this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
147 points (92.5% liked)
Canada
7236 readers
483 users here now
What's going on Canada?
Related Communities
π Meta
πΊοΈ Provinces / Territories
- Alberta
- British Columbia
- Manitoba
- New Brunswick
- Newfoundland and Labrador
- Northwest Territories
- Nova Scotia
- Nunavut
- Ontario
- Prince Edward Island
- Quebec
- Saskatchewan
- Yukon
ποΈ Cities / Local Communities
- Calgary (AB)
- Edmonton (AB)
- Greater Sudbury (ON)
- Guelph (ON)
- Halifax (NS)
- Hamilton (ON)
- Kootenays (BC)
- London (ON)
- Mississauga (ON)
- Montreal (QC)
- Nanaimo (BC)
- Oceanside (BC)
- Ottawa (ON)
- Port Alberni (BC)
- Regina (SK)
- Saskatoon (SK)
- Thunder Bay (ON)
- Toronto (ON)
- Vancouver (BC)
- Vancouver Island (BC)
- Victoria (BC)
- Waterloo (ON)
- Winnipeg (MB)
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
π Sports
Hockey
- Main: c/Hockey
- Calgary Flames
- Edmonton Oilers
- MontrΓ©al Canadiens
- Ottawa Senators
- Toronto Maple Leafs
- Vancouver Canucks
- Winnipeg Jets
Football (NFL): incomplete
Football (CFL): incomplete
Baseball
Basketball
Soccer
- Main: /c/CanadaSoccer
- Toronto FC
π» Schools / Universities
- BC | UBC (U of British Columbia)
- BC | SFU (Simon Fraser U)
- BC | VIU (Vancouver Island U)
- BC | TWU (Trinity Western U)
- ON | UofT (U of Toronto)
- ON | UWO (U of Western Ontario)
- ON | UWaterloo (U of Waterloo)
- ON | UofG (U of Guelph)
- ON | OTU (Ontario Tech U)
- QC | McGill (McGill U)
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
π΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales
- Personal Finance Canada
- BAPCSalesCanada
- Canadian Investor
- Buy Canadian
- Quebec Finance
- Churning Canada
π£οΈ Politics
- General:
- Federal Parties (alphabetical):
- By Province (alphabetical):
π Social / Culture
Rules
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nobody claimed it's broadband. And nobody claimed they need broadband up there. Nobody is trying to remote into their tech job from the Arctic Circle.
Take your straw men home.
The fuck are you talking about...rural Canada is not the fucking artic circle...jesus you're dense, do you think people who live there don't deserve proper Internet? Do you think people who live there can't be tech workers or people who would remote into a job?
Remote tech workers aren't living in a place without broadband, and I seriously doubt they're moving to villages so remote they get supply planes, as weather allows. And yes the area includes the Arctic Circle. Remote workers are living in a medium sized town with a fiber backbone connection because their job already depends on it. They aren't pining away at Cambridge Bay wishing someone would give them broadband internet.
Large areas of the world are fine without broadband internet. Especially when the method of delivery is to smother LEO with disposable satellites. Trying to extend the western standard of living to every corner of the world instead of ameliorating the standard is a major driver of climate change. Some things just don't work in remote areas.
I'll repaste the same here since you and another basically said the same thing "fuck poor people and rural people and minorities" right?
Lol what a joke, so you're saying people in rural areas don't deserve Internet lol fuck those kids who want to learn, and fuck those people who live out there and don't have the means to live in an expensive city, they should enjoy their shitty connections or no connections at all.
You're hilarious
Geosync Satellite Internet works fine for learning, they still have school and libraries. Geosync has worked for decades, so the question isn't should we screw them over. It's should we upgrade, given the price?
There's plenty of other ways to bring services to these very remote areas and raise their standard of living. Just because one thing is held back does not mean nobody cares about them. It means we're being responsible with our resources and environment.
And it's especially important to question these things whenever people start talking about, "for the kids!"
No it does not, you cannot do any sort of voip learning with it.
Yea they tried that and it failed...
I'm not even going there with you.
I'm sorry. I didn't realize learning online was restricted to VOIP. That's usually solved by just making teachers available there.
But I am going there with you because you started with remote workers and went to "but the kids!" When you realized you were wrong.
The majority of interactions online that matter (e.g. jobs/schools/training/certs) require low latency. Stop fucking acting like they don't.
I pointed all of this out in one large lump, and you ran with "the kids". Which is ironic coming from you, who pulls the "the kids" when it's about gun legislation...
The problem is I've done online classes and you're just full of shit.
Uhh...ok? Have you attempted to do them on geosync satellites with latency in the 2k range? Have you attempted a certification where someone monitors you? All of this does not work with high latency....the fuck are you a sales person for huesnet?
Cambridge bay might be a bad example the research facility is there so imagine that has high speed internet.
You'd be surprised. Sometimes it's better to just clone and send the hard drive. There's always the old half joke about the bandwidth of a station wagon moving a bunch of drives down the interstate.
Ehrm, no to both questions? You live in rural fucking Canada. Connectivity will be shit, that's a given. If you choose a job that relies on that, you should move to where you can actually work.
Fast internet is a privilege, not something people "deserve". Fucking up LEO so people can stream or Netflix or whatever is absolutely not worth it, and imo the practice should be banned. Starlink has been disastrous for astronomy already. Put fiber in if it's so important, expensive but hey, people "deserve" it right?
He's switched from remote workers to kids. He's just trying to gin up outrage now.
