• Tiger_Man_〔he/him〕@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    there’s nothing better than optic fiber because nothing can be faster than light

    Edit: as comment below says optic fiber isn’t actually faster, but still better because it has lower packet loss, is cheaper and not owned by elon musk

    • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      That’s…not really a cogent argument.

      Satellites connect to ground using radio/microwave (or even laser), all of which are electromagnetic radiation and travel at the speed of light (in vacuum).

      Light in a fiber travels much more slowly than in vacuum — light in fiber travels at around 67% the speed of light in vacuum (depends on the fiber). In contrast, signals through cat7 twisted pair (Ethernet) can be north of 75%, and coaxial cable can be north of 80% (even higher for air dielectric). Note that these are all carrying electromagnetic waves, they’re just a) not in free space and b) generally not optical frequency, so we don’t call them light, but they are still governed by the same equations and limitations.

      If you want to get signals from point A to point B fastest (lowest latency), you don’t use fiber, you probably use microwaves: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/11/private-microwave-networks-financial-hft/

      Finally, the reason fiber is so good is complicated, but has to do with the fact that “physics bandwidth” tends to care about fractional bandwidth (“delta frequency divided by frequency”), whereas “information bandwidth” cares about absolute bandwidth (“delta frequency”), all else being equal (looking at you, SNR). Fiber uses optical frequencies, which can be hundreds of THz — so a tiny fractional bandwidth is a huge absolute bandwidth.

      • piecat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Microwave point-to-point radios are fastest because they travel through air, but more importantly, are typically the shortest path possible by line-of-sight.

        Being 66.7% of speed of light doesn’t matter terribly when you consider that the cable path is shorter by more than 66.7% of path taken by satelite link.

    • untakenusername@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ve heard starlink is faster than fiber by a few nanoseconds and big finance really wants that for their high-speed trading

      most of its signals move though space, compared to the glass in fiber so it sorta makes sense

      • Goretantath@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Its not, light is the fastest AND isnt as interuptuble and lag induced as satalite. A wired connection will ALWAYS have lesslatency to a sat link.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          The problem with fiber is it isn’t direct, and the satellites do use lasers (light!) to travel longer distances. The longer the distance the bigger edge satellite internet gets.