SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states • Hacker News Board

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#111

Post by iptrans » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 10:01 PM UTC

btilly wrote: post #30

iptrans wrote: post #15

Riddle me this, would SpaceX not have built out Starlink if they didn't get this subsidy? Since they already put Starlink satellites in orbit without any guarantees of subsidies, was this good use of government funds?

SpaceX has had 42,000 satellites approved. They have just under 1000 operational and are about half-way to phase 1. Which will only be able to provide broadband for a limited number of users at latitudes for Canada and some northern US states. (That is why they are doing beta programs, they don't have the capacity for more.) Money to launch more satellites will give the company the ability to get broadband for more p…

Not quite.

The subsidy isn't large enough to pay for all the satellites they need. They have money to launch more satellites and will be doing more launches subsidy or no subsidy.

The subsidy will only go directly to their bottom line.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#112

Post by bumby » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 10:02 PM UTC

serf wrote: post #68

remarkEon wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good. They seem to be the first defense contractor in a long time, maybe ever, with a specific eye on controlling costs. It may not be this way forever, but for now the taxpayers should get the savings where they can.

1) Every defense contractor mentions interest in controlling costs; they bid against each other with these specific values in mind. The problem is over-run and underestimation, and the govts' lack of flexibility with regards to contract termination in most instances. 2) Defense spending has been historically hovering between 15-25 percent in the United States. 'Taxpayer savings' does not, nor has it ever, indicated m…

>The problem is over-run and underestimation

I would argue this is a bug for the taxpayers but a feature for the contractor. Much of their profit comes from change-orders after they win a poorly administered low-bid contract. It seems the M.O. often is "bid low to get the contract, and then argue/nickel-and-dime the taxpayer to pad the profit margin"

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#113

Post by Reedx » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 10:03 PM UTC

notthemessiah wrote: post #107

staunch wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine what we could do if it was possible to identify and fund a thousand Elon Musks with hundreds of millions each? He's eliminating gas vehicles, improving solar adoption, fixing rural internet, improving space science, making life interplanetary, etc. It may be that Elon Musk types are extremely rare but I doubt they're as nearly as rare as most people think and we only need a thousand out of billions. The thing…

He also lucked out on inheriting fortunes from his parents diamond mines. But, there are lots of people who inherit fortunes and do nothing with it. There are lots of people with drive and intelligence comparable to Elon Musk who don't have the privilege necessary to accomplish anything. Seems we're still a long way away from a meritocracy.

Maybe you're thinking of someone else?

“You get really tired of hot dogs and oranges after awhile,” he said. “And of course pasta and a green pepper and a big thing of sauce. And that can go pretty far, too.

“So it’s like, ‘Oh, okay, if I can live for a dollar a day then at least from a food cost standpoint, well it’s pretty easy to earn like $30 in a month anyway, so I’ll probably be okay.’ “

This isn’t the only example of a young Musk roughing it. When he started his first company, Zip2, he and his brother slept in their office instead of renting an apartment. They showered at the YMCA.

“We were so hard up, we had just one computer so the Web site was up during the day and I was coding at night,” Musk recalled during a commencement speech at USC. “Seven days a week, all the time.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2015/03/2...

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#114

Post by qz2 » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 10:03 PM UTC

bumby wrote: post #104

cromwellian wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And? Building bases on the moon, mars, or the asteroid belt doesn't require terraforming, anymore than living on an Antarctic base through winter requires the ability to farm for food, and wear a bikini. We spent $700 billion a year on the defense budget, and $7 trillion on wars, $1 billion on inspiring stunts like moon landings or mars landings once a generation, are not really a waste, the money is mostly spent on…

> We spent $700 billion a year on the defense budget, and $7 trillion on wars, $1 billion on inspiring stunts like moon landings or mars landings once a generation, are not really a waste That's because they are framed as a more immediate existential threat. Humans are present biased and don't like to spend lots of money on low-probability events until they are unavoidable (see: attitudes towards pandemic preparation…

