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago (9 children)

If we must have a satellite it should be a single geostationary one.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago (8 children)

Geostationary satellites orbit at a height of 35,000 km. That means there's a huge lag, making the satellites unsuitable for interactive Internet, and it also means they're far away, so you need a big directional antenna to send data to them.

Starlink is awful, but you definitely don't want geostationary satellites for Internet.

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Correctamundo. You can't speed up light. For low latency you need LEO, and since they don't sit still for you (8km/s roughly) you need a bunch of them in some kind of formation or constellation, so that you generally have something to connect to at any given moment, or at least a chain that can relay to ground stations.

[–] Isaac@waterloolemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Kessler syndrome has entered the chat

We could be architechting our own Great Filter (assuming we've not passed it already, and assuming we can't solve the Kessler syndrome).

Some light reading for those unfamiliar:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I think Kessler is rather less of a concern than global climate change.

[–] alsimoneau@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And all those sattelites burning up on the atmosphere have absolutely no impact on climate?

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 hours ago

Assuming your question is not rhetorical...

Some combustion products have climatic effects. For you to lean into this, the next step would be to calculate the relative effect of perhaps 80 tons of space junk burning up on reentry per year, versus perhaps 42 billion tons of CO2 emissions per year. You'll want to estimate the radiative forcing or climatic effects of the space junk combustion products to get there. I'll save you the effort and tell you that space junk burning up on reentry is likely to be several hundred thousand times less impactful than terrestrial GHG emmissions.

Which should not be surprising intuitively, just considering the volume of GHGs we produce globally each year.

[–] Isaac@waterloolemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

Yea I can see that, we can live comfortably on earth with Kessler syndrome but some carrington event and already struggling populace would probably set us back a century at least and wed be trapped on earth nearly forever, or until we can solve Kessler syndrome

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)