25 ms·

Wireless will always be worse than proper fiber. In a perfect world, we would all have active optical fiber from the backbone to our home routers. But 5G and s

Wireless will always be worse than proper fiber. In a perfect world, we would all have active optical fiber from the backbone to our home routers. But 5G and satellite internet is cheaper...

bushbaba 4y ago
Cheaper, in some situations. E.g. starlink would be horrendously expensive to provide service to everyone in downtown SF. But yes. For rural less dense deployments. Long range signal through the air is much cheaper.
- hef19898 4y ago
  Agreed, problem is with everything SpaceX hard numbers are hard to come buy. So wireless will be cheaper, if satelites are cheaper than 5g and other groind based solutuons is hard to tell.
- thereddaikon 4y ago
  Cell towers already provide internet to everyone in downtown SF and have for 20 years. Just because you aren't using your PC with it normally doesn't mean it doesn't count. Wireless is always cheaper than wired for an equivalent coverage area. It just requires less physical infrastructure. But in almost every other way it has inferior performance.
elif 4y ago
Could you explain your reasoning? My understanding is that: fiber=c lasers=c fiber=nonlinear lasers=linear So in physics terms, starlink will eventually surpass buried fiber in latency for all situations where fiber routing divergence from linear exceeds the ~1000km orbital round trip.
- yencabulator 4y ago
  Now compare the noise level in a buried fiber, versus satellite radio transmission. We've been getting a thunderstorm every evening here, and my Starlink slows down a lot -- not sure if it's ionization, the water content of clouds, or what, but it's definitely noticeable. And my previous point-to-point wifi would also essentially stop transferring data when it rained, just in case some Starlink hater thinks it's somehow worse than alternatives.
- leplen 4y ago
  Technically the speed of light in fiber is 2/3c because fiber has a higher index of refraction. Some HFT funds have actually moved away from fiber in some instances because they can pick up a few microseconds by going through the air instead.
  - nerpderp82 4y ago
    Goldman Sachs actually moved to a neutrino beam between London and NYC.
    - sterlind 4y ago
      there's nothing about this on Google, and neutrino detectors are definitely not advanced enough for this. was this a joke that went over my head?
      - urspx 4y ago
        Maybe it's a joke about the (anomalous) detection of faster-than-light neutrinos? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_ano...
    - westmeal 4y ago
      I can't find anything about that online is this a joke or is this actually real

Wireless will always be worse than proper fiber. In a perfect world, we would all have active optical fiber from the backbone to our home routers. But 5G and satellite internet is cheaper...

bushbaba 4y ago

Cheaper, in some situations. E.g. starlink would be horrendously expensive to provide service to everyone in downtown SF. But yes. For rural less dense deployments. Long range signal through the air is much cheaper.

hef19898 4y ago
Agreed, problem is with everything SpaceX hard numbers are hard to come buy. So wireless will be cheaper, if satelites are cheaper than 5g and other groind based solutuons is hard to tell.
thereddaikon 4y ago
Cell towers already provide internet to everyone in downtown SF and have for 20 years. Just because you aren't using your PC with it normally doesn't mean it doesn't count. Wireless is always cheaper than wired for an equivalent coverage area. It just requires less physical infrastructure. But in almost every other way it has inferior performance.

elif 4y ago

Could you explain your reasoning? My understanding is that: fiber=c lasers=c fiber=nonlinear lasers=linear So in physics terms, starlink will eventually surpass buried fiber in latency for all situations where fiber routing divergence from linear exceeds the ~1000km orbital round trip.

yencabulator 4y ago
Now compare the noise level in a buried fiber, versus satellite radio transmission. We've been getting a thunderstorm every evening here, and my Starlink slows down a lot -- not sure if it's ionization, the water content of clouds, or what, but it's definitely noticeable. And my previous point-to-point wifi would also essentially stop transferring data when it rained, just in case some Starlink hater thinks it's somehow worse than alternatives.
leplen 4y ago
Technically the speed of light in fiber is 2/3c because fiber has a higher index of refraction. Some HFT funds have actually moved away from fiber in some instances because they can pick up a few microseconds by going through the air instead.
- nerpderp82 4y ago
  Goldman Sachs actually moved to a neutrino beam between London and NYC.
  - sterlind 4y ago
    there's nothing about this on Google, and neutrino detectors are definitely not advanced enough for this. was this a joke that went over my head?
    - urspx 4y ago
      Maybe it's a joke about the (anomalous) detection of faster-than-light neutrinos? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_ano...
  - westmeal 4y ago
    I can't find anything about that online is this a joke or is this actually real