Slashdot Mirror


Pepsi Says It'll Use an Artificial Constellation, Hung in the Night Sky Next To the Stars, To Promote an Energy Drink (futurism.com)

A Russian company called StartRocket says it's going to launch a cluster of cubesats into space that will act as an "orbital billboard," projecting enormous advertisements into the night sky like artificial constellations. And its first client, it says, will be PepsiCo -- which will use the system to promote a "campaign against stereotypes and unjustified prejudices against gamers" on behalf of an energy drink called Adrenaline Rush, reports Futurism. From the report: Yeah, the project sounds like an elaborate prank. But Russian PepsiCo spokesperson Olga Mangova confirmed to Futurism that the collaboration is real. "We believe in StartRocket potential," she wrote in an email. "Orbital billboards are the revolution on the market of communications. That's why on behalf of Adrenaline Rush -- PepsiCo Russia energy non-alcoholic drink, which is brand innovator, and supports everything new, and non-standard -- we agreed on this partnership."

318 comments

  1. No. Just no. by xSander · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Go away. Don't pollute our beautiful skies like that.

    1. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck No!!!!!!!

    2. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      If they do this, I promise never ever to buy anything from Pepsi corporation again.

      Not just polluting the view for everyone in the planet, they would also add more of pointless pace junk which can break useful satellites and therefore harm navigation, communication and scientific research.

    3. Re:No. Just no. by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If they do this, I promise never ever to buy anything from Pepsi corporation again.

      Not just polluting the view for everyone in the planet, they would also add more of pointless pace junk which can break useful satellites and therefore harm navigation, communication and scientific research.

      I would join you in the boycott... if I bought anything from Pepsi in the first place. I don't drink soda, or lipton; I almost never eat fast food, so me boycotting KFC and TacoBell, and any other Pepsi owned chains over this won't help.

      I will however sign any petition over banning this, and write to my local representatives asking they put a stop to this if this comes to fruition. This may be a harmless one-off for them, but if it is successful and other companies follow suit the night sky could quickly become a trashland of light pollution... I don't want to start down that trail.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    4. Re:No. Just no. by thermopile · · Score: 5, Informative
      Arthur C. Clarke beat them to this: read the short story called "Watch This Space", where almost exactly this was performed ... by a soda company ... except they did it on the moon. In 1956.

      It was amusing (and pretty good) as a sci-fi short story. It's terrifying as "reality."

      --

      "Diplomacy is something you do until you find a rock." --Richard Pound

    5. Re:No. Just no. by butchersong · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm in complete agreement with you. Luckily we have a handy list of products to avoid. wiki list of assets

    6. Re:No. Just no. by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      And there's the simple fucking audacity to put that goddam advertising shit right in everyone's faces.

      They do that already with billboards and LED signs, and I think most people don't go outside and look up at night, anyway.

      Now, if they could arrange to get that shit on my ceiling ...

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    7. Re:No. Just no. by AdamFistler · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sure screw up the night sky with some gawky advertisement to advertise their new drink aimed at neckbeards. I'm sure Pepsi will be the first company on board when they broadcast ads into your dreams like on Futurama.

    8. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy shit they own a lot of products. Going to be tricky to totally boycott them.

    9. Re:No. Just no. by GrumpySteen · · Score: 4, Informative

      You probably buy a lot more stuff from PepsiCo then you realize.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    10. Re:No. Just no. by squiggleslash · · Score: 0

      Is there a TV you don't own that you could not stop talking about too?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    11. Re:No. Just no. by sidekick2 · · Score: 2

      As if this will just be Pepsi. It will be PepsiCo for 6 mo, until their contract runs out, then Verizon, then Visa, then Amazon. Then we'll have 40 other companies, like CBS Outdoors launching their own cubesat program. Can't wait for the political ads -- to light up the night skies.

    12. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet it ends up looking really lame, which would make me happy.

    13. Re:No. Just no. by butchersong · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is ultimate result of abandoning things lofty things like beauty and truth as foundations of society and replacing it with what... consumerism? Capitalism? I've spent my whole life as a hard-core republican but lately, the old free market this and libertarian that mantras just leave me feeling empty and dissatisfied.

    14. Re:No. Just no. by SumDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Chair Face Chip-n-Dale!

    15. Re:No. Just no. by supremebob · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ah, man... they own Cheetos? That's it, boycott is over. They can cover up the big dipper with a giant Mt. Dew ad for all I care, I'm not giving those up.

    16. Re: No. Just no. by GoTeam · · Score: 1

      And they own Sting! Does that cover his work when he was still active with The Police?

    17. Re:No. Just no. by alvinrod · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I looked over it and there were some brands on there that I wasn't aware of Pepsi owning (mostly a few of the snack food brands) but I also realized that there isn't a product on that list that a person couldn't get from someone else or just do without entirely. In fact, you'd probably be better off if you never bought products from almost all of those brands to begin with for health reasons.

    18. Re:No. Just no. by backbyter · · Score: 1

      The only thing on the Wiki list I might have to boycott is Dole. I think that's the brand for the bananas that I buy.

    19. Re:No. Just no. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's basically impossible to live an ethical life these days because the world is too integrated and interconnected. Every action can be eventually traced back to some badness of some kind.

      Yes I've been watching The Good Place, but it's probably true.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    20. Re:No. Just no. by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

      Not to mention Cobra of GI Joe fame. And Fred Pohl's "Space Merchants" comes to mind.

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    21. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, nada.

    22. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Arthur C. Clarke beat them to this: read the short story called "Watch This Space", where almost exactly this was performed ... by a soda company ... except they did it on the moon. In 1956.

      It was amusing (and pretty good) as a sci-fi short story. It's terrifying as "reality."

      On the bright side the idea for once wasn't from the 1984.

    23. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who knew that being Ethical was sooo difficult?

      Do what American business did and change the definition of Ethics!

      Does Ethical behavior make it more difficult to make money, then simply change your Ethics to being all about making money (i.e. Enhancing Shareholder Value)

      Just make sure that you also own the media so that they can brainwash large segments of your population into believing that scraping by while the plutocrats dine on endangered species and leave the scraps for you to fight over is a _good_ thing.

    24. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heard U2 will air a free music video on the night sky to promote their next album.

    25. Re:No. Just no. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      In The Tick, Chairface Chippendale tried to carve his name into the moon with a giant laser so it would be visible from earth. He only got as far as "CHA" before The Tick stopped him.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    26. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One might say you've grown up and matured.

    27. Re:No. Just no. by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      me boycotting KFC and TacoBell, and any other Pepsi owned chains over this won't help

      No, that won't help, because Pepsi no longer owns any of that. So no need! :D

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    28. Re:No. Just no. by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      It's basically impossible to live an ethical life these days because the world is too integrated and interconnected.

      Ethics is, as ethics does. Seems to me like being integrated and connected would be good for ethics.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    29. Re:No. Just no. by PackMan97 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except that Libertarian principles do not say "do whatever you want". Many libertarians are strong environmentalists and believe the principle of non-aggression applies to spewing out unwanted particulates, sound or light (all forms of pollution) is a form of aggression and therefore prohibited. Certainly putting obtrusive displays in the night sky for all to see would fall under that and be prohibited as a form or pollution in any libertarian utopia.

    30. Re:No. Just no. by Solandri · · Score: 1

      The moon isn't so bad - the light pollution is limited to just the moon's surface. This idea of lit cubesats in orbit pollutes a huge swath of the night sky, interfering with astronomy all around the globe. To put it in terms marketers might understand, it's like if someone drew lines across every ad on every medium all across the globe. It's an incredibly disruptive and monumentally bad idea, almost sure to result in government regulation of objects put into space much like the government regulates radio transmissions.

    31. Re:No. Just no. by PsychoSlashDot · · Score: 1

      If they do this, I promise never ever to buy anything from Pepsi corporation again.

      Not just polluting the view for everyone in the planet, they would also add more of pointless pace junk which can break useful satellites and therefore harm navigation, communication and scientific research.

      I would join you in the boycott... if I bought anything from Pepsi in the first place.

      Well, you see, that just means you haven't been sufficiently advertised to. Clearly you've demonstrated the need for orbital billboards.

      --
      "Oh no... he found the .sig setting."
    32. Re:No. Just no. by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

      Holy fuck...

    33. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should open up a market in small linear accelerator devices for the home market....
      There seems we'll have some interesting targets.

    34. Re:No. Just no. by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Mountain Dew?! Oh, man, this is going to be tough...

      Granted, I prefer Mello Yello, but it's almost impossible to find in bottles around here.

    35. Re: No. Just no. by Evtim · · Score: 1

      Hahaha...
      Oh boy, this is precious! Sorry, I won't elucidate much but here is the short version.
      There is an excellent book by a modern Russian author called Viktor Pelevin titled "Generation P". It deals mostly with advertising (ha!). The first 3 pages tell us why "P". Because during communism the only western drink that was available in the USSR was.....Pepsi Cola.
      The author wonders why the apparatchiks decided for Pepsi and not Coke (while mentioning that it had to be only one available because in those days only one Truth and one Way was considered).
      BTW, in the Amazon version which I bought to give to friends those few pages were omitted. Apparently the US book market can't have fun with Pepsi or Coke. I'm serious, it is censored (there are few jokes as to why in the US coke won, plus some jibes about evolution and red necks..)
      Man, this news is hilarious. Read the book anyway (in the west the title is Omon Ra).

      Oh yhea, fuck Pepsi and that Russian agency!

    36. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The first Red Dwarf book had advertisers deliberately sending suns into supernova to spell out sky messages:

      Captain Yvette Richards ran her fingers through the bristles of her crew cut, and craned forward to look at the spectrascope of the sun they were approaching.
      It was perfect. She let out a Texan yelp.
      'We got it!'
      Flight Coordinator Elaine Schuman leaned over her shoulder and peered at the console. 'It's a supergiant?'
      'You betcha!' said Richards, and yelped again.
      'Time to celebrate,' said Schuman.

      Kryten, the service mechanoid, handed round styrofoam cups of dehydrated champagne, and topped them up with water.
      The eight-woman, two-man crew yelped and cheered and partied, while Kryten handed round more champagne and irradiated caviare nibblets, which he'd been saving specially.
      It had taken the crew of Nova 5 six months to find a blue supergiant - a star teetering on the edge of its final phase in the right quadrant of the right galaxy. Another month, and they would have ruined the whole campaign. They certainly felt they had good reason to celebrate.

