Live data from Hacker News

Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

xda-developers.com

291–300 of 348 posts

Re: Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

#291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no, it's not a strong sign of that. it's a strong sign that with VC money and government money you can offer unrealistic service at unrealistic prices. but when you need to start showing that you are profitable and launching satellites to maintain the current network is also expensive, both your service and prices start to get more in line with what everybody else already had. The honeymoon phase of starlink is over.…

Almost all of Starlink’s competitors are completely dependent on government money. The FCC spends billions a year cutting checks to rural ISPs to subsidize them. The FCC took Starlink’s subsidies away because the Biden admin hates Musk now. But I think Musk will still beat many of these clown companies anyway.

FCC spends billions a year cutting checks to big telecom rather than municipal or open access networks. Big telecom is gobbling most of the of the federal grant money too.

Re: Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

#292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Generally speaking, what is the cost differential between hanging wires and digging wires? Orders of magnitude. I actually once worked in construction, specifically in trench digging for German Telekom. Putting up poles is easy, drill a hole in the ground for the pole, put the pole in, string a fiber on it, done. Even cheaper if you already have poles, all you need there is a truck with a lift. Downside is, unless…

Thanks for the detailed reply! Does any of this calculus change when you're talking about really rural areas, like in the desert of Australia? My guess is that would mean higher cost of sending someone out to fix a pole (point against poles), but also lower likelihood of running into existing infrastructure (point in favor of digging).

No idea to be honest.

For power at least, running it buried is no good idea at all because capacitive losses are larger, so at least as long as an area has a grid connection it makes sense to "dual use" the already existing poles.

Based on popular memes I can imagine, especially in Australia, that it might not be a good idea to bury lines in the open desert because you will get animals burrowing and chewing through the cables.

Re: Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

#293
post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Fiber?

Such disappointing potential

Typical google seemed to think a politics and business problem was actually a technical one and then give up completely when it was clear they would actually have to make a real business investment to get what they wanted.

Re: Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

#294
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comcast is over $120/mo in California.

> Comcast is over $120/mo in California. Starlink does not really compete with Comcast in areas Comcast already serves(at least when it comes to speed/price/reliability), it just doesn't make sense to use Starlink when Comcast is available other than maybe as a secondary backup connection. Starlink is significantly faster and cheaper however than other providers like Viasat which serve areas without economical terres…

> $250,000

That’s insane!

Do they give you an option to draw your own lines? Any chance you can apply for some subsidy?

I really don’t know why in 2023 fiber internet is not treated the same as water or electricity..

Re: Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

#295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last-mile rural electrification will never reach everybody in the USA. It's just too many people to service. Roosevelt would've mandated free service for the poor for all new startups, among other considerations which would have made making a new a rural electrical utility a complete non-starter. If you want Electricity, you can pay for it.

Many rural areas do not have power and never will.

True, but those are typically rather low density/large plots, which makes them much easier to serve with a satellite based service.

Re: Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

#296
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when there are already plenty of cheap and reliable alternatives, including alternatives at higher bandwidths That’s not true even in California. Plenty of small town where the only alternative is line of sight wireless internet.

That’s a rural town. I explicitly said “urban”.

Oh.. I must have missed it. Sorry

But yeah, I totally agree with your points

Re: Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

#297
post #27

$65 billion going into rural broadband over the next 5 years. Not finalized, but my read is the feds want fiber. They are wrangling over maps right now. https://www.commerce.gov/news/fact-sheets/2021/11/fact-sheet...

I'll bet 70+% of the money that ends up allocated will find its way into established isp pockets with absolutely nothing to show for it in return.

Standard operating procedure seems to be, promise the world, update the maps with lies, then announce a stock buy back plan with the profits.

Re: Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

#298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink is delivering internet to otherwise off-grid homes... Solar+battery tech has made power lines not only unnecessary, but in some states arguably not worth the fire risk anymore.

> Solar+battery tech has made power lines not only unnecessary, but in some states arguably not worth the fire risk anymore. Power lines aren't an inherent fire risk. Unmaintained power lines, however, are. Primarily, you need to maintain clearance from bushes and trees.

