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

271–280 of 331 posts

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#271

Post by walrus01 »

lorenzhs wrote: post #260
walrus01 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you want is an Iridium 9575 handheld phone, or the model that they release when the Iridium NEXT constellation comes fully online and they start turning off the old satellites. This is not going to be for handheld satellite phones or things that weigh less than maybe 7-10 kilograms.

Yup, but apply the same thought to sailing boats and the GP’s point stands. Could be great for search & rescue (EPIRB is incredibly slow, this could maybe be used to build an alternative system?), but could also compromise the feeling of remoteness.

GP is talking about hiking - big difference in a 300g satellite phone vs the size and weight of what you can mount on a 30' sailboat.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#273

Post by lorenzhs »

walrus01 wrote: post #271
lorenzhs wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, but apply the same thought to sailing boats and the GP’s point stands. Could be great for search & rescue (EPIRB is incredibly slow, this could maybe be used to build an alternative system?), but could also compromise the feeling of remoteness.

GP is talking about hiking - big difference in a 300g satellite phone vs the size and weight of what you can mount on a 30' sailboat.

Yes obviously, but sailing is similarly remote from civilisation, you’re a small group with nobody else nearby. So the changes would be similar, except that it’s trivial to mount on a boat so the changes the GP was thinking about actually apply to that scenario. (But with a solar-powered battery-buffered LTE antenna with satellite backhaul, it could apply to hikers without them having to carry around an antenna)

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#274

Post by mtanski »

sjwright wrote: post #257
t3rmi wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. It looks like their orbit is around 800 miles compared to the usual 22,000. Expected latency seems to be around 25ms. Would satellites be used for first hop only? I image latency would quickly increase if used for multiple hops.

I imagine SpaceX could eventually perform the majority of routing in orbit, with packets returning to earth for the "last mile". If they're successful, you could potentially see a high bandwidth SpaceX link on the roof of every major data center on the planet. They could be self-reliant for connections to every major online service. If they're very successful, you could potentially see data providers like Netflix and…

Netflix ISP CDN in space. Now that'd be something seriously cool.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#275

Post by gsich »

walrus01 wrote: post #270
gsich wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why 5-9s? I doubt any home connection has this, let alone the satellite.

An ISP serving from 5 to 30 downstream customers needs the micro pop to be up and online at least five nines, if not, something has gone terribly wrong.

doubt

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#276

Post by GordonS »

walrus01 wrote: post #259
GordonS wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What benefits would a lower-level encryption protocol provide over TLS (or anything else on top of layer 3/4)?

None, really, this can be treated like any other ISP connection. Build things with solid RSA+SHA384 TLS1.2 and 1.3, battle tested VPN tech, etc. There is no need for anything special unique to it being a satellite link.

That's what I thought too - I was just wondering what the parent had in mind.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#277

Post by ccozan »

Fanmade wrote: post #244
madushan1000 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from a third world country(Sri Lanka) and we already have really cheap LTE access, the connection I'm using right now(on my phone) gives me something like 1GB/1.5USD at average 4MBPS. What sucks is the speed and reliability, speed always fluctuate and even though most of the island is now covered by 3G, LTE is not a given. It has been improving a lot though because we have relatively good competition between mobi…

I'm from a third world country(Germany) and we don't have cheap LTE access. I pay more than 40€/month (about 50 USD) for 4GB of LTE and I got my contract for half of what it would normally cost. The reception is very poor and I barely ever see the LTE popping up on my phone, most times it's just 3G. And that's in the ex-capitol of Germany. If I visit my parents, which live barely a 45 minute drive outside of the city…

Fellow German here. I know this issues. But I think the Bayerns strategy worked. They subsidied all the fiber from Telekom, and now we have in the south of Bayern incredible internet speeds at acceptable price : 110Mbit/35Mbit for about 40 euros. I can double that for extra 10 euros.

LTE is everywhere and in my home town I get 20Mbs/5Mbs rates over Vodafone. There is only one place, literally in the middle of a dense forest ( part of a Wandertour ) where there is no signal at all. The highways are well covered, I normally skype and other VoIP apps work flawless.

So while we are talking about Germany, let's not forget this is a federal state and each state can individually influence the development. Not sure if USA is the same.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#278

Post by mtanski »

fastball wrote: post #183
madushan1000 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from a third world country(Sri Lanka) and we already have really cheap LTE access, the connection I'm using right now(on my phone) gives me something like 1GB/1.5USD at average 4MBPS. What sucks is the speed and reliability, speed always fluctuate and even though most of the island is now covered by 3G, LTE is not a given. It has been improving a lot though because we have relatively good competition between mobi…

Sri Lanka is only the 51st "best country in the world" according to US News[1]. That's really not bad and not really 3rd world at this point. [1] https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/sri-lanka

The term third world is often used incorrectly. It was created during the cold war to refer to countries that we're not in alliance with one of the dominant super powers (USA, USSR). [1]

People often use when they want to say "backwards" countries.

The correct term is developing world, which just means rapidly improving and doesn't cloudy the convo with connotations about the cold war.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#279

Post by seatotree »

mrep wrote: post #201
seatotree wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If China shoots down a SpaceX satellite, that is an act of war against the United States. China wouldn’t risk it. This is a great opportunity to break the great firewall and finally give the Chinese people access to unfiltered information.

> If China shoots down a SpaceX satellite, that is an act of war against the United States. These are not government satellites and china owns the airwaves over their nation. I highly doubt the US government would retaliate whatsoever against China if they shot down a satellite that illegally interacted with their airspace. > China wouldn’t risk it. This is a great opportunity to break the great firewall and finally…

Airspace extends 12 miles. Satellites are governed by space law. It would be the same as sinking a commercial American ship in international waters.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#280

Post by seatotree »

zpr wrote: post #114
seatotree wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If China shoots down a SpaceX satellite, that is an act of war against the United States. China wouldn’t risk it. This is a great opportunity to break the great firewall and finally give the Chinese people access to unfiltered information.

Which might be seen as a provocation by the Chinese Government of the US to destabilize it's citizens.

Not illegal under international law. We did this all the time to the Soviets. This is what Voice of America does today.
Post reply on HN