      Sipping her champagne Kirsty Fantozi, the star demolition engineer, started programming the nebulon missile. It had to explode at just the right moment to trigger off the reaction in the star's core which would push it into supernova stage. A star in supernova would light up the entire galaxy for over a month, giving off more energy than the Earth's sun could in ten billion years. It would be a hell of a bang.

      One undetected bug in Fantozi's programming could ruin everything. Not only did she have to push the star into supernova, she had to time it so the light from the explosion would reach Earth at exactly the right moment. The right moment was the same moment as the light from the other one hundred and twenty-seven supergiants, which were also being induced into supernovae, reached Earth.

      For anyone living on Earth the result would be mindfizzlingly spectacular. One hundred and twenty-eight stars would appear to go supernova simultaneously, burning with such ferocity they would be visible even in daylight.
      And the hundred and twenty-eight supernovae would spell out a message.
      And this would be the message:

      'COKE ADDS LIFE!'

      For five whole weeks, wherever you were on Earth, the huge tattoo would be branded across the day and night skies.
      Honeymooners in Hawaii would stand on the peak of Mauna Kea, gazing at sunsets stamped with the slogan. Commuters in London, stuck in traffic jams, would peer through the grey drizzle and gape at the Cola constellation. The few primitive tribes still untouched by civilisation in the jungles of South America would look up at the heavens, and certainly not think about drinking Pepsi.

      The cost of this single, three-word ad in star writing across the universe would amount to the entire military budget of the USA for the whole of history. So, ridiculous though it was, it was still a marginally more sensible way of blowing trillions of dollarpounds.
      And, the Coke executives were assured by the advertising executives at Saachi, Saachi, Saachi, Saachi, Saachi and Saachi, it would put an end to the Cola war forever. Guaranteed. Pepsi would be buried.

      OK, it wasn't wonderful, ecologically speaking. OK, it involved the destruction of a hundred and twenty-eight stars, which otherwise would have lasted another twenty-five million years or so. OK, when the stars exploded they would gobble up three or four planets in each of their solar systems And, OK, the resulting radiation would last long past the lifetime of our own planet.

      But it sure as hell would sell a lot of cans of a certain fizzy drink Fantozi finished the program and fired the nebulon missile off into the heart of the star. She finished her styrofoam cup of champagne and flicked on her intercom.
      'Let's turn this son-of-a-goit around and go home.'
      The nose cone of Nova 5 slowly swung around to begin the jag back to Earth.

    37. Re:No. Just no. by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      I feel your pain but if they do this shit, then it will be cold day in hell before I touch another one.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    38. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also Red Dwarf in which a series of ships would force a thousand stars to go super nova so that the they would spell out ‘COKE ADDS LIFE!’ in earth's sky.

    39. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not so much "the night sky" at risk of screw-up than "near-earth space". See "Kessler Syndrome" aka debris collision cascade.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

    40. Re:No. Just no. by apoc.famine · · Score: 2

      I don't know what's more surprising.....that list, or the fact that I don't seem to consume any Pepsi products, despite how fucking giant that list is. I thought for sure that I'd consume something, but since the local stores started selling the phenomenal tortilla chips that a local restaurant makes, Tostitos don't show up in my house anymore. That was the only thing on the list that I've had in the last few years.

      I'm starting to realize that I eat a shockingly small amount of processed food, which is a pleasant surprise.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    41. Re:No. Just no. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Half of me worries about a slippery slope of mass sky ads.
      The other half says, "Fun colorful light show, cool!" I'm torn.

    42. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Red dwarf did the exact same thing right down to it being Pepsi. But instead of cube SATs, they made stars go super Nova.

    43. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only would I join a boycott, I would actively participate in lobbying against them.

    44. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other than Quaker Oats their products are poison to my old man body. In your face Pepsico, I can eat generic of that.

    45. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      parent: "I promise never ever to buy anything from Pepsi corporation again."

      That would include a whole shitload of Pepsi stuff; KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut for starters.

    46. Re:No. Just no. by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      Quaker Oats and on rare occasion cracker jacks are the only things I buy off that list. Not that I eat healthy all the time, Pringles just wasn't on the list (that's proctor&gamble another company that surprisingly makes everything under the sun).

       

    47. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Half of me worries about a slippery slope of mass sky ads.
      The other half says, "Fun colorful light show, cool!" I'm torn.

      Yeah... but would your fun colorful light show also be cool to millions of other people who can view the show for miles around?

      There are some analogies here... like billboard bans (like Vermont), protest windmills on mountain ridges off beaches, or noise regulations... which generally fall into the "NIMBY" bucket, but "Not In My Back Yard" doesn't even begin to grasp the magnitude of projecting ads on to the night sky.

      (posting AC to preserve mods)

    48. Re:No. Just no. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      If it's not overdone it's not going to create significant nor long-term distractions. If done occasionally, most will find it "cool". We already have planes and satellites that inadvertently put on light shows, and ad blimps that do it on purpose.

      "Don't do cool things because copy-cats might get carried away" is possibly being overly paranoid. I'm still on the fence.

    49. Re:No. Just no. by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      You probably buy a lot more stuff from PepsiCo then you realize.

      No. Checked through the list and it happens I never buy any of that stuff.

    50. Re:No. Just no. by grahamsz · · Score: 1

      Yeah i'm the same way, there's virtually nothing on that list that i've eaten in the last few years. Maybe some quaker instant oats from hotel breakfasts and a couple of bags of stacy's pita chips.

      I don't think of myself as a obsessive about avoiding processed food, we just try to cook a lot and model good habits for our kid. I realize a lot of America eats this on a regular basis, but it's kind of hard to wrap my head around. It definitely feels like there's a weird schism in society around that kind of thing.

    51. Re:No. Just no. by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      If it's not overdone it's not going to create significant nor long-term distractions. If done occasionally, most will find it "cool".

      Just like telephone calls to notify us about interesting sales offers, emails suggesting tablets for erectile disfuncion, and adverts in TV shows? Nothing overdone or distracting, only occasional, very cool, and of course highly useful.

    52. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Unabomber, who basically wrote the book/manifesto on extreme libertarianism, literally killed people who polluted the earth and harmed the environment.

      You could argue that libertarians care more about the natural world than anyone else, but are also willing to do something about it, instead of whine on Twitter.

    53. Re:No. Just no. by denzacar · · Score: 1

      It's basically impossible to live an ethical life these days because the world is too integrated and interconnected. Every action can be eventually traced back to some badness of some kind.

      That's exaggerated nonsense.
      Even in Scotland, let alone outside of it where true Scotsmen are REALLY difficult to ferret out.

      You just have to get used to the fact that you can't make sweeping feel-good generalizations and that you need to evaluate each moral or ethical choice on case by case basis, following the best information you got at hand at the moment.
      That's all there is to it.
      That way you can still have a family containing members who happen to not give too much of a fuck about your particular economic boycotting preferences.
      Particularly those of the underage kind who can be really difficult sometimes and who stubbornly refuse to accept that they are at fault for ruining everything for everyone by eating that particular brand of sugary... stuff.

      Downside is that, besides spending time and calories on each choice, you must actually have morals and ethics - you can't rely on those borrowed from other people.
      But it's OK, most of those are sweeping generalizations and cherry-picked nonsense anyway.
      That is when they are not neolithic nonsense masquerading as moral high ground while giving you a carte blanche to stone to death or otherwise murder people you don't like or who happen to have the stuff you'd like for yourself.

      Also, if the ethical and moral responsibility is shareable and transferable, that would mean that it is also dilutable.
      After all, we can't be blamed today for all the shit the first primates did no more than can you personally be blamed for every shady action that someone in your extended human-to-human network did.
      Clearly, individual guilt lessens as one moves away from the source, regardless of the increase in "interconnections and integration".

      Just eat your strawberries, don't actively try to shit all over the place, clean up after yourself a bit and try not to think of the tigers too much.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    54. Re:No. Just no. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      That's essentially the slippery slope argument. I 100% agree that every big company putting ads in the sky would be a bad thing. But a doing it once won't interrupt my dinner nor my nap.

    55. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they do this, I promise never ever to buy anything from Pepsi corporation again.

      It's going to happen. If not PepsiCO, then someone else.

      When Philip K. Dick was alive and writing, he would sometimes use pervasive advertising for comedic effect -- you know, putting ads in places like, oh, elevators -- places where there would never be advertising.

      It's all happened. What was considered funny and absurd a few decades ago is now humdrum and mundane.

      In case you haven't noticed: if there is a place that advertising can be placed, it eventually will be places there. As far as I can tell, there are no exceptions to this rule.

      Even space.

    56. Re:No. Just no. by Woeful+Countenance · · Score: 2
      Robert Heinlein used the idea of advertising on the moon in The Man Who Sold the Moon (1950). The titular character actually got one person to pay him not to advertise for his competitor and got another to pay him to get to the moon before the Soviet Union could put a giant hammer and sickle on it.

      I suspect this announcement to be some kind of joke or publicity stunt. I would think orbital advertising would piss off too many people to be advantageous. But I could be wrong.

    57. Re:No. Just no. by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Many libertarians are strong environmentalists and believe the principle of non-aggression applies to spewing out unwanted particulates, sound or light (all forms of pollution) is a form of aggression and therefore prohibited

      But most aren't. Try mentioning externalities in a Libertarian forum and you'll usually suffer derision and ridicule. Look at libertarian lobbying groups and forums like Reason and their attitude towards, for example, global warming.

      Now, I'm glad _you_ see the light on this, and I like your argument, it makes logical sense and would fit within the proto-libertarian ideology if such a thing were thrashed out into a coherent block. But in practice, environmentalism is seen as this thing the government would have to be involved in, that restricts people from doing what they want. Not hard to see why the people who are attracted to libertarianism reject the logic when it goes in that direction.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    58. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not at all. if you want to be involved in the modern world to any meaningful extent, you become complicit in any number of foul practices and inhumane abuses. i want a phone so i can talk to my grandkids-- materials in the phone connect me to brush wars and forced child labor. i want to buy groceries to feed myself-- in the process paying big agrocorps whose agricultural practices exhaust land and poison the sea. i have some health expenses-- all mediated through a medical system that is thoroughly gamed to extract wealth. i have a job-- and my undifferentiated income taxes build bombs that rend the flesh of children, scopes that guide bullets into protesters, and flying robots that extinguish entire families

    59. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We must know different Libertardians, then.