"This shirt is dry-clean only, which means it's dirty" - Mitch Hedberg

Re: Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

#299
According to ITU, more than a third of world population has no (proper) access to the Internet, and that equates to about 2.7 Billion people worldwide [1].

Personally I'd really love Starlink to provide Internet access to all people in the rural areas but it probably will not going to happen. By their own estimate, they are only currently deploying around 5% to 10% of their 42K projected Starlink satellites for global coverage. I'm not seeing that going to happen for at least another ten years (2033) provided they get the funding they're requesting and it does not seems to be the case [2].

The best alternative for satellite link for rural is the terrestrial based fixed wireless access (FWA). There are mainly 3 segments/types of FWA namely [3]:

1) ‘Wireless Fiber’ (100 – 1K Mbps, cost USD50 – 100)

2) ‘Build with Precision’ (50 – 200 Mbps, cost USD20 – 60)

3) ‘Connect the Unconnected’ (10–100 Mbps, cost USD10 – 20)

This last (3rd segment) is characterized by virtually non-existent fixed broadband alternatives, and mobile broadband using smartphones is the dominant way of accessing the Internet. Average revenue per unit (ARPU) cost are very much limited and user expectations of access speed are relatively low. The irony is that the 3rd segment is the "low hanging fruits" in term of technology while being the hardest to achieve in practice due to the very nature of terrestrial wireless signals. Starlink or any LEO based solution, however attractive, cannot possibly fill this gap due to the high cost involved in the satellite business and its astronomical ROI.

The author of the OP article is from the first (1st) segment of "elite" users and they're very far in between in the grand scale of rural users, i.e. not a typical rural users most probably 5% maximum. It seems to me that Starlink is focusing on this type of "elite" rural to survive and remain profitable not unlike Tesla did with their initial luxury/premium Tesla EV models strategy. But Tesla success is largely hinged and depended on huge (US) govt support for Tesla early days, and Starlink is also counting in the same strategy [4]. However, the latest bidding for govt money for Starlink is not successful and it's evidence from the stalls number of further starlink satellite deployment [5]. Elon Musk has been mentioning on record that one of the first Starlink priorities is not to go bust as what had happenned to its predecessor Motorola's Iridium but the odd seems to be against them at least for now.

I think it's the best for most of the countries that struggling with rural internet access (e.g. all countries US included) is to go for terrestrial fixed wireless access (FWA) for the third (3rd) segment i.e. connecting the unconnected. But if US cannot make satellite based Internet access work what are the chances that other countries might have?

Probably the best solution is to be flexible in tackling the Internet access for the 3rd segment with FWA perhaps similar to approach taken by Magma [5]. It's still early days for the rural areas connectivity but the sooner we can tackle this issues is better, as demonstrated during the height of the pandemic where travels are limited and digital divide phenomenon is at its worst.

[1] Measuring digital development Facts and Figures 2022:

https://www.itu.int/itu-d/reports/statistics/facts-figures-2...

[2] FCC decides against giving Starlink $1b in rural broadband subsidies:

https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/11/fcc_starlink_rural_in...

[3] Fixed Wireless Access handbook (2023 Edition) by Ericsson:

https://www.ericsson.com/en/fixed-wireless-access

[4] SpaceX’s Starlink satellite network wins $885M in federal aid for rural broadband:

https://www.geekwire.com/2020/spacexs-starlink-satellite-net...

[5] Building Flexible, Low-Cost Wireless Access Networks With Magma (to appear in 20th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation 2023):

https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~jrex/papers/magma23.pdf

Re: Starlink internet is going from rural savior to unreliable luxury

#300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All these talks about Starlink -> Remember it's a bandaid solution to your governments poor planning and infrastructure rollout of a core utility / service. Partially. The thing is, the US is so unbelievably huge that it is economically infeasible to serve extremely rural areas with high-speed wired (i.e. fiber, DSL) or wireless (microwave, 4G/5G phone) internet, even with massive government subsidies - and that ap…

Yes, the US is huge, but if an area can get power, we should be able to rollout fibre along the same routes. It just takes a bit of work.

The problem with that is that the power lines were laid down some 30+ years ago, and a new digging project is not cost-efficient. Laying fiber with other utilities should happen in every new development, but that only helps new developments.
Post reply on HN