this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2026
67 points (95.9% liked)

Technology

86187 readers
3329 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
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

Hasn't this clearly been the plan for years, surprised this is a a surprise to anyone. When musk was talking about delivering payloads anywhere in the world in under an hour, he's wasn't talking about getting you toilet paper quicker (or solving world hunger)

[–] ArcaneGadget@nord.pub 42 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (2 children)

"What is the most resource inefficient way we can come up with, to get supplies to the frontline." I hate theese tech-bros so much...

[–] abbadon420@sh.itjust.works 8 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

It's not the worst idea. The road between your basecamp and the frontline can easily be blocked by enemies, but the line between a satelite and your frontline is not easily blocked. For simplicity I'm assuming our hypthetical enemy doesn't have an abundance of relatively cheap ground to air missiles, like every military in the world has.

[–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

Why would you want this over just airdropping supplies?

Also I'm no military need, but if the road between your basecamp and the frontline can easily be blocked then I don't think you actually hold that territory and may have over extended yourself and no matter how many supplies you drop/"Enemy" "combatants"/civilians you kill, you're likely losing the war (see Rhodesia (LOL) or Vietnam)

[–] HieroProtagonist@lemmy.ml 8 points 14 hours ago

Funnily, it's not THAT new of an idea:

http://www.astronautix.com/i/ithacus.html

[–] Soulphite@reddthat.com 20 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Sure, lets jump straight to MILITARY and not.. oh say, I dunno... space exploration? Typical military industrial complex bullshit.

Sick of this fucking timeline.

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works -2 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Dude, you realize the whole 'going to the moon' thing was just a way to convince the public to fund ballistic missile technology? And the whole reason for the shuttle was to steal Russias satellites? One of the biggest use cases for space is war. Space travel won't feed anyone.

[–] cy888@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

Ballistic missile tech already existed.

It was modified for use in the Mercury program.

[–] robear@lemmy.zip 16 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

We can already feed everyone. We just choose not to. Space travel has nothing to do with it, but we should do it anyway.

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I'm for space travel but I think the commercialization of space will benefit a very few.

[–] dzsimbo@sopuli.xyz 0 points 57 minutes ago

Not if we have gay space-communism and anyone and their mother can use the skytrain (my colloquial name for a space elevator).

[–] harrison_fnord@reddthat.com 10 points 14 hours ago

Ok this is it. Last straw for me. Imma go do something now.

Technology has failed us. Time to build some emps, time to stop paying taxes.

[–] NM_Gringo@lemmy.world 0 points 8 hours ago

Just as soon as Ketamine Man gets his rockets to stop blowing up or looking like crispy critters when they ditch in the ocean.