Lol what a joke, so you're saying people in rural areas don't deserve Internet lol fuck those kids who want to learn, and fuck those people who live out there and don't have the means to live in an expensive city lol
You're hilarious
Not living in an expensive city doesn't equate to living in extremely remote areas. If you choose to live in an area with very few services, then don't expect the rest of the world to bend over backwards to provide those for you at their expense. The sheer entitlement is hilarious.
Besides, there's still internet, just not fast broadband.
That's hilarious, so you think people in developing countries should just get fucked as well then?
Where the fuck did anyone say that? Is this the next level? After the kids?
Go look at pictures of Nairobi and tell me seriously you think they don't have broadband Internet.
You...you did, you're entire argument hinges on "fuck those people, they shouldn't live outside a city"...
No it's they shouldn't expect the same services as even small towns. These are thousand person affairs on or above the Arctic Circle.
Dude, people in small towns are having to use starlink. The fuck are you talking about....my fucking god I cannot believe I'm arguing with someone who thinks basic services shouldn't be provided for their citizens.
Most developing countries have pretty decent internet access already. Maybe not in the more remote areas, but again, access to the internet is not a requirement to live. Internet has barely existed for 30 years, I don't think screwing up LEO in an attempt to bring faster internet to people who didn't have it anyway is remotely reasonable.
You do realize that a massive portion of the world lives in what ISPs consider rural, and refuse to provide the Internet. If this wasn't an issue, then starlink would have never taken off.
You realise that this has held true for literally everywhere, and that it's only a matter of time until they're connected too? Between 2017 and 2023 an additional 20% of the world received internet access, a trend that doesn't appear to be slowing down just yet. By 2030 approximately 80% of the world will have internet access, and somewhere between 2040-2050 we'll consider the entire world to be connected.
I still see absolutely no reason to screw LEO and fill it with sattelites, just so that someone in bumfuck nowhere can Netflix or something. Internet access may be important for a western lifestyle, but the 90s barely anyone had internet and they lived perfectly fine without it. Even before Starlink sattelite internet existed (and still does), it's just slower.
Very little of that is because of ground lines. Starlink services damn near the globe now.
The level of bullshit I'm seeing from you people who seem to only hate starlink because that shit stain musk has his name attached to it, is insane. Internet access for a long time has been pushed as a priority and should be treated as a utility and that everyone should have access to it. Yet here I am defending access and you lot are on a triad of "fuck those people who live in rural areas". You know that some of us are 10miles from town and considered rural? And the big Telecoms refuse to run broadband for us? Rural WISPs are a thing for a reason.
Starlink doesn't cover the globe, it's available in the Americas, Europe and Oceania. It's not available in most of Africa, the Middle East, India, China, Russia, Indochina. E.g. the majority of the world cannot access Starlink.
I don't give a shit that Starlink is owned by Musk. Starlink as a company seems fine (it's not X or anything), but I strongly dislike that their product messes with astronomy in such a major way that astronomists complain about it every chance they get.
Sounds like your fight is with "big telecom" and with your local government for not putting up a good enough quote to run fiber. This isn't an issue for large portions of the world, including rural areas, where they've figured out how to get them to lay fiber.
Access is not the same as high-speed access. Almost all of the world has some level of access, even in rural areas, through sattelites that are not in LEO. Enough to (slowly) browse, not enough to stream in HD. I don't believe sacrificing considerable astronomical discoveries and progress is remotely worth it when feasible alternatives are available and have been used in large areas of the world already.
https://www.starlink.com/map
China/russia/middle east not allowing it, is not the same as not being available. Did you even check the coverage map before replying.
Astronomers complain about light bleed from ground cities as well. No one was telling them to shut down the cities.
Lol no just no... I dont know where you live but the majority of people in rural areas are not served, otherwise starlink would have never taken off and been sustainable. You think businesses just make products for a few people and break even?
Again this myth you keep spouting that the majority of the world has access is bullshit, and the idea that you're basically telling people, well planes exist but you need to walk because you live to far from the airport is some classist bullshit.
So can you use it or is it not available then? And yes, I checked that map, where else do you think I got the list from??
People claim we should turn down city lights all the time! Under what rock have you been living? But for city light bleed, astronomers have an alternative solution, simply place the telescope somewhere not near the cities. And yes, whenever a city tends to grow near one of those telescopes astronomers do kick up a fuss about it.
If you fill LEO with thousands of sattelites, there's nothing astronomers can do about that.
I don't know where you live, Mars perhaps?
https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestand:InternetPenetrationWorldMap.svg
Clearly shows most of the Earth has internet access. Or do you think the US has no rural areas? They're still above 90% somehow. Oh wait, I know, they must be using those mythical internet-via-sattelite services that existed well before Starlink did! I wonder where you'd find a mythical creature like the Viasat-1 for example.
Starlink took off because they promise higher speeds than some ISPs and most other sattelite companies do at lower cost, not because they're your only option. Starlink has 3 million customers, which makes them the size of a small ISP.
Except for the fact that the data backs me up.
Continuing your analogy, you propose demolishing the local university because people are entitled to fly to Ibiza, or their local supermarket. Or something, it's not like it made much sense anyway.
You still completely failed to address the main point, that universal high-speed internet access is not critical for most of the world, certainly not for areas that have always managed perfectly fine without, and that filling up LEO is a disaster for astronomists that they don't have a workaround for. If you're not going to actually argue that point I think we're done here.