from the It's-a-bird,-it's-a-plane,-it's-an...art-object? dept.
Less than a year after "Humanity's Star" was launched by Rocket Lab and destroyed in Earth's atmosphere, another art project aims to place a highly reflective object in the night sky:
Now, nearly 50 years [after the Apollo 12 mission], artist Trevor Paglen hopes to draw the public's eye back to the sky with "Orbital Reflector," a sculpture made of shiny material much like Mylar that will reflect the Sun's light while orbiting the Earth. The sculpture, contained in a small structure called a CubeSat, is scheduled to launch on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, in mid-November. When it enters orbit about 350 miles away from Earth, the sculpture will detach and inflate to its full shape, a diamond that may shine as bright as a star in the Big Dipper. After about two months, it will re-enter Earth's atmosphere and disintegrate.
By sending an object with no military value into space, Paglen said he hopes to raise a conversation about who is allowed to operate past Earth's atmosphere. As artists and historians praise his effort as boundary-breaking, some people within scientific communities are saying it lacks a practical purpose.
Paglen, a 2017 MacArthur fellow, has long been preoccupied with the less-visible, or deliberately hidden, infrastructures that make up the world. For years, he tracked the movements of more than 180 classified U.S. military spy satellites, measuring and photographing their locations for his project "The Other Night Sky."
[...] The project has drawn some criticism and confusion from scientists who question the value of adding what they see as impractical items to Earth's orbit. "It's the space equivalent of someone putting a neon advertising billboard right outside your bedroom window," Jonathan McDowell, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, told Gizmodo. [...] Paglen responded to criticisms in August in a Medium post titled "Let's Get Pissed Off About Orbital Reflector...," saying he hoped to provoke productive conversations.
Related Stories
Rocket Lab has put a highly reflective object into orbit around Earth:
US spaceflight startup Rocket Lab put three commercial satellites into orbit during its rocket launch this past weekend — but it turns out there was another satellite that hitched a ride on the vehicle too. The company's Electron rocket also put into orbit a previously undisclosed satellite made by Rocket Lab's CEO Peter Beck, called the Humanity Star. And the probe will supposedly become the "brightest thing in the night sky," the company announced today.
Shaped a bit like a disco ball, the Humanity Star is a 3-foot-wide carbon fiber sphere, made up of 65 panels that reflect the Sun's light. The satellite is supposed to spin in space, too, so it's constantly bouncing sunlight. In fact, the probe is so bright that people can see it with the naked eye. The Humanity Star's orbit also takes it all over Earth, so the satellite will be visible from every location on the planet at different times. Rocket Lab has set up a website that gives real-time updates about the Humanity Star's location. People can find out when the satellite will be closest to them, and then go outside to look for it.
The goal of the project is to create "a shared experience for all of humanity," according to Rocket Lab. "No matter where you are in the world, or what is happening in your life, everyone will be able to see the Humanity Star in the night sky," Beck said in a statement. "Our hope is that everyone looking at the Humanity Star will look past it to the vast expanse of the Universe and think a little differently about their lives, actions, and what is important for humanity." That includes coming together to solve major problems like climate change and resource shortages, Beck says.
Some astronomers are not happy about the geodesic sphere:
The only good thing about the "Humanity Star" (aka the NZ pollutes the night sky project) is that it burns up in 9 months. 9 months is way too far away IMHO.
— Ian Griffin (@iangriffin) January 24, 2018
Also at BBC.
Previously: Rocket Lab's Second "Electron" Rocket Launch Succeeds, Reaches Orbit
Humanity Star to reach fiery doom earlier than expected
Rocket Lab's Humanity Star is expected to reach a fiery doom much earlier than expected.
The 8kg carbon fibre geodesic sphere with 65 reflective panels, which resembled a disco ball, was shot into orbit from the Mahia Peninsula on January 21 on board Rocket Lab's Electron rocket.
The launch also carried small satellites into the Earth's orbit for US companies Planet Labs and Spire Global.
It was expected the Humanity Star would be one of the brightest objects in the night sky for nine months, but satellite-tracking website Satview reported on Wednesday that it will re-enter the Earth's atmosphere and disintegrate at 3am on Friday.
Previously: Rocket Lab's Electron Rocket Launched "Humanity Star", a Temporary Source of Light Pollution
Submitted via IRC for Sulla
Look up at the night sky in 2020 and you might see an ad for McDonald's floating among the stars. A startup is planning to use a constellation of tiny satellites to create glowing ads. The satellites would light up different messages for up to six minutes at a time at about 250 miles above Earth.
