this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025
110 points (98.2% liked)

Technology

71502 readers
4754 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Darkard@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I always wish I was quick enough to take advantage of things like this but I always miss the boat

[–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk 1 points 3 months ago

I didn't read the article but I'd bet the "why" is because it's been on the news and people think it's an easy way to make a quick buck. However, these people are amateurs - when it's in the news you're already too late.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

invest in community run broadband instead

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 months ago

SpaceX and Starlink have no competitors. They’re so far ahead that it’s not even funny. I really wish Elon had just kept his mouth shut and kept working on it without sullying its image. I bet he wishes that too sometimes.

[–] sasquatch7704@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (18 children)

Unpopular opinion: we don't need freaking internet from satellites, just get cat6 in every home and everyone is happy. I'm sure the cost would be lower then having to launch 999999.91 satellites to have similar speeds

[–] MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

You do if you're fighting a war against Putin and the ketamine troll is threatening to turn off your internet.

[–] SamB@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

There are remote areas where cable won’t reach. For example, I need surveillance on a remote farm and I would love to get internet there.

[–] sasquatch7704@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I understand, but that is the exception. Even in your case probably getting 4G / 5G to that area would be cheaper / easier long term. Also Europe has a relatively high density compared with other continents

[–] SamB@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I’m in Italy and outside cities, the Internet is still horrendous. And as I said, if you have a remote farm or garden, which are fairly common here, then you are on your own. Sim based internet is a thing, but there are monthly limits which are risky when you need surveillance and automation to be always live.

[–] stembolts@programming.dev -1 points 3 months ago (6 children)

Cable will reach anywhere. There is not such a place that cable "will not reach". Is there a profit incentive to serve you as a customer in a capitalist system? Maybe not. But cable will reach.

[–] MoonHawk@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Not sure if you are in Europe, but in the US there are places where you could walk the width of Germany and see 100 houses. It does not serve to be technically correct here. Also, how would that work with boats / other vehicles and places without infrastructures?

[–] Cyber@feddit.uk 1 points 3 months ago

You'd need signal boosters at regular intervals, which need power... so now you're running multiple cables.

But you can't run them too close together as the power will induce noise in the data cable.

And after a long distance even the power needs boosting.

And to protect the cables, you'd need to bury them or put them on poles. Separately.

At a certain point, cable becomes the expensive option...

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

I know plent of places in my European country where cable does reach, but was made for landline phones and cannot carry any data for internet because its so far from the nearest distribution center. even wireless like microwave can't sustain more than a quality camera feed

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Well, cable will not reach a warzone which is a rather pertinent use for a satellite communication system at present.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 months ago

The cost of a cable to a remote cabin is clearly not worth it either when you can just use a 4G antenna instead at a fraction of the cost. Ships won't even be able to reach 4G signals.

[–] EstonianGuy@lemm.ee 0 points 3 months ago

One broken cable can result in a city/town without internet. Speaking from experience.

Also satellites have other uses like GPS

[–] abcdqfr@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Now get rid of the home and the cable, how do you cover 99.9% of the earth? Nomads need satellite, and so do rural homes too far from an isp fiber/copper endpoint But yes, if starlink has it done, why double the satellites to do it again with a different name? Because it's easier to launch 1000 more satellites than dismantle the system that enables such feats.

[–] witx@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 3 months ago

Satellites are not there for speed, but breadth

[–] Tja@programming.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Exactly! Amazon can ship it to you for like 10 bucks. Problem solved!

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 0 points 3 months ago

You need to plug it into something though. If you are on a boat, what are you going to plug into?

For my house I use a 4G router and a combination of ethernet and wifi over the LAN. 4G is also fine for kayaking, but if I had a larger boat that went further out and for longer I would probably consider satellite options.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›