▲ 1052 ▼ I wouldn't have believed you either (slrpnk.net) submitted 1 year ago by j_roby@slrpnk.net to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world 162 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 year ago (1 child) Running fiber to low density areas is expensive but there's no way it can be as expensive as launching all those satellites. Even if it is, the ROI has got to be way worse for satellites. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] zbyte64@awful.systems 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) There's also the cost of relaunching satellites once they run out of fuel. The maintenance cost is also higher compared to fiber. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) talking out of your ass here. satellites don't typically just run out of fuel. they don't really need fuel once they're in orbit. the reason why spacex satellites fall down after like 5 years or sth is because they're in an intentionally low orbit, where atmospheric friction is still relevant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] zbyte64@awful.systems 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) I literally clapped my cheeks together on the keyboard to write that last comment and couldn't be bothered to provide the numbers or context that you provided to support my statement. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago don't worry :P permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) There's also the cost of relaunching satellites once they run out of fuel. The maintenance cost is also higher compared to fiber. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) talking out of your ass here. satellites don't typically just run out of fuel. they don't really need fuel once they're in orbit. the reason why spacex satellites fall down after like 5 years or sth is because they're in an intentionally low orbit, where atmospheric friction is still relevant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] zbyte64@awful.systems 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) I literally clapped my cheeks together on the keyboard to write that last comment and couldn't be bothered to provide the numbers or context that you provided to support my statement. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago don't worry :P permalink fedilink source parent
[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) talking out of your ass here. satellites don't typically just run out of fuel. they don't really need fuel once they're in orbit. the reason why spacex satellites fall down after like 5 years or sth is because they're in an intentionally low orbit, where atmospheric friction is still relevant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] zbyte64@awful.systems 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) I literally clapped my cheeks together on the keyboard to write that last comment and couldn't be bothered to provide the numbers or context that you provided to support my statement. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago don't worry :P permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) I literally clapped my cheeks together on the keyboard to write that last comment and couldn't be bothered to provide the numbers or context that you provided to support my statement. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago don't worry :P permalink fedilink source parent
[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago don't worry :P permalink fedilink source parent