Also at Futurism.
Related: Company Will Create an "Artificial Meteor Shower" Over Hiroshima, Japan in 2019
Japanese Company Could Put "Billboard" on the Moon
Japanese Company ispace Plans Two Missions to the Moon
Another Highly Reflective Art Object Will be Launched Into Orbit in November
First Artificial Meteor Shower Might Outshine Nature
(Score: 2, Disagree) by krishnoid on Wednesday September 26 2018, @04:04AM (11 children)
If only there were scientists who could educate this first group that the value of things isn't just in the observations, numbers, and evidence -- it's in the non-measurable, external, and emotional responses to putting shiny crap in space, conspiracy theories, anthropogenic contributions to climate change, curvature of the earth, heliocentric theory, witches, et al. It would probably help everyone all around if they could learn a little about theoretical/applied 'convincing' along with the raw facts.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by c0lo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @04:17AM (7 children)
You may have a point if not only the scientists emotions would have been considered, but also their budget.
Imagine yourself waiting for 2 years to get your 2 days access slot for some observation and charged for it [google.com], only to discover that half of your slot time you are blinded by that reflector.
Honestly, would you be so considerate to the esthetic emotions of others?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @05:08AM (1 child)
Who are these scientists who think they own the night fucking sky?
It's no so clear that studying the flow of nebular gases, you know, because reasons, is more important that putting a smile on millions of people's faces and thereby inspiring young, inquisitive minds to look up into the sky, where they may dream of building a telescope on the dark side of the moon instead.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @05:21AM
Uh, oh. Almost lost my sense of humor after the first line.
An excellent troll, good sir, if I may say so.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:36PM (4 children)
Then, of course, these people are either willfully ignoring, or unable to mentally process, the social value of "awareness."
Whether or not the value of awareness exceeds the cost of the project (including delayed or otherwise hindered "hard science" projects) is a subjective question - but "art" which can reach 7+ billion people, even if it has a tiny positive social value, can be far more valuable than a less than 1% reduction in the "science capacity" of this year's impacted research.
Now, it is entirely possible that the net social value is negative (though highly improbable that it is zero, or even insignificant given the 7B multiplier), that is a subjective matter based on how you measure value - much like the age old question: what is Art?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Wednesday September 26 2018, @06:04PM (3 children)
I think it would have to be a hell of a lot more impressive for "7 billion" to be a legitimate multiplier for anything.
TFS says it *might* be as bright as other stars. Which aren't really as bright as aircraft and other crap that's already flying around overhead all the time. So unless you see the news articles about it, and then go look up where it's going to be, and generally go out of your way to find and see it...you won't. Or at least you won't realize that you did.
I don't think something which most of the world probably won't know about, and fewer still will experience, can be said to be reaching the entire global population. Most people never even bother to look up at all.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @06:46PM (2 children)
7B may be optimistic, however 2B of us have smartphones and therefore the capability to easily go outside and see this thing if we should choose to (and the sky is clear...) Even if only 1% of the 2B capable even attempt to see it, that is 20 million, and if 1% of those are in some way positively impacted, that's 200,000 positive impacts, and if 1% of those positive impacts end up doing something significant as a result, that's 2000 significant positive results.
Take the cost of the project, including diminished science, and divide by 2000 - that's not a high bar.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Wednesday September 26 2018, @07:17PM (1 child)
Yeah, that's a more reasonable number :)
I'm not really buying the argument that it's going to "destroy science" in any significant amount...but it does seem like a waste of money and rockets. It's their money, they can do what they want I guess, but this doesn't seem particularly productive considering their goals. The moon landing inspired a ton of people; and even more directly we have things like ISS astronauts talking to ham radio operators. Then we've got hobbyist cubesats and such launching today (Hell, Make Magazine had an article about launching your own satellite back in 2014!). What's more inspiring -- learning that some civilian stuck a big mylar balloon up there, or learning that some civilian is in radio contact with their own makeshift Sputnik? It's pretty expensive to throw a satellite up there; I'd expect that making the satellite actually *do something* would be fairly affordable in comparison. Inspire people to learn a bit so they can tune in to its transmissions or learn what it's actually doing up there rather than just looking through a cellphone screen at some space tracker app going "Oh, there it is"....
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @07:35PM
Well, being visible is "doing something" - although Sputnik was maybe more impressive with its AM transmitter, but.. that's been done and who has portable AM radios anymore (and knows how to use it)?
