<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Brightness Characterization for Starlink Direct-to-Cell Satellites · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2407.03092/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2407.03092/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Brightness Characterization for Starlink Direct-to-Cell Satellites — mentioned by DylanSp</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41177981</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2407.03092:41177981</guid><pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2024 03:26:58 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m curious if SpaceX has applied those mitigation techniques yet. I could maybe understand not doing it for the initial test batch of 6 DTC satellites, but they&amp;#x27;ve been continuing to launch more, and they should be taking at least some action by now, like those &amp;quot;routine mitigation techniques&amp;quot;. There&amp;#x27;s apparently up to &amp;gt;100 DTC sats in orbit now (see [1] and [2]); I can&amp;#x27;t figure out from the study [3] exactly when the astronomers took their measurements, but it seems like they were able to see most of the DTC sats. It&amp;#x27;s not great if SpaceX is delaying their mitigations, this isn&amp;#x27;t exactly a…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2407.03092/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph.IM</category></item><item><title>Brightness Characterization for Starlink Direct-to-Cell Satellites — mentioned by DylanSp</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41177917</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2407.03092:41177917</guid><pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2024 03:14:41 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Took me a moment to parse the article and find a link to the study, here it is: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2407.03092.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2407.03092/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph.IM</category></item></channel></rss>
