They all just have this weird quality to them beyond the hand thing that I can’t describe. It looks okay to some extent, but something is always off-putting about them right at first glance.

It shouldn’t be draining like that, at least…

That decreased bandwidth would still help to maintain a digital connection though, wouldn’t it? There’d be a weaker and slower connection as the devices get further apart, so I was thinking less demand on the connection would keep them from dropping it.

I don’t think it’s the same as what you meant exactly, but I looked it up and Bluetooth does hopping between 2.402 and 2.480 GHz.

I wonder if this has anything to do with how the bandwidth is automatically decreased when taking a call vs when you’re just playing audio. Less bandwidth means a slower but more robust connection or something like that?

A few games used it, but none of it sounds like a must-have. Just a lot of stuff that could be more effectively done with the triggers.

My thumb was forever sore after learning that pressing the “X” button down harder actually made the cars drive faster. So glad we seem to have switched to using the triggers for driving games now.

Revolutionary

Analog

Buttons

I’m honored any time a comment passes 10

Edit: I wake up and I am honored

Is it actually measuring progress of anything as it’s happening, or do they just update the percentage when it passes certain milestones? So many progress bars are just straight-up lies that slowly increment a number until the real process finishes and it shoots to 100% from wherever it was at before.

Something I’ve noticed with my computer monitor is that it does this shifting thing. The usable resolution is 1440p, but the screen is actually a slightly higher resolution with maybe 10 extra pixels in each direction that it uses to very slowly bounce the display image around in like a very large DVD player screensaver.

Fair, bad choice of words on my part. What I was trying to say is that Starlink isn’t a government owned asset, it’s a commercial product. While it has the potential for defense applications, the government has no reason to pressure them to activate satellites faster than SpaceX want to.

There aren’t any defense contractors involved in this, it’s a commercial internet service from a for-profit company. They can take as long as they want to activate their satellites as long as they’re still communicating with the ground, which they are.

The fact that they’ve been launching satellites for months? Here’s a Starlink satellite that launched last week I guess. You can search for Starlink in the catalog there and see tons of others in orbit as well from launches just over the past few weeks.Wikipedia also graphs all the Falcon 9 launch outcomes and it looks like they haven’t had a failure to deploy a satellite to orbit since 2016?

Can you back up the claim that these satellites are failing before they’ve even been turned on? That seems like something that would be covered pretty extensively.

What does “deployed” mean in this context, then?

Wild concept, that planning ahead thing is

Yeah not to defend Elon or anything, but this post seems pretty misleading now that I’m looking into it. It doesn’t look like they’re failing to deploy satellites at all. They’re up there and communicating with the ground based on every tracking site I’m looking at (including the one linked in the post). I don’t know why the new satellites aren’t being added to the network as soon as they’re launched, but these satellites aren’t dead so it seems way more likely to be a logistical choice rather than literally every satellite launched in the last 3 months immediately failing.

Thankfully, these things are at least too low to stay in orbit indefinitely like that

Your office sounds like a cool place