I would wish for "better science," but on the other hand, most really good science is far beyond the interest zone of most people, so... again, there's a social value in being simple and that social value (this one time) might just outweigh the lack of science.
I feel it's kind of like the dolphin shows at Sea World - on the one hand, the whole thing sickens me, captives in tiny tanks with nothing to do but perform for little stadiums full of people. On the other hand, the awareness-impact on those people in the stadium, including my children, is going to do far more good for dolphins as a species in the future than any possible suffering the performers might endure, and I don't know of a more efficient and effective way to make that awareness-impact, so....
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @04:17AM
Yes, because everyone becoming a Brand Ambassador is what has left IT (previously an engineering discipline) so productive, mature and yielding such consistently high quality results, industry-wide.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @05:05AM (1 child)
... man-made climate change, or the idea that we can do anything about it (or should) becomes increasingly suspicious.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @07:35AM
We must send MORE rockets to heat up the atmosphere and belch tens of tons of toxic gasses and waste into it, while making the man in the street feel guilty about driving to work to support his family. Now some 2c clown wants to slot in his idiot launch... if you're not part of the solution you are a part of the problem.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by black6host on Wednesday September 26 2018, @04:35AM (1 child)
Ok, so I'll buy the premise that we should consider that perhaps space is different from out planet and that there won't be a power struggle to control every square inch that could be. No religious wars, no technical wars... Man, space is just free!!!!!!! Like, peace man, it's just art!
Sure. Ain't nobody going to cede control to anybody and the folks with the most money, and likely military, will win. That's just the way it's going to be. Wake me from my cryogenic chamber and prove me wrong, :)
Note: no artists were killed in the making of this post and frankly I hate the world today that has made me such a cynic. Please prove me wrong.
(Score: 2, Funny) by realDonaldTrump on Wednesday September 26 2018, @06:41AM
Thank you very much, ~black6host. I appreciate it. You think like my Generals. Not General Assembly losers & haters. We're putting a Sword in the Sky. Space Sword. The biggest one. Because it's gonna be the only one. Beautiful sword, perfect size. Believe me, there's no problem there. We'll be the only Country that has it. And we'll point it at anyone we want to. Whether they want to see it or not. Folks in Venezuela will look at the Sky. Folks in Nambia. In Iran. Cuba. And they'll know -- USA. Those lightweights just can't compete. Space Force all the way! 🇺🇸
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @06:30AM
Space Force Advertising! Only the best and most fantastic Orbital Branding and Advertising! Apply now to have your product featured on the Trump Full Live-Motion Billboard in Space! Bigger than Times Square! See by more Earthlings! But, we are opposed to the whole "globalization" thing, and we want to preserve Trump sovereignty and Patriarchailism. Space Force!
(Score: 3, Informative) by coolgopher on Wednesday September 26 2018, @07:56AM (3 children)
Space graffiti.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:40PM
What else is human existence besides making stuff happen that wouldn't happen if we weren't alive?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by zocalo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:45PM (1 child)
The only thing I can see this is likely to achieve is irritating a few astronomers, and (maybe) "raise a conversation" amongst peoples who will have no idea what this latest new object in the sky is - assuming they've not already given up on trying to keep their religion or whatever up to date with all the other things now flying overhead like aircraft, other satellites, etc. Many of the other people who might understand what a satellite is are probably not going to be looking up anyway because there's only a few dozen stars visible to the naked eye most nights because light pollution, so what's the point? Still, for the privilege of getting this art installation into orbit, they'll be shoving a chunk of cash into SpaceX's coffers, and hopefully they'll be able to do something more productive with it.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday September 26 2018, @05:21PM
It's a new light in the sky, oh no! Aliens!!! Because, you know someone's not going to believe the whole art aspect.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Wednesday September 26 2018, @07:58AM (4 children)
Ok, here is my idea for a productive conversation.
Let's start with conversations about international laws regarding sending junk into space, and the fines for not cleaning up.
And anyone that sends anything that is more distracting than $limit without good technical or scientific reason will be sent to jail for the number of days it is above the limit in each country that files a protest.
Really, keep space clean.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:42PM (3 children)
Define merit. NdGTyson, Sagan, Bill Nye - do they have merit? Ignoring any actual science that those giants may or may not have done, they undeniably put significant effort and resources into education, awareness and mind-shaping.
I think this project has addressed the "keep space clean" aspect with a responsible de-orbit plan. Much better than I can say for the multitude of booster stages that have been orbiting for 50+ years.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Wednesday September 26 2018, @03:25PM (2 children)
Will not define "merit" since I avoided that phrase due to it tending to devolve into politics rather than science or technology quickly (hence "reason" - such as "need solar panels for power").
