this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023
184 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

59665 readers
3476 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 another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ilickfrogs 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I think temporarily Starlink should be reducing their constellation ambitions, spread out the dishes and reduce throughput. The accessibility Starlink offers is a 11/10 win for the world. But the bandwidth and size should come after we have better mitigation for Kessler Syndrome and inference with observing the universe.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Don't worry, it'll only be 20 years after the chain reaction accident that all these satellites will burn up in orbit. Surely 20 years of no low earth orbit satellites will be fine, right?

[–] netburnr 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I personally consider 100mbit to be the minimum internet people should have. And everyone should have at least that.

I got my parents Starlink because they live a few miles outside the capitol of Texas and have zero unlimited cellular options and no terrestrial options. They get about 120mb/sec and I would hate for that number to go down. It's over 110 dollars a month versus Gigabit bidirectional for Google fiber that I have just 6 miles from them that is only 45 a month.

[–] Wooly 5 points 1 year ago

100megabit is not the minimum, that's about what I'm on and have the fastest internet out of anyone I know, downloading games in a couple hours and stuff.

People can absolutely live with +16megabits, I did at my parents house for years. 100 would be nice, but in no way necessary.

[–] cecirdr 2 points 1 year ago

I only have 22mbit where I live and no available fiber. There's no faster service either. We get by with it, but in a full household, it can certainly cause lots of buffering and bandwidth restrictions. When we worked from home, it could be a problem on occasions. I live in a decently sized community in the southeastern US. There's no excuse for this.