NASA To Develop Small Satellites

coondoggie brings news that NASA has announced it will team with Machine-to-Machine Intelligence Corp. to produce small satellites, called 'nanosats,' weighing between 11 and 110 pounds. The satellites will work together in 'constellations' and facilitate networking in space. According to NASA's press release, it will 'develop a fifth generation telecommunications and networking system for Internet protocol-based and related services.' We've discussed miniature satellites in the past.

Re:Great,

[Tesen]

I for one, welcome our new R2D2 sized falling space debris overlords! May they fall on your house, scar you for life and give you a reason as to why you are still a virgin and living with your parents when you are 40 years old! On the other hand, I feel bad for your parents - so I withdraw my previous comment. May our new... ah fuck whatever!

oh yes, no machines have ever communicated before

[justdrew]

thanks god some new company has come around to develop ways for machines to talk to each other. I'm betting it involves 'networking protocols' and 'message' packets being passed around. ground breaking shit here.

In other news...

[Strange Ranger]

Satellites weighing 110-1000 pounds will be called "Biggie sats" and those at the top of the scale will be called "Venti Sats".

Re:A 'nano' satellite that weighs 110 lbs?

[dfsmith]

A cubic nanometer of water weighs 2.2*10^-24 lbs. I'm guessing that's the approximate weight of the 110 lb satellite (in freefall). That or NASA doesn't consider 26 orders of magnitude anything to worry about.

Re:Great,

[Ethanol-fueled]

You, sir, are wrong: I might actually get laid if I had my own satellite.

(woman's voice:)"...oooh, shiny! Ethanol J. Fueled, please take me NOW"!

Re:Mass appeal

[Orange Crush]

As a technologically inclined website, I would think we'd be more concerned with the potential latency issues of orbital IP networks . . . what kind of latency should we expect in knuckle-to-eye units?

Re:Mass appeal

[NemoinSpace]

Most engineers are quite capable of dividing by 2-1/4 in their head.

It's not like this is rocket science we're talking ab ... oh wait.. ummm,

Take your religious war elsewhere before I pound you with my 16 oz. hammer like a 10 penny nail!

Re:1 Sat = 5,000,000,000 kg

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, seeing as how the moon is 7.3477 e 22 kg according to wikipedia, and is a satellite, I think they're quite right with the "nano" = "really small"

Re:Great,

[Captain Nitpick]

You, sir, are wrong: I might actually get laid if I had my own satellite.

I think you'd have better luck if you lost some mass.