Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

fcc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 331 posts

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#131

Post by wallace_f »

freehunter wrote: post #128
wallace_f wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People aren't perfect, and some are terrible, so it makes sense to have government. However, it is reasonable to be critical of government removing your rights to work. Actually, it is a civil duty. I am not sure where the line should be drawn, but it has certainly gone too far. Should you need gov approval to download an IDE, or sell an app? What about to braid hair?[1] I would bet that as soon as government begins…

You don't own the radio spectrum. Neither do I. No one individual does. We can license it, but since there's such a great opportunity for harm, it's controlled by the government. You're against the government deciding on "removing your right to work", but the alternative is your neighbor or your competitor making that decision for you and overloading "your" spectrum. And you have no recourse to complain, all you can…

Yea, if you see the other comment I replied to, I tried to make it more clear that this case is obviously to the benefit of everyone. What you describe is a simple tragedy of the commons market failure, which need be regulated, and is not unique to radiowaves.

I think the point I was trying to make is missed. Should someone, the OP, criticizing the FCC's role for doing this be downvoted/ridiculed? No, I think it's an important job, because we should always question when rights are taken away from the people and handed over to government.

Maybe it's all too far gone and this is a better discussion to have for a Mars colony, but I still have faith.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#132

Post by [deleted] »

kakarot wrote: post #130
wallace_f wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but it's completely self evident. The point was that the natural right to perform/produce a service/product should be the null hypothesis (as opposed to government removing that right and granting it at their discretion) in any such case; and while on the extremes the answers may seem obvious (launching communication satellites vs braiding hair), it's often not always so. Finally, I concluded that people s…

I'll ask again, what does any of that have to do with launching satellites and distributing radio bandwidth?

[deleted]

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#133

Post by walrus01 »

bpd1069 wrote: post #4

This is monumental - I claim every major advance in communication technology immediately precedes a major progress for society. This will make the 'Internet' truly global and ubiquitous. So excited for the developing world.

If you really want to get excited for the developing world - research the number of new submarine fiber cables that have connected coastal cities in many major African nations in the time frame from 2004 to 2018.

That's a lot of capacity. Now a big part of the problem is outdated regulatory regimes and government-controlled telecoms that are keeping prices artificially high, and keeping out competition in the 4G/LTE market and ISP market.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#134

Post by hyperpallium »

tyingq wrote: post #20
cft wrote: post #12

Will it work inside cars without a special antenna?

From one of their early FAQ docs: https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/7zqm2c/starlink_f... "What kind of antenna does it use? It will use a flat Phased Array antenna about the size of a pizza box or laptop computer and expected to cost between $100 and $300. You will need line of sight to the open sky, mounted on your roof or anywhere outside. The antenna handles both upload and download and is capable of giga…

Weight?

Antennae volume is mostly air, so could be portable.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#135

Post by shaklee3 »

walrus01 wrote: post #6
jagger27 wrote: post #5

Has SpaceX indicated that this network is meant to cover every home and business directly or connect to a hub to distribute locally? In terms of democratization, space to the home with commodity hardware is such a game changer it's not even funny. My napkin math says that latencies across the Earth (like NYC to Melbourne) would beat existing fiber.

Both, I think. I would be surprised if there is not a higher-bandwidth, larger, more expensive high gain rooftop CPE which can be used by a small ISP/WISP in a remote area. They would use that for their uplink to the internet and then distribute access locally via point to multipoint 5 GHz radio systems, GPON fiber, whatever is feasible.

I doubt it's for home. As many articles point out, it needs a phased array antennas attract the satellites. The current technology for those is far too expensive to recoup the cost for residential service.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#136

Post by Dylan16807 »

cft wrote: post #52
tyingq wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From one of their early FAQ docs: https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/7zqm2c/starlink_f... "What kind of antenna does it use? It will use a flat Phased Array antenna about the size of a pizza box or laptop computer and expected to cost between $100 and $300. You will need line of sight to the open sky, mounted on your roof or anywhere outside. The antenna handles both upload and download and is capable of giga…

So this is for stationary internet only, not for mobile.

No reason it couldn't be made to work on vehicles.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#137

Post by wallace_f »

kakarot wrote: post #130
wallace_f wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but it's completely self evident. The point was that the natural right to perform/produce a service/product should be the null hypothesis (as opposed to government removing that right and granting it at their discretion) in any such case; and while on the extremes the answers may seem obvious (launching communication satellites vs braiding hair), it's often not always so. Finally, I concluded that people s…

I'll ask again, what does any of that have to do with launching satellites and distributing radio bandwidth?

I can't think of a better way to explain it. Maybe you should re-read the comment chain to help you understand this conversation.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#138

Post by lev99 »

olympus wrote: post #126
mattsfrey wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. While not as profound as bringing access to the developing world, this will also be a major win for people looking to live alternative lifestyles, i.e. perpetual traveling, van life etc, where keeping a consistent internet connection is the one thing holding many back.

You can get decent 4G internet plans already in most parts of the world. While this will have better coverage of rural areas, mobile internet is very adequate for the van lifestyle.

That really depends on how much bandwidth you need. Several aspects of remote working like video conferencing large file transfers are too demanding for 4G in terms of bandwidth and transfer caps.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#139

Post by shaklee3 »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #61
paul7986 wrote: post #59

What is the big advancement here compared to say Hughes Satellite Internet that is slower then DSL?

Lower latency and much higher data rates.

You're comparing current satellite technology to something that is scheduled to come out in about 3 to 4 years. That's not very fair considering that there are many other geosynchronous high-bandwidth satellites scheduled to come out before SpaceX is ready.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#140

Post by lev99 »

greedo wrote: post #124
unepipe wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will not affect it in any way. They have released their plans for Starlink and there will be a "blackout" zone over China, so China doesn't shoot down their satellites. In 2007, China shot down FY-1C as a test of a kinetic kill vehicle (leaving tons of high speed space debris). Unless they receive approval from China to broadcast, they won't over China. Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-internet-satell…

China won't shoot down commercial satellites, they'll just either jam the signal, or block ownership of the ground terminals. Shooting down satellites is very expensive, and would cause an incredible hue and cry internationally. It's one thing to shoot down one of your own defunct satellites, quite another thing to shoot down someone else's.

> Shooting down satellites is very expensive

It's less expensive than launching satellites, and the Chinese goverment has enough money to do it if they want.

Post reply on HN