[potiuper]

d=r(1/cos(s/(2r))-1)=3958(1/cos(6906/7916)-1)~=2198 mi; Yes, into the lower mantle with only 692 mi to go to the outer core. What I would love the internetz to explain is how to justify the h8 for HFT, yet the luv for Musk since he is the one in the driver's seat at the moment for this stuff with StarLink and the Boring company.

[koheripbal]

One of the important components of online hate is that it requires zero justification or logical consistency.

It just needs to feel gratifying.

[wmf]

Because HFT helps the rich AF get richer but Starlink benefits normal people?

[potiuper]

Satellite internet already exists; StarLink's defining feature is lower latency both by being in a lower orbit and inter-satellite links. It does benefit consumers by introducing another satellite internet competitor, but how many "normal" people want to rely on satellite internet or, if they do, care about a few extra 100s of ms of latency? (Inter)-National wireless companies have a tendency to consolidate and lobby out smaller companies and municipalities who have less incentive to build out fiber and landline companies, if any, have further justification to cut cords. StarLink is the now the leading solution for global low latency connections for HFT by being in a near vacuum in low orbit. The case for HFT benefiting non-professional trader Mrs. Mainstreet is that she no longer has to eat the larger spread offered by the big bank market maker every pay cycle when the 401K contribution hits with HFTraders providing liquidity. The opportunity for smaller traders to make the market is no longer there, but the odds that they would had a chance to begin with have been stacked against them for a long time with the cost of the fastest connection being marginal to now near insignificant.

[roomey]

We used to manage a remote branch over geo stationary satellite, it was an excersise in pain. We used to check the local weather forecast to see if it was raining before doing any work on the servers. Geo internet is awful, I think you are underestimating how much usability difference there would be between LEO and GEO latencies and bandwidth (because geo bandwidth was awful too)

[p1necone]

Current satellite internet is really bad. ~600ms of latency is very noticeable even just loading webpages, and the throughput isn't great either.

Also multiplayer gaming is rather popular, and that's just not possible with that much latency.

VOIP is a pretty terrible experience with that much latency too.

[Seanambers]

" care about a few extra 100s of ms of latency?"

Well, as someone who grew up in the modem era(90's) and was trying to play online fps games. I cared quite a bit about latency. Normal people also like things to be quick you know :)

Based on that experience in the 90s to this day i want my internet connectivity to be as fast as possible and i'm willing to pay.

Low latency enables video/audio chat amongst other things and just a better experience.

A quick google search gives 600 ms latency for satellites(not Starlink) thats quite a alot. Also bandwidth is a issue with existing providers i think.

[Retric]

The ping on satellite internet is usually around 640 ms as it’s a ~45,000 mile round trip, worse the bandwidth is terrible. That kind of latency breaks a lot of assumptions in the modern web. Dropping to ~20ms and dramatically upping the bandwidth is a huge win for rural internet users.

PS: I am on the waiting list for starlink.

[samstave]

And tell me how one would service any problems that arise either by tectonic movements or breaching an alien/breakaway civilization hollow earth chamber?

[potiuper]

Repair it like any other tunnel that requires maintenance?