Well, only in USA and neighbouring areas (possibly excepting Sagan). I found out about Bill Nye from the show NCIS, and NdG.Tyson from memes (when I wondered what the heck all the "black science man" stuff was about) - that should say a bit about how low their presence is outside of N.Am (funnily enough, up until just now (checked wikipedia) I didn't know Carl Sagan was involved in PR-stuff, I only knew of him as an author and someone involved with NASA and astrophysics).
Personally I'd say bread-and-circuses is not a valid reason to screw with actual research, and if the country needs BaC to notice fundamental research then it simply is a band aid for a much more serious problem.
(As a sidenote - I actually got interested in space due to a quite excellent local museum of natural histories that used to have excellent space exhibits, up until they started to only be wellknown for their IMAX-theatre (so I have a bone to pick with bread-and-circuses ruining an otherwise good experience))
Yes, the project managed it (hopefully) decently, but the "artist" wanted a productive conversation and I'd say that international laws of cleaning up would be the best possible outcome.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @04:18PM
The U.S. has plenty of serious problems in this area, and if you're honest about it we're not alone.
There are many, many more good possible outcomes. I was in kindergarten in 1971, the "what do you want to be when you grow up?" stats had recently shifted (for boys) from 47% policeman 48% firefighter 5% whatever dad does to about 60% astronaut... even girls were responding >30% with astronaut or something related. Watching live moon landings undeniably shifted interest toward STEM education...
Elon's Japanese billionaire taking artists and philosophers along with him to the far side of the moon is another great thing... keeping the whole "we can go to space" thing out of science fiction and in tangible reality. It changes people's attitudes, how they live, and what they vote for.
As for international laws... I'm not terribly impressed with their effectiveness to-date, in many areas. They're better than no laws at all, but fall FAR short of what's needed to protect future generations from the present.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @06:13PM
I grew up in the US and didn't know who Tyson was until a couple years ago. I didn't watch TV as a kid though.
(Score: 2) by Rich on Wednesday September 26 2018, @08:44AM (16 children)
I remember reading about utopian plans to place mirrors in space for solar power generation on the ground. This little project gives us a very tiny hint what implications such big mirrors might have.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @09:31AM (15 children)
Not really. On the contrary rather.
A space reflector is likely to focus the energy it is meant to capture/convert, anything going astray is contrary to its purpose.
This one will spread the incoming energy in directions some (e.g. the astronomers) will find at least annoying.
It's like one trying to hear the grass growing and somebody else starting to sing 'Nobody knows how dry I am'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Rich on Wednesday September 26 2018, @09:51AM (6 children)
I can't really imagine that the losses (through mirror imperfections or diffusion through particles in the atmosphere) of a multi-kilometer-sized mirror aren't at least in the ballpark of this comparatively little sphere. The distribution of light will be different over the angles, with a sphere more even, but consider that in comparison the visible light in one location of a sphere's reflection comes only from the tiniest part of the angle it covers.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Wednesday September 26 2018, @10:04AM (5 children)
I always thought the biggest issue with the space-solar reflectors is human/political. Who will have control over what would essentially be to humans what the magnifying glass is to ants?
In the wrong hands such a device would be one serious weapon, and knowing human nature, someone would try to turn it into one. Assuming of course there isn't an error or failure in the safety systems and it all turns into one big accident.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:01AM (4 children)
I reckon the biggest issues are going to be engineering/safety in nature.
To worth it, the mirror has to be fucking big - some hundred of MW at least to worth the trouble of deploying something on geosync and then take the trouble to keep it stable (will look and behave like a solar sail).
At the level of energy fluxes in the latest 20 km of the path until it hits the receptors/converters, I have this nasty feeling the atmosphere isn't going to be a steady optical medium in which the rays propagate in straight predictable lines. Heating the air intensely (we talking hundred of MW, right?) is bound to create some spectacular tornado-like phenomena [youtube.com]
Heh, try to fry some ants able to launch some shiny reflective rockets and your magnifying glass is gonna last as long as the transit time of them rockets.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:50PM (2 children)
Once the engineering/safety issues are overcome, it will become a political issue.
I have greater confidence in our increasing engineering abilities to deal with such problems than I do our apparently stagnant/oscillating political progress.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @05:33PM (1 child)
It may not worth it based on building and maintenance costs.
