There is an issue with that, if the starlink saterlites were destroyed they would no longer be able to make avoidance menovers. This could very quickly lead to a cascade of massive crashes that pretty much means we will never be able to leave the earth for a long time.
Which is also fucking horrible. Yeah just further pollute the atmosphere with vaporized satellites why don’t you. Hope that Fortnite battle was worth it.
The Elon aspect has already been covered by other commenters, so purely against Starlink’s technology as a primary method for internet, ignoring Musk:
It has an enormous carbon footprint. Launching stuff into space takes a ton of energy, and SpaceX rockets are entirely powered by fossil fuels. Most of the rocket body is just massive tanks of fossil fuels, and because they don’t fly very far from Earth, most of that ends up in the atmosphere. The internet already has a significant carbon footprint, and adding this layer when we absolutely don’t have to is stupid. We can build A LOT of terrestrial radio infrastructure for less environmental impact, covering pretty much all rural areas. Microwave dishes pointing to towers is superior for rural internet in pretty much every way, including latency which is Starlink’s main selling point over older satellite internet systems, and wired internet is still the best option in every benchmark possible so using Starlink in urban places where you can effectively supply wired internet is stupid.
But what about people who live in super remote areas where ground based infrastructure is unfeasible? Well, we’ve already had internet capable satellites for much longer, and Starlink is an inferior satellite technology in terms of efficiency compared to satellites that orbit much higher up. They fly so low that most of the time they’re doing nothing with no ships under them because they’re flying over the ocean or places no one is using the service. With geostationary satellites, each satellite can “see” a larger portion of the Earth, so not only do you need fewer satellites while still providing global coverage, each satellite is in use much more of the time even when they’re flying over unpopulated areas because they cover so much more area, so say, ships and wildlife researchers in the jungle can stay connected to a single satellite instead of needing a dense web of satellites flying by overhead to deliver continuous coverage.
Flying so low also causes them to experience much more atmospheric drag, meaning they have a much shorter life. So you need more launches in total to replace satellites and maintain global coverage, massively increasing the carbon footprint. You also further pollute the atmosphere with vaporized satellites (which contain some nasty heavy metals BTW) when they run out of propellant and fall back to Earth. So not only do you need fewer satellites with geostationary orbit, each satellite also has a longer life.
The antenna you’d need on the ground is also much simpler, just a dish instead of an expensive, fragile, and power hungry phased array. Pretty important for truly off grid people.
It’s also bad for national security (again, speaking on national security implications of the technology in general because as a Canadian I couldn’t care less about US national security) to rely on it as a primary way of getting Internet because, as we’ve just learned, other countries can just shoot down your satellites when they fly over their territory. Not helped by the fact that they’re so close to the ground. It would be a lot harder to attack infrastructure in a country’s own territory. And if you’re not the country operating it, you’re also at the mercy of that country because they can just deny you access.
The broad answer is that Starlink clutters up the night sky with often visible satellites that ruin our view of the cosmos and risk negatively impacting radio astronomy while putting altogether to much power in the hands of a corporation and in this case the worlds richest douchebag/nazi.
The answer specific to Mainland China is that their government opposes the free flow of information. Anything that undermines their government’s ability to control the narrative is frowned upon.
Same applies to all social networks and MS Windows, right? Just making sure I’m tracking - these are also hated here? Things that rich people own manufacturing of? What about cars? They’re pretty much govt spyware now too. Just wondering how far this govt coercion hatred extends into everyday life.
Same applies to all social networks and MS Windows, right?
The only social networks I willingly use are Fediverse instances, none I’m registered on are hosted in the US.
No device in my house runs Windows. Linux is an upgrade, I recommend it.
Things that rich people own manufacturing of?
As a socialist, I believe the working class must seize the means of production, and am doing my part in building that future for us all.
What about cars? They’re pretty much govt spyware now too.
Yes, I despise the ‘smart’ features shoved into cars, televisions, etc… I am also active in /c/fuckcars, I am critical of their overuse and rarely use one.
Now, none of this is necessary for us to recognize that giving the US control of important infrastructure is dangerous. But you did ask. And many governments are also moving away from US infrastructure, although more slowly.
As for Starlink, its common use is the result of laziness and neglect. Satellite internet is clearly not the cheapest, fastest or most efficient for most of its customers to get modern internet infrastructure. Governments should be reducing their citizens’ need for Starlink as a serious priority, by building internet infrastructure.
Unironically, yes. I don’t know if you’re trying to make that scenario sound ridiculous, but I can assure you that it very much is not. At least outside of the US.
It’s not everyone at the moment, but the IT people who are paying attention are freaking the fuck out. I legitimately think Microsoft, AWS, and GCP will lose substantial market share overseas in the next 24 months.
Consider that much of the rest of the world has started trusting China more than the US. Now think about the US CLOUD Act. What person in their right mind is going to feel comfortable hosting their company’s most sensitive data within jurisdictional reach of whatever the fuck is going on over there?
Oh I agree! But I still drive a car and use windows when I have to. I don’t want to, but to avoid it is currently quite a life nuisance. And that’s I suppose how I feel about those who use Starlink.
Oh I agree! But I still drive a car and use windows when I have to. I don’t want to, but to avoid it is currently quite a life nuisance. And that’s I suppose how I feel about those who use Starlink.
It seems I stepped on a landmine. My bad. I truly didn’t and don’t realize that satellite internet is destroying humanity but I hear now it’s the guy that started the company that is so I have to hate those too.
Think about iran, where they had to jam the starlink signal to keep the cia agents from murdering everyone (they paid per murder).
Now if usa attacked a less powerful country without jamming technology, the cia agents could get their orders and data over starlink, and use that to murder everyone.
Starlink has been proven to be utilized for dubious activity to undermine sovereignty (see Mossad coup attemptin Iran as a most recent example). It hides under the guise of global internet for those who otherwise wouldn’t have access but seeing as how it comes at the cost of western imperial overreach, having solid counter measures ain’t a bad idea.
Ah, Ok so you don’t particularly have anything against humanity, you’re just an ignoramus with no sense of right/wrong and a chronic inability to read the fucking room, and tacitly accepts the products and services of a Nazi pedophile techbro. Gotcha.
I also have a problem with overengineered inferior solutions to investing in improving and expanding what is cheap and works very well and that will negatively impact future space projects.
Oooooo. Wow ppl really just gonna hate everything he touches eh?
Remind me why. Is it mainly because of his attempt to reduce government spending, his views on trans, his Asperger’s, or his odd approach to reproducing with women?
SpaceX has 10k employees that aren’t Elon ya know.
I’m using it as part of a question, asking if it’s his socially awkward behavior that makes him disliked. That’s all. That’s what I wrote. No need to rip your britches.
Yes I understand that’s the party line. I was hoping for something more concrete but now it feels like this is being answered in bad faith so we can shut it down
What party line? It’s the truth? He’s in the Epstein files begging to go “party” on the island. He hit multiple nazi salutes on camera. It’s not a line it’s a statement of fact Elon Musk is a nazi pedophile.
Bad faith is when people point out my idol is fucking evil.
I genuinely saw the man making a hand gesture out to all the people. I didn’t see, nor have I even seen, any sign or symptom that he’s actually a Nazi.
The pedo thing, eh that’s pretty inconclusive that he was touching underage women because he asked to go to a party imo. I prefer a bit more damning evidence.
The man isn’t my idol. I hate a lot of his personal life and the way he appears to treat woman.
I truly am thinking independently, and I understand that your view on the world is different. Is this all it takes for you to say pedo Nazi or is there more?
He’s a white supremacist who grew up in apartheid South Africa, comes from a family of racists (look up his grandfather, Elon is doing everything he can to carry on his legacy), and regularly promotes racist conspiracy theories. If you genuinely haven’t seen any signs that he’s a Nazi then you haven’t been fucking paying attention.
I was hoping you were genuinely concerned about the most effective and equitable solution to get such an important utility to as many people as possible but clearly you’re just here to defend the weird billionaire
I already see this is going to be a fruitless discussion with those proposed discussion points. “His attempt to reduce government spending” 🤣 “attempt”.
He didn’t do anything to reduce government spending other than dismantling agencies investigating him for malfeasance. That was a lazy cover to steal government data while simultaneously destroying any accountability for his crimes.
Huge fan of Alec, seen most his vids and yeah I caught that earlier this week, including the full ending.
I agree with and love every bit of that video except for that part about Starlink. Everything in his video aligns with my view of the world and I learned a ton of stuff as well, but I feel like this one I would have to sit down and think about a lot more.
It seemed out of place in the video in fact. I brushed it off and didn’t go further down the rabbit hole, but nothing he said changes my mind immediately on this particular matter. Everything else in the video made total sense and easily defensible.
I am realizing now that perhaps this was simply a cheap jab at Elon - Just because everyone hates Elon right now. You have me thinking and maybe I’ll rewatch it and think through this a lot more. I don’t recall him saying anything specific against Elon himself. Prob a dramatic eye roll?
IIRC his point was that 5G to every household is better than an ISP satellite constellation. That felt like it was ignoring so much including national security (for USA at least), global impact, and upgrade costs.
(Edit: made a more formal comment closer to the root of the thread)
Why? Launching shit into space is hard as fuck and has an enormous carbon footprint. You can build A LOT of cellular infrastructure for the same cost and impact.
And building your internet infrastructure in your own territory instead of floating in space will make it a lot harder for China to shoot with their badass microwave canon.
And I’m just a common idiot, but I’d wager upgrading satellite infrastructure is going to be slightly more expensive than terrestrial infrastructure. There’s a reason we’re still using a lot of satellite infrastructure from the 1980s.
Starlink satellites are disposable from the start. They have a five year lifespan before deorbiting and burning up. So launches continue forever. So basically upgrades just come as they come, the mechanism is already in place. No clue on how costs compare with upgrading hundreds of thousands of terrestrial towers every 10 years or whatever is needed.
Agreed that domestic benefits would require far more analysis than I’m capable of.
Mr. Xi, fire when ready.
There is an issue with that, if the starlink saterlites were destroyed they would no longer be able to make avoidance menovers. This could very quickly lead to a cascade of massive crashes that pretty much means we will never be able to leave the earth for a long time.
Not true. Starlink are in a very low orbit and regularly (1 or 2 a day) will simply burn up themselves as they fall out of orbit.
Which is also fucking horrible. Yeah just further pollute the atmosphere with vaporized satellites why don’t you. Hope that Fortnite battle was worth it.
Damn, what do you have against global internet?!
The Elon aspect has already been covered by other commenters, so purely against Starlink’s technology as a primary method for internet, ignoring Musk:
It has an enormous carbon footprint. Launching stuff into space takes a ton of energy, and SpaceX rockets are entirely powered by fossil fuels. Most of the rocket body is just massive tanks of fossil fuels, and because they don’t fly very far from Earth, most of that ends up in the atmosphere. The internet already has a significant carbon footprint, and adding this layer when we absolutely don’t have to is stupid. We can build A LOT of terrestrial radio infrastructure for less environmental impact, covering pretty much all rural areas. Microwave dishes pointing to towers is superior for rural internet in pretty much every way, including latency which is Starlink’s main selling point over older satellite internet systems, and wired internet is still the best option in every benchmark possible so using Starlink in urban places where you can effectively supply wired internet is stupid.
But what about people who live in super remote areas where ground based infrastructure is unfeasible? Well, we’ve already had internet capable satellites for much longer, and Starlink is an inferior satellite technology in terms of efficiency compared to satellites that orbit much higher up. They fly so low that most of the time they’re doing nothing with no ships under them because they’re flying over the ocean or places no one is using the service. With geostationary satellites, each satellite can “see” a larger portion of the Earth, so not only do you need fewer satellites while still providing global coverage, each satellite is in use much more of the time even when they’re flying over unpopulated areas because they cover so much more area, so say, ships and wildlife researchers in the jungle can stay connected to a single satellite instead of needing a dense web of satellites flying by overhead to deliver continuous coverage.
Flying so low also causes them to experience much more atmospheric drag, meaning they have a much shorter life. So you need more launches in total to replace satellites and maintain global coverage, massively increasing the carbon footprint. You also further pollute the atmosphere with vaporized satellites (which contain some nasty heavy metals BTW) when they run out of propellant and fall back to Earth. So not only do you need fewer satellites with geostationary orbit, each satellite also has a longer life.
The antenna you’d need on the ground is also much simpler, just a dish instead of an expensive, fragile, and power hungry phased array. Pretty important for truly off grid people.
It’s also bad for national security (again, speaking on national security implications of the technology in general because as a Canadian I couldn’t care less about US national security) to rely on it as a primary way of getting Internet because, as we’ve just learned, other countries can just shoot down your satellites when they fly over their territory. Not helped by the fact that they’re so close to the ground. It would be a lot harder to attack infrastructure in a country’s own territory. And if you’re not the country operating it, you’re also at the mercy of that country because they can just deny you access.
Global internet that is controlled by a Nazi man-child who wants to destabilize western democracy? Yeah, what could possibly be wrong with that…
The broad answer is that Starlink clutters up the night sky with often visible satellites that ruin our view of the cosmos and risk negatively impacting radio astronomy while putting altogether to much power in the hands of a corporation and in this case the worlds richest douchebag/nazi.
The answer specific to Mainland China is that their government opposes the free flow of information. Anything that undermines their government’s ability to control the narrative is frowned upon.
Sovereignty is a huge issue here - handing control of critical infrastructure to a US oligarch is just begging to be coerced and exploited.
Same applies to all social networks and MS Windows, right? Just making sure I’m tracking - these are also hated here? Things that rich people own manufacturing of? What about cars? They’re pretty much govt spyware now too. Just wondering how far this govt coercion hatred extends into everyday life.
YES
/c/fuckcars
A lot
Oh I agree!
Yep people here hate windows. We hate cars, for reasons aside from spying as well they just generally suck.
So does no one here drive?
Whataboutism
Yeah, in search of answers. Not to defend a point.
The only social networks I willingly use are Fediverse instances, none I’m registered on are hosted in the US.
No device in my house runs Windows. Linux is an upgrade, I recommend it.
As a socialist, I believe the working class must seize the means of production, and am doing my part in building that future for us all.
Yes, I despise the ‘smart’ features shoved into cars, televisions, etc… I am also active in /c/fuckcars, I am critical of their overuse and rarely use one.
Now, none of this is necessary for us to recognize that giving the US control of important infrastructure is dangerous. But you did ask. And many governments are also moving away from US infrastructure, although more slowly.
As for Starlink, its common use is the result of laziness and neglect. Satellite internet is clearly not the cheapest, fastest or most efficient for most of its customers to get modern internet infrastructure. Governments should be reducing their citizens’ need for Starlink as a serious priority, by building internet infrastructure.
Unironically, yes. I don’t know if you’re trying to make that scenario sound ridiculous, but I can assure you that it very much is not. At least outside of the US.
It’s not everyone at the moment, but the IT people who are paying attention are freaking the fuck out. I legitimately think Microsoft, AWS, and GCP will lose substantial market share overseas in the next 24 months.
Consider that much of the rest of the world has started trusting China more than the US. Now think about the US CLOUD Act. What person in their right mind is going to feel comfortable hosting their company’s most sensitive data within jurisdictional reach of whatever the fuck is going on over there?
I am inside the United States and those corporations are all cancer and need to be cut out before they further spread.
Oh I agree! But I still drive a car and use windows when I have to. I don’t want to, but to avoid it is currently quite a life nuisance. And that’s I suppose how I feel about those who use Starlink.
Oh I agree! But I still drive a car and use windows when I have to. I don’t want to, but to avoid it is currently quite a life nuisance. And that’s I suppose how I feel about those who use Starlink.
did you ever wonder how we got steered into a situation where we’re forced to use windows, and cars, and starlink?
Yup. Hate all of them.
What do you have against humanity?
It seems I stepped on a landmine. My bad. I truly didn’t and don’t realize that satellite internet is destroying humanity but I hear now it’s the guy that started the company that is so I have to hate those too.
Think about iran, where they had to jam the starlink signal to keep the cia agents from murdering everyone (they paid per murder).
Now if usa attacked a less powerful country without jamming technology, the cia agents could get their orders and data over starlink, and use that to murder everyone.
Starlink has been proven to be utilized for dubious activity to undermine sovereignty (see Mossad coup attemptin Iran as a most recent example). It hides under the guise of global internet for those who otherwise wouldn’t have access but seeing as how it comes at the cost of western imperial overreach, having solid counter measures ain’t a bad idea.
Ah, Ok so you don’t particularly have anything against humanity, you’re just an ignoramus with no sense of right/wrong and a chronic inability to read the fucking room, and tacitly accepts the products and services of a Nazi pedophile techbro. Gotcha.
Hope you recover from the landmine injury!
deleted by creator
That it’s owned by … the person who owns it.
I also have a problem with overengineered inferior solutions to investing in improving and expanding what is cheap and works very well and that will negatively impact future space projects.
You know, his entire shtick.
Oooooo. Wow ppl really just gonna hate everything he touches eh?
Remind me why. Is it mainly because of his attempt to reduce government spending, his views on trans, his Asperger’s, or his odd approach to reproducing with women?
SpaceX has 10k employees that aren’t Elon ya know.
As an autistic person, don’t you FUCKING DARE defend his use of that fucking card for the horrible way he acts.
I’m using it as part of a question, asking if it’s his socially awkward behavior that makes him disliked. That’s all. That’s what I wrote. No need to rip your britches.
Found Elon’s alt
Him being a nazi pedophile is probably what most people take issue with.
Yes I understand that’s the party line. I was hoping for something more concrete but now it feels like this is being answered in bad faith so we can shut it down
What party line? It’s the truth? He’s in the Epstein files begging to go “party” on the island. He hit multiple nazi salutes on camera. It’s not a line it’s a statement of fact Elon Musk is a nazi pedophile.
I genuinely saw the man making a hand gesture out to all the people. I didn’t see, nor have I even seen, any sign or symptom that he’s actually a Nazi.
The pedo thing, eh that’s pretty inconclusive that he was touching underage women because he asked to go to a party imo. I prefer a bit more damning evidence.
The man isn’t my idol. I hate a lot of his personal life and the way he appears to treat woman.
I truly am thinking independently, and I understand that your view on the world is different. Is this all it takes for you to say pedo Nazi or is there more?
He’s a white supremacist who grew up in apartheid South Africa, comes from a family of racists (look up his grandfather, Elon is doing everything he can to carry on his legacy), and regularly promotes racist conspiracy theories. If you genuinely haven’t seen any signs that he’s a Nazi then you haven’t been fucking paying attention.
I was hoping you were genuinely concerned about the most effective and equitable solution to get such an important utility to as many people as possible but clearly you’re just here to defend the weird billionaire
I already see this is going to be a fruitless discussion with those proposed discussion points. “His attempt to reduce government spending” 🤣 “attempt”.
not even sure what you’re laughing abt. but fair to say it’s not going to be fruitful given this response.
He didn’t do anything to reduce government spending other than dismantling agencies investigating him for malfeasance. That was a lazy cover to steal government data while simultaneously destroying any accountability for his crimes.
He never stood a chance, he was untrusted by half the country.
He dug his grave himself. Zero sympathy.
I’ll let someone much smarter than me speak to this:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=KtQ9nt2ZeGM&t=4420
Huge fan of Alec, seen most his vids and yeah I caught that earlier this week, including the full ending.
I agree with and love every bit of that video except for that part about Starlink. Everything in his video aligns with my view of the world and I learned a ton of stuff as well, but I feel like this one I would have to sit down and think about a lot more.
It seemed out of place in the video in fact. I brushed it off and didn’t go further down the rabbit hole, but nothing he said changes my mind immediately on this particular matter. Everything else in the video made total sense and easily defensible.
I am realizing now that perhaps this was simply a cheap jab at Elon - Just because everyone hates Elon right now. You have me thinking and maybe I’ll rewatch it and think through this a lot more. I don’t recall him saying anything specific against Elon himself. Prob a dramatic eye roll?
What didn’t make sense about his point?
IIRC his point was that 5G to every household is better than an ISP satellite constellation. That felt like it was ignoring so much including national security (for USA at least), global impact, and upgrade costs.
(Edit: made a more formal comment closer to the root of the thread)
Why? Launching shit into space is hard as fuck and has an enormous carbon footprint. You can build A LOT of cellular infrastructure for the same cost and impact.
And building your internet infrastructure in your own territory instead of floating in space will make it a lot harder for China to shoot with their badass microwave canon.
And I’m just a common idiot, but I’d wager upgrading satellite infrastructure is going to be slightly more expensive than terrestrial infrastructure. There’s a reason we’re still using a lot of satellite infrastructure from the 1980s.
Starlink satellites are disposable from the start. They have a five year lifespan before deorbiting and burning up. So launches continue forever. So basically upgrades just come as they come, the mechanism is already in place. No clue on how costs compare with upgrading hundreds of thousands of terrestrial towers every 10 years or whatever is needed.
Agreed that domestic benefits would require far more analysis than I’m capable of.