• dubious@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    lordkitsuna is the answer, dude. more people getting away from the grind of the big machine to live remote lives far from society is the answer. i don’t like starlink either but these networks are crucial for the modern nomad to exist.

    • spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The answer to what? If everyone does this, there won’t be a single remote place on earth that isn’t crawling with sprinter vans. It can’t scale, and it doesn’t need to be specifically catered to. You want the wilderness, you get the wilderness. You want low latency Internet, then get to a fiber connection. We don’t need every first world amenity everywhere.

      • dubious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        nah. you can live in the city if that’s what you like. i’ll do what i like. do you really want to alienate non-urban liberals?

        depopulation is a possible alternative to preventing swarms of sprinter vans too. you really don’t want to put everyone in a city.

    • Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Does the modern nomad need to exist in the first place? Taking your money into an RV so you can guzzle gas on it, and just stream videos while you pretend to enjoy nature?

      • dubious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        you can just exist in a remote place and not make videos too my friend. sorry that your understanding of what life outside a city looks like has been shaped by the internet instead of reality.