this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
1022 points (97.8% liked)

Microblog Memes

5403 readers
3682 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AA5B -3 points 10 hours ago (18 children)

That’s a nice thought, but

  • Starlink has no old infrastructure
  • Rural and remote customers are difficult to wire up

Even in the best case where US was close to 100% wired up like we paid for, Starlink would have a market in remote areas world wide, RVs, aircraft, ships

[–] LordKitsuna 2 points 7 hours ago (13 children)

This, I'm both very rural and in an RV at the same time. Starlink is literally my only means of playing games. The only other even remotely viable option is LTE internet from something like T-Mobile but out here the towers don't really have much capacity so I might be able to play the game fine and I might just start disconnecting Midway through a match randomly as the internet struggles to even load a basic web page

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 hours ago (12 children)

Welp, I guess we'll all have to suffer the consequences so that Lordkitsuna can game in the middle of nowhere. Truly first world problems.

https://www.space.com/starlink-satellite-reentry-ozone-depletion-atmosphere

[–] dubious -3 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

lordkitsuna is the answer, dude. more people getting away from the grind of the big machine to live remote lives far from society is the answer. i don't like starlink either but these networks are crucial for the modern nomad to exist.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The answer to what? If everyone does this, there won't be a single remote place on earth that isn't crawling with sprinter vans. It can't scale, and it doesn't need to be specifically catered to. You want the wilderness, you get the wilderness. You want low latency Internet, then get to a fiber connection. We don't need every first world amenity everywhere.

[–] dubious 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

nah. you can live in the city if that's what you like. i'll do what i like. do you really want to alienate non-urban liberals?

depopulation is a possible alternative to preventing swarms of sprinter vans too. you really don't want to put everyone in a city.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 31 minutes ago

I'm not trying to alienate anyone, I'm trying to understand why low latency gaming needs for digital nomads is worth the real downsides of providing such a service (scientific, GHG, atmospheric tinkering, etc). I also believe that we should leave a lot more of the earth alone and that nature matters. I'm not trying to put people anywhere, just recognizing there are pros and cons to different living schemes, humans are social creatures, and population of 2 areas don't warrant large societal investments. I'm similarly against a hypothetical drone sushi delivery service for rural Canadadian boreal forests if that happens to have real downsides too.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Does the modern nomad need to exist in the first place? Taking your money into an RV so you can guzzle gas on it, and just stream videos while you pretend to enjoy nature?

[–] dubious 1 points 2 hours ago

you can just exist in a remote place and not make videos too my friend. sorry that your understanding of what life outside a city looks like has been shaped by the internet instead of reality.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)