• RangerJosey@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    We all know why CNBC. You could have just posted the title.

    Because the drug addled used car salesman who’s currently about to default on his Twitter loans decided to embrace his roots and started throwing up seig heils and is currently having a crack team of 4chan incels dismantle a government while he threatens the world and works to make what he’s doing here happen everywhere.

    Dude is a comic book villain. Villain of the week level. No real staying power. Either he’ll go broke or die from a ketamine overdose before Xmas. And what a gift that will be. I hope it happens on video.

  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Sat internet is so overhyped. As it’s limited by physics cell towers will always outperform them. Simple as that.

    • cities - cables and 5g
    • country side - 4g and cables in high concentration areas
    • middle of nowhere or war zones - low orbit sats.

    This is purely a security issue not a consumer one.

    • witx@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Spoken like a true spoiled city person Good luck getting the necessary infrastructure built (cables, towers, et al) to really remote places. It’s probably more expensive in the long run than having a satellite constellation.

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Good luck? Most of the world is already there. I had 3g in deep jungles of Thailand last weekend and even in the most remote places in China have wire these days.

        The main point is that sat is limited by physics so cell towers and wire are upgrades over sat so it makes much more sense to start with better technology now as we’ll never need less connection.

        • witx@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          And wires are not bound by physics? To run cables over such long distances you have to boost the signal at periodic distances to avoid voltage drops and noise

          • DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            If we can figure out how to put them on the bottom of the ocean and pipelines over just about any terrain, I think we can figure this out

            • witx@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months 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
                0
                ·
                2 months 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
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months 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?

  • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is why I will never be rich. I never see business opportunities to buy tons of stock and act upon them.

        • Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I have nothing against people investing, it’s just not accurate to think the average person can invest and get somewhere with it, back in the 70s or earlier Warren Buffett said you needed to have around $300,000 invested to make any kind of reasonable gain, adjusting for inflation $300k in 1970 dollars is $2.5 million. When you’re below that threshold your not really getting returns you can do something with. It’s fine to invest less, it’s fine to invest aggressively even if you are poor, just don’t look at people with less than $2.5mil like their dumb for not investing more. It doesn’t work that way.

      • Chadus_Maximus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Commission fees are less than a buck. The rules don’t change just because you have little money.

        • Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          No, the problem is that 20% growth of $2000 gives you a gain of $400. 20% growth of $10,000 gives you a gain of $2000. An average Americans entire yearly income is $70,000, it’s 20% growth is $14,000.

          Edit: this is all in terms of a full year of investing.

          But 20% isn’t happening every year, you are more likely to average 10%. Some years can be single digit, some can be negative, the point is this, you must begin with a very large amount of money to get real money out of the stock market. Even solidly middle class incomes aren’t going to be able to save up a years worth pay in only a few years, it would take many years, often enough to ensure the money will never be realized by anyone but by your children or grand children