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

Starlink is now Accepting General Pre-orders

starlink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 541 posts

Re: Starlink is now Accepting General Pre-orders

#371

Post by andrewaylett »

mothsonasloth wrote: post #358
andrewaylett wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try using a Plus Code? The link you sent is 9C9MRJ9C+XP (visible in the left panel of Google Maps when you click on a location) which isn't on land and is rejected by the Starlink website, but "V84R+RR Isle of Scalpay" (the nearest land) gives me the same pricing as I see for my location in Edinburgh. So I suspect you'd be fine.

Thanks, I sent the wrong link (updated) The plus code for my area returns nothing, however for a satellite that is ~500km above me, surely subscribing to a location that is 27 miles away from me won't make a difference?

No idea why the Starlink website won't recognise the short Plus Code, especially when it shortens the full code if I put that in :P. Your area code is "9C9J", making your full code "9C9JJQX3+84".

As an aside, plus codes should be wonderful things but the tooling isn't particularly well built out -- this is the first application I've seen using them that's not Google Maps, and it's not worked as well as I'd hoped it would :(. In this case, the geocoder for the area hasn't done what it ought to have done. And I fear that while the full codes don't need a geocoder, short codes might be generally susceptible to incompatible geocoders leading to incompatibilities between implementations. Which is what we seem to be seeing here.

Re: Starlink is now Accepting General Pre-orders

#373

Post by dboreham »

enra wrote: post #118
colordrops wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I regularly get 12ms latency to google over my DOCSIS3 cable coax connection.

I regularly get 25-250ms latency (average is maybe 60ms) to google or 8.8.8.8 over my DOCSIS3 cable coax connection in addition to 2-5% packet loss. The ISP network and node is oversaturated and they plan to do nothing about it (Cox). So I'm actually excited if Starlink can provide 20-30ms stable latency, I have an option which is not tied to the regional operators.

Latency or RTT?

Re: Starlink is now Accepting General Pre-orders

#374

Post by josefx »

sien wrote: post #270
awaaz wrote: post #258

Curious to see how this plays out in a country like mine (India) where the government loves [1] to shut off Internet access on the flimsiest of excuses. Everything from entire states (like Kashmir), to few localities (farmer protests around Delhi) have had their mobile Internet access switched off because the government likes to curtail communication when it suits them. [1] https://www.indiatoday.in/diu/story/more-th…

Great point. It'll be interesting to see what China does.

Musk has quite a bit of money invested in China, so it will be more interesting what he does when China wants to integrate Starlink into the great firewall.

Re: Starlink is now Accepting General Pre-orders

#375

Post by martinald »

geerlingguy wrote: post #14

I was able to place an actual order just last week in St. Louis, MO. I will be using it and doing some tests in an area that actually has cable Internet (though spotty, and until very recently was limited to less than 20 Mbps up, no matter how much you paid). But you have to realize, when you look at the $600 initial cost and $100 monthly fee—this will bring 100+ Mbps down and 15+ Mbps up to so many places (even in s…

Let's see how well it copes with more users. My guess is it won't cope well. There is only 20gig/sec of capacity per satelite, and I believe that is raw speed, which will get hammered in poor weather conditions and more FEC or less efficient QAM is required.

20gig/sec is not a lot of capacity for many thousands of square kms. It's 1-2k users at peak times watching Netflix for example on 1080p or 4K streams, nevermind everything else. It is probably not far off many DOCSIS CMTS allocations, which get horrendously overloaded being only a few city blocks.

My guess is after beta they will get rid of the unlimited aspect pretty sharpish, and probably introduce aggressive traffic shaping.

It is likely to work very well in very rural areas with no major cities or towns in line of sight of the satelite. However, for suburbs/exurbs close to cities and towns which have poor internet I think the experience will be pretty poor once it has more customers (especially in Europe. There are basically no truly remote areas).

Re: Starlink is now Accepting General Pre-orders

#378

Post by meibo »

secondcoming wrote: post #345
whylo wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

£439 for hardware, £89/month service, £54 delivery in the UK. The equivalent of US$611, $124 and $75 respectively at today's rates. Our prices include sales tax (VAT) though.

Ooft, that's pricey.

It really isn't in a lot of european countries. For this speed, you'd be paying 60-90€ at any ISP in Germany, if it's even available to you.

Re: Starlink is now Accepting General Pre-orders

#379

Post by rkangel »

mike_d wrote: post #220
fulafel wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> b. no ipv6 yet. > c. all IPs are in cgnat IP space Interesting, this is more like an internet proxy than connecting devices to the internet. Hope they fix it soon. Does the TOS forbid running eg ssh or remote desktop services? Or VPNs?

It is a consumer internet eyeball service. Having an assigned routable address is not a thing in many countries, and you really shouldn't expect it as a "feature" in the future. Eventually the Comcasts of the world will sell off the majority of the IPv4 they hold to the AWSs of the world.

> Having an assigned routable address is not a thing in many countries, and you really shouldn't expect it as a "feature" in the future

I don't see why not in an IPv6 world.

Re: Starlink is now Accepting General Pre-orders

#380

Post by zaphar »

escalt wrote: post #362
sgtnoodle wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol, the fact that they just went with IPv4 supports the theory that they know what they're doing. I've read multiple tutorials on IPv6 and it's so complicated that I still can't grasp how it all works in my head. For some context, I've personally written an Ethernet IPv4 network stack with DHCP from scratch. I also worked on Ethernet switch firmware, coincidentally for SpaceX...

I guess I don't have as much low level experience as you do, but in my eyes IPv6 is literally just IPv4 with more bits. Due to the increased number of possible addresses, IPv6 is used with some different (better) concepts than IPv4. For example having (very likely) unique local networks (ULAs) is amazing when you happen to merge previously independent networks together or do some VPN stuff. You pretty much never have…

That's just the addressing/subnetting though. Ipv6 and 4 for that matter also have a lot more going on in the packet handling and specification. and Ipv6's packet handling stuff is way more complicated than Ipv4. I was reading through just the ICMP parts and the difference is significant. I imagine the rest of it is the same.
Post reply on HN