181–190 of 252 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Starlinks costs per unit bandwidth are almost certainly far lower Interesting, how do you know that?
It's not true. LEO systems are far more CAPEX intensive than GEO, and neither Starlink, Oneweb, Telesat, or Kuiper will be cheaper than Viasat-3 and will not be able to compete in terms of cost per Gbps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Get specific about the concern, otherwise it's easy to get afraid about everything. Govt's hardly own telecom infra, it's all in private hands. And when orgs get too big for their boots, things like this happen- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System
> Get specific about the concern, otherwise it's easy to get afraid about everything. There are many reasons to be afraid about a private corporation from a country with little regulation providing a utility to areas with no other choice. If Amazon was sponsoring this, that's one thing, but them owning the network raises red flags for me surrounding: 1) Privacy 2) The potential for anti competitive practices 3) Quali…
Competitive practices: there are laws for that, and it's going to be competing with Elon's
Quality of service: if it stinks then people won't subscribe to it, and it's going to be competing with Elon's
At what point should we start worrying about Kessler Syndrome? > The Kessler syndrome (also called the Kessler effect,[1][2] collisional cascading or ablation cascade), proposed by the NASA scientist Donald J. Kessler in 1978, is a scenario in which the density of objects in low Earth orbit (LEO) is high enough that collisions between objects could cause a cascade in which each collision generates space debris that i…
Those dense internet satellite constellations will be in low earth orbit, which have relatively fast decay times. So even in the worst case it would only set us back by a few decades while either cleanup solutions are developed or we wait for them to decay naturally. You can still launch through the debris field into higher orbits because the collision probability will be quite low at any given moment, it just adds u…
Uhhh, that’s quite some time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not true. LEO systems are far more CAPEX intensive than GEO, and neither Starlink, Oneweb, Telesat, or Kuiper will be cheaper than Viasat-3 and will not be able to compete in terms of cost per Gbps.
Do you have any good sources on that? Not that I doubt you, but would like to read more on the subject.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah and there's already a lot of providers of satellite internet. But, Starlink has not published their pricing, so it's unclear how much of the market will they capture.
Sure, there are competitors. Starlink (or any other proposed LEO constellation) offers a fundamentally better product as a result of low latency (ballpark 640ms vs 20ms). Which they get as a result of being in low earth orbit instead of geosynchronous orbit. Starlinks costs per unit bandwidth are almost certainly far lower, meaning the ability to out compete on price. I don't see the existing constellations remaining…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Specially now that the satellites have no crosslinks.
My understanding was that was just a limitation on the first batch, as they're still developing the design, but they're intending to cross link in future. Is that not the case?
I can't even think about a horrible company like Amazon being an ISP too! Think about all the privacy issues that we are going to have!
But if they do this, this is going to be good for the US broadband customers who don't have internet currently. Not to mention they are stuck with monopoly companies without any competition and options. This is going to wake Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and Charter!
But Amazon is going to screw your net neutrality in the most crazy way once the initial period of cheap plans gets over and they have a strong monopoly of user base!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Won't this offer internet to everyone on Earth ?
For those who can afford to spend hundreds of dollars on a receiving, sure. (starlink, for example, will require a pizza box sized dish at what they hope will be a price of a few hundred dollars)
So what it's gonna be like - latency and bandwidth?
For latency at LEO, we're looking at below 50ms, going as low as 20ms. For bandwidth, it obviously depends on load and usage. SpaceX's satellites each can handle 1 Tbps, so it comes down to how they distribute and price it. At 100Mbps and 3000 satellites, that's roughly 10 million users. Obviously not all users will be using that much data simultaneously.
Welcome to the dystopian future where no human anywhere on Earth can look up and see an authentic sky, as their ancestors did. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/01/science/starlink-spacex-a... And thanks to SpaceX (and now Amazon), astronomers will now have to do their observations from space. If only there was a way to get telescopes up there. Oh, wait... SpaceX just happens to have a way to solve the problem it creat…
The video in the article you linked is not a good example of the long term impacts. The satellites were at a lower orbit than their final orbit and not oriented the same way they will be once in their operational orbit. Once they reach their final orbit, which most of them have now, they will be far more spread out, higher, and all around much harder to identify. That and SpaceX is actively working with astronomy gro…