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

#231

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 1:53 AM UTC

maccam94 wrote: post #223

mssundaram wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mars .... Compared with the absurd amounts of money wasted on defense contractors Couldn't we spend absurd amounts of money on fixing Earth instead? Surely it's easier than starting from even less resources and livable environment than Mars. There is a cultural myth in New Age communities that humans decimated Mars and came to Earth after, or something like that. We should fix Earth first

There's not much we can do if Earth is hit with another giant asteroid. Or some massive biological or radiological disaster. Or some other type of impossible to predict or mitigate disasters that could render Earth uninhabitable for humans. Musk's goal is to make the human race multi-planetary, not escape to Mars. Just as you should back up your critical data more than one hard drive, or run redundant servers to ensu…

[deleted]

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

#232

Post by stetrain » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 2:08 AM UTC

nikolay wrote: post #190

stetrain wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you find a spot on Earth with no radio waves let us know. AM goes pretty far, even amateur radio can travel across continents in the right atmospheric conditions. GPS Satellite TV Every other civilian and military Comsat since we started launching things. Starlink isn’t the problem if you are worried about being “irradiated”, the nuclear fusion reactor at the center of our solar system is likely of greater concern…

GPS and Satellite TV are different, plus, your way of thinking is flawed - just because there are precedents, it doesn't mean we should continue to add on top of them! In addition to light pollution, radio pollution is worse than ever. After Starlink setting a brew type of precedent, more will try doing the same.

How are they different? They beam radio signals to every corner of the planet.

What new precedent is Starlink setting?

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

#233

Post by FlyMoreRockets » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 2:18 AM UTC

extropy wrote: post #158

bumby wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if those who would argue against funding SpaceX take the "either traditional defense contractors or SpaceX" bait. I think a major argument is that there are better ways to spend the money here on Earth. I.e., it's nobler and more feasible to protect and improve this planet than settle another one. As a former space industry worker, I don't know if I subscribe to that, but that's the best steelmanning I c…

The problem with protect and conserve is that is leads to limited resources mentality. "There is not enough to go around" becomes ugly very fast. https://mobile.twitter.com/robert_zubrin/status/101347705748... Edit: Will surely invest considerable resources to convert Earth to a national park once we have outgrown earth's economy 100x

You touch on the primary flaw of "spend the money here on Earth" argument.

Money spent on space programs IS spent here on Earth. The money paid to engineers and fabricators and for raw materials goes to pay for house payments, durable goods, food and taxes of the individuals working on these projects. And those payments create jobs delivering these services, which benefits an ever increasing number of people.

It's not as if dollar bills were litterally burned to provide rocket thrust.

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

#234

Post by nikolay » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 2:29 AM UTC

cromwellian wrote: post #160

nikolay wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, Elon Musk first flirted with Democrats, because this is how he got the buddy favors. But this year, he probably saw a change in the wind and started to flirt with Republicans - I expect him following the wind again...

What would you do if the local mafia showed up at your business and said "Nice little space/car company you got there, it would be a shame if something happened to it?" Call it an act of cowardice, but all of the top companies are currying favor with governments, because cronyism is everywhere, and if you are not in the game, you are out of it. Do you think SpaceX would have beat ULA, who literally had the Apollo moo…

Very well put. And to your first question - in the 90s when a friend and I had a custom PC business is Bulgaria, the mafia showed up at our business and started to negotiate a monthly insurance policy, we kicked them out. They didn't show up again and didn't do anything to our business... but, yeah, we were too small and too lucky. I'm sure if we had a lot more to lose, we'd have probably reacted differently. But I still recall them starting negotiations at 1,000 Deutsche Marks (the German currency before the Euro) per month down to 100 DEM and I still kept saying "No." Fun times!

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

#235

Post by nikolay » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 2:31 AM UTC

stetrain wrote: post #232

nikolay wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPS and Satellite TV are different, plus, your way of thinking is flawed - just because there are precedents, it doesn't mean we should continue to add on top of them! In addition to light pollution, radio pollution is worse than ever. After Starlink setting a brew type of precedent, more will try doing the same.

How are they different? They beam radio signals to every corner of the planet. What new precedent is Starlink setting?

Starlink is a new precedent for an affordable general public ISP using satellites.

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

#236

Post by bumby » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 2:35 AM UTC

FlyMoreRockets wrote: post #233

extropy wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with protect and conserve is that is leads to limited resources mentality. "There is not enough to go around" becomes ugly very fast. https://mobile.twitter.com/robert_zubrin/status/101347705748... Edit: Will surely invest considerable resources to convert Earth to a national park once we have outgrown earth's economy 100x

You touch on the primary flaw of "spend the money here on Earth" argument. Money spent on space programs IS spent here on Earth. The money paid to engineers and fabricators and for raw materials goes to pay for house payments, durable goods, food and taxes of the individuals working on these projects. And those payments create jobs delivering these services, which benefits an ever increasing number of people. It's no…

I think you’re taking the phrasing too literally. It is meant to confer the money should be spent on programs that directly contribute to more people’s lives than just those who work on the specific program.