    60. Re:No. Just no. by swillden · · Score: 1

      Many libertarians are strong environmentalists and believe the principle of non-aggression applies to spewing out unwanted particulates, sound or light (all forms of pollution) is a form of aggression and therefore prohibited

      But most aren't. Try mentioning externalities in a Libertarian forum and you'll usually suffer derision and ridicule.

      Cite? This isn't my experience, at all. In my experience, libertarians are quite cognizant of externalities. They may disagree with the use of government to internalize them, but tend to look for alternative mechanisms, not ignore or deride the concept.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    61. Re:No. Just no. by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      When you say things like patriotism, honor, bravery, faith, etc are all risible and worthy only of mockery, what do you have left?

      --
      -Styopa
    62. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This comes across as, "Since everyone exchanges money, and I'm breathing the same air as criminals ... I might as well sleep around, download pirated GoT, and fritter my life away in my parent's basement."

      If criminals shop at Walmart and get busted, Walmart is not going to be held liable.

    63. Re:No. Just no. by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      I agree and somewhat disagree.

      I think part of it is what your parents modeled for you (which you're addressing, so kudos), part of it is time and money, but a good deal of the blame lies on companies like Pepsi.

      The things on this list exist to fill an immediate need for a very short period of time, while causing that same immediate need shortly afterwards.

      I don't snack much because I tend to eat good portions of protein, fat, and fiber, with minimal refined carbs and added sugar. That fills me up, and I'm quite happy going 4-6 hours without something to eat. But replace that with some of the items on this list, and I'm suddenly going to need food a lot earlier. And what product is going to fill the instant need to eat? Yet more shit on this list.

      It's hard to take the time to cook good food when you're starving, and there's a snack at hand. When the availability of these things is almost universal, the advertising is universal, and eating them creates a vicious cycle where you suddenly need more, I can see how people can fall into this trap.

      Pretty much anybody can learn to cook amazing food, but they need the time and money to do it. (And access to ingredients, which you'd think is a given, but the US really does have serious food deserts.) If you want to learn to cook, there are 3-4 TV channels and probably a million youtube videos, and another couple million blog posts and websites. It's easier now than every to learn to cook.

      But making that a habit is hard, and it's hard to give up the snacks that Pepsi and others make available on every corner, in every building, and advertise constantly. It's almost like you need to go cold-turkey to try to break the very well understood science of hunger and food craving that they're relying on to keep people coming back for more.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    64. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ahem: there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. All capitalist products are the result of exploitation at one level or another. Welcome to the right side, comrade.

      Now downvote me to hell and try to forget any of this was ever said.

      Captcha: backbone

    65. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read "The Man Who Sold The Moon." by RAH. 1949 (published in 1950). Except he sold NOT doing this - also to a soda company.

    66. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mello Yello? Just get mountain dew and and put some chalk into the cup. To get the flavor right, it has to be used chalk, like off a blackboard's lip. Or throw a Tums in there if desperate.

    67. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But starbuck, but but...

    68. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone doesn't like advertising in the sky, they are free to file a lawsuit against the multi billion dollar conglomerate, show cause, show harm and pay their lawyers however many tens of thousands, if not millions, in court fees. If they win, they can then get a non precedent setting ruling offering them coupon for one twentieth of a cent off on their next purchase, which is about the provable financial value of the harm received.

      As a free country, we shouldn't have any socialist "class actions" which would allow a bunch of hippies and lawyers to band together and rip off job creating conglomerate companies.

      Go free market! Rah rah capitalism without regulation!

    69. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If skywriting was doable by drones with water vapor for a penny a square meter per hour, we would be Venus im a week. If ultralight plastic banners hit that price point the inhabited areas would be essentially shrinkwrapped.

    70. Re: No. Just no. by TimMD909 · · Score: 1

      It's actually a false flag operation by Coca-Cola funded by BigChemTrail Corp. Brilliant, if you ask me... If I'm wrong, then I'd have to stop drinking Mt Dew which obviously isn't going to happen. Therefore, I must be right (even though I'm left handed). Right?

    71. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PepsiCO also is one of the perpetrators of the bottled water scam! You know, where they claim that tap water is bad for you so that you will buy the VERY SAME TAP WATER in bottles at highly inflated prices!! And causing billions of tons of plastic waste to be added to the environment every year, because the bottles are non-return, and most do not end up being recycled!!!

    72. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wont work. Who looks at the night sky when our heads are buried down in our phones.

    73. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...We already have planes and satellites that inadvertently put on light shows, and ad blimps that do it on purpose...

      Except the viewing area of "shows" is orders of magnitude less than a projection on the sky. The Goodyear blimp gives stadium and folks a several blocks away a "show"... projecting on the sky gives the entire city a "show" maybe even folks that live in the suburbs who left the city because they don't want that sort of intrusion.

      .... satellites that inadvertently put on light shows...

      Huh? What satellite light shows? The barely visible speck of light that passes across the night sky in less than 1 minute? One that loses orbit and burns up like a meteor in ~1 second? If that's what you had in mind for current satellite light shows, I don't think it's an apt comparison to what's being proposed.

    74. Re:No. Just no. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Occasionally sunlight reflects off of various flat panels and they briefly glint brightly in the sky. I've seen it a few times.

    75. Re:No. Just no. by neoRUR · · Score: 1

      Well it's not as bad as Hot Black Desiato sending his space ship into a sun to go super Nova to promote one of his Disaster Area metal band tours.
      From HHGTTG

    76. Re: No. Just no. by Potor · · Score: 1

      All you need to do is use paper bags, or bring your own, and, presto! - you're ethical!

    77. Re:No. Just no. by King_TJ · · Score: 1

      I really haven't found that free-market libertarian ideals leave me "empty" in the slightest... They're still, IMO, the single best and most just way to encourage people to be productive, and to reward that productivity.

      Consumerism is only an issue to the extent individuals ALLOW it to be. For example? If Pepsi goes through with this and the bulk of the comments and stories written about it after the fact are negative? They're probably not going to do it again. Successful marketing doesn't involve angering your target audience.

      Furthermore -- if these orbiting billboards disrupt astronomy around the globe, it won't take long before there's push-back against the Russian company responsible for putting up the satellites in the first place.

      This is one of those problems that solves itself. This is just another of MANY attempts to do something new and attention-getting to market products or services, and it won't be financially viable if the majority expresses a strong dislike for it.

    78. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some might say that a purely reflective (not projecting) object isn't "spewing", but that would be ridiculous.

      Truth is, there isn't a way to give everyone their own isolated bubble of air, water, and night sky. These things require non-voluntary collective governance -- that's what does the prohibiting.

    79. Re:No. Just no. by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      In Buddhism the question is simply; Did you see, know, or suspect that it was immoral? Then you fully share the responsibility.

    80. Re:No. Just no. by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      I don't have a TV, soda, or trademarked oats, but I do have a razor with 5 blades.

      Yes. Yes it is a Gillette. Thank you.

    81. Re:No. Just no. by HornWumpus · · Score: 0

      We're also cognizant of the history of commies pulling insane values for 'externality' out of their butts.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    82. Re: No. Just no. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The unabomber manifesto was _insane_. Have you read it? It had nothing to do with libertarianism, rather it was violently paleo.

      He was once very smart, but had untreated schizophrenia for decades. The average schizophrenic episode kills enough brain cells to cost the sufferer about 1 IQ point, it's a physical disease. But he remembered being smart, so treated his thoughts as being useful.

      By the time he was 'manifestoing' his IQ was room temperature at best. But reporters are _stupid_, anything they don't understand is 'genius'. The unabomber manifesto is a towering structure of fallacies built on other fallacies. He completely lost the thread on the first page.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    83. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dole needs to be boycotted for more that this. I worked for them (Bud Of California) and they treat their employees like shit.

    84. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And nothing of value is lost.

    85. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modern capitalism has trapped us in a system where almost everything is somehow made using some kind of unethically exploited labor or resource.

    86. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the planet, not in the planet.

    87. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here, although I very rarely consume sugary drinks like that anyhow.

      The unfortunate fact of it is that most people probably wouldn't care, especially millennials who grew up thinking that blatant corporate disrespect is the norm (at least in the olden days, companies pretended to care about customers). So long as they got their truck/SUV that never hauls anything and never goes offroad, their shitty one/two bedroom apartment, their "reality" shows and/or cheesy sitcoms and their McDonald's meal with their Pepsi, they are ignorantly complacent.

    88. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right on. Terrible idea, it makes me and everybody hate you Pepsi... this wont be good for you.

    89. Re: No. Just no. by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

      His first fatality was a computer store owner. He wounded a police officer, a secretary, two graduate students, a research assistant, professors in engineering, psychology, and computer science, a geneticist, twelve airline passengers, and the president of United Airlines. He also murdered an advertising executive and a timber industry lobbyist. Sort of random, wouldn't you say?

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski

    90. Re:No. Just no. by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 2

      This is one of those problems that solves itself. This is just another of MANY attempts to do something new and attention-getting to market products or services, and it won't be financially viable if the majority expresses a strong dislike for it.

      Sure. Because spam and scams are so popular with a majority of the population; that's why they have become so prevalent.

    91. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything they own produces junk foods. As a healthy, fit person with a sophisticated palate, I don't buy anything of theirs ever.

    92. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, I have known a few libertarians. A few are professionals. They all argue to destroy the environment, with some fake non-existant feedback method.They whine in person, and all were entitled rich kids that profit of reckless environmental damage in the short term.

    93. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop being a fucking pussy and man up: being ethical is *more expensive*. Either pay up or shut up.

    94. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, the whole thing is a scam and will never happen.

      This is a publicity stunt.

    95. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This

    96. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It just wouldn't work on any level.

      But floating it as an idea? It's a great publicity stunt.

    97. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No no no! Access to space is too important to allow it to become a wild west of shooting down satellites. The 3 that have been done is already 3 too many, Kessler Syndrome is a very real risk!

    98. Re:No. Just no. by yakumo.unr · · Score: 1

      Couldn't agree more.

    99. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Certainly putting obtrusive displays in the night sky for all to see would fall under that and be prohibited as a form or pollution in any libertarian utopia.

      Those libertarians sound interesting. Pity we've got the freedom to do anything no matter the costs version.

