I stand corrected
I stand corrected
Well that just wouldn’t make any sense, they hardly get any snow down there!
Starlink works differently than conventional sattelite. I’m not an expert, so I’m not going to try to explain it beyond saying that I think it’s due to the properties of the sattelites being low orbit, requiring more ground transmission stations and more sattelites than conventional sattelite internet.
I believe their coverage has increased greatly over the past few years. When it was first out my parents also didn’t have coverage. They do now, and have for a couple of years.
Do you understand how slow dial up is? Do you understand that conventional sattelite throttles you to unusable speeds after a shockingly low data limit is used up? Those services are not modern internet services. Starlink is. In my testing, I got an average of 45mbps down over a 40GB download. That’s so fucking fast compared to even DSL, which is commonly 10mbps down, and even slower up.
Found the person who’s never lived in a area with dial-up or conventional sattelite as their only options. I hate Elon as much as the next person, but starlink is revolutionary for those with no other options.
Thanks for the explainer, that makes a lot of sense.
They said kilawatt hours per how, not kilawatts per hour.
kWh/h = kW
The h can be cancelled, resulting in kW. They’re technically right, but kWh/h shouldn’t ever be used haha.
This is a factual but irrelevant statement
Watt hours makes sense to me. A watt hour is just a watt draw that runs for an hour, it’s right in the name.
Maybe you’ve just whooooshed me or something, I’ve never looked into Joules or why they’re better/worse.
Mate, kWh is a measure of electricity volume, like gallons is to liquid. Also, 100 watt hours would be a much more sensical way to say the same thing. What you’ve said in the title is like saying your server uses 1 gallon of water. It’s meaningless without a unit of time. Watts is a measure of current flow (pun intended), similar to a measurement like gallons per minute.
For example, if your server uses 100 watts for an hour it has used 100 watt hours of electricity. If your server uses 100 watts for 100 hours it has used 10000 watts of electricity, aka 10kwh.
My NAS uses about 60 watts at idle, and near 100w when it’s working on something. I use an old laptop for a plex server, it probably uses like 50 watts at idle and like 150 or 200 when streaming a 4k movie, I haven’t checked tbh. I did just acquire a BEEFY network switch that’s going to use 120 watts 24/7 though, so that’ll hurt the pocket book for sure. Soon all of my servers should be in the same place, with that network switch, so I’ll know exactly how much power it’s using.
Instead of a toy beer we could just give them a real beer.
I don’t know what you want man. I like automating stuff so I don’t have to worry about remembering as much.
I don’t keep track of my weight so I could be wrong here, but more/less than last time wouldn’t be very helpful as your weight can vary by the day. You need a trend over weeks to really see what’s going on. I definitely wouldn’t use pen/paper as it’s just too much data to organize and graph, but excel would be a reasonable alternative.
Sure, and I could also turn on/off my lights with a switch instead of having them come on when I get home, and turn off when I leave.
I’d guess automatic history tracking. Step on it every morning and it’ll automatically save your weight to Home Assistant or whatever so you can see if you’re gaining/losing over time.
I was also a first time Subaru owner this year… Of a '93 Loyale. I don’t think this news affects me.
The same issue is true with starlink though. So many in rural areas, and even some not-so-rural areas, have starlink as their only real option now. I love what starlink has done for rural internet access, as someone who had dial up (yes, not even DSL) up until 2018 when I moved. However, it’s still a monopoly, and that’s concerning. Starlink can essentially charge whatever they want for their service and have a market for their product. That’s sorta scary to me.
If there was a paid service that allowed me to download a file instead of having to buy a Blu-ray and rip it myself or be DRM attached to Amazon or something, I’d buy my movies for the higher quality than whatever odd torrent I find. The movie industry needs to do what steam has done. Make it more convenient to do it legally and people that have money will pay instead of stealing.
If this goes live, I’m out. YT premium is my most expensive subscription, but I watch enough YouTube that I’m OK with it, especially considering that it supports creators more than ad viewers. If I still get ads? Nah dawg. I’ll divy up that money amongst patreons or whatever, and install add blockers.
The home page is fine for me, it’s dialed pretty well into my tastes. I always click the don’t reccommend channel or video if I don’t like a recommendation.
The Trending tab, on the other hand… Yikes.