Actually we don’t fix stuff as a species until people start dying. How long it takes is how much bad PR is involved. Avoiding that bad PR instead of solving the problem is an art that we have become better at than solving problems.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#115

Post by ativzzz » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 10:04 PM UTC

nevdka wrote: post #87

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My recent employer was one of the ISP providing rural telecom service. These subsidies accounted for a hefty percentage of our income and the company was still perpetually on the edge of failure. Most of our competitors were in similar situations, loaded down with breathtakingly large amounts of debt and expensive to maintain decaying infrastructure, much of it purchased from the Baby Bells when they got out of the m…

The infrastructure those companies have built already exists, and the subsidies are mostly going to pay debt. If the subsidies stopped, the companies would go bankrupt. Their assets would be sold to another company, likely at a price less than the debt. The new company could therefore have a lower debt burden, and wouldn't necessarily need the subsidies to provide the same level of service. The subsidies are stopping…

Sure, but what about the people who will have disrupted or potentially no internet access/support while the market is sorting itself out?

If your plan is to be carried out, then there is ripe opportunity for a politician to come to these areas an say, "vote for me, I will protect your internet access" and then fight for the funding instead.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#116

Post by aroch » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 10:04 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #79

dkdk8283 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn’t characterize defense spending as waste. China is a significant threat, for example, and maintaining superiority over them is of national importance IMO.

Some defense spending is reasonable, but we could get a lot while limiting things to say 200 - 300 Billion per year. That’s 4-6 times what the UK spends for example and they have 2 aircraft carriers etc.

Calling the British navy a battle ready fleet would be rather a positive attitude. Their submarine and surface ship captains don't know how to navigate, running aground and into other boats. And their aircraft carriers don't even have enough crew/planes and will deploy US Marine Corp units to meet their full complement. It will likely take the UK 15-20 years for the two new Carriers to be at full operating capability (2009-TBD, probably 2024 at the earliest).

That being said, the US could stand to spend less on military funding.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#117

Post by sneak » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 10:04 PM UTC

dkdk8283 wrote: post #103

octopoc wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think nations are a bad thing? What's your alternative? City states? Planet-wide government?

Nations are great. Not everyone agrees on all policies. My personal opinion is that I do not want to live in a censored or communist country (Such as China). Having borders and different countries allows multiple ideas to exist and folks can choose where to live.

> folks can choose where to live.

This is absolutely not true in practice, even for rich people fortunate/lucky enough to be born in a place where they receive a passport with lots of options.

For the 99% of the other humans, it's even worse.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#118

Post by partiallypro » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 10:05 PM UTC

I don't have a terrible issue with this, it's actually not very much money and could have good benefits that have an economic impact much larger than $886M. I am against wasteful spending, but I believe on an economic/GDP basis this will more than pay for itself in the long run.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#119

Post by spullara » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 10:07 PM UTC

nevdka wrote: post #87

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My recent employer was one of the ISP providing rural telecom service. These subsidies accounted for a hefty percentage of our income and the company was still perpetually on the edge of failure. Most of our competitors were in similar situations, loaded down with breathtakingly large amounts of debt and expensive to maintain decaying infrastructure, much of it purchased from the Baby Bells when they got out of the m…

The infrastructure those companies have built already exists, and the subsidies are mostly going to pay debt. If the subsidies stopped, the companies would go bankrupt. Their assets would be sold to another company, likely at a price less than the debt. The new company could therefore have a lower debt burden, and wouldn't necessarily need the subsidies to provide the same level of service. The subsidies are stopping…

There is some similar thing that happens with ski resorts. Something like 3 bankruptcies and debt buyouts before they are successful.

Re: SpaceX gets $886M from FCC to subsidize Starlink in 35 states

#120

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 10:07 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #79

dkdk8283 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn’t characterize defense spending as waste. China is a significant threat, for example, and maintaining superiority over them is of national importance IMO.

Some defense spending is reasonable, but we could get a lot while limiting things to say 200 - 300 Billion per year. That’s 4-6 times what the UK spends for example and they have 2 aircraft carriers etc.

[deleted]