undefined | Better HN

0 pointssixti605y ago0 comments

Do you find the questions about sky and sattelite space are often addressed by people's representatives?

I don't think I heard it addressed even once on public media during major elections.

You'll probably say: "then change your representatives or do some lobying or choose representatives who care about this".

This is a little more complicated than this: people are busy with hundreds of other things when they vote, and the fact these questions are never addressed in public debates should not give an 'implicit consent' about "Ok, tech companies, you can do whatever you want with our sky. Dozens of thousands of new satelites? Ok, no problem, please do!"

0 comments

knorker5y ago

I think your problem is with representative democracy. Most issues are not taken all the way to the public floor.

> these questions are never addressed in public debates should not give an 'implicit consent'

In a western society whatever is not forbidden is allowed. In more oppresive regimes whatever is not allowed is forbidden.

There has been some press about e.g. SpaceX affecting astronomers, but by and large people don't care. And without the people pressuring them to not do it, the people's representatives, or people appointed by them, make their best judgement.

Regulators have the authority to grant launch and orbit permission just like the DMV (presumably) has authority on a whole bunch of driving license issuance rules and decisions. And how there aren't town halls to get input about the number of fire exits a building has to have.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse