Ohmmy

Lol "Starlink is a bad ISP" "BuT wHaT aBoUt Ukraine!!?!?!?!?" "Mostly irrelevant to this conversation" A true lemmy experience.

I love how you completely ignore how starlink is only viable for ukraine because the US military industrial complex.

There was satellite internet before Starlink and Starlink should be banned for all the 5ghz interference it creates

This is a really weird "ends always justify the means" because I could also say it wouldn't be necessary if Ukraine never gave up their nuclear weapons and how I doubt the Ukrainians would disagree. This is also further impacted by the protection of Starlink by the US military because if it wasn't an act of war against the US to destroy them, Russia could take down low earth orbit satellites pretty easily.

But none of this is relevant to how Starlink is not an ISP, it is not infrastructure it is a fleeting wasteful service.

Those places can get internet from satellites outside of low earth orbit that is simply slower with higher latency.

The main problem is that starlink is not a viable ISP like Comcast. Relying on low earth orbit is extremely wasteful as you need to constantly launch more and more satellites. Starlink gives their satellites a 5 year lifespan where fiber can go on for 40 years or more. There are 7,500 starlink satellites, so we're talking a constant replacement of satellites all falling into earth's atmosphere, not being recycled.

Starlink is literal space trash waiting to happen.

Piracy has never been theft because nothing is missing. It's not stealing or theft if someone takes a picture of my shoes and makes their own because I still have shoes.

I thought it was called capitalism.

Yeah that way the ROG ally can cook them right

It's not about what is common but instead that micro sd cards aren't typically designed for so many reads and writes.

IMO SD cards are not good for gaming and accessible M.2 should be more common

I’m not in academia, but I’m pretty sure research papers are usually part of the job for many professors, and they are paid for those jobs. Research students get stipends (money) to live off of while doing research and publishing their work. So, money is supporting those efforts as well, right?

You don't get paid for your research papers being published, it's required in may fields but it isn't something you get paid for. Stipends are not money to live off, in most cases you barely get by. So no, money is not supporting those efforts, it's literally corporations taking the labor of researchers and making money off it.

I’m not in support of having to pay for quality information being the way, but it is the way right now. There are people that refuse to pay for journalism, some saying because it restricts access to quality information to those that can’t afford it, but I posit boycotting paying for journalism is having a net negative effect on quality information getting into anyone’s hands, including those that don’t have the means to pay for it.

Who are you shadowboxing here? I'm simply agreeing that information SHOULD be free and you clearly agree.

That doesn't really address their point, that's simply a motte and bailey. Limiting access to information (knowledge/education) on a basis of payment is a hindrance of lower classes not upper classes. We especially see this with academic publishing and the people writing those papers aren't even paid for it usually.

You shouldn't have to pay for the journalist or the transmission, similarly to education it is best for a society (especially a democracy) if information is freely accessible regardless of one's finances.