Show HN: Will my flight have Starlink?

Post by platevoltage » Thu, Mar 19, 2026, 2:21 AM UTC

devin wrote: post #126

I've written it elsewhere, but: it is such a shame that the United States saw fit to run electricity _everywhere_, no matter how rural your location, but instead of do the same for rural internet we had to wait for... a private company to launch a global network of satellites. Yes, this post is about internet access while traveling 500mph, which is a different problem, but it is so messed up that people fall over the…

Post by platevoltage » Thu, Mar 19, 2026, 2:27 AM UTC

edgyquant wrote: post #220

iknowstuff wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People in the United States can choose to live in very rural and sparsely populated areas, far more remote than most OECD countries. It’s not clear to me that we should necessarily massively subsidize their choice to live in the sticks these days. Starlink and 5G are great for this, as is solar energy and batteries. We already subsidize sprawl’s expensive-per-person infrastructure with tax revenue from dense cities.…

I don’t think we should subsidize internet, but your framing here rubs me the wrong way. People in these rural areas usually live among family and have lived there for generations, reducing this to a choice feels very elitist. People aren’t “choosing” to not pack up their entire lives and move to a city or town.

Post by UltraSane » Thu, Mar 19, 2026, 2:28 AM UTC

andrewharvey wrote: post #215

modeless wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have it exactly backwards. It is far less complex and expensive and resource intensive to build Starlink than to run a new copper or fiber line with associated telecom equipment on both sides to every rural residence in the US, let alone worldwide. Yes, despite the large cost of launching satellites. And it's especially good that we don't have to force everyone to subsidize inefficient monopoly utilities with our…

this. Except it's no longer only in rural areas, grid connected utilities are now costing more than being off grid in the cities too. Starlink residential 100 Mbps is cheaper ($69/mo AUD) (ignoring hardware and setup costs) than 50 Mbps fixed line internet ($80/mo AUD). Depending on location, home solar + batteries will usually work out cheaper than being on the grid within the battery warranty period too.

Post by grahamburger » Thu, Mar 19, 2026, 2:32 AM UTC

shagie wrote: post #205

devin wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buddy, many of the people who are being served by Starlink are by no means "very" rural at all. If you get into "lives in a shack in the mountains", then sure I agree, but a HUGE number of people are barely outside of an immediate service area and have no access for one dumb reason or another. This is a demonstration of the failure of our country to do simple, pragmatic things that would benefit our citizens' lives.…

My parents have Starlink. They live in an area surrounded by dairy farms. It's half a mile between mailboxes. The nearest town is 7 miles away (though only 3 as the crow flies - lots of hills between here and there). None of the neighbors have cable TV. You've got to either go into town or t'wards the highway 7 miles the other direction). Three years ago, the utility ran natural gas that far out. Prior to that, it wa…

Post by pibaker » Thu, Mar 19, 2026, 2:38 AM UTC

AndroTux wrote: post #147

fdghrtbrt wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. I don't know what I find more disturbing: that people are this addicted, or that they don't care. Either way, I'm with you.

So let’s get rid of internet on the highway and in trains, too. Because it’s pretty much exactly the same thing. One just happens to be airborne.