    100. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Old Russian saying: "Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man. Communism is the reverse."

    101. Re: No. Just no. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      And mammals rule now because somebody let dinosaurs play with fireworks despite all the warnings.

    102. Re:No. Just no. by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      I suspect the orbits wouldn't last long and they'd burn up within a couple of years. But even so, I'm HIGHLY skeptical that a clump of cubesats are going to be visible enough for this to be viable.

      Oh, and there aren't any *unjustified* prejudices against gamers.

    103. Re: No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. The self-righteous aggrandizing comments in this thread are typical of âoethe internetâ but still depressing.

    104. Re:No. Just no. by chaotixx · · Score: 1

      In Buddhism the question is simply; Did you see, know, or suspect that it was immoral? Then you fully share the responsibility.

      So ignorance is bliss.

    105. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the future, all restaurants are Taco Bell...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cF6D8zDa9U

    106. Re:No. Just no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is it self-righteous to not eat crap foods? It sounds more like you are jealous of that fact that you are fat and addicted to junk foods and are trying to make light of that fact by lashing out at others who have better habits and self-control to justify your poor choices to yourself. You are the epitome of the fat, lazy, uncultured couch potato American who has never read a book or exercised.

      Also, why are people like you so stuck on talking about TV all of the time? Perhaps if you shut up about it, you wouldn't hear people say things like "I don't watch TV".

  2. You can hear the Astronomers screaming by sacdelta · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And on a personal note, if I ever needed a reason to boycott PepsiCo products, there it is.

    --

    Brought to you by: "Al"toids - the curiously weird mint.

    1. Re:You can hear the Astronomers screaming by Type44Q · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And on a personal note, if I ever needed a reason to boycott PepsiCo products, there it is.

      Boycott every fucking thing they make just for thinking that this might be a good idea.

    2. Re:You can hear the Astronomers screaming by sheramil · · Score: 2

      Company promoters say a lot of things. I don't think they'll do it.

    3. Re:You can hear the Astronomers screaming by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That they consider something like that is enough.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:You can hear the Astronomers screaming by AdamFistler · · Score: 1

      Just say no to Neckbeard cola! As if Mountain Dew and Doritos didn't have a big enough share of the neck beard market, now comes this 'gamer' cola to market further to neck beards and ruin the nights sky worse than a neck beard ruins the night of poor waitress who waits their table. Next if Pepsi can get into selling anime porn and fedoras they would be all set with the neck beard set.

    5. Re:You can hear the Astronomers screaming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be a hater.

    6. Re:You can hear the Astronomers screaming by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I don't think they CAN do it. At least not for any length of time. A constellation of satellites big enough to make some recognizable 2D pattern from the ground would be on decently different orbits. The satellites would have to maneuver constantly to maintain formation. So you could put one of these up, but it wouldn't stay there long.

    7. Re:You can hear the Astronomers screaming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think a boycott will send the message you are delusional. We need to pass laws to regulate this. Pollute the night sky - get fined OUT OF FUCKING BUSINESS and go to jail.

    8. Re:You can hear the Astronomers screaming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boycott ANYONE who does business with them too.

    9. Re: You can hear the Astronomers screaming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a cube sat with some bright LEDs and the rest is power source. It only needs to run for the night they can launch more the next night.

      If that seems expensive, they can throw a mini plutonium battery and peltiers in there as a power source for the LEDS extended operation.

      I know, I know, what if it crashes? No worries, it would burn up harmlessly in the atmosphere in a way that generates no provable liability. But for PR must have the sata blow up into tiny invisible fragments with some c4 when the client stops paying.

      What could possibly go wrong/ /s

    10. Re: You can hear the Astronomers screaming by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      No, they're talking about a constellation of cube sats that make some recognizable image (like the Pepsi logo maybe). Presumably you'd use something shiny, rather than LEDs, but that's not the problem.

      Any two initially co-orbiting objects will be in slightly different orbits, and so will be drawn apart (possibly after being initially pushed together). To make a logo recognizable from the ground, you'd have to have your satellites at significant distances from each other. The ones spread over the N-S direction, would actually be in orbits with different inclinations. In order to maintain formation, they'd have to more or less continuously thrust. The limiting factor would be the amount of on-board propellant.

      You could get around this problem by having one big satellite, but it would have to be *really* big in order to show any kind of structure from the ground.

    11. Re: You can hear the Astronomers screaming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tether them together

  3. Bring in India! by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dear space organization in India, There is a new target for you. Please fire at will. A space billboard already is space junk.

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    1. Re:Bring in India! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This will never happen as India loves Pepsi because their CEO is from India. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  4. Dystopian cyberpunk future, here we come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd happily crowdfund a rocket to forcibly deorbit these ads.

    1. Re:Dystopian cyberpunk future, here we come by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      Or have the rocket "land" on PepsiCo's headquarters.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    2. Re:Dystopian cyberpunk future, here we come by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Fuck that; their target needs to be a certain office building or these "brilliant ideas" are ar risk of continuing.

    3. Re:Dystopian cyberpunk future, here we come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a much better solution. This avoids adding even more debris in orbit around the Earth. It may also give India a hint of what is to come if they keep needlessly littering in orbit (as Pepsico's Chairmain is from India). It would be a two-fer.

  5. We don't need this... by ctilsie242 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A number of years ago, France was looking at doing something similar, using a number of large Mylar ballons, so they could celebrate an anniversery as the satellite passed overhead, which would glow brightly. This was finally nixed when astronomers made mention that this would destroy their equipment, as it would be difficult to plan for this object to go overhead, and its brightness would fry sensitive photocells.

    Again, someone trying a project like this. The fewer items in space, the better. With countries starting to shoot down satellites, it is only a matter of time before the Kessler Syndrome rears its ugly head, and getting past low earth orbit would be impossible.

    1. Re:We don't need this... by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      getting past low earth orbit would be impossible.

      Not impossible. Merely challenging. You can engineer a lot of things, design to resist damage from space junk. The problem is it adds cost and mass making it much more expensive. But if you are determined you can always make it.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:We don't need this... by BKDotCom · · Score: 1

      You might want to have a word with SpaceX
      https://fcc.report/IBFS/SES-LI...

    3. Re:We don't need this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone else pointed out Spacex along with a half dozen other companies/countries are trying to make lobbing crap into space very economical. I imagine in 10-20 years space will be as crowded as the 405 at rush. Who knows, maybe there will be so many that enough sunlight is blocked to stop global warming.

    4. Re:We don't need this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      getting past low earth orbit would be impossible.

      Not impossible. Merely challenging. You can engineer a lot of things, design to resist damage from space junk. The problem is it adds cost and mass making it much more expensive. But if you are determined you can always make it.

      Care to elaborate a bit more as to the bulletproof material you're going to make our space shuttles out of?

      Idiots are determined to be idiots. Doesn't mean they add value because of sheer will.

    5. Re:We don't need this... by Cederic · · Score: 1

      4 inch steel panels would stop most bullets.

      Of course, a composite design would be lighter and you don't need to be bullet proof, just damage resistant.

      Idiots are determined to be idiots. Doesn't mean they add value because of sheer will.

      You may wish to search online for the term 'self awareness'.

    6. Re:We don't need this... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Relevance?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re:We don't need this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From my understanding, space junk can often have much more energy contained within it than bullets from small arms, or even heavy artillery.

    8. Re:We don't need this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck launching that into space within an order of magnitude of current launch costs. Self awareness indeed...

      Captcha: impudent

    9. Re:We don't need this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to have literally no idea what kind of energies are involved in orbital collisions. A tenfold increase in velocity increases kinetic energy by a factor of 100. Bullets are *nothing* in comparison to a space junk impact.

    10. Re:We don't need this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I though you just put more power to the shields.

    11. Re:We don't need this... by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      You're assuming the worst case. Pretty much all orbits are west to east, so all the stuff will be moving in roughly that direction. It's not going to hit you at 7000 mph. The bigger pieces can be tracked on radar. The smaller stuff, well yeah it's going to hit hard but it's less mass.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    12. Re:We don't need this... by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      4-inch steel panels would sttop most bullets - but where would they transfer the momentum ? If your tank is standing / moving on the ground, your 4-inch steel panels just need to spread the impact of the bullets, and transfer momentum to the body of the tank. Body is standing on the ground with a lot of frictional force in most horizontal directions. For the vertical component of the impact of the bullet - compressive and tensile strength of the tank is enormous - supported by the hardness of the ground in the one direction, and gravity with hundred ton-weight force in the other direction.

      When an object is trying to leave the earth / travelling around the earth all of these advantages vanish, or get drastically reduced. It gets billions of times lower friction from the atmosphere. Nothing extra to protect it in the vertical direction. It would surely keep getting misdirected significantly.

      100 ton tank would barely get misdirected by pico-radians with a 30 g bullet at 1200 km / h. 100 ton satellite, while being much rarer than 100 ton tank and much more expensive to launch than usual size of satellites - would get misdirected by multiple tens of milli-radians with 30 g debris at 1200 km / h.

      So, engineers would come up with a constantly steering design. Which might be more expensive than a design that fights the space debris back - detect using radar / optical / heat sensing : and shoot incoming debris using laser.

      Naysayers will almost never win against engineers in the long term - but this is just an enormous cost increase for any space faring for no good reason.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    13. Re:We don't need this... by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Statement: "You can engineer a lot of things, design to resist damage from space junk. The problem is it adds cost and mass making it much more expensive."
      Challenge: "Care to elaborate a bit more as to the bulletproof material you're going to make our space shuttles out of?"
      My response stating the obvious: "4 inch steel panels would stop most bullets."

      I didn't need to mention the cost, someone else had already highlighted that issue.

    14. Re:We don't need this... by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Oh, agreed, a collision imparts kinetic energy that needs to be countered or movement will result.

      Even deflecting the bulk of the energy away leaves a residual that will suffice to impact the orbit. That's the real challenge, even disregarding cost.

  6. satire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "campaign against stereotypes and unjustified prejudices against gamers"

    This is clearly satire... r-right?

  7. Astronomer Boycott by pefisher · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This might not go over as well as they think. People are kind of tired of corporations thinking they own everything. I can imagine children interested in science finding it offensive rather that cool. Pepsi has a lot of different products that could be boycotted. I run a planetarium, and I can imagine the shows I could do on light pollution, having a great big orbting billboard to point to as an example of BAD. Right now, everybody has too many bright lights. Nobody's head stands head and shoulders above the rest as offensive. But when Pepsi puts their name on a billboard, I have a bad guy to memorialize forever. It'd be terrible, but it'd be great for Pepsi to bring a whole world of opinion down upon their head as enemies of the night sky.

