Yes, aslong as the gaggle of goons you bring with you don’t fuck it up.

Oh yeah. If you’ve got 4 GB ram, win 11 is going to absolutely skullfuck that machine.

You’re goddamn right.

2016, we got a dictator because people wouldn’t vote for checks notes a “lesser evil”.

2004, we got a warmongering fascist with daddy issues because we wouldn’t vote for checks notes a “lesser evil.”

The irony of saying this when we literally have a fascist dictator trashing the Whitehouse because we checks notes didn’t vote for the “lesser evil” last year.

All those tech companies downsized or all together pulled out for some reason in the last year…

Avoid it like the plague. Once you admit you have Internet, Microsoft never forgets.

Inconclusive. Re-used machines instead of new computers. Systems did have Windows 11 on them. OOBE\BypassNRO worked, but they may have pending updates.

Edit: one machine would not let me skip MS account sign in with OOBE\BypassNRO. IPConfig /Release immediately let me set up a local account.

OOBE\BYPASSNRO has been off and on for me, but so far nuking the network connection has always worked for me. I’m setting up a few new computers tomorrow, it will be interesting to see what tricks still work.

My go to is to pop open the console and run “ipconfig /release” right before you create an account. Win 11 will have you set up a local account if you don’t have a network connection.

I just click on “domain login”

It’s regular Windows 11, not Enterprise

You need to have 11 Pro or better to domain join a computer.

Your computer would also need to be joined to your domain to allow the login, so there is definitely some config going on that is not available to the typical home user.

Yeah. That’s an exercise in futility. You can’t get that data back under wraps. The only solution is to obfuscate your data with noise.

It’s already paid up. They’ve basically got a piggy bank with 10 bil in it.

My taxes already pay for the meteorology

Yeah, but it got privatized, so now you need to pay more money to a 3rd party to access the services you are already paying money to access.

We are talking about Starlink here, correct? Owned by Elon

No, we are talking about how hard of a target a satellite based network is vs a terrestrial fiber network. Starlink is being used purely as an example here, but is by no means a complete representation of all aspects of the technology.

That said, all satellite networks are subject to dying if their ground-stations are taken offline…

Yes, but they can route traffic between satellites and back down to working ground stations. Theoretically, one working ground station could keep the satellite network connected to the entire Internet. Hence why Starlink still works over Ukraine, and why it is such a big deal when Elon shuts it off.

Sure, that’s a fault of Elon though, not a fault of satellite networks.

Still works over Ukraine somehow… Maybe that fancy satellite network just carries it to the next available ground station?

To put into scale how wrong you are about taking out a satellite, the last satellite the US shot down was in 2008, and it took a specially modified 9 million dollar missile to shoot it down. A Starlink satellite with launch costs included is just under 2 million dollars. Not only is it technologically difficult to take out a satellite, but it’s much more costly to shoot them down than it is to put them up.

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

It’s not a trivial thing to take out a single satellite, let alone a whole constellation of satellites.

You literally could not be more wrong about this.

…Russia bombed their power plants, all the cabling, and it was a literal war zone.

Here you are acknowledge that ground-based systems are very vulnerable to attack. Guess what still works in Ukraine right now (or at least when Elon allows it to work). You got it. Starlink.

How about another comparison. Starlink has a full project estimated cost of ~10 billion dollars, that’s with launches and satellites. The estimated cost to rebuild Ukraine’s telecom network is 4.7 billion dollars, and that is just for the damaged infrastructure in Ukraine. Starlink has already generated 72 million in profit (not revenue, but profit!)

We gave telecom providers 200 billion in tax breaks to build a fiber network in the US, and they didn’t even finish the job. 20x what Starlink’s estimated cost is.

Serioualy, the scale of how wrong you are about all of this is staggering.

Alright. Let’s clear this up.

Are satellite links easier to take down than a fiber link? No. It takes specialized weapons manfactured by state level actors to take out a a single satellite, let alone a whole constellation. I can take a pair of wire clippers, and take out every cable link in my neighborhood in a afternoon. Russia fairly regularly sabotages undersea cables just by “accidentally” dragging an anchor over them.

Is Starlink funded partially by public money? Absolutely yes, along with every other telecom provider. Hell, we gave them the public TV bands as compensation for builfijg a public fiber network (which they never even fucking did!)

Do Starlink satellite need to be replaced at extreme cost? Yes, but so does terresrrial network infrastructure. There is a reason why your internet isn’t 12kbps anymore… As far as the cost goes, the consumers determine if the cost is worth the benefit, and so far the answer is ‘yes’.

Ever wonder why Ukraine was using Starlink for network connections in the first place? Maybe it’s becuse the vulnerable terrestrial based networks were damaged or taken out of service months ago, and you can’t exactly get a contractor to go into a warzone and lay down new cables.

Your points, that satellites based networks are more vulnerable and prohibitively expensive is simply not compatible with reality.

I’m well aware of those issues as well, which is why I’m not pro-starlink replacing all terrestrial networks.

It is simply harder to sabotage if the wires are underground and cannot be readily seen by hostile actors.

This statement is not correct. It is the topic being discussed. Fiber network are more vulnerable than satellite networks. It takes specialized weapons to take out a single satellite link. Any idiot with wire clippers can take out a fiber link, and it happens all the time. Fiber networks are more difficult to replace at scale than a satellite network, and individuals links are more important to fiber network than they are to satellite networks.