SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
There are fewer than fifty days until the company building the [Australian] National Broadband Network (NBN) will blast its first broadband satellite 36,000 kilometres into orbit, with a planned launch date of October 1.
Blasting off from French Guiana, an overseas region of France, the announcement will be welcome news for those on the existing interim satellite service, which has suffered from slow speeds due to congestion.
Weighing[sic] nearly 6400 kilograms, it is one of the world's largest communications satellites and is the first of two that NBN will launch into space. The second will launch later next year "to ensure there is sufficient capacity to meet the needs of users in regional and remote areas", Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull said in a statement.
The satellites will deliver peak download speeds of up to 25 megabits per second regardless of where people live, Turnbull said, meaning that Australians living in rural and regional areas will have access to a satellite service "much better than they currently experience".
Scheduled to launch from Guiana Space Centre in South America, Sky Muster is set to progressively deliver broadband to more than 200,000 homes and businesses in rural and remote Australia from next year.
Julia Dickinson, NBN's company's managing space systems architect, said the satellite would play a crucial role in levelling the playing field between city and bush.
"Many rural and remote Australians do not have access to a quality broadband service and continue to experience dial-up level speeds,"; she said. "Sky Muster will help deliver world-class broadband services to the bush – it will offer better opportunities for distance education online through use of video-conferencing as well as improved access for specialist telehealth applications in the home."
-- submitted from IRC
Original Submission
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 14 2015, @02:05AM
Weighing is spelled correctly. You don't use sic here. They wrote "Weighing" and they meant "Weighing". You use sic when you want to make it clear that there wasn't a typo in the article, NOT BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE WITH HOW A WORD IS USED.
Jesus Fucking Christ. Give someone a little knowledge . . .
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 14 2015, @02:09AM
Besides, it is used correctly here anyway, unless everyone's bathroom scale now reads in Newtons.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 14 2015, @02:39AM
You will have a long, romantic, and happy life together with your reflection in the mirror.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 14 2015, @05:45PM
Well, we're at least the two best looking and smartest in the room.
(Score: 3, Informative) by wonkey_monkey on Friday August 14 2015, @08:03AM
It's perfectly valid to use sic in this way. Calm down.
You use sic when you want to make it clear that there wasn't a typo in the article
No, you use it to make it clear that you have not altered the word(s) in question, that it does in fact originate from the article as presented. This includes "erroneous or archaic spelling, surprising assertion, faulty reasoning, or other matter that might otherwise be taken as an error of transcription."
In these days of cut-and-paste, though, this can usually be taken as read.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by Bytram on Friday August 14 2015, @09:49AM
A kilogram is a unit of mass, not of weight. 6400 kilograms of mass at the Earth's surface is still. 6400 kilograms of mass at the height of geostationary orbit.
Its weight would vary, however, depending on elevation as it depends on the acceleration of gravity at the point of measurement.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 14 2015, @11:50AM
Wiki definitions aside, do you contend that it is proper use here? It is not, unless we are to fill our writings with endless sic's that arise out of pedantry backed by whiny insistences that we are indeed correct. Colloquially, a kilogram is a weight. Our bathroom scales let us switch between pounds and kilograms. If you put the satellite on a bathroom scale, it will read 6400 kilograms. The author meant what he wrote and let him stand and take his lumps.
The sic ignoramuses take the wiki definition as fiat and run with it. See, it says "surprising assertion"! When I read that article about the mine wastewater turning that river orange, that surprised me. Orange?? Clearly the article should read to the effect ". . . turning the river an orange (sic) color." Rivers aren't orange. This cannot be a correct statement, so we must sic it for sure. Those Rosetta and New Horizons mission articles should be littered with sic's. Rosetta measured the water on the comet to be different (sic) than the water on Earth. There was one boob here to littered his article summary with sic's because some political figure was making statements that the article submitter found incorrect because he didn't agree with it from his political prism, something to the effect of: "We need to collect this metadata to stop terrorists (sic)."
As for the satellite, I haven't been following its progress very closely. I was surprised to hear that it has a launch date because I thought they still had to do their Critical Design Review. I hope the editors change this article title to be: "NBN's 'Sky Muster' Satellite Gets Launch (sic) Date"
But, if this is the New World Order, I must echo your definition as sic to ""erroneous or archaic spelling, surprising assertion (sic), faulty reasoning (sic), or other matter that might otherwise be taken as an error of transcription."
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Saturday August 15 2015, @09:59AM
Wiki definitions aside, do you contend that it is proper use here?
Yes. I didn't say it wasn't pedantic, but yes, it is proper usage.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk