this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025
888 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

66067 readers
5495 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 content.
  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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MITM0@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

Of course it did, are there any programmes clean up space junk ?

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 15 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Sat internet is so overhyped. As it's limited by physics cell towers will always outperform them. Simple as that.

  • cities - cables and 5g
  • country side - 4g and cables in high concentration areas
  • middle of nowhere or war zones - low orbit sats.

This is purely a security issue not a consumer one.

[–] witx@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 10 minutes ago

Spoken like a true spoiled city person Good luck getting the necessary infrastructure built (cables, towers, et al) to really remote places. It's probably more expensive in the long run than having a satellite constellation.

[–] sunbytes@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Infrastructure can be a real problem in some places.

I'm currently on a mountain and since they upgraded to a hybrid satellite/cable system the speeds have skyrocketed. Laying cable/towers is just not viable, especially with dense rock peaks blocking line of sight.

Also I have coworkers in Nigeria who lose internet multiple times a day (and often don't have the bandwidth for a video call) but most of them have bitten the bullet and paid the high up-front cost to get starlink at home. And now can do HD video calls with zero interruption (unless they have power issues, but that's a whole other thing).

So I think there's a lot of use-cases for sattelite, especially for people who aren't considered worth the investment in non-sattelite infrastructure.

It's just unfortunate that yeah, space junk is going to one day (suddenly) be a massive problem.

Edit: ah I may have replied to the wrong comment

[–] espressdelivery@lemm.ee 14 points 11 hours ago

So much space junk….

[–] sasquatch7704@lemmy.world 11 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (10 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

[–] witx@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 9 minutes ago

Satellites are not there for speed, but breadth

[–] Tja@programming.dev 0 points 1 hour ago

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

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 9 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

cat 6 in every home lol. you have any idea about range of cat 6? I mean, any?

[–] sasquatch7704@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

~50m for cat6, ~100 cat6a, enough to get you to a switching box where you connect to fiber.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Oh so now there's also fiber is there?

[–] sasquatch7704@lemmy.world -1 points 57 minutes ago (1 children)

Obviously there is fiber, copper is usually "last mile". Its cheaper to have a long fiber and short copper. Copper more or less anyone can install, fiber is more specialized.

I'm not proposing to reinvent the wheel, just continue what has proven to work.

[–] Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world 1 points 49 minutes ago

The Australian government is heavily criticised for half-assing fibre internet because they did copper to the house in most cases. We still, a decade later, have one of the worst internet in the western world.

I think satellites are likely much cheaper to deliver internet to a whole continent than trying to run bloody copper.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 0 points 32 minutes ago

oh I didn't know there's a fiber box in 100m at any place in the country! tell that to my ISP who cant serve any internet through the landline telephone cable because it's too far from distribution! oh and also to all the customers of microwave wireless networks.

and this doesn't even need to be on the countryside! It's a problem here even in villages that the ISP is not allowed to run any cables on the high voltage electric poles!

[–] MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world 11 points 11 hours ago

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

[–] abcdqfr@lemmy.world 7 points 10 hours 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.

[–] SamB@lemmy.world 11 points 12 hours ago (4 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.

[–] stembolts@programming.dev 3 points 12 hours 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 14 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

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?

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

There are exceptions, but in most cases (in Europe) hardwire should work fine. The problem is that starlink is advertised for any use case.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Their are villages in rural England who don't have fiber. It wouldn't be cost-effective delay it for the six customers that require it.

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 6 points 12 hours ago

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

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 hours 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

[–] Cyber@feddit.uk 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

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...

[–] sasquatch7704@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago

Usually fiber is used between cities and in cities and copper is for the "last mile". Usually there is a switching box for the street / building complex

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Cat 6A caps out at like 330 ft. Also thats a ton of copper.

Fiber optic nonprofit utilities makes more sense in cities and in rural areas we should just subsidize cell phone data plans.

[–] sasquatch7704@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago

I didn't say that cat6 should be used everywhere, usually is just for "last mile delivery" get it from your home to a switching box that has fiber.

[–] turnip@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 hours ago

Bring back ethernet jacks on phones!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] madjo@feddit.nl 16 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

If only I wasn't too chicken shit to start investing... I was looking at Eutelsats stocks earlier in the week. But it'd be my first steps on the market so decided against it.

[–] theangryseal@lemmy.world 4 points 13 hours ago

I finally got brave enough to do it. Between August and January I had made over 800%.

Trump has ruined that for me. Oh well.

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not even sure how, it seems like its kind of wealth gated because you have to be able to make enough from your investments to cover brokerage fees. I'm not aware of any non US retail investment platform that doesn't have a regular fee to pay.

[–] SouthEndSunset@lemm.ee 2 points 11 hours ago

Trading212.

[–] BevsDad@lemmy.ca 29 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

It'll be interesting to see what the Canadian telesat LEO system will be capable of. They're supposed to be launching satellites next year and are using a higher orbit so will need much fewer satellites than starlink.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 14 points 15 hours ago (9 children)

But sadly increased latency. Also don't hold your breath on Canada telecom anything, we have a history of being the worst at it.

[–] BevsDad@lemmy.ca 6 points 14 hours ago

I don't mind a bit more latency (should still be nicely below 100ms) but my use case is more related to mid-Atlantic mobile connectivity than remote region broadband.

Their planned implementation just seems much better than others with beam shaping, linked satellites and less than 200 satellites to maintain and replace.

Although you're not wrong about our telecom track record...

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] mbirth@lemmy.ml 76 points 23 hours ago (6 children)

“European Starlink rival” is a bit far fetched when there’s merely rumours that they might be able to offer a similar service. But that’s the stock market for you.

[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 67 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (5 children)

They have both GEO and LEO satellites. Not on the scale of Starlink (for LEO), but they do have a network.

I am not commenting on the nature of the stock market or anything like that. Just pointing out that they do have a working network, it's not 100% speculation (like you see with crypto schemes).

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] bassad@jlai.lu 18 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Is starlink business model like uber/airbnb? Killing the market with low prices by circumventing regulations to establish their monopoly?

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 17 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

No, it just vertical integration. You need to send up rockets to make money, so you make sure they never have an empty slot on them by filling it yourself. You get enough satellites up, then you have a revenue generating payload you can send up steady from then on.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 20 hours ago (5 children)

Bye bye future space launches once we have full or partial Kessler syndrome.

Bye bye earth based astronomy.

But dang this tech is so much better than Hughesnet

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›