• @Ilovethebomb
    link
    43 months ago

    As someone who spends a lot of time in the outdoors, I have to disagree with you. I’m very excited about how this will simplify logistics, and make getting weather etc much easier.

    • warm
      link
      fedilink
      43
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The skies are already polluted with Starlink satellites and there’s even more coming. I agree that is does solve some situations, but it’s being done for profit, not for undeveloped areas. Sticking more shit in our skies for money is really sad, I am surprised there’s not more international regulations for this kind of satellite spam.

      • @Ilovethebomb
        link
        -253 months ago

        but it’s being done for profit, not for undeveloped areas.

        This is such a Lemmy comment, there’s nothing evil about providing a service for a price.

        • warm
          link
          fedilink
          21
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Not on its own. Polluting the skies for profit is the problem. Why the cherry picking though?

          • @Ilovethebomb
            link
            -53 months ago

            Do you also think cell towers are “polluting the landscape”?

            • warm
              link
              fedilink
              7
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Of course cell towers are an eye sore. Though they are more necessary than starlink, often hidden by landscape or on top of buildings anyway. It’s not the “gotcha” comparison you think it is.

              • @Ilovethebomb
                link
                -23 months ago

                Why are they more necessary? They both do the same job.

                • warm
                  link
                  fedilink
                  0
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  Perhaps necessary was the wrong word, though I don’t know if starlink supports the same bands the towers already do for 2G, 3G, 4G etc. They don’t obstruct our skies, so that’s much preferable.

                  • @Ilovethebomb
                    link
                    -13 months ago

                    Starlink sats are only visible to the naked eye when they’ve just launched, once in orbit they’re only a problem for ground based optical astronomy, and even then it doesn’t seem to be as much of a problem as everyone makes out.

                    I get that you probably hate Musk, but a lot of the points you’re making are just nonsense.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -23 months ago

          Providing a service for a price is not the problematic part.
          The problem with serial killers isn’t that they want money in exchange, either.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              3
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Oh it does, despite you not understanding it. The point is that even though someone does something for money, that does not mean what they do is not harmful.

              And before you ask say this does not have to do anything with this topic, the reason I said that, is that I think what spacex is doing here is harmful.

              • @Ilovethebomb
                link
                23 months ago

                The point is that even though someone does something fun money, that does not mean what they do is not harmful.

                Who said it wasn’t? You’re arguing against a point nobody made.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  33 months ago

                  In your “this is such a lemmy comment” reply you sounded to be condeming the other user for their anti-spacex opinion.

                  Also, I’ve fixed a typo in my previous comment, in the part of it that you have quoted. The quote is fine, just telling it in case it has caused misunderstanding.

                  • @Ilovethebomb
                    link
                    -13 months ago

                    Their opinion seemed to be a combination of hatred for capitalism and Elon Musk, and they came off to me as being grasping at straws to justify that opinion.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      If there were more third-world people here they’d probably agree with you as well. Last I checked there’s like one or two cables going into the entire continent of Africa.

      It’s actually a really good idea, with the main exception being the impact on astronomy. That Musk happens to be the guy behind this first network is just an unfortunate coincidence.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        53 months ago

        As a person who lives in the third world I absolutely do not want the internet to only be controlled by American corporations from space and would much rather fund proper fiber optics and connections.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          43 months ago

          Starlink is probably a stopgap measure for areas that still have to build up the physical infrastructure for the real solution.

          It’s more of a solution for having internet available just about anywhere. Probably good for various emergency/rescue scenarios.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            23 months ago

            I still don’t want the Americans to be controlling literally anything I use or interact with. They will harvest that data to execute military operations against leftists where I live. No fucking thanks, keep your Starlink.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              33 months ago

              Sad American upvote for that. I can’t imagine how this country must look to people around the world.

            • @Ilovethebomb
              link
              13 months ago

              Of course this is coming from a .ml account.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          23 months ago

          Ah. Yeah, I guess that’s true. It is an American thing. Would you feel better if it was European or Chinese?

          Wire infrastructure is great, but it’s just damn expensive, and manufacturing+laying it can be very specialised labour. Even here in Canada not everyone has it in rural areas. Meanwhile, small satellite swarms pass over everywhere by force of geometry, and are actually still pretty fast internet.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            23 months ago

            Not really, but of that list only China hasn’t directly colonized the country I live or send storm troopers into the forest to murder people in the past decade. I would like the taxes we pay here to go towards developing ourselves, we can pay to educate networking engineers and subsidize the work ourselves and hook into the internet as a peer instead of as a subscriber. Third world countries aren’t poor because we have no money, we’re poor because we’re trapped in bad loan agreements, have lopsided international investment and bad interior planning which prefers plantation cash crops over food security.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              23 months ago

              Yeah, development is a “sticky wicket”. I didn’t mean to speak on your behalf when you’re there to speak for yourself, so sorry about that.

        • @Ilovethebomb
          link
          13 months ago

          That’s a great idea, let’s run fibre to ships, campervans, and places so remote it’s not even practical to run mains power!