Prof. Sam LawlerFeb 5

Well, everyone, you can now submit a comment to let the FCC know what you think about SpaceX asking for 1 million satellites for "AI datacenters" whatever the fuck that means.

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-113A1.pdf

Comments due March 6.

I am having a very hard time believing this is really happening. Fuck you, SpaceX, and fuck you, FCC. This is not regulation, this is a fucking joke, that will destroy our ability to use satellites for centuries.

Show threadProf. Sam Lawler
If anyone has time and energy to set up instructions for how to submit a comment to the FCC (it's really fucking complicated, on purpose, I'm sure), I would very much appreciate it! Otherwise I'll do it in the coming days.
Feb 5 at 1:29amWeb
Show threadLauren WeinsteinFeb 5
@sundogplanets It's not going to work. That will be obvious long before he has all that many satellites up, and he'll move on to his next sick joke.
Show threadjbaggsFeb 5
@lauren @sundogplanets It will probably destroy what it was meant to in the time it is being developed though. Just as Hyperloop was really meant to kill off high speed rail projects.
Show threadMichael KohneFeb 5
@lauren @sundogplanets I think this one is about the IPO - he wants to pawn off SpaceX on the open market (especially now that he's rolled the other loser companies into it), and this is about hyping SpaceX. If the commentary were to kill the idea ASAP, it might help fubar the IPO, which would be good for all the rest of us.
Show threadWandering StarFeb 5

@sundogplanets https://www.fcc.gov/about/contact

https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/how-comment

Show threadAaron Brick — אהרן בריקFeb 5
@sundogplanets Yikes. Is DA 26-113 the “docket number or rulemaking number of the proceeding”?
Show threadrvandegriftFeb 6

@sundogplanets @aarbrk 26-113 matches the format of past proceeding identifiers, but it isn't in ECFS (yet?). I also had the email failure reported elsewhere.

The fallback is to mail a signed original, with *four* copies - details at https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/how-comment#paper

I reported the issues using consumercomplaints.fcc.gov - they were forthright that I'd not be hearing back, but maybe it will unstick a fix.

Show threadSeán FenianFeb 5
@sundogplanets A milliuon satellites is utterly barking insane. Based on the rate they're burning out GPU/VPUs in AI datacenters, my rough estimate is they're going to need 140 Falcon 9 launches PER DAY just to sustain the constellation. A million satellites that need replacement every 18 months on average?
Show threadkatzenbergerFeb 5

@sundogplanets

If somebody wants to venture into this, please test all steps.

The first one involves sending an email to [email protected] with "get form" and your email address in the message body.

The reply I got was trying to strangely gaslight me:

"Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups:

[email protected]
Your message couldn't be delivered. The Domain Name System (DNS) reported that the recipient's domain does not exist."

There seems to be a strange subdomain falstaff.fcc.gov involved. The attached error log says:

Diagnostic information for administrators:

Generating server: SJ0PR09MB11735.namprd09.prod.outlook.com

[email protected]
Remote server returned '550 5.4.310 DNS domain falstaff.fcc.gov does not exist [Message=InfoDomainNonexistent] [LastAttemptedServerName=falstaff.fcc.gov] [SA2PEPF00003023.namprd09.prod.outlook.com 2026-02-05T12:30:46.776Z 08DE6078A5284768]'
Show threadAlex StrasheimFeb 5

@katzenberger @sundogplanets

This is boring stuff, but when your server tries to deliver mail, the first thing it does is look for the MX records for the recipient's domain.

It looks like they're using Microsoft to run their email system.

My first guess is that they're changing their mail servers, and somehow your message got stuck during the transition.

1/2

Show threadAlex StrasheimFeb 5

@katzenberger @sundogplanets

Then it looks up the numerical address of the mail server. That's working as well. I think that if you try again, it will work.

The caveat is that when you query a DNS server, the answer gets cached for a while. So you might have to wait for your server's cached copies of the data to expire. But the data that's live now is good.

Show threadQuark MakerFeb 5

@katzenberger @sundogplanets
# whois.nic.gov

Domain Name: fcc.gov
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.nic.gov
Registrar URL: https://get.gov
Updated Date: 2025-07-21T18:50:44Z
Creation Date: 1997-10-02T01:29:23Z
Registry Expiry Date: 2026-07-16T18:50:44Z
Registrar: get.gov
Registrar IANA ID: 8888888
Registrar Abuse Contact Email:
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone:
Domain Status: serverTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#serverTransferProhibited

get.gov

.Gov is the top-level domain for governments in the U.S. Request and manage a .gov domain.

Show threadQuark MakerFeb 5
@katzenberger @sundogplanets I wonder if they'll remember to re-up the domain before July 16. Someone far cleverer than I should see if they can take control of it.
Show threadMidgePhotoFeb 5
@katzenberger @sundogplanets
Falstaff is a good name for a mail server, but it looks as if DNS is either misconfigured, or has not yet propagated.
Notionally, a domain will contain several machines, one of which is called mail. And another is called post. And a third called www.
In fact they all may be on one physical machine. Which might be called Falstaff. or Laertes, Mercutio etc
Mine tend to astronomical.