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

SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 496 posts

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#441

Post by manquer »

mlindner wrote: post #96
fogleman wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This isn't just Theranos, this is Walgreens as well."

Why do people keep comparing to Theranos when Starlink is already being used by hundreds of thousands of people? Starlink exists. In fact, SpaceX/Starlink now operates more satellites in Low Earth Orbit than every other country and business in the world, combined. Theranos had no proven track record. Like, what's enough to satisfy you?

Minor pedantic observation

Starlink will be able to claim that achievement of having more than everyone else combined soon but isn’t there yet.

There are around 4000ish non starlink satellites in orbit today , starlink has 3k today .

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#442

Post by assttoasstmgr »

epgui wrote: post #429
bagels wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how fraud works, not marketing.

It’s not fraud when you’re just over-optimistic, you believe what you’re saying, and you end up being wrong. It might suck, but it’s not fraud.

> It’s not fraud when you’re just over-optimistic, you believe what you’re saying, and you end up being wrong.

"It's not a lie if you believe it."

-- G. Costanza

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#443

Post by boomchinolo78 »

Roark66 wrote: post #339

This is indeed very nice if it is implemented. As for T-mobile, how about they commit to ipv6 on all of their LTE networks? Here in Poland they have a network sharing agreement with Orange which means they use the same infrastructure, but when I use Orange's APN I get an ipv6 address. With T-mobile only ipv4 and they have no plans to implement ipv6.

What do you get other than decreased privacy?

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#444

Post by samstave »

mlindner wrote: post #212
samstave wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is that airplane mode is a farce, and even if you put yourself into airplane, there is still a back-trickle... can anyone disclaim this? What are the anechoics of an airplane mode phone?

No I mean, there's a power button.

Ever heard of ILO?

-

Edit:

And back doors, and Eschelon, and six degrees and a bunch of other things people dont want you to recall.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#445

Post by v0idzer0 »

lrvick wrote: post #438
Sporktacular wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good enough for what? If you have SMS where you didn't before you're still equally free to not use it. Personally I like the idea of always having a simple channel for emergencies.

Not good enough to be the only standard form of communication permitted other than a handful of centralized proprietary apps. A journalist or a dissident may wish to get critical communications out from a remote area without exposing their identity or location.

Whose goal is to solve this? Not T-Mobile or SpaceX

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#446

Post by fivestarman »

bottlepalm wrote: post #437
fivestarman wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He never studied to be an engineer. He doesn't have his name on any designs or inventions within his companies. He isn't an engineer. A lot of claims have been made that he also hasn't actually coded anything that's been used. The guy is a liar, look it up. Go on youtube and search "elon musk debunked". There are lots of videos with sources showing how elon is a fraud.

Elon has a degree in physics. You think you can only work as an engineer if the word 'engineer' is the degree you have? Many engineers have degrees in physics among other foundational sciences - math, chemistry, etc... They make for especially good engineers.

He has a bachelor of arts in physics. He isn't an engineer. There are actual qualifications to being an engineer and he doesn't have those. He came up from his dad's unethical mining company. His code has never been used because it "was garbage".

If elon musk is an engineer, what has he engineered that has his name on it?

Please point me in the direction that shows that elon has the certifications and education to call himself an engineer.

Musk has a lot of people fooled that he's a genius, and he even lied about having asbergers, on top of everything else he has lied about.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#447

Post by bottlepalm »

fivestarman wrote: post #446
bottlepalm wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon has a degree in physics. You think you can only work as an engineer if the word 'engineer' is the degree you have? Many engineers have degrees in physics among other foundational sciences - math, chemistry, etc... They make for especially good engineers.

He has a bachelor of arts in physics. He isn't an engineer. There are actual qualifications to being an engineer and he doesn't have those. He came up from his dad's unethical mining company. His code has never been used because it "was garbage". If elon musk is an engineer, what has he engineered that has his name on it? Please point me in the direction that shows that elon has the certifications and education to ca…

There actually aren't any official qualifications to be an engineer unless you are talking about 'licensed engineers' of which only 20% of all engineers are. Please correct me if I'm wrong and post the official qualifications.

That being said, a physics degree is more than enough to work in most engineering positions. Elon being the leader is probably the most important part of the SpaceX and Tesla engineering teams and shares the credit with everyone else when a good product ships.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#448

Post by Sporktacular »

lrvick wrote: post #438
Sporktacular wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good enough for what? If you have SMS where you didn't before you're still equally free to not use it. Personally I like the idea of always having a simple channel for emergencies.

Not good enough to be the only standard form of communication permitted other than a handful of centralized proprietary apps. A journalist or a dissident may wish to get critical communications out from a remote area without exposing their identity or location.

Then this isn't the solution for them. You keep assuming this is an internet service when it's not. Internet protocols are massively inefficient and have latency constraints that would choke narrow channels while offering almost no utility. This will be a modified SMS service, not a not an IRC service. Don't like it? Go buy an actual satphone with a data plan.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#449

Post by lrvick »

v0idzer0 wrote: post #445
lrvick wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not good enough to be the only standard form of communication permitted other than a handful of centralized proprietary apps. A journalist or a dissident may wish to get critical communications out from a remote area without exposing their identity or location.

Whose goal is to solve this? Not T-Mobile or SpaceX

When you are the only source of a critical service in an area, you become a utility and should shoulder the responsibilities that come with that.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#450

Post by Melatonic »

lrvick wrote: post #366
Cogito wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the event they addressed this, and said they would work with anyone, and that the real issue is making sure that the data is correctly identified as messages and not generic data. This apparently would require back-end work between T-Mobile and the messaging app to identify the data in some way.

This is a net neutrality killer any way you look at it as whitelisting apps in any way will by design mean blocking legitimate privacy focused messaging solutions that do not have fixed IP addresses or identifiable traffic patterns. I somehow doubt for instance they would have a way to allow a federated and often self-hosted messaging protocol like Matrix over an anonymization networking layer like Tor, which is the…

This is probably just a temporary solution to give everyone SMS capability after the fact - why would you assume this is permanent? Obviously the goal is to get everyone global internet. What happens at that point will determine net neutrality but that is far off into the future.
Post reply on HN