Easily solved with a fine and, for repeat offenders, a ban from the airline.
(I'm not happy with the direction of tech culture, that this could be an open question. The first half of the computer revolution was about making cool things for people to use. The second half seems to be about taking those cool things away. I imagine an airline user from 1950's jet age, who would be beyond astounded to learn a human could talk to anyone on the planet from the *middle of the freakin' ocean*, through a series of space-based microwave relays—they would give their right hand to live in that reality. Now that we've created literal magic, we're... simply throwing it away? Bah, humbug).
Personally, I’d hate to be next to someone on a call on a plane, and I’d hate to be on a call while next to someone on a plane. This is personal preference. It is no better or worse than your personal preference to sit next to someone while they take a call or to take a call while sitting next to someone.
Perhaps we’ll see an evolution of plane seating to allow for quiet zones, similar to how some trains have quiet cars.
I can imagine a number of things that can kicked you out of coffee shops that have guest wifi. Since it's a private business, that doesn't bother me on principle.
Libraries are often pretty open about what they allow, but the one at my university had a policy of "porn is fine unless other patrons see it and object." I find that policy to be incredibly reasonable.
But you can't send a Signal message or send a photo.
And that's before you get to the ban in law because the FCC mused about letting airlines decide. In 2018
Well, perhaps, since air travel was much more heavily slanted towards high-ranking executives. For them communication matters.
For the vast majority of everyone, it is true now, and it was then, that sending and receiving communications up to a day earlier than otherwise doesn't approach the value of your right hand.
I would definitely agree I don't want arbitrary restrictions, but when jamming a ton of humans from all walks of life into a narrow metal tube, sealing it, and sailing it through the air, we have to have some common rules of conduct to prevent it turning into an unbearable hell for some of the people. Definitely don't want to see governments pass laws or even ISPs, but the plane owners I see no issue with and in fact think it is an important thing to do.
airplane wifi is still going to suck.
You'll need four in Ku Band (that's what's publicly in use)
To get 2 Gbps antennas in Ka, V, E or Q will have to be used.
I watch streaming video over plane Wi-Fi. Sometimes over the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean.
United, who are the ones quoted to be adding Starlink, has already invested some of the most I have seen in on-plane Internet so this is just a gradual upgrade for those who fly United.
I explained the situation ahead of time to a coworker in the same meeting and that I'd answer any questions via chat.
A little surprised it worked as well as it did.
…or random skate videos on YouTube which won’t be replicated.
So it’s not the on-plane CDN.
It’s true that the upstream probably isn’t too great for streaming but I also upload media over plane Wi-Fi just fine.
Pretty wild how well it works.
This announcement is just that they are going to be trialing using Starlink as an ISP in addition to the other providers they already work with.
YT needs bulk throughput while meetings need latency and quality. YT can seem smooth for much longer despite massive amounts of retransmission and packet loss, meetings fall apart rapidly with even a tiny bit of those
That describes the current situation in lots of everyday setups, like waiting room in a clinic, bus, train…
Sometimes I wish the world was more like Japan in that regard…
Yes, which is why I never get on an airplane without headphones/earbuds. Seems simple enough to solve this problem at the receiving end.
If you are lucky enough that you can be in comfort and noise-isolated from earbuds or headphones, I envy you.
Might look weird but shrug.
You just accidentally made the case for WFH :)
There's no law that says somebody can't take a phone call or a conference on a bus. A plane is just a bus in a sky ("public transportation")
Are they being kind of rude/selfish? Sure. Are you being kind of rude to say "you can't do this thing you want to do because it's an inconvenience to me"?
But the pleasure it brings the two of us might be outweighed by the displeasure of the other 500 people on the plane.
There likely is a rule about being disruptive on a bus (or airplane), and it is within the law to enforce those rules.
Many more people do sleep on planes than busses.
Section 403, passed in 2018. Search for "41725" for an easier search through the PDF. Installed phones are not prohibited, it's more about restrictions on personal, portable electronic devices brought on by passengers. Crew are also exempted.
> ‘‘(2) MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE.—
>> ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘mobile communications device’ means any portable wireless telecommunications equipment utilized for the transmission or reception of voice data.
Oh man, I really hope I don't have to sit anywhere near somebody doing a video conference during a flight. We've avoided this minefield previously since phones don't work on planes so it's not been an issue before, but it seems we're about to cross that bridge.
Incidentally, I hope this doesn't mean that as employees we'll be expected to attend meetings even when on a plane...