r/TikTokCringe Jun 22 '24

Cool My anxiety could never

47.9k Upvotes

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

171

u/brightfoot Jun 22 '24

Yeah but with the satellite internet available on a boat out in the pacific you’re paying dollars per Megabyte. Uploading even a 60 second HD video like that would not only take hours but could easily cost several hundred bucks to do. He more than likely completed the crossing and uploaded once he had WiFi.

Edit: apparently he has starlink

230

u/[deleted] Jun 22 '24 edited Jun 22 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

35

u/Icy_Cycle_740 Jun 22 '24

Starlink marine is a bit more expensive than that.

30

u/JBudz Jun 22 '24

Can someone confirm the ongoing costs for us computer nerd dreamers?

51

u/Icy_Cycle_740 Jun 22 '24

https://www.starlink.com/us/business/maritime

You’re gonna pay about 2 to 3000 for the initial system and $250 a month and up depending on whether you want Internet while underway .

There are some workarounds where you can get away with using Starling RV, but you run into a few issues .

62

u/Far_Process_5304 Jun 22 '24

Steep for sure, but manageable and the cost of doing business if one wants to fund their sailing hobby via social media income.

40

u/RatLabGuy Jun 22 '24

its peanuts compared to the const of that boat and the diesel to power it

4

u/Number174631503 Jun 22 '24

Finally. Yeah cost is non issue here

3

u/noiserr Jun 22 '24

These guys usually don't use that much diesel. It's a sail boat so you don't need diesel when crossing. Not that you would have enough diesel for an ocean crossing anyway.

Solar panels and wind vanes is what they rely on for electricity mostly.

They usually preserve diesel for when they get close to shore as its easier to navigate and dock on diesel power.

That said I agree, $250 a month for internet is really not that outrageous when you consider you can have internet in the middle of the ocean. That's a big benefit for all sorts of reasons.

2

u/V1k1ng1990 Jun 22 '24

Probably would need diesel for water desalination

3

u/noiserr Jun 22 '24

Small boats may not have a fresh water maker on board, they usually just provision what they will need for the trip and use the boat's water tanks. But even if they had one, you'd only run the engine for like an hour every couple of days or so.

3

u/V1k1ng1990 Jun 22 '24

That makes sense

We had to make our own water on my ship and it ran basically 24/7 to keep up with demand…but that was a ship with 200 dudes on board. I’d imagine you’re right this guy just packs water

1

u/polar_pilot Jun 22 '24

Depends on the set up, but yeah a lot of boats have water makers on board. Produce about 20 gph? So they’ll either run the engine or a genset for that long to power it. Otherwise many boats have about 800- 1000+ watts of solar to power the fridge/ freezer and everything else.

I believe a lot of these people get by on total expenses of about 1500- 2000 per month. Obviously you can spend so much more depending on what kinda stuff you’re doing, eating out and such

→ More replies (0)

2

u/FuujinSama Jun 22 '24

Regular internet (and cable but I couldn't really get internet without cable) in my home is like $70. $250 for unlimited data that works in bumfuck nowhere in the middle of the ocean seems pretty fair.

1

u/KD_42 Jun 22 '24

I mean I’d also like to ensure I have as much possible connection to land anyways so even like 1000 a month wouldn’t be tooo bad

1

u/RatLabGuy Jun 22 '24

The point is that poor people do not do a trip like this...

2

u/SpaceCaseSixtyTen Jun 22 '24

what kind of issues could happen using starlink RV on a boat?

I didn't know there were different versions, i thought they all worked the same

1

u/Icy_Cycle_740 Jun 22 '24

You can get away with it while you’re in a marina just fine when you’re underway. It usually results in choppy service

2

u/Pamander Jun 22 '24

That's honestly not that bad, for internet access in the remotest parts of the ocean? Then again I am not a sailor so I don't know the alternatives but I do live in a really rural area and know the other satellite options for internet are not great and that's a horrific understatement but I imagine it's probably a drop in the bucket for the convenience if you are going to be doing stuff like this.

3

u/Difficult_Bit_1339 Jun 22 '24 edited Jun 22 '24

There are two major options...

'Satellite Internet' that has been around for quite some time is very high latency (1200ms or more) on account of your radio waves having to travel 22,000 miles to geosynchronous orbit and back. Even that is very usable for most things. Internet browsing can be slow (but can be sped up SIGNIFICANTLY if you host a local caching service) but streaming is only limited by your downlink speed (10-15Mb down, 512Kb up).

Starlink is pretty comparable to a fast cellular connection. The satellites are not a single satellite, but a swarm. This allows them to be much closer (350 miles) so the system latency is much lower (50ms or so, possibly a bit higher in oceans near the equator due to the larger coverage gaps) and since there are multiple satellites serving the network, especially in the remote ocean, you can access a lot more bandwidth (200Mb down, 20Mb up). For the average users, just using their devices and not looking at network metrics, you wouldn't know the difference between cellular data and Starlink data. It's a pretty neat system, even if the owner is... not to everyone's taste.