    1. Re:Astronomer Boycott by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Informative

      I've been to planetarium shows where they highlight light pollution. The closest one to me does a "night sky" routine where they darken the sky and make it look like night. Then, they note that we live in an urban area so light pollution limits how many stars we can see. They keep the position the same, but pretend that we've removed all light pollution. Suddenly, it's extremely dark and there's a TON of stars in the sky. Having grown up in suburban and urban places all my life and no matter how many times I see it, I'm always amazed at how many stars appear when you remove light pollution.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:Astronomer Boycott by geekmux · · Score: 1

      This might not go over as well as they think. People are kind of tired of corporations thinking they own everything. I can imagine children interested in science finding it offensive rather that cool.

      When was the last time you offended a child?

      Actual children don't get offended. That only happens when they grow up and act like bigger children in their pursuit of being perpetually offended in the name of social justice, or some nonsensical shit.

      Pepsi has a lot of different products that could be boycotted. I run a planetarium, and I can imagine the shows I could do on light pollution, having a great big orbting billboard to point to as an example of BAD. Right now, everybody has too many bright lights. Nobody's head stands head and shoulders above the rest as offensive. But when Pepsi puts their name on a billboard, I have a bad guy to memorialize forever. It'd be terrible, but it'd be great for Pepsi to bring a whole world of opinion down upon their head as enemies of the night sky.

      Less than 5% of Pepsi customers will even expend the effort to do the research to find all of the products they own in order to enact a boycott. And less than a single percent of them will actually get off their lazy ass and do it. End result? Zero impact.

      You grossly overestimate the give-a-shit factor on this by an order of magnitude or seven. It's hard trying to reach people when they have a 15-second attention span. "Outrage" will be forgotten about before the evening news.

    3. Re:Astronomer Boycott by sjames · · Score: 1

      Fine, file individual suits in small claims court.

    4. Re:Astronomer Boycott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Less than 5% of Pepsi customers will even expend the effort to do the research to find all of the products they own in order to enact a boycott.

      That doesn't matter. Even if the boycott has no effect on anything that doesn't literally say "Pepsi" on it as long as the scale is large enohg to tank the value of the pepsi brand or a net drain on their bottom line the boycott will deter repeats of the stunt.

    5. Re:Astronomer Boycott by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Fine, file individual suits in small claims court.

      Find enough people who give a shit enough to expend that effort first.

    6. Re:Astronomer Boycott by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      True. My experience in cities is you can barely see any stars. In Chicago, at least, I'd joke "the airplanes are bright tonight" because that was mostly what you'd see, plus maybe a couple of planets and at most a dozen other stars. I've got to wonder if this ad would be bright enough to even be noticeable to city dwellers. If not, that'd be a big waste of advertising dollars, putting up a constellation that could only be seen in rural parts, by people who aren't inside watching TV.

  8. Wasn't there a SciFi novel ... by rnturn · · Score: 2

    ... or a short story about this published about 50-60 years ago? I'm drawing a blank (and all my old scifi novels are in storage) but it involved billboards in space or ads on the moon or some such idea.

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    1. Re:Wasn't there a SciFi novel ... by dromgodis · · Score: 3, Informative
    2. Re:Wasn't there a SciFi novel ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      This reminds me of the Red Dwarf novel 'Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers' (1989). The Coca-Cola company sends the spaceship Nova 5 on a mission to induce a simultaneous supernova in 128 supergiant stars, creating a five-week-long message in the sky visible even in daylight, reading "COKE ADDS LIFE!", and thereby crushing rival Pepsi...

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacecraft_in_Red_Dwarf#Nova_5

    3. Re:Wasn't there a SciFi novel ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Watch This Space", Arthur C Clarke, 1956. And it was even a soda company doing it, too.

    4. Re:Wasn't there a SciFi novel ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was also an Asimov short story called "Buy Jupiter" with a similar concept.

    5. Re:Wasn't there a SciFi novel ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about Asimov's short story "Buy Jupiter"?

  9. Joke's on you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    With all the tall buildings and smog I can't see the sky anyway

    1. Re:Joke's on you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Move to Caracas in Venezuela.
      Plenty of light pollution free nights.

  10. People that live in Cities can't see that crap by DalM · · Score: 1

    This is the absolute dumbest idea. The absolute dumbest. Beyond the absurd expense, beyond the stupid risk of debris, only people living in the darkest skies will be able to see it if they wanted to.

    1. Re:People that live in Cities can't see that crap by dromgodis · · Score: 1

      There are contenders to the title: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/te...

    2. Re:People that live in Cities can't see that crap by DalM · · Score: 1

      You know, I'm going to disagree. At least that, while definitely stupid and generally awful, would at least possibly do the job it was designed to do.

      This advertising stunt, won't be seen by a single person on the ground. For one, the majority of people live in cities and our skies are too bright as it is. And even if you live in the darkest skies, you would have to know exactly when to look for the ad passing you by to see it. There is a 95% chance you would miss it even if you went significantly out of your way to go find it.

    3. Re:People that live in Cities can't see that crap by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      This is the absolute dumbest idea. The absolute dumbest.

      VP Darth Cheney proposed covering the moon with mirrors. To light the Earth at night. To reduce crime by preventing dark streets.

  11. This didn't work last time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And why will it work this time?

    https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=120121&page=1

  12. No for Public Safety by zuckie13 · · Score: 1

    This could interfere with celestial navigation. What do I do if suddenly a part of a pepsi can is now the brightest thing in the sky? When the solar flares take out the GPS satellites, we're all in trouble now.....

    1. Re:No for Public Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how will this affect wildlife navigation, especially birds?

    2. Re:No for Public Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As if Pepsi gives a shit.

    3. Re:No for Public Safety by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      They will move very fast, so celestial navigation should not be a problem.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  13. oblig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Didn't we have ads in the 20th century?

    Well, sure, but not in our stars. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines and movies and at ball games, on buses and milk cartons and T-shirts and bananas and written on the sky. But not in stars. No siree!

  14. Enough advertising already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pepsi may be trying to wrap this up in some kind of SJW sentiment but the reality is that it's just more advertisements.

    We have enough garbage in space, and if we are going to do anything useful in space in our future it's important that we don't ruin it with more debris.

    And who will be able to SEE this?

    1. Re:Enough advertising already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This solar eclipse is bought to you by Pepsi.

  15. I read that book by fat+man's+underwear · · Score: 1

    Wasn't it The Merchants of Venus by Fred Pohl?

    Anyone have a can of Coffiest they can lend me?

  16. This has been done in Red Dwarf novel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "In the novel Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers, Nova 5 is an American vessel owned by "The Coca-Cola Company" which was sent on a mission to induce the supernova of 128 super giant stars in order to create a five-week-long message in the sky visible even in daylight, reading "COKE ADDS LIFE!" Kryten causes Nova 5 to crash after cleaning the sensitive computer terminals with soapy water. After the Red Dwarf crew finds the wreck it is brought aboard and repaired in order to utilize its Duality Jump engine, which could get the crew back to Earth within three months. However, although the ship is successfully repaired, circumstances prevent them from ever going through with it. "

    https://reddwarf.fandom.com/wiki/Nova_5

  17. Red Dwarf had a spiel on this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  18. I will never buy Pepsi if this goes through. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck you pepsi.

  19. Awesome... by orlanz · · Score: 2

    It's going to get hacked... and images of penises, Nazi, Mohammed, and shit will rain from the heavens.

    It will be a good fun year... or month...

    1. Re:Awesome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Slashdot's favorite Bob Goatse.

  20. Any good part to this? by Bobrick · · Score: 1

    So basically pollute the sky with a freaking advertisement... and it's against prejudices towards gamers. Why the fuck should this happen?

    1. Re: Any good part to this? by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

      Corporations have a history of using drugs (in this case: caffine and sugar) and propaganda aimed at niave youthful sentiment to create lifelong loyal consumers.

    2. Re:Any good part to this? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Ackshurely it's about ethics in astronomy...

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  21. Elitist astronomers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Elitist astronomers have had thousands of years to look into the night sky - time for someone else to have some fun with it!

  22. Just another PepsiCo space publicity stunt? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is PepsiCo, the same company that wanted to project a giant Pepsi logo on the moon with lasers for advertising. Of course this turned out to not be real and instead they settled for putting their logo on the side of a rocket.

  23. To stop making fun of gaming nerds... by geekmux · · Score: 1

    ...you go off and do one of the nerdiest things in human history?

    Oh yeah. That'll keep Ogre at bay.

    1. Re: To stop making fun of gaming nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that reference to something, or just a really strange comment?

    2. Re: To stop making fun of gaming nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that reference to something, or just a really strange comment?

      Yes, it is a reference.

      I would recommend watching it, but even that movie is enough to get the idiotic PC police all riled up.

  24. Is there a way to block this ad? by propheth · · Score: 1

    My family does not drink artificially infused sugar water. Do we have to watch it? Or the mug of a hell bound presidential candidate.

  25. And another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What country/organisation could launch a few extra, just floating nearby.... that would change the message to something funny/rude/brand damaging.
    It's like buying a billboard next to one you dislike and adding a few extra words.....

  26. Yes, do it! by EvilSS · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'd love to see this. It's a pretty neat technological achievement if it works. So yea, I say do it. Show the world what it's capable of so we can all see it. I think it would be pretty damn neat to see.


    Then ban the shit out of it at the international level and force them to de-orbit their sats, so we don't have to ever see it again. Once was plenty.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    1. Re:Yes, do it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, don't. Cubesats have no capability to deorbit. Just don't put them in orbit in the first place. We don't need more light pollution, or space junk.

    2. Re:Yes, do it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd love to see this. It's a pretty neat technological achievement if it works. So yea, I say do it. Show the world what it's capable of so we can all see it. I think it would be pretty damn neat to see.

      Let's hope you don't hold the same opinion about our weapons of mass destruction.

      Then ban the shit out of it at the international level and force them to de-orbit their sats, so we don't have to ever see it again. Once was plenty.

      Stupid is, as stupid is. I don't even need to see this bullshit once, and if it goes horribly wrong, I don't want the rest of the world dealing with the cleanup.

    3. Re:Yes, do it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. Do it once ad then ban this this type of advertising forever.

    4. Re:Yes, do it! by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Let's hope you don't hold the same opinion about our weapons of mass destruction.

      Worked pretty well so far. You cranky we haven't nuked anyone since WWII?

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  27. deep space pictures by Tomahawk · · Score: 2

    Looks like the next black hole we are going to image is going to look like the pepsi swirl logo...

  28. Global pollution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a revolution on the market of global pollution. Polluting the night sky like that. Shame on you.

  29. Gamers rise up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're rising all the way up to the heavens.

  30. Energy drink is code for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Energy drinks always taste bad.

  31. adblock by levi.c.smith · · Score: 1

    Great.. now im gonna have to figure out how to Ad-Block SPACE! (Pops open UBlock Origin Umbrella)

    1. Re:adblock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or we could launch a giant captcha in a balloon.

  32. Re:No. Just no. - astronomers beware! by ripvlan · · Score: 1

    Billboards are illegal in my state - outlawed back in the 1970's. How will these laws stand up against the out-law space region?

    This is the ultimate in light pollution preventing astronomers from seeing the night sky. As a person with a small backyard telescope it might be interesting to view them. But for those multi-hour images I just hope these don't drift into my view. It'd be like that annoying mime at the park who keep trying to photo-bomb.

  33. Old joke by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

    Suddenly a joke from the space race era gets new merits:

    "What if the Russians get to the moon first?"
    "They'll probably paint it red."
    "So we have to hurry!"
    "Relax. If they do, just send up a crew with loads of white paint and have them write "Coca Cola" across"

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Old joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck, that's a truly bad joke.

      Captcha: rejector

    2. Re:Old joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's great. It shows how America is capitalist scum.

  34. When Seen By The Few Tribes Left In The World by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    All hail the new God.

  35. Maybe something was lost in translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > That's why on behalf of Adrenaline Rush -- PepsiCo Russia energy non-alcoholic drink, which is brand innovator, and supports everything new, and non-standard -- we agreed on this partnership.

    That doesn't seem right. No one supports every new thing.

  36. A short story by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They looked on the beautiful night sky, pointing out to each other the constellations they knew, admiring the band of the Milky Way as it swept across the inky night sky.

    But all go things must come to an end, they had to get up early to polish the shipping drones for tomorrows run. They stood up, and removed the augmented reality goggles.

    Looking up again, one of them thought he could maybe see Orion peeking out from behind the neon cup-o-noodles constellation and northen lighting shading effects, but then it was gone as the remaining colors of the night sky washed over his eyes competing for attention.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:A short story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WHAT WE HAVE COME TO

      When the advertiser saw the cathedral spires over the downs in the distance, he looked at them and wept.

      "If only," he said, "this were an advertisement of Beefo, so nice, so nutritious, try it in your soup, ladies like it."

      - Lord Dunsany, 1915

  37. Putin sucks by skovnymfe · · Score: 0

    In big fat letters across the Russian night sky. "PUTIN SUCKS."

    1. Re:Putin sucks by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      "Who has the pee-pee tape?"

  38. This again?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A company proposed something like this about 15 years ago which was a giant orbital billboard made of a very thin durable material that would be unfurreled once it reached the proper orbit. It was going to be a simple logo which would be associated with various companies and products.

      This backfired like crazy, pissing off astronomers as well as people who simply didn't want to see this crap pollute the night sky . The project never got started.

      Now they are trying this crap again, this time in Russia. Either they didn't learn the first time around, or maybe (in a very insulting way) they think Russians are stupid and will accept this kind of shit 'the Americans' wont.

      Keep this shit out of the night sky.

  39. Remove PepsiCo from academia by k2r · · Score: 1

    If this happens we'll have to make sure to completely remove PepsiCo from all universities (not only those with faculties of astronomy), all colleges and all highschools and schools.

  40. Then... by Gonoff · · Score: 1

    Some anti-capitalist or anti-western will take it out in some way and be very disappointed at the lack of negative reaction from the "west" or most capitalists. In fact we will be able to see who is most in the pockets of the crazies by how loud they howl.

    What treaties or international treaties would be broken by whoever takes out those things? Which country could do it? As India can, I suspect Pakistan is working on it. They have a track record of working with North Korea. Perhaps they see Iran as someone to cooperate with and so on.

    --
    I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
  41. Um, did they actually by Sqreater · · Score: 1

    Did they actually say NEXT to the stars??

    --
    E Proelio Veritas.
  42. Monkey see monkey do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really hope the Universal studios won't get any funny ideas from this.

  43. This will be killed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pepsi is a multi-billion dollar company. Right now the CEO of PepsiCo is yelling at some idiot in Russia about how the entire Pepsi brand is going to get a huge dose of negative publicity if this thing actually happens.

    Now, that doesn't mean some other brand that cares less about its image won't do the same thing. GoDaddy sounds like a good candidate.

    1. Re:This will be killed. by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      Now, that doesn't mean some other brand that cares less about its image won't do the same thing. GoDaddy sounds like a good candidate.

      A Danika Patrick constellation? That's a lot of cubesats.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  44. Re:No. Just no. - astronomers beware! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The same way your state could regulate content of radio stations outside of its borders. In other words, not at all. If there is profit in it, then it WILL be done, and done to its maximum effect. Remember, "Wall Street Demands It".

  45. FUCK YOU! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously if these assholes actually do this, they should be hunted down and shot

  46. You know this is a joke, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fake.

    1. Re:You know this is a joke, right? by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      You know you're a moron, and so is the idiot who modded you up.
      http://astronomy.com/news/2019...

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  47. A bad idea, so just make it bigger by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    I won't accept this horrible insult to nature unless is supports 4K resolution with HDMI support. I wanna play video games on a giant screen in the sky!!!!

    Seriously though, reading the article is sounds more like a joke. But academically, I'd love to see how the science for this could work.

  48. Complain To Your Reps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just sent an email to my Congress critters asking them to ban space based advertising. Please do the same: https://ziplook.house.gov/htbin/findrep_house

  49. Do You One Better by ememisya · · Score: 1

    Why not shadow a full moon in such a way that you draw the Coca Cola logo on it. You're walking with your lover's hand in yours on a beautiful moonlit night along the beach. You stop, hold her hands, gaze at the moon and there she is, "Coca Cola written on the face of it." You crack open a bottle of Coke and forget all about each other. Go home, get some Cheetos.

  50. I fail to see how this could work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not as if the things are going to stay stuck in the sky were these guys had put them. Most of them would be not in any position to display anything to anybody, most of the time. You'd need to have huge numbers of them that weren't displaying anything most of the time to have the much smaller number (but still huge) that were in a position to meaningfully display something at any given time.

    Can anybody explains why this makes the slightest bit of sense?

  51. But it is for a good cause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those poor gamers! So misunderstood. Glad Pepsi is going to stand up for those victims. Such virtue!

  52. Pepsi Should Hear from All of Us by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    This kind of shit should not be allowed...

    http://astronomy.com/news/2019...

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  53. "...next to the stars..."? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see they have their top minds on this project.

  54. I Love Pepsi, But by kackle · · Score: 1

    (Boycott) Me too!

  55. This Mystery of Lawlessness is already working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion(operation of wandering)(planet) so that they will believe the lie.

    Mystery Red of the Great American Eclipse
    It has blood on it!
    ABCNews: Eclipse makes pendulum wander
    Sound of Silence
    Sun researchers find strange eclipse reading

    Next total eclipse: July 2, 2019 South America/Pacific

  56. Heinlein even called the company, sort of. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Informative

    In _The Man Who Sold The Moon_ the idea was to go to the (thinly disguised) Coca Cooa company and sell them the rights to turn the moon into a billboard - a giant bottle cap - by launching small rockets to spread soot to selectively darken the surface.

    But the idea was not to actually DO it. It was to NOT do it, and build an ad campaign on how it had bought the rights in order to head off one of its rivals (7 up, also thinly disguised as "6+"). The 7up/6+ logo would be easily readable from Earth, but the Coca Cola / (whatever he called it) was too "busy" to be clear.

    7up was independent at the time. But it's now owned by PepsiCo.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  57. Pepsi marketing on such a roll by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

    Between this and that commercial with a Kardashian-Jenner they really get what most people want

  58. I, for one, welcome our corporate overlords by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gamers rise up!

  59. Idea has come up many times before by gmiller123456 · · Score: 1

    I've heard this idea was being explored many times before, but it's never materialized. I think a CEO hears about the idea and gets excited over it, but the economics usually mean a lot of billboards and other ads will reach more eyes for less money.

    Firstly, these work by reflecting sunlight. That means it will only be visible at night, but only when the satellite is still in sunlight and hasn't entered Earth's shadow yet. Then it's only visible to people with good horizons, or where it's passing very high overhead and people just happen to be looking up.

    And the biggest problem is that these have a very large surface area which increases the atmospheric drag. So the orbit will decay a lot faster, with pretty much no options for any control after the ad is unfolded.

    So, it's probably not going to happen this time either.

    The opposition to it is also a bit overblown. The ods that you will ever see it are pretty slim, let alone have your view obstructed by it. All of the other ads spewing light neadlessly into the atmosphere are a much bigger problem for astronomers.

  60. So, anyway, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you say "Not All Edgelords" in Russian?

  61. Ban by SuperDre · · Score: 1

    There should be a ban on advertisement methods like this. This is going too far. There's already too much junk hanging around our planet, and with systems like this one can also make it harder to navigate without tools.

    1. Re:Ban by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      If they really do it they'll probably get fined by most of the countries they do business in.

  62. Will be hacked almost immediately by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    They do this, it'll become Target Number One for every hacker and hacking organization on the planet, like an Eagle Scout Merit Badge for hackers. Just imagine it: a giant ASCII penis in your night sky. Or "KILL {insert country leader name here}". Political propaganda.

    Overall? Worst idea EVER. This is graffitti on a cosmic scale. Should not be allowed.

    1. Re:Will be hacked almost immediately by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      This week's new favorite phrase: "like an Eagle Scout Merit Badge for hackers".

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    2. Re:Will be hacked almost immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do this, it'll become Target Number One for every hacker and hacking organization on the planet

      HAHAHA. That is rich. Hang on, still laughing. Let me get myself under control. Nope, not happening.. You? A number one hacker? Nope. Can't compute that. But I will give you this, you keep your delusions grand. I thank you for the good belly laugh.

