Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

17
()
posted 3 years ago by pkvi 3 years ago by pkvi +17 / -0
19 comments share
19 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (19)
sorted by:
▲ 7 ▼
– CrazyRussian 7 points 3 years ago +7 / -0

If you want to find any solid proofs that Starlink is not about internet I could advise you to dig info about Starlink internet exchange and autonomous systems.

Any internet provider must have several things that are absolutely essential to be an internet provider.

  1. uplinks to IX'es (Internet eXchanges), ie thick channels to the large datacenters.
  2. AS'es (Autonomous Systems, i.e. IP ranges) to provide connectivity
  3. Assigned IANA ids for company, tech contacts and so on.

Check that things, it could be interesting. Something tell me that thickness of channels and AS'es Starlink have orders of magnitude lower than bare minimum necessary to somehow, with very questionable quality service number of users Starlink announces to be able to serve. Tech, admin and other contacts of AS, ORG, even Starlink domains from IANA database (available via whois utility on your computer or via web services) could be interesting too, showing who is actually in charge of whole Stralink networking.

PS: I know, for some audience that pictures with staellites could look fascinating, but really they does not prove anything. Especially if one know that this dots have to be much smaller to show real scale of those satellites over the Earth. If you do the same with non-Musk satellites, the picture will look much more dangerous, because it will be much thicker layer ot that large dots and without holes over the Earth poles.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 4 ▼
– aldagautr 4 points 3 years ago +4 / -0

https://geoxc-apps.bd.esri.com/space/satellite-explorer/

Yeah, there's a lot of shit in our sky.

permalink parent save report block reply

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No subversion.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
  • Perun
  • Thisisnotanexit
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2026.02.01 - 8wn6p (status)

Copyright © 2026.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy