trident5000

I suppose. I have old friends who are pretty up there. One of them (a very best friend and childhood friend) in a family that’s very wealthy. Think Waltons.

Never once did I lever this relationship or any others I have. I think the network thing is overrated. Wealthy and connected people mostly want to be left alone and very rarely do favors for people not independently at their level.

Also I’m trying to think how many close friends I kept from college or even in contact with. I think maybe 5 and none of them were well off or connected.

But yes, that is part of what is sold as well. Or at least the idea of it. There’s no question about that.

I think colleges have purposefully positioned themselves as they are today as a business strategy, specifically ivy leagues or top tiers.

They know nearly all information is online now and taught even more effectively in many cases. And once inferior colleges and professors can also harness this and compete on near even footing on the knowledge front. That was not the case just 15 years ago.

So they now lean into an area that they think the internet and those who harness it cannot compete. They lace every discipline with philosophy and sell it as an ivy league education. But really they're just bamboozling people with an inferior education and destructive cognitive habits.

Ah yes I see that. Will be curious if it stays as just a dead zone service. Interesting the wireless providers would sign on for this which could ultimately challenge them in the future.

It seems to be traditional wireless providers from what Ive been hearing Musk say. I could be mistaken though.

Limited by what? Where is this limitation metric coming from? Is this from Starlink?

Where is this info from? Hard for me to fathom this. Surely digging up ground to lay wires with lots of labor and materials is more expensive...at least I would think.

Awesome. My wireless bill is too high and competition never hurt. I would think satellites are way cheaper than setting up ground based towers and therefore will offer cheaper service.

Testosterone, higher metabolism speeds up aging, protein intake/mtor pathway. Men are probably more likely to get debilitating injuries from the type of hands-on work they do. Just a few ideas (other than whats in the article) that could be wrong.

Doesnt sound snarky at all. "paying them to move" sure does though.

You can arrive at your own conclusion. I think its pretty obvious whats happening here (the commissioners voted along party lines right down the middle). And theres no other company thats even close to Starlink now or in the medium term future. So I dont know who would practically fill this spot.

For below comment: This is for "rural" connection. You're not laying wire for that regardless of what Comcast wants you to believe. They can barely service what they have and the cost/benefit of laying 30 miles of wire to reach someone in the woods is never going to make sense.

I actually dont think this article/headline is that egregious. But in general anything having to do with Musk/Tesla is going to be put in a negative light. And I think we all know why. Election season, twitter ownership, etc etc.

The NYT is more than capable of making a clear headline. These are not stupid people. But they do have goals.

Training based on a bunch of dull bickering humans on Reddit and elsewhere would produce that result.

Deliberately hiding evidence should should equate to hefty prison time for a prosecutor.