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

SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

testmy.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 325 posts

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#261

Post by shrubble »

apexalpha wrote: post #199

So I guess companies will now fill the entire global sky with thousands of sats just to make up for the fact that the US government ignores rural houses when it comes to digital infrastructure? I'm sorry but how is 42Mbps worth spamming the entire nightsky with to the point that it prevent astronomers from obtaining useful data? Not even 10Mbps upload? My inlaws live in a village in France that has 70 people total. I…

About 70% of the earth is covered by water. If you had a sailboat with an auxiliary motor you could go hang out in the Sargasso Sea and have perfect weather most of the time, eat healthy with fresh caught fish and use silar panels to have enough electricity for laptop and starlink modem.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#262

Post by bryanlarsen »

apexalpha wrote: post #199

So I guess companies will now fill the entire global sky with thousands of sats just to make up for the fact that the US government ignores rural houses when it comes to digital infrastructure? I'm sorry but how is 42Mbps worth spamming the entire nightsky with to the point that it prevent astronomers from obtaining useful data? Not even 10Mbps upload? My inlaws live in a village in France that has 70 people total. I…

The latest generation of Starlink satellites is invisible to the naked eye once fully raised to full height in a couple of months. The impact on astronomers is real, but very small.

OTOH, the benefit is the ability to participate in the modern economy.

Cost/benefit to the world seems pretty clear to me.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#263

Post by gsich »

reportingsjr wrote: post #238
cooljacob204 wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we need rural areas to supply us with food and other materials.

A massive number of the people that live in rural areas are not providing food and key materials. In fact, the amount of farmland and farmers has been declining for years due to increases in agricultural efficiency (green revolution). I've got no problem (to a point) subsidizing infrastructure for farmers and other key jobs, but acting like all of these people who insist on living in an incredibly unsustainable way d…

Does that matter? Not really. Infrastructure (Internet counts as that) should be available everywhere people live. Who knows, one day you might be in such a situation.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#264

Post by amanaplanacanal »

syshum wrote: post #240
apexalpha wrote: post #199

So I guess companies will now fill the entire global sky with thousands of sats just to make up for the fact that the US government ignores rural houses when it comes to digital infrastructure? I'm sorry but how is 42Mbps worth spamming the entire nightsky with to the point that it prevent astronomers from obtaining useful data? Not even 10Mbps upload? My inlaws live in a village in France that has 70 people total. I…

I am sorry but how it is the role of government to provide everyone with internet? The American government "refuses" because there is no Constitutional Authority for which it could use to provide such a service, and that is a good thing People seem to think government should just provide everything to everyone, the government should be very limited in size and scope, and providing internet is WELL outside what a limi…

The US spent a bunch of money on rural electrification back in the day. It’s hard to see how this is much different.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#265

Post by TomGullen »

sumedh wrote: post #220
TomGullen wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you can argue on the whole is a waste, but I do believe it does have some advantages. EG efficient HFTs can reduce bid ask spreads which does save a lot of money for retail traders.

> EG efficient HFTs can reduce bid ask spreads which does save a lot of money for retail traders. Berkshire Hathway has $1000+ spreads yet you dont see a lot of people complaining.

Stock price is probably a pretty big factor in that along with volume.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#266

Post by squarefoot »

delcaran wrote: post #253
apexalpha wrote: post #199

So I guess companies will now fill the entire global sky with thousands of sats just to make up for the fact that the US government ignores rural houses when it comes to digital infrastructure? I'm sorry but how is 42Mbps worth spamming the entire nightsky with to the point that it prevent astronomers from obtaining useful data? Not even 10Mbps upload? My inlaws live in a village in France that has 70 people total. I…

I'm in Italy, 15km from the province capital, 7km from a major turistic village, in a village of 3000 souls. I'm waiting for 2Mbps ADSL since 2007.

Where do you live? (I'm Italian as well). Mobile connections aside, there are some vendors who would reach you through WiFi if you're in line of sight with any of their repeaters. (eolo.it and alternatyva.it came to mind, but there are others). In 2009 I brought a whoppy 4DL/4UL connection (with a really low latency excellent for online gaming) to a house in a rural area where the only available option would have been a 57k analog modem. Now there are much faster solutions.

