Comment on SpaceX Might Have Lost 200+ Starlink Satellites In Just 2 Months Shows Data
LastYearsPumpkin@feddit.ch 1 year agoAs much as this is true, this is also a solution that’s doesn’t have a lot of alternatives for very isolated areas. You can technically run undersea cables to everywhere, but it’s actually faster and easier to have LEO satellites serve places like Antarctica. Some smaller island nations, the middle of Africa, etc.
There are problems with every solution, but this was always an inevitable solution for worldwide communication.
echo64@lemmy.world 1 year ago
We’ve had communications satellites for this function for decades without needing starlink and blotting out the sky with garbage
aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Yeah and they suck with 500kbps links and ping times measured in seconds.
shalafi@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Geosynchronous sats are just fine! Only 22,236 miles high vs. Starlink’s 342 miles.
Want me to do the math on speed-of-light delay? .119 seconds is hella slower than .002.
echo64@lemmy.world 1 year ago
oooh nooo i can’t play cod
shalafi@lemmy.world 1 year ago
So, you’ve never had to rely on satellite internet? That was a rhetorical question.
Had a client not far from here, only option was satellite. Couldn’t even get 3G at the time. 950ms+ ping times.
We were trying to hook up a simple RDP system, PC to PC, and I finally had to tell him it wasn’t possible to do anything but FB and email, and that would be miserable. Hell, almost nothing was possible.
So you don’t get speed-of-light delay, and you also don’t get low-altitude orbital decay. You won’t admit it, but you have no idea what you’re talking about it. But you’ll be back to double down on your ignorance! FFS, just stop.
LastYearsPumpkin@feddit.ch 1 year ago
Yup, that’s why the Antarctic Event Horizon telescope needed to wait 6 months to send its data back…
There is a reason that StarLink is better than the previous options.