• Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Wait so you’re saying the ships, just the ships moving across the pacific are enough reason to have low earth orbit satellites in such quantity they impede things as simple as looking at the stars? The ships can get internet from higher earth orbit satellites that don’t have to be constantly replaced. We haven’t been choosing between internet and no internet with starlink, there has been satallite internet way before starlink and there will be way after. All it takes is a less cooperative FAA not allowing so many rocket launches for the AI nazi company and slowly holes form in the coverage as the satellites burn up.

    • bluGill@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      38 minutes ago

      No, I’m saying that the ships would like it. Also having used geosynchronous satellite internet I have first hand experience that the lag sucks. Better than nothing, but Starlink has less lag. Probably faster but I don’t know what the latest speeds are. Still geosynchronous covers a lot of area which means you are sharing with a lot of people.

      Cruise ships pay a lot for internet because their customers want it. Crew on all ships want it for their breaks.

      Starlink isn’t worth it for just the above, but add in rural people on land and it makes sense. Though I understand the astronomers hate it.