Yeah, i saw that note later. I can wait.
GreyEyedGhost
joined 2 years ago
I'm kind of curious. Is the Quest 3 actually profitable, or is it a loss leader? If it's the latter, I'd be even more inclined to take their product and have them lose money in the process.
Those kinds of leaps in battery labs have been a dime a dozen for decades now.
I was pretty irritated when I saw this.
In the real world we just get a steady march of slow improvement.
Well, there goes my 15-minute tirade on how much batteries have improved in the last 3 decades.
Someday in the distant future, there is going to be a very confused archeologist.
Which is that? All I see is "*******".
Remember, Passw0rd1! is a handy filler, meets most password requirements, and is a strong password!
It also helps that Canada has a non-fee option that only has the downside of being traceable.
Every time I come across it, it becomes a little less painful.
Not to dismiss the very real problem you raise, but that only has to be solved once per hardware configuration. This is why digital piracy is so successful - you only need the efforts of some very talented individuals to solve that particular problem and you're good. As hard as that may be, it's still simpler than manufacturing and assembling hardware where accuracy to 1/1000" in a dust-feee environment is a requirement.
I had Starlink for over 2 years while waiting for my fiber to be installed. Worlds better than the marginal DSL I had available before (5 Mbps down, 1 Mbps up), but I'm far happier with the fiber I have now.
This makes no sense on the face of it. Let's say the satellites are 100 km (or miles) above the earth. If I was to connect to a server 10 km (or miles) away, my complete route over fiber is 10 km. My complete route over satellite is just over 200 km (assuming it's between those two points). Now, let's say the server is 500 km (we'll assume the earth is flat over this expanse, even though that's about 5° around the earth). So our fiber link has to go 500 km, more or less. Our satellite link has to go about 540 km, best case scenario. If we raise those satellites, it only gets worse (it's probably closer to 860, best case scenario, for satellites at 350 km).
I just did a quick check, and the curvature of the earth over that 500 km scenario is about 20 km (it won't be 20 miles for 500 miles).
Now, you might start to argue that were talking about straight lines, and that's true for satellites but not for fiber. And that might be true. But we've already shown that the hop to space and back is already increasing that distance by 60% or more. But those two or so straight lines are just til you get to the Starlink hub, so you aren't going to reduce this much more than the numbers above. And yes, fiber will have some extra distance due to following the grid rather than straight lines. But, again, that only matters to the ISP hub and then you're back to the same distances.
The other argument you listed is the speed of light in space/atmosphere vs. fiber, and it's a valid point. Not there are some interesting things done with guiding light to the center of the fiber, which is another way of saying there are multiple refractive indexes, but let's go with a refractive index of 1.5. That means the speed of light in glass is 2/3×_c_, or that light in space can go about 50% farther. And that's about the added distance for using LEO satellites.
tldr: All the benefits of transmitting through air or space are basically negated by the added distance, where the best-case scenario is only slightly better than the worst-case scenario for fiber.
That's more from Jewish/Yiddish roots, I believe.