Canal_Volphied t1_j5olkse wrote
Reply to comment by slowslownotbad in Starlink Is ‘Forced’ To Finally Start Caring About The System’s Light Pollution And Harm To Scientific Research by Albion_Tourgee
Yep, even more mentions of previously existing satellite connection.
Thank you for thoroughly demolishing your previous false claims of data tape only connection.
slowslownotbad t1_j5om6e9 wrote
I didn’t say only tapes. But think about it. Modern scientific datasets are massive. Thousands of gigabytes.
1mbps running 12h per day is less than 100 gigabytes per year. You’ll saturate it with day-to-day operational messages. No way you’re doing real science.
Not to mention quality of life for the staff. Nobody’s making video calls over Iridium.
Canal_Volphied t1_j5oqxd9 wrote
> I didn’t say only tapes.
You said that before Starlink Antarctica used physical tapes. You intentionally made zero mention of this pre-Starlink satellite connection.
osteologation t1_j5pp56q wrote
Traditional satellite internet might as well be nothing, as far as the average person is concerned.
slowslownotbad t1_j5qxx7y wrote
Yeah, cuz that’s how they get scientific data off the continent. Tapes.
[deleted] t1_j5op3tp wrote
[deleted]
foonix t1_j5ont4q wrote
Why are you arguing so vehemently over something so trivial? Obviously, the access wasn't zero, but just as obviously, 3 Mbps isn't going to cut it for a lot of applications.
SuperRette t1_j5qopzv wrote
Because it's moving the goalposts? I value integrity, and watching someone try to wiggle out of what they said is dishonest.
foonix t1_j5rtth7 wrote
What they said was honest. Trying to contest it was moving the goalpost.
> Hell, Starlink will soon be serving Antarctica. Currently they send data back via tapes, flown on airplanes.
This was a good-faith answer to the question. But then the person who asked the question flipped and tried to argue with it for no good reason.
> Wrong. Satellite connection with Antarctica existed long before Starlink.
That is moving the goalpost. They didn't say it didn't exist. They just said that they transport data physically. The two aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, their own citation shows that bandwidth was a scarce resource. It indirectly supports the claim they are arguing against.
Canal_Volphied t1_j5op5ga wrote
>Why are you arguing so vehemently over something so trivial?
Why do you care? What problem do you have with me outpointing out clumsy attempts at goalpost moving?
jiggamain t1_j5or8hi wrote
Go back and read the original comment, pls and stop being a contrarian jerk in life. Their first comment is clear and leaves room for both to be true. You come off like an ass with this comment, consider deleting? Will save others the time I wasted going back to reread (and will keep others from going back, rereading, and figuring out that your reading compression leaves something to be desired…
OriginalCompetitive t1_j5otj5z wrote
Don’t tell him to delete these asinine comments are the whole reason I read read it in the first place.
Canal_Volphied t1_j5oshl9 wrote
> Their first comment is clear and leaves room for both to be true.
No it's not. Stop trying to gaslight people. >You come off like an ass
Pot, kettle. Your comment is overly vulgar and hostile. Gonna put you on ignore now.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments