this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2025
1804 points (99.0% liked)

Buy European

3949 readers
2022 users here now

Overview:

The community to discuss buying European goods and services.


Matrix Chat


Rules:

  • Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. No direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments.

  • Do not use this community to promote Nationalism/Euronationalism. This community is for discussing European products/services and news related to that. For other topics the following might be of interest:

  • Include a disclaimer at the bottom of the post if you're affiliated with the recommendation.

Feddit.uk's instance rules apply:

  • No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia or xenophobia
  • No incitement of violence or promotion of violent ideologies
  • No harassment, dogpiling or doxxing of other users
  • Do not share intentionally false or misleading information
  • Do not spam or abuse network features.
  • Alt accounts are permitted, but all accounts must list each other in their bios.

Benefits of Buying Local:

local investment, job creation, innovation, increased competition, more redundancy.


Related Communities:

Buy Local:

!buycanadian@lemmy.ca

!buyafrican@baraza.africa

!buyFromEU@lemm.ee

!buyfromeu@feddit.org

Buying and Selling:!flohmarkt@lemmy.ca

Boycott:!boycottus@lemmy.ca

Stop Publisher Kill Switch in Games Practice:!stopkillinggames@lemm.ee


Banner credits: BYTEAlliance


founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Andromxda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 138 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Don't let the fascists fool you, there are alternatives to Starlink. Eutelsat in France, Telesat in Canada and Inmarsat in the UK, just to name a few examples.

[–] bradd@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Why is starlink being used, do you know?

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 65 points 1 week ago

It’s faster, cheaper, and on the tech side more reliable (definitely not politically reliable though).

[–] learningduck@programming.dev 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

My guess is better coverage and latency with its sheer number of satellites.

They use low earth orbit, which require them to use more satellites, but lowered latency.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Technically, and this is purely semantics, coverage is the major downside to starlink. They are faster, though.

The coverage of satellites has an exponential factor of the distance of that satellite to earth. If you had the satellite further out then its signal could reach a wider area before being cut off by the curvature of the earth. However, as the distance increases, so does latency.

[–] Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Now, I don't know, but I would assume its the latency. Starlink has a (impressively) low ping of < 100ms, while existing alternatives usually have 600ms+. Now, that's only relevant if they are using it for stuff like flying drones.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think you'd notice half a second even just browsing the Web.

[–] Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 week ago

Yes, but a wep page loading slow isn't critical. Controlling armed drones in a battle is.

[–] Inktvip@lemm.ee 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Starlink has enough uplink to be able to handle live video streams and a latency low enough to do this with simple tools.

I’m not sure if that still happens, but I’ve seen some pictures of Ukrainian command bunkers literally getting drone feeds using discord screen share.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

"Would you like to upgrade to Nitro"