      I'm going to be chuckling all day at that one.

    3. Re:Will be hacked almost immediately by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      How is it that most of you ACs can put together (more-or-less?) coherent sentences here on Slashdot, yet be so completely incompetent when it comes to reading comprehension? Are you using some half-assed AI to correct your spelling and grammar? Would the uncorrected post look like LEET-speak? Did you start working at the Jiffy Lube after you dropped out of grammar school, is that the problem? How do you even work a computer being this dumb?

  63. empty and dissatisfied? by White+Yeti · · Score: 1

    The sky told me Pepsico has a solution for you.

  64. I already do. How about that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All it took, was to eat actual food. Instead of whatever they are selling.

  65. Why not? This is exactly what hate is for. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't be a "smile or die" American.
    It's creepy and psychotic.

  66. This a violation of US law by DarkOx · · Score: 1

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...

    This is already illegal, in the US. I wonder where this company is based and we can just charge, and try in absence their executives.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    1. Re:This a violation of US law by green1 · · Score: 1

      Two problems:
      1) US law doesn't apply to space launches performed outside of the US.
      2) US law rarely applies to any corporation that has more than a few million dollars lying around.

    2. Re:This a violation of US law by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      They have a US presence so US law probably does apply to them. They need FAA clearance to actually do it. It won't really happen.

    3. Re:This a violation of US law by green1 · · Score: 1

      Pepsi isn't doing the launch. So laws regarding it won't apply to them.

      Also see point 2 above.

    4. Re:This a violation of US law by green1 · · Score: 1

      FAA clearance is only required for us launches.

    5. Re:This a violation of US law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two problems:
      1) US law doesn't apply to space launches performed outside of the US.
      2) US law rarely applies to any corporation that has more than a few million dollars lying around.

      That's only one problem, #2 specifically.

      #1 isn't correct how you word it. US law criminalizes *advertising in space*
      The method of that advertising doesn't matter much for that law.

      So you claiming US law regarding launches, quite off topic, doesn't mean they are not advertising using outer space.
      That would only apply if they are launching something themselves. It's strange typing that since you mention it too so should know better, but it's not the launching or laws about launches being discussed, so it's baffling why you even bring it up.

      There are only two facts that matter.
      1) Are they using outer space to advertise? Yes
      2) Do they have a US presence? Yes

      That's the only requirements. Launching is actually not required. It would be equally illegal if they utilized some other "billboard" owned and launched by unrelated companies.

      The one and only issue is if the US will bother enforcing the law against them.

  67. Boycotting PEPSICO by Hallux-F-Sinister · · Score: 1

    You pull some shit like this, you loose this customer in perpetuity.

    --
    Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
  68. Great line from the source by drew_kime · · Score: 1

    This startup made an AI read every dystopian fiction novel and is turning its cursed ramblings into business plans.

    --
    Nope, no sig
  69. Tired of corporations in general. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here in Europe (not just the EU), people more and more lean towards making the concept of a corporation outright illegal per se.
    That includes the concept of "for-profit".

    Eastern Europe liked that by default, given their history and recently seeing how much capitalism fucked them up in different but just as bad ways. Including, and this is key, the eastern part of Germany!
    France loves everything they can protest, so they're in.
    The UK is not exactly part of the in-group anymore until they find out what they want.
    And the rest are either small tag-alongs or too busy with the internal chaos the EU caused them.

    The goal is: An organisation is expected to improve not just some stupid and mostly imaginary number, but to improve *the world* and humanity! Money should always be mere means to achieve that.
    And WE define what "good" means, because they have proven that they can't be trusted with that.
    We will also check that they actually do this. And literally disown them if they don't.

    The housing corporation "Deutsche Wohnen" is the first that is currently about to be disowned, for price gouging, extortion, and causing thousands to be homeless or leave the city (Berlin) altogether.
    I hope they get expelled. From the planet.

  70. Gregorian Calendar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Must be April first on the calendar they use in the Russian Empire.

  71. Joke's on them. I barely ever see an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have no TV/radio, use an ad blocker, and I don't go out a lot. If I do, then only to the supermarket down the little side road that has only store brand products. Or along the river. The first one is not woth advertising in. And along the river it's illegal, to not ruin the scenery.
    Non-food items are usually ordered online.

    So when I occasionally get some flyer in a package, I toss it before I even read anything. And when there is an emergency, and I need to go some place else, I can ignore nearly all ads. I try to prevent it from even happening.

    No, I don't like humans. They are a planetary pathogen. I just wait out their imminent extinction.

  72. Reminds me of reading the Red Dwarf novels by John+Allsup · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of the Red Dwarf books. (source: https://reddwarf.fandom.com/wi...)

    "In the novel Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers, Nova 5 is an American vessel owned by "The Coca-Cola Company" which was sent on a mission to induce the supernova of 128 super giant stars in order to create a five-week-long message in the sky visible even in daylight, reading "COKE ADDS LIFE!" Kryten causes Nova 5 to crash after cleaning the sensitive computer terminals with soapy water. After the Red Dwarf crew finds the wreck it is brought aboard and repaired in order to utilize its Duality Jump engine, which could get the crew back to Earth within three months. However, although the ship is successfully repaired, circumstances prevent them from ever going through with it."

    --
    John_Chalisque
  73. Cocaine you mean. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can guarantee you, that ever single person in management at Coke & Pepsi snorts cocaine. At the very least.
    I mean it was the key selling point and ingredient of their product! And corporate culture usually sticks around for centuries.

  74. I can see it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Red Neck 1: Lookit! Nasty Viet stuff floating up there!
    Red Neck 2: We need to shoot it dead. Get get us a Big Ass Gun (BAG).
    Red Neck 1: We let's go to the hardware store, we gonna make ourselves one.

    1 month later.

    Soviet 1: Something is shooting at our satellites!
    Soviet 2: On schedule. Now place shiny satellites next to invisible spy satellites. And grab popcorn.
    Sovient 1: Da.

  75. holy crap, assholes!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First off.. this is obviously going to be bright enough to be seen by people in cities. They want to be profitable, so.. that realistically means far brighter than most stars, as seen in the city.

    How will you see this in large cities? Well, it'll have to be as bright as the moon, really. Brighter, preferably.

    This means two things.

    1) Holy fuck, will it ever be bring in rural areas. I live 50 miles from a medium sized city, and while it doesn't get super dark like in the real, deep country... it gets dark. That'll be gone. Just gone.

    2) This will FUCK UP NATURE. An example? Google 'moon lights' for marine fish tanks. In my tank, I bought and added them in. They track the 'real world' light of the moon, and simulate it. And all sorts of shit started to spawn, to appear in the tank at night. Things that had never happened before.

    The ocean is FULL of life that utterly and completely depends upon the moon for mating cycles, and more. And the land also has high dependency upon some of that.

    Animals don't always adapt. Some do. Look at the crow, the robin, the budgie (in Canada at least). These birds THRIVE in the city, and couldn't care less about man being around. Hell, the robin LOVES cut lawns, nice and short, easy to find its worms and bugs .. while preventing predators from sneaking up through tall grass.

    But some animals and birds are NEVER seen in the city. They can't handle it. Some of that is just... mankind. Can't handle, get used to us in such numbers.

    But other parts are environmental. Like -- being able to see stars. Like there being real, actual, full darkness. Or a moon.

    This isn't just an eyesore people!

  76. wtf? by pyrrho · · Score: 1

    fuuuuuuck theeem!

    --

    -pyrrho

  77. Wankarrius by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    The 7-year-old in me is hoping hackers re-shape the constellation into a giant you-know-what.

  78. Paraphrased Futurama by DaFallus · · Score: 2

    Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 20th century?
    Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines. And movies. And at ball games and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts and written in the sky. But not in dreams. No siree!

    --
    No one cares what your captcha was

    Houston TX, USA
  79. Why not? by barakn · · Score: 1

    Light at night, especially blue light, messes up circadian rhythms and has been implicated in sleep disruption, diabetes, and cancer. Imagine putting up an advertising constellation only to be sued by every woman with breast cancer and every man with prostate cancer. https://www.eurekalert.org/pub...
    Those lawsuits would certainly hurt the bottom line. Is there blue in Pepsi's logo?

    --
    "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
    1. Re:Why not? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > Is there blue in Pepsi's logo?

      That's a rhetorical question, I'm sure.

      Anyway, great idea, let's get class action status. Where do I sign?

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  80. "Orbital billboards are the revolution" by roc97007 · · Score: 2

    Yeah, no they're not. Hard no. Absolutely, positively, no.

    But hey, there's a bright side. It'll give us a way to test anti-satellite defenses.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  81. Trump will shoot it down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump will shoot it down with powerful lasers.

    Make Sky Great Again!

  82. Dilbert warned us. by xisco · · Score: 1

    Does this remind anyone else of a certain Dilbert episode?

    --

    --
    Francisco
    São Paulo / Brazil
    1. Re:Dilbert warned us. by FilmedInNoir · · Score: 1

      It was also an episode The Orville - If the Stars Should Appear.
      One cataclysm later and people will be sacrificing their children to the great flying Pepsi in the sky.

      --
      Sig. Sig. Sputnik
  83. Red Dwarf by Immolo · · Score: 1

    Wasn't this prophesied in the Red Dwarf books with the same company? Been a while since I've read them but I'm sure this was part of the story that lead to the Earth being voted to be the space dump for the entire solar system.

  84. join me in hurling death threats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://contact.pepsico.com/pepsi

  85. this sounds familiar by roc97007 · · Score: 1
    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  86. Think of the astrological possibilities! by Woeful+Countenance · · Score: 1

    "I was born on the cusp of Pepsi and Verizon, with Taco Bell in retrograde."

  87. Just because you can doesn't mean you should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Irresponsible pollution of the night sky is something we should all be completely against. Around half of our environment is UP and we really don't need adverts there.

    On the one hand, we have sugared water, on the other we have one of the most enthralling and beautiful sights known to man. The choice is not difficult, and PepsiCo must never win this.

    I suggest boycotting all their products until they agree to divorce themselves from stupidity and ignorance.

  88. I expect more, Slashdot by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 4, Informative

    I expected better from Slashdot. You're getting trolled, folks. The dimmest object you can see with the naked eye is magnitude +6. Those are only visible in very dark rural areas. In big city suburbs, the best you can see with the naked eye is magnitude +4. A cubesat's reflected sunlight magnitude is typically +10 or +11. Cubesats are only barely visible to a very large telescope when illuminated solely with sunlight.

