• witx@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Yes and we can also use a solution which requires absolutely no cables and digging at all, and that doesn’t disrupt any natural environments and occupies land.

    And yes I’m aware of the impact satellites have on the atmosphere. There’s no free lunch.

    • DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Because building space ports and rocket launches have 0 impact as well.

      But you acknowledge this, so what’s your point? Why pay a techno billionaire when we can publicly fund cables way cheaper and more friendly?

      • witx@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 minutes ago

        Oh I’m all for Musk to eat shit. I was arguing that satellites are better, not starlink in particular. Lemmy seems to have issues separating their (valid) hate for muskrat with some of his companies or related technologies. And OP was arguing that cell towers are an improvement over satellites? Wth

        Why can’t we have a publicly funded satellite constellation?