Also, don't trust the national provider Telecom Italia. Before finding that solution, we pestered them with requests to cover that area, and their canned response has always been "we're working on it", while actually they were waiting for more people to move in that area so that it would have been more convenient for them.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#267

Post by rckoepke »

mayama wrote: post #256
apexalpha wrote: post #199

So I guess companies will now fill the entire global sky with thousands of sats just to make up for the fact that the US government ignores rural houses when it comes to digital infrastructure? I'm sorry but how is 42Mbps worth spamming the entire nightsky with to the point that it prevent astronomers from obtaining useful data? Not even 10Mbps upload? My inlaws live in a village in France that has 70 people total. I…

You are ignoring millions of people in rural Asia and Africa who don't have internet connection, or a spotty 3g/4g connection for internet. Satellite internet is legitimate use case for these people. Starlink might be too costly for most of them, but some other satellite internet company might cater to them.

Something like 45% of the world's people don't have internet access right now, so that number would be billions, rather than millions.

Also, Starlink doesn't have to be too costly for them. The constellation's operating costs could potentially be fully paid by North American and European users. The satellites would still incidentally fly over the southern hemisphere, and any revenue at all from Africa/South America/Asia would mostly just add to Starlinks bottom line profit. The marginal cost of additional users should be minimal once general revenue targets are met.

I'd like to hear whether the throughput will increase with additional satellites, or whether it requires re-designs. I wouldn't expect the current satellites to be saturated with users by the currently "limited" number of beta test users.

Cost of end-user terminals also will likely have to come down significantly before the worlds poorest would have any access. Although sharing the cost of that among a large group would help, it would also help a lot if the speeds were actually closer to gigabit for sharing the connection.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#268

Post by ls612 »

reportingsjr wrote: post #206
apexalpha wrote: post #199

So I guess companies will now fill the entire global sky with thousands of sats just to make up for the fact that the US government ignores rural houses when it comes to digital infrastructure? I'm sorry but how is 42Mbps worth spamming the entire nightsky with to the point that it prevent astronomers from obtaining useful data? Not even 10Mbps upload? My inlaws live in a village in France that has 70 people total. I…

On the flip side, why should the majority of us in denser areas in the US subsidize people who want to live in exurbs/rural areas? If you want to live in a place like that, be prepared to pay the cost for the infrastructure. We already pay enough subsidies for roads, water, power, etc in rural/exurban areas.

Why should the rural people in podunk nowhere subsidize our food?

Ultimately it is in the best interest of cities to keep on good terms with their breadbasket.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#269

Post by ls612 »

krageon wrote: post #147
jfindley wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consistent 30ms would be pretty excellent, and make it useful for many things. Consistent 50ms, similarly. It starts to get a bit more of an issue at 80ms or 100ms, but my worry is more that jitter may be huge, and 30-100ms is a huge jitter window that could limit usefuless not just for games, but also many other things such as voice calls.

A 100ms ping is perfectly playable in everything except twitch-based shooters. In voice calls you will notice it, but it won't get in the way like say a 1-2s delay would (like you get if you phone from one end of the world to the other). It's really a very good result bearing in mind that this can work absolutely anywhere.

Even in an FPS unless you are trying to play at a pro level or something 100ms will be barely noticeable. Your reaction time is already probably over 300ms

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#270

Post by ls612 »

taneq wrote: post #80
Torkel wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I understood it correctly Starlink doesn't send between satellites yet, only sat ground. Sat sat is a big point of starlink and when they roll that out the latency should go down, especially for starlink starlink comms I imagine.

I don't understand how this is meant to lower the latency. Currently: ground satellite ground With satellite links: ground satellite satellite ground How can the latter possibly be faster? Edit: Thanks for all the responses. I'd been assuming it was a test of Starlink latency only, but if it's Starlink -> ground station -> open internet -> ISP then it would make sense how that would be slower than a pure Starlink con…

There are some places where there is no ground, say the middle of the Atlantic. Satellite to satellite is important for that.
Post reply on HN