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

481–490 of 496 posts

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

#481

Post by DoesntMatter22 »

Robotbeat wrote: post #412
itsoktocry wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think people underestimate just how challenging the problem is Is this the shifting of the narrative? "People" aren't underestimating the problem. It's widely known to be an extremely difficult problem. Musk said he'd have it done by now, and actually sold the technology. People have been skeptical of it for the better part of a decade.

I remain skeptical Tesla is anywhere near let-the-driver-sleep self driving (except perhaps in tunnels), but I’m very glad they’re trying to do it, and do it at scale for consumer cars, not just company-owned hyper-sensored vehicles that cost as much as a house. Literally every company working on the problem a decade ago was over-optimistic, but many pursued a strategy that would keep the technology only for company-…

People are already sleeping while the Tesla drives, albeit illegally. Highway driving it seems to do really well, around town though sleeping seems way off.

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

#482

Post by vlovich123 »

epgui wrote: post #431
philistine wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not how marketing works. Show me a reputable book about marketing that says: promise something that doesn't exist.

Alternatively… Explain to me how making predictions about the future that don’t pan out is surprising or alienating to anyone reasonable. Anyone who thinks predictions about the future hold the same weight as statements about things that currently exist ought to know better.

He's been saying repeatedly that "it's going to be fully self driving next year" for the past 6 years now. At what point for you does that change from "overly optimistic prediction that didn't pan out" to "he's likely lying through his teeth"?

The unsettling duality that Tesla fans will accept is that somehow Musk is both an unrivaled genius AND he's consistently betting incorrectly on Tesla's timeline for L5. When other self-driving experts in the field indicate full L5 for the industry is probably a decade or so away (optimistically), I'm not keen to believe that Musk is just blinded by pure optimism for 6 years running.

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

#483

Post by bottlepalm »

carlivar wrote: post #453
bottlepalm wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I'd say it's 95% there if the car is fully self driving 95% of the time. Taking over for tricky situations alerts Tesla to those situations and allows them to rank and fix the issue. 1,000's of miles might be nothing, but then multiply it by the tens of thousands of drivers using it everyday and yes Tesla basically is aware of all the tricky situations and is working to resolve them. I really don't understand…

Are you a developer? Everyone knows the last 10% takes 90% of the time. Though in this case I would say the remaining problems in FSD become exponentially more difficult the closer to 100%. Why am I critical? Because Elon Musk reminds me of bad bosses and product managers in my career. They act like PT Barnum to the public and throw tantrums internally. I also strongly dislike Musk's rejection of Kanban and Toyota Pr…

Err the best engineers in the world work for him and want to work for him. Engineers run his companies. They’re given crazy ambitious goals and the resources to go do it. Engineers love challenges and making the impossible possible. Robots, fast cars, and rockets.

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

#484

Post by carlivar »

bottlepalm wrote: post #483
carlivar wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you a developer? Everyone knows the last 10% takes 90% of the time. Though in this case I would say the remaining problems in FSD become exponentially more difficult the closer to 100%. Why am I critical? Because Elon Musk reminds me of bad bosses and product managers in my career. They act like PT Barnum to the public and throw tantrums internally. I also strongly dislike Musk's rejection of Kanban and Toyota Pr…

Err the best engineers in the world work for him and want to work for him. Engineers run his companies. They’re given crazy ambitious goals and the resources to go do it. Engineers love challenges and making the impossible possible. Robots, fast cars, and rockets.

You keep saying things like that, but from your comment history you seem to be a huge Musk fan, so color me dubious. So what data do you have on 1) the best engineers and 2) their preference for Musk as boss?

Yet more tantrum like behavior with Twitter and Tesla return-to-office has definitely soured many of my colleagues recently.

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

#485

Post by LightG »

ericabiz wrote: post #153

I believe this is SpaceX trying to stay one step ahead of Apple. Anyone else remember this strange rumor about iPhones including satellite capability a year ago? https://www.macrumors.com/2021/08/29/iphone-13-to-feature-le... Now you have Apple’s event in a couple weeks themed “Far Out” with space pictures. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Apple announced something similar, possibly with Globalstar instead. Of cours…

Of course, despite Musk's largesse, no one is really going to give af about it.

The Apple Event will put it front and centre.

Musk coukd have announced it a year ago, it wouldn't have mattered.

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

#488

Post by skimo8 »

black3r wrote: post #394
dfadsadsf wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If recipient does not have iMessage he will get it as SMS.

iMessages aren't converted to SMS on Apple's servers side. It's a fallback on the phone's side. When you're on a WiFi but with no cell coverage, you can send an iMessage but can't send an SMS.

This isn’t entirely true. If you have WiFi calling enabled, you can also send SMS over WiFi if the carrier supports it. I use this extensively when traveling internationally.

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

#489

Post by NavinF »

deelowe wrote: post #430
NavinF wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is indeed nonsensical, but it was covered by every news outlet a couple of years ago. Astronomy issues: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_flare#Mega-constella... Orbital debris: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome#Potential_tri... Nobody bothered to look at the details.

I read the links, but I'm not seeing where the concerns are nonsensical.

The links are just background info.

The concerns are difficult to dispute because they’re “not even wrong”. There are no specific claims that can be disputed.

Serious astronomers don’t just look at a photo with bright dots and get confused because some of them are satellites. A few predictable bright pixels are the least of their concerns.

As far as space debris, see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_debris_produci...

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

#490

Post by mlindner »

manquer wrote: post #441
mlindner wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 .

I explicitly said low earth orbit (below 2000 km), not all satellites in orbit.
Post reply on HN