Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #90034 > unrolled thread

What's Wrong With LinuxMint ?

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-18 01:44 -0400
    Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-18 01:59 -0400
    Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-18 06:05 +0000
      Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> - 2026-08-18 08:10 +0000
        Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-08-18 11:33 +0100
        Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-18 22:16 -0400
          Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 03:32 +0000
            Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 14:05 +0100
              Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-08-19 13:23 +0000
                Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 14:10 +0000
                Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 15:15 +0100
                  Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 21:53 +0000
                    Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-19 22:54 +0000
              Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 14:01 +0000
                Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 15:24 +0100
                  Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 22:07 +0000
          Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-08-19 12:57 +0000
          Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 14:03 +0100
            Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-19 22:24 -0400
      Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-18 22:07 -0400
        Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 03:42 +0000
          Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-19 02:14 -0400
          Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 14:13 +0100
            Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 14:14 +0000
              Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 15:27 +0100
                Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-19 16:57 +0000
        Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 14:02 +0100
          Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 13:54 +0000
          Re: What's Wrong With LinuxMint ? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-19 22:21 -0400

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#90092

On Tue, 18 Aug 2026 22:07:20 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    It's why I was wondering about StarLink a little while back. Alas
>    seems you need a pretty clear northeast 'view' from where I am - and
>    I don't HAVE one ... big trees most everywhere. I'd have to run a
>    100' cable out under the yard to get a good clear point.

I was concerned about the tree but it's to the west and the receiver is 
oriented to 5 degrees. You can download the app for free to evaluate the 
site. You point the phone at the sky and rotate through 360. 

I was skeptical about the services using geosynchronous sats, the 
footprint, and how many subscribers would be in the beam. The Leos, and 
there are a lot of them, solve that problem.

I am a bit curious how it works. Back in the day the ham sats were store 
and forwards and the window was only a few minutes. Of course there was 
only the one and not over 1000. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#90104

On 8/18/26 23:42, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2026 22:07:20 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     It's why I was wondering about StarLink a little while back. Alas
>>     seems you need a pretty clear northeast 'view' from where I am - and
>>     I don't HAVE one ... big trees most everywhere. I'd have to run a
>>     100' cable out under the yard to get a good clear point.
> 
> I was concerned about the tree but it's to the west and the receiver is
> oriented to 5 degrees. You can download the app for free to evaluate the
> site. You point the phone at the sky and rotate through 360.

   I don't have the kind of phone that'll run "apps".

> I was skeptical about the services using geosynchronous sats, the
> footprint, and how many subscribers would be in the beam. The Leos, and
> there are a lot of them, solve that problem.

   LONG back I put my office on geo-sync sat internet.

   It worked, and - sometimes - was faster than our
   old shotgunned dial-ups. Alas as web pages quickly
   became full of SHIT ... the signals bouncing 33,000
   miles up and back and up and back REALLY dragged
   down the connection. Then the phone offered DSL
   and we used that for a long time.

   Sorry, even the speed of light is NOT nearly fast
   enough these days.

   StarLink kinda CHEATS - very low orbits and clever
   data-routing tricks.

> I am a bit curious how it works. Back in the day the ham sats were store
> and forwards and the window was only a few minutes. Of course there was
> only the one and not over 1000.

   Well, StarLink is "in the works" even now. I think
   Musk still wants at least ten times as many sats,
   and the next-gen sats handle many more channels.
   A sort of extravagant system, but it's proven very
   useful and resistant to sabotage.

   ANYway, my geography is NOT so great for StarLink.
   It'd probably work but I'd never get the promised
   data speed. BIG trees everywhere.

   Also, their MOUNTING schemes ... searched Amazon
   and there was NOTHING really suitable for my house
   and likely weather conditions. I'd need to fab
   a hardwood frame and a 4-point mount to a concrete
   wall. Ordinary T-storm came through today ... gusts
   to maybe 60mph. It can get worse, much worse.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#90123

On 19/08/2026 04:42, rbowman wrote:
> I am a bit curious how it works. Back in the day the ham sats were store
> and forwards and the window was only a few minutes. Of course there was
> only the one and not over 1000.

Well starlink is simply an extreme case of IP routing. Your link will 
pick the best signal and transmit a burst to that and your router will 
be advertised as available via that satellite.

Clearly there is something like OSPF running inside starlinks network at 
very high speed.

Ah.
Good old AI

"Starlink uses a custom, proprietary internal encapsulation and routing 
protocol in space rather than standard Internet Protocol (IP) suites. 
Standard routing protocols like OSPF or BGP cannot cope with thousands 
of hyper-velocity LEO nodes changing topology every second.

Core Internal Architecture
=================
     Encapsulation: Standard IPv4/IPv6 packets from user devices are 
intercepted at the user terminal or Point of Presence (PoP) and wrapped 
inside a lightweight, proprietary space-layer protocol.

Predictable Ephemera: Because orbital mechanics are mathematically 
rigid, satellite trajectories and inter-satellite laser link (OISL) 
handoffs are pre-computed on the ground rather than dynamically flooded 
via traditional link-state advertisements.

