• Skyrmir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yeah, but it’s really hard to pull behind the boat. And my buddies say the installer refuses to drive through the combat zone.

    • axh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I remember the story about one old lady with a shovel cutting off a part of European country (was it Romania?) from the internet. In that case if fiber optic wire could doge, it would save the day for a lot of people*

      *I’m not sure if the story is true and if I remember it correctly.

  • cecirdr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    The only reason for starlink to exist is because telcos were allowed to ignore building out infrastructure to serve more areas. I don’t know if incentives were ever provided to get them the capital to be willing to build out the infrastructure in less populates/rural areas.

    Realizing that we have turned earth orbit into a garbage pile simply because we refused to step up and do right by our citizens instead of maximizing capitalism certainly stings.

  • Hello_there@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Complaining about the number of objects in orbit as you persist in putting thousands of additional objects in orbit seems hypocritical

  • donuts@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I just hate seeing these stupid things polluting the night sky. Other than Elon Musk, who the fuck wants to see this junk flying around when you look up at the stars?

  • ilickfrogs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I think temporarily Starlink should be reducing their constellation ambitions, spread out the dishes and reduce throughput. The accessibility Starlink offers is a 11/10 win for the world. But the bandwidth and size should come after we have better mitigation for Kessler Syndrome and inference with observing the universe.

    • netburnr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I personally consider 100mbit to be the minimum internet people should have. And everyone should have at least that.

      I got my parents Starlink because they live a few miles outside the capitol of Texas and have zero unlimited cellular options and no terrestrial options. They get about 120mb/sec and I would hate for that number to go down. It’s over 110 dollars a month versus Gigabit bidirectional for Google fiber that I have just 6 miles from them that is only 45 a month.

      • cecirdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        I only have 22mbit where I live and no available fiber. There’s no faster service either. We get by with it, but in a full household, it can certainly cause lots of buffering and bandwidth restrictions. When we worked from home, it could be a problem on occasions. I live in a decently sized community in the southeastern US. There’s no excuse for this.

  • rambos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    is anyone even using that starlink internet? ive seen prices go from 100$/mo which is a lot, but maybe not for sattelite net idk… Is there anything else he gets from sattelites or just internet?

    • KickMeElmo@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I use it. My option before was $240/mo for microwave internet. Starlink is both faster and significantly cheaper for me. It’s just internet though, same as my other options.