    Now if each cubesat is an active light emitter, that's a whole different thing. Let's say it's primarily solar powered. Let's further say Pepsi spends $BIG_NUM on 44% efficient multi-junction solar cells. If 3 of the 6 faces of the cube are solar cells, that's 300 square centimeters of solar cell. Solar irradiance outside atmosphere is 1367 watts per square meter. 300 square centimeters is 0.03 square meters. 1367 * 0.03 * 0.44 = 18.04 watts. Let's say the other 3 faces of the cube are LEDs. 18 watts of LEDs from Amazon gets you 1260 lumens. 1260 lumens from 0.03 square meters is 42,000 lux. That's like a tiny spot of direct sunlight as seen from Earth. That's pretty good, though the angle at which it's visible is limited by altitude and it having only 3 illuminated faces. There's no image whatsoever. It's just a bright spot.

    These are all best case numbers, of course. In reality the three faces of the cube won't operate at maximum efficiency since they can't all face the sun directly at once, and in LEO they don't see sunlight at all for half their orbit, etc etc. Still, if they worked at it, it could be pretty obnoxious.

    1. Re:I expect more, Slashdot by Aighearach · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You don't seem to appreciate that they can fold out solar panels, they're not limited to the sides of a cube. Also they could collect power all day and store it in a battery, and only run the LEDs for a short time.

      Also you would not have multiple surfaces illuminated.

      As for the time out of sunlight at low Earth orbit, it can be as low as zero, and in practice these are already popular orbits.

      Your numbers are not best case, they're lower than worst case.

    2. Re:I expect more, Slashdot by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 1

      I can see plenty of man made objects, satellites, the ISS when it flies by... So I think this is not only possible but inevitable with the shitty capitalist model. But heck, doesn't even have to be for profit. Russia or the USA could put something up there for propaganda. Play your jingoistic cards right and the public might even end up justifying it!

      --
      -
    3. Re:I expect more, Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's amazing how somebody has the energy to write an essay as a response to something he was too lazy to even read. It took me roughly ten seconds of reading to see the relevant bit: "plans to project huge ads into the night sky using cubesats with Mylar sails that’ll reflect sunlight back down to Earth". You can pack a lot of mylar into a cubesat.

    4. Re:I expect more, Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is called a 'pixel'. One pixel isn't much. An array of pixels is your screen... AC

    5. Re:I expect more, Slashdot by Woeful+Countenance · · Score: 1

      The sail doesn't have to be equally reflective on its whole surface. It could have a picture on it or shaped holes in it.

  89. Not how orbits work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised no one has pointed out that you can't put a bunch of satellites into orbit and have them maintain a formation. The only way to maintain formation in orbit without constantly using some kind of propulsion is to have all objects in an identical orbit, line astern. So maybe the ads will be in morse code?

  90. too bad Philip K Dick didn't live by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to see the future he predicted.

  91. Using the moon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next theyâ(TM)ll project advertising on the moon and use it as a giant billboard.

  92. It's bad enough they are playing ads at the gas pumps now.

    Can there be no space free of ads?

    1. Re:urk by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Yikes! That is scary.

      I'm glad I'm in a State where you're not allowed to pump your own gas. That isn't even a thing here.

  93. That's a good reason to burn fossil fuels. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This species deserves what's coming.

  94. I'm not sure . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . . . That this will work. BUT if it does, here's the perfect application for India's new missile system.

  95. You're living in the past, dude by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 2

    I would join you in the boycott... if I bought anything from Pepsi in the first place. I don't drink soda, or lipton; I almost never eat fast food, so me boycotting KFC and TacoBell, and any other Pepsi owned chains over this won't help.

    Pepsi hasn't owned KFC, Taco Bell or Pizza Hut (you forgot them) since 1997. I can't get mod points very often here, yet people have thrown you enough to get you up to a score of 5 for basically being ignorant of history. So that's what it takes to get modded up around here. Very interesting.

    1. Re:You're living in the past, dude by jjbenz · · Score: 1

      I think they owned KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut just long enough to ruin those brands.

    2. Re:You're living in the past, dude by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      Pepsi hasn't owned KFC, Taco Bell or Pizza Hut (you forgot them) since 1997.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  96. Cubesats? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cubesat killer crowd funding! Get busy!

  97. Defacement sats by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    Should get coke to pitch in and launch some additional cube sats to deface the Pepsi constellation and establish a defacement foundation dedicated to defacement of all similar advertising campaigns by anyone else contemplating this.

  98. "Next To the Stars" by David+Gould · · Score: 2

    I'm just still trying to figure out WTF "Next To the Stars" is supposed to mean.

    --
    David Gould
    main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
    1. Re:"Next To the Stars" by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      If they do put this next to the stars, the problem will solve itself within milliseconds.

  99. Just out of curiosity, why? by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    I mean, this really isn't that far out there. In the 60s there were Senate hearings over advertising to children where experts made it clear that kids couldn't tell adverts from actual programming, but they were brushed aside. There's all the smoking adverts too, not just to kids but the outright lies to adults. Or the tricks used by marketers to make Diamond engagement rings seem like a thousand year old tradition when they invented it themselves in the 30s. Oh, and Santa Claus was made up to sell Coke.

    I guess what I'm saying is that I'm not sure if this should be the straw that breaks the camel's back. It's seems pretty par for the course. I suppose you could say it's harder to avoid, but to be honest I'm not an astronomy nerd and can't remember the last time I went stargazing.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  100. missed the memo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently tossing the word "pollution" around makes anything you label with it bad.

    Can I insist all the Democrats TIME magazine puts on its covers look bad and are therefore polluting the world?

    I don't trust the green people's views of esthetics and certainly not of business.

  101. WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    campaign against stereotypes and unjustified prejudices against gamers

    Do you have an idea how hard it is to be a gamer?

    GAMERS RISE UP

    -Gang Weed 2020

  102. F*#k Pepsi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet another reason to despise that company.

  103. I predict... by vizbones · · Score: 0

    an increase in amateur rocketry and ordinance design...

  104. Are You A Bit? by Zorro · · Score: 1

    Life isn't all YES or NO answers.

    Pepsi Satellites NO!

    Flaming Hot Cheetos YES!

  105. DO NOT WANT by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    Keep your craptastic advertising out of our skies, you fucking maggots.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  106. Marketing does it again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Marketing keeps destroying everything in order to sell more cheese balls.

  107. Terrible Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have those annoying Ads, on mobile, web sites, TVs, on the streets, pretty much everywhere. This is enough. If Pepsi do it, it's easy as they are trespassing the limit. We should not buy any product from them anymore. If we are having this much ad in our lives, means that's very ineffective. Otherwise those companies would be saving $$$ from ads (that's not cheap) and having more profits. Someone isn't doing the right calc.

  108. what a waste by renegade600 · · Score: 1

    Hey pepsi, how about using that money and lower your prices!!! the best advertising is having the lowest prices.

  109. piss off pepsi by mapkinase · · Score: 1

    get the heck off my sky

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  110. Pepsi seems mostly junk food by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Eat like an adult, and you'll already be boycotting Pepsi:
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_PepsiCo

  111. Space Force, ready for action! by edi_guy · · Score: 1

    Time to launch the ad blocker hyper sonic missiles.

  112. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. Just fuck off. No.

  113. WORLD'S MOST BORING LYING FAGGOT KENDALL DIES SOON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " They see people almost being denied a supreme court seat because they once had a beer while in school." - No, he perjured himself under oath. It's not the beer, you lying faggot. IT'S THE LYING, YOU LYING FAGGOT.

    YOU TELL A LIE UNDER OATH AND YOU ARE A CRIMINAL. That he basically ATTEMPTED TO RAPE A CLASSMATE also didn't really rise to the occasion of a lifetime appointment to the SCOTUS without investigation.

    But with TRAITOR SUPPORTING DISHONEST FAGGOTS LIKE YOURSELF in charge? He sailed right through anyway, to lie another day.

    Dry your eyes, traitor. Your little perjurer didn't get caught - yet!

      https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=13577626&cid=58274188

  114. Nyet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nyet tovarvich, we must have cheki breki instead

  115. The Big Ball of Wax by Shepherd Mead ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...written 1954 and I think it had a Constellation Pepsi in it.

    But I cannot find it in the Amazon snippet. I remember it because the dot over the "i" had gotten out of sync with the rest of the constellation and was now over the "e."

  116. Ad Blocker??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That sounds cools, oh wheres the opt out option? Oh well at least my Google Glass comes with uBlock Universe!

  117. Slurm!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really hope this promotes Slurm!!

    Pepsi sells that, right?

  118. Red Dwarf - Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the funniest books I've ever read, was this novel spin off of Red Dwarf. In it, something very much like this is predicted:

    In the novel Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers, Nova 5 is an American vessel owned by "The Coca-Cola Company" which was sent on a mission to induce the supernova of 128 super giant stars in order to create a five-week-long message in the sky visible even in daylight, reading "COKE ADDS LIFE!" Kryten causes Nova 5 to crash after cleaning the sensitive computer terminals with soapy water.

    https://reddwarf.fandom.com/wiki/Nova_5

  119. Target practise anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally a reason to use those anti sat rockets

  120. Mad Mike to the rescue! by darth.hunterix · · Score: 1

    So, I've heard there is a guy building a home made rocket to go to space. Since flatearthers pay the bills he promises to prove Earth is flat.

    So, how about we chip in, so he would knock this shit down while he's at it?

    --
    What is best in life? Hot water, good dentishtry and shoft lavatory paper.
  121. Or maybe Pepsi can.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dye the ocean Brown to promote their cola drink?

    Polluting the night sky with something that has to be brighter than the stars and bright enough to penetrate the light pollution would simply make more light pollution.... until another cola company has to go one better. - In the end we can model another sun to replace the original. - and burn cola companies advertising to create energy.

    Better to spend the money on green packaging and remove the 1000s of tons of plastic bottles from landfill IMHO.

  122. Sales Pitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This immediately reminded me of "Sales Pitch" by Philip K. Dick,

  123. Pepsi... say what!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Outrageous.... Time To Boycott!!!

  124. Military is unaware by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Scramble the jets boys, we're under attack.

    99 red balloons.