That is, it may only worth it as a military gizmo, but given the difficulty to defend and the maintenance cost is going to be a self-defeating strategy to have one: your enemy just needs to wait for you to run out of money. If you attack, the enemy needs to last some hours for the rockets in transit to blow it in pieces - not very hard in underground shelters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @06:36PM
With 8 billion people on the planet, we have already activated a doomsday device which will be fiendishly difficult to defuse. Global Thermonuclear war could seal our fate in 100 hours, but simple overpopulation seems sure to do us in with less than 100 years.
I don't really care who gets the scraps after either, it will be thousands, perhaps millions of years before anything resembling today's fun returns to the world.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:24AM
You're thinking in terms of nations and militaries.
Think in terms of "Joe, disgruntled power-station employee" and "Joe's boss's flammable house in the suburbs".
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:48PM (7 children)
Space is big, really big. etc. - Douglas Adams
Any astronomer doing anything even remotely interesting is focused on less than 1 degree of sky at a time, and there are over 40,000 degrees of sky [badastronomy.com] in our 3 dimensions. So, for a period of a couple of months, 0.0025% of the sky is going to be "corrupted" with this thing that's little different from the space station or any number of communication satellites [heavens-above.com] of dubious value.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @05:46PM (6 children)
That thingy reflects light noise in > 2π steradians - the half a sphere receiving light from the sun. Come on, draw a circle and see how it reflects a parallel beam
When your observation rely on exposing a photo for hours to register something of 27 magnitude [wikipedia.org], that thing crossing the sky will drown your photo big time.
(stop playing the fool, the time for large observatories is expensive)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @06:41PM (5 children)
There is no (manmade) object capable of reflecting sunlight from more sky than it physically occupies.
If you're doing a long exposure, sure this will be painting a stripe through the sky - but no more than any one of dozens of manmade objects already up there, and if you're really going after a 27 magnitude target, there are literally thousands of manmade objects that can spoil your fun - one more for a period of 2 months is kind of like getting pissed off at a streaker crossing the highway on your way to work in the morning... it's not like he's going to be snarling traffic every morning for years, or that thousands of people are going to copy him.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @07:00PM (4 children)
You forget or do you deliberately ignore the fact that access time to large telescopes is limited and expensive?
Let me use a car analogy: it's like you hire a Ferrari to have your one hour travel ruined by a streaker driving a tractor in front of you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 26 2018, @07:27PM (3 children)
If you live your life for one trip in a Ferrari, it sucks to be you.
Likewise, bitching about this single extra confounder is like bitching because there's ANOTHER lorry using the M1 when you get your Ferrari time.
Personally, those rolling advert trucks that intentionally drive slow during commute hours - yeah, those should be dealt with harshly, but this particular dot in the sky isn't actually any worse than dozens of others which will be there for much longer timeframes.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:33PM (1 child)
The difference between this and other lorries - all the other lorries point their shiny surfaces away from you and the rest of the surfaces are diffusive.
This bitch is:
- all glitz and glitter
- closer to your Ferrari (remember that inverse square with the distance attenuation?) than the lorries
- it serves no purpose other than showing its round form and inflating the ego and vanity of the pimp ( hey, yeah, I've done it! Now you have a robust discussion - aka talk about what I, me, look at me have done)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday September 27 2018, @10:52AM
Reminds me of the pink island wrap in Miami - similarly short lived for similar good reasons.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:01AM
BTW, remember that "publish or perish"?
Sucks or not, that one rule of academia; you know? the guys that bring you discoveries and theories and technology and whatnot that make possible that space flight you used to place the fucking good-for-nothing gizmo on orbit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 5, Funny) by Entropy on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:35AM (1 child)
"By sending an object with no military value into space, Paglen said he hopes to raise a conversation about who is allowed to operate past Earth's atmosphere."
->
"I'm going to do something really stupid so people will have to make a rule against doing obviously stupid crap."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @04:37PM
Congratulations! You win the internet for today. Go grab yourself a cookie. And I mean that sincerely.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 26 2018, @01:22PM
Art Project proposal:
Put up a constellation of art project satellites with global coverage.
Don't make them shiny, so that they do not interfere with fussy entitled astronomers.
Make them dark by having outward facing solar panels to collect power. With this power, they can bless the earth with 1 megawatt blasts of radio noise at various frequencies. To be friendly, they should only send blessings on frequencies that are detected to be in use on the earth below to maximize the number of people who are blessed by the satellites' greeting.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 26 2018, @02:03PM
When my lunar base is complete I'm gonna build a giant, lit picture of buttocks on it so every night I can moon the Earth.
Washington DC delenda est.