this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2025
687 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

74247 readers
4204 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 news or articles.
  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
[–] blind3rdeye@aussie.zone 17 points 58 minutes ago

Company says that everyone should give them money and stop using competing products.

Obvious thing to say in the land of self-interest.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 11 points 46 minutes ago

American taxpayers paid for both Starlink and Space X. Overpaid, actually, that's why he's the richest man in the world. None of his businesses are profitable, he just skims hundreds of billions off the enormous government grants he gets.

Since we overpaid for that tech, we should just confiscate it from him. He can be thankful that he doesn't go to prison for misappropriating government funds.

He can keep Tesla. It'll be bankrupt in 2 years anyway.

[–] Ascrod@midwest.social 19 points 1 hour ago

"Oligarch mouthpiece demands diverting of major public funds to oligarchs instead"

Story of America, really.

[–] uhdeuidheuidhed@thelemmy.club 9 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Remember how Elon Musk conned Vegas out of millions with the hyperloop.

Satellite internet is not the future; it's cell internet.

[–] CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world 4 points 53 minutes ago (1 children)

it's cell internet.

Physical lines first.

[–] uhdeuidheuidhed@thelemmy.club 2 points 44 minutes ago* (last edited 44 minutes ago)

We already have physical lines.

Businesses and governments aren't going to invest in digging and laying down more cables to give people in rural America access to fiber. They're already reluctant to do it for major cities.

[–] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 17 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Wireless data transmission should only ever be used for nomadic, temporary, and/or sacrificial links.

They’re useful for quick deployment, but are intrinsically brittle and terrible for resiliency and efficiency.

The longer the dependence on them for a given use case, the less defensible arguments in support of them become.

I’m all for the use of satellite delivery of internet services, but only when it’s used in conjunction with a broader roll out of hardwired infrastructure, at which point it can reasonably be relegated to serving as a secondary, backup diverse path.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 hour ago

Cory Doctorow described it as anti-futuristic tech. Where fiber networks get better, faster, and cheaper the denser they get, wireless satellite will get slower and less reliable the more people share that spectrum.

[–] thatkomputerkat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

No fucking thanks. Gigabit+ fiber > Nazi-ass satellite internet that doesn’t have even remotely near the needed bandwidth for actual dense population centers.

[–] bizza@lemmy.zip 28 points 7 hours ago

I got a better idea: a civil war against oligarchs

[–] Octavio@lemmy.world 10 points 7 hours ago

I have a better idea: don’t do that.

[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago

You cannot actually serve hundreds of millions in the US even if you invested the 75B it would cost to give every household a satellite it just can't support the bandwidth.

[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 47 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Going from the most secure, hard wired formats to a con man's satellites would be a fatal error. Any sort of military conflict and the network is all down, atleast broadband keeps secure networks intact.

[–] gramie@lemmy.ca 3 points 25 minutes ago

Just have a look at what's going on in ukraine. Once they started using drones, the drone were attacked through their wireless connections. Now they trail fiber optic cables for control. What does that say about the relative reliability and security?

[–] BabyVi@lemmy.world 12 points 15 hours ago

Gotta gear up for America's century of humiliation.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 43 points 18 hours ago (6 children)

One day he's gonna get assassinated and it will be a global holiday

[–] hunnybubny@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 5 hours ago

I should buy some fireworks

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 19 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

You'd be instantly banned on reddit for this comment lol

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 hours ago

Some of us were already banned for such comments, but now we are here being bloodthirsty dickheads. I want to put Musks head in a vice and tighten it till the two plates are dry.

[–] bigbabybilly@lemmy.world 13 points 15 hours ago

Which is why I’m here and not there. It’s the internet: I hope nobody posts their hot takes! Reddit needs to lighten up. Or even better, fuck off.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 8 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

i like the alternative saying

Some make the world better by their passing, others make the world better by their passing.

it's vague and passive enough that you have plausible deniability, but the meaning is clear. plus I like the poetry of it.

[–] buttnugget@lemmy.world -1 points 6 hours ago

We should always celebrate whenever male supremacists meet their demise. People who use the term “misandry” unironically, for example.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sugarfoot00@lemmy.ca 45 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Publicly funded fibre can be provider agnostic. Starlink can't. Unless Musk is arguing for the nationalization of Starlink, which frankly I could get behind.

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 31 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

We paid for it, it should be nationalized. But they only ever socialize their losses, the profits are private.

[–] CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world 3 points 51 minutes ago

Technically, S0aceX should be nationalized by the US based on the volume of money they've received in contacts.

[–] DigDoug@lemmy.world 10 points 15 hours ago

I say that Emma Stone should divorce her husband and marry me instead.

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 17 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

It shouldn’t be all or nothing. It should be diversified.

Yeah, there are rural locations where Starlink makes sense but also there are a lot of urban places that it would never work in.

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Problem with Starlink is that the satellites need to be replaced every 5 years or so.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 hour ago

That, and if they could pull heavy copper wiring to the furthest rural reaches of the country in the 1930s, they can pull fiber along side it today. The poles and right of way is already there. Satellite is a fine stop-gap while it gets done, but there’s no excuse for it to be the permanent solution.

load more comments
view more: next ›