Your same argument can be used for the defense contractors as well and people will still line up to argue it’s not the best use of tax dollars

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

#237

Post by nickik » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 2:41 AM UTC

joecool1029 wrote: post #165

juanbyrge wrote: post #9

If there is any corporate entity I'd happy giving public funding, it would be SpaceX. Their end goal is to settle Mars and potentially other bodies in the solar system. Compared with the absurd amounts of money wasted on defense contractors, I am perfectly happy with funding SpaceX in every way possible.

While I absolutely agree that defense contractor spending is an abhorrent waste of public funds, this is a bad take. Literally every company in this space (ISP's, and more so ISP's that utilize satellites) have used it as a platform to grift public funds. Examples include Lightsquared, Iridium, Globalstar, and the worst of all, DISH) SpaceX has significantly reduced the cost of building a satellite ISP but you need t…

> SpaceX didn't launch this service as a practical or sensible business model for them, they already get paid to launch other telecommunications equipment into space, they are doing this to keep on the government, the public's tit.

This is pretty much nonsense. Spend 10min actually researching the market and you would know it is nonsense.

Rocket launches are tiny part of the space market, even if SpaceX had a monopoly it would not be that much money. Also, the most valuable launches are trying up and there are not nearly enough of them for SpaceX to continue to grow.

Telecommunications however is a much bigger market, and that is why SpaceX is going into it. There is a gigantic market to be captured and SpaceX with cheap launch and amazing sat technology have a chance to do it. This is also a global play, the idea that this was done just to get access to US subsidies is nonsensical.

They have been planning for this for many, many, many years long before it was even clear if they could get access to this FCC subsidy at all, something that was disputed until just a couple months ago. They didn't invest multiple billion into this project to hopefully get less then 1 billion back in the next 10 years.

As to why SpaceX takes advantage of this, why should they not? SpaceX would do the same thing without these funds, but why not take advantage of it if the government offers it?

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

#238

Post by bumby » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 2:42 AM UTC

rlt wrote: post #193

joecool1029 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I absolutely agree that defense contractor spending is an abhorrent waste of public funds, this is a bad take. Literally every company in this space (ISP's, and more so ISP's that utilize satellites) have used it as a platform to grift public funds. Examples include Lightsquared, Iridium, Globalstar, and the worst of all, DISH) SpaceX has significantly reduced the cost of building a satellite ISP but you need t…

> Literally every company in this space have used it as a platform to grift public funds. > they are doing this to keep on the government, the public's tit $1B is a fraction of what SpaceX, and Morgan Stanley among others, believe they can make from Starlink: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/10/22/mor... I think this time it really is different. SpaceX has already reduced launch cost by an order of…

>reduced launch cost by an order of magnitude

Which specific launches are you referring to? Some of the Space Force launch costs have gotten quite bloated for SpaceX as well

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

#239

Post by nickik » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 2:47 AM UTC

bumby wrote: post #236

FlyMoreRockets wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You touch on the primary flaw of "spend the money here on Earth" argument. Money spent on space programs IS spent here on Earth. The money paid to engineers and fabricators and for raw materials goes to pay for house payments, durable goods, food and taxes of the individuals working on these projects. And those payments create jobs delivering these services, which benefits an ever increasing number of people. It's no…

I think you’re taking the phrasing too literally. It is meant to confer the money should be spent on programs that directly contribute to more people’s lives than just those who work on the specific program. Your same argument can be used for the defense contractors as well and people will still line up to argue it’s not the best use of tax dollars

This program is about giving internet to under-served communities so their children can do remote schoolwork and things like that. What exactly is your problem with that?

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

#240

Post by nickik » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 2:53 AM 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.

This old bullshit anti-Musk propaganda nonsense again. Some people will just do anything to prove that actually there are no special people. Everything is just privilege, we would have 100s of Elon Musk if only not for income inequality.

And if reality doesn't actually line up with that, hey why not just invent a bunch of stuff.

We can do this infinity. Somebody that grew up poor in the US has success. Well, he had food as a child, 100s of starving African could have done the same, but 'who don't have the privilege necessary'.

So lets not give credit to anybody ever. If you were not a slave in Somilia at 13 that swam across the ocean by yourself and then build a new technology from the ground up, you deserve nothing and you are just one of those no good privileged people.