Minimal Overhead: The custom layer strips out heavy traditional packet 
headers to maximize data payload efficiency across space-to-ground radio 
links and laser crosslinks.

Decoupled Edge: At the ground gateway or network POP, space packets are 
de-encapsulated back into standard IPv4 (often via CGNAT 100.64.0.0/10) 
or native IPv6 before handing off to the terrestrial internet backbone. "

So there ya go.It knows which satellites are going to be where and 
routing is switched between them .

pretty cool tech. One thing's fer sure. The MusktRat never designed it 
himself


-- 
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#90140

On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:13:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> pretty cool tech. One thing's fer sure. The MusktRat never designed it
> himself

Your point? I think William Boeing may have designed a plane once upon a 
time but he may have mostly copied the Martin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Model_1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#90144

On 19/08/2026 15:14, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:13:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>> pretty cool tech. One thing's fer sure. The MusktRat never designed it
>> himself
> 
> Your point? I think William Boeing may have designed a plane once upon a
> time but he may have mostly copied the Martin.
> 
My point is that these people - Musk, Gates, Jobs etc - are always 
lauded as technical geniuses, when all they are, are people who spot a 
commercuial opportunity and exploit other people to develop it.
Especially in the USA where people think that making shitloads of cash 
is in itself an indication of excellence in everything else.


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Model_1
> 

-- 
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have 
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#90150

On 2026-08-19, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 19/08/2026 15:14, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:13:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> 
>>> pretty cool tech. One thing's fer sure. The MusktRat never designed it
>>> himself
>> 
>> Your point? I think William Boeing may have designed a plane once upon a
>> time but he may have mostly copied the Martin.
>> 
> My point is that these people - Musk, Gates, Jobs etc - are always 
> lauded as technical geniuses, when all they are, are people who spot a 
> commercuial opportunity and exploit other people to develop it.
> Especially in the USA where people think that making shitloads of cash 
> is in itself an indication of excellence in everything else.

Hear, hear!

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  In this world there are
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  two kinds of people:
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  1. Those who can extrapolate
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  from incomplete data.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#90120

On 19/08/2026 03:07, c186282 wrote:
> It's why I was wondering about StarLink a
>    little while back. Alas seems you need a
>    pretty clear northeast 'view' from where
>    I am - and I don't HAVE one ... big trees
>    most everywhere. I'd have to run a 100'
>    cable out under the yard to get a good
>    clear point.

Are you sure about that? IIRC starlink satellites are all over the sky. 
On skewed orbits that cover everywhere....

https://space-safety.starlink.com/docs/space-safety-articles/constellation_altitudes/

-- 
“it should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism 
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans, 
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and 
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a 
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,' 
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for 
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet 
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that 
you live neither in Joseph Stalin’s Communist era, nor in the Orwellian 
utopia of 1984.”

Vaclav Klaus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#90136

On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:02:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 19/08/2026 03:07, c186282 wrote:
>> It's why I was wondering about StarLink a
>>    little while back. Alas seems you need a pretty clear northeast
>>    'view' from where I am - and I don't HAVE one ... big trees most
>>    everywhere. I'd have to run a 100' cable out under the yard to get
>>    a good clear point.
> 
> Are you sure about that? IIRC starlink satellites are all over the sky.
> On skewed orbits that cover everywhere....
> 
> https://space-safety.starlink.com/docs/space-safety-articles/
constellation_altitudes/

I thought the app used to determine a good site was showing stylized 
satellites. Not so. There are a hell of a lot of them.  9.818 at the 
moment.

https://orbitalradar.com/how-many-starlink-satellites

I'd expected something more like the GPS sat constellations shown when the 
device is trying to acquire a position.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#90184

On 8/19/26 09:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 19/08/2026 03:07, c186282 wrote:
>> It's why I was wondering about StarLink a
>>    little while back. Alas seems you need a
>>    pretty clear northeast 'view' from where
>>    I am - and I don't HAVE one ... big trees
>>    most everywhere. I'd have to run a 100'
>>    cable out under the yard to get a good
>>    clear point.
> 
> Are you sure about that? IIRC starlink satellites are all over the sky. 
> On skewed orbits that cover everywhere....
> 
> https://space-safety.starlink.com/docs/space-safety-articles/ 
> constellation_altitudes/

   Well, the StarLink site has advice on that. If in
   the USA and much of Europe it seems more sats are
   to be found in a north-northeast track. Opposite
   south of the equator.

   However they keep adding MORE - so 'banding' gaps
   may soon disappear.

   Hmm ... eventually StarLink sats will solve global
   warming - creating a huge metal shell around the
   entire planet  :-)

   Anyway, there's ONE, somewhat inconvenient, point
   on my house where I might get close to the "ideal"
   alignment without TOO much tree interference. Alas,
   as said elsewhere, I can get VERY bad weather, so
   the commercial mounts would be torn off the building.
   Would have to build something, an all-around frame,
   of hardwood or strong fiberglass angles and then
   anchor that at four distinct points - sort of
   a shallow-angle 'wedge' shape close to the wall.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web