51–60 of 103 posts
[flagged]
1.5 million customers according to google, ~$100 per month per customer is like 1.8 billion cashflow in per year, seems possible to me.
Plus, while they were selling terminals at a loss, they are close to even now and some of the more fancy terminals are likely making some money.
So its really not that crazy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why do you even think this is so important -- it achieves nothing we don't already have terrestrially and just pollutes the sky visually (causing problems with ground based telescopes) and pollutes the atmosphere we actually breathe: https://science.slashdot.org/story/23/11/05/0330226/spacecra... I can't see any upsides to this venture.
Shipping tracking to reduce black market exchanges and human/drug trafficking. Also, without starlink Ukraine has said they would have been defeated quite quickly. (Ie fighting without a gun). There are many upsides.
I'm sorry-- what? Surely a totally global satellite network available in remote regions such as mountains and jungles would just be a force multiplier for these kinds of activities.
> Also, without starlink Ukraine has said they would have been defeated quite quickly. (Ie fighting without a gun).
What? :
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/09/07/ukraine...
> There are many upsides
Please let us know when you've found some.
There are many timelines without spacex where something like starlink isn’t achieved for many more decades, possibly centuries. Very few thought this was possible.
But why do you even think this is so important -- it achieves nothing we don't already have terrestrially and just pollutes the sky visually (causing problems with ground based telescopes) and pollutes the atmosphere we actually breathe: https://science.slashdot.org/story/23/11/05/0330226/spacecra... I can't see any upsides to this venture.
How is providing access to the internet not an awesome thing for society?
There are millions of people in my same situation for which this system is doing good.
Also airplanes and light from cities pollute the sky infinitely more than these satellites do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Starlink is comparable to Iridium if you are discussing ‘internet from the sky’ but the details are more complex.
They are not comparable. Starlink offers highspeed (actually, not marketing gibberish), low latency internet around the world at a price people can actually afford and without unreasonable datacaps. This is possible because they are mass producing phased array antennas, something that was out of reach of common affordability before Starlink. Starlink is comparable to Iridium like dial-up internet is comparable to fib…
You align the element order to what is actually being compared. Just pointing that out for any other non-native English speakers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Starlink is comparable to Iridium if you are discussing ‘internet from the sky’ but the details are more complex.
They are not comparable. Starlink offers highspeed (actually, not marketing gibberish), low latency internet around the world at a price people can actually afford and without unreasonable datacaps. This is possible because they are mass producing phased array antennas, something that was out of reach of common affordability before Starlink. Starlink is comparable to Iridium like dial-up internet is comparable to fib…
True, but Starlink isn't what made phased array antennas affordable. The affordability of phased array antennas is what made Starlink financially feasible.
When the Iridium constellations were launched in the 1990s, the commercial phased array antennas in use today had not yet been invented. When the second-generation satellites were designed in the 2010s, phase array antennas were not yet commercially available, and did not become commercially available until around the same time that the 2nd-gen satellites were launched.
There are many timelines without spacex where something like starlink isn’t achieved for many more decades, possibly centuries. Very few thought this was possible.
But why do you even think this is so important -- it achieves nothing we don't already have terrestrially and just pollutes the sky visually (causing problems with ground based telescopes) and pollutes the atmosphere we actually breathe: https://science.slashdot.org/story/23/11/05/0330226/spacecra... I can't see any upsides to this venture.
Sorry, but this is a very first world, urban perspective. Please have a little empathy. I live in the US and have only one choice for internet from home and it is lousy. Starlink has been a dramatic change for us. This is the situation for many, many people in the US and around the world.
Starlink is absolutely offering something that is NOT available terrestrially.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If he was doing (1) that would preserve his integrity. Sure he’d get flack, but his position would be consistent. Maybe Tesla had to use the tax money for competitive reasons and under investor pressure, and Musk personally disagrees with the general system of government handouts. Ok I’ll buy that but I haven’t heard such a nuanced take from him.
It’s an absurd complaint. An NBA coach may not like changes in rules around “traveling” in the past 20 years, but either they embrace the new rules and have their players take the extra step or they just lose to teams that do. Advocate for the rules you want, but play the game with the rules it actually has.
But I get what you’re ultimately saying, which is what I said — it would be a competitive disadvantage to Tesla if it turned down this money and its competitors did not. So it may accept it reluctantly while disagreeing with the overall handout. Again I have not heard that take from Musk. He just rails against the government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1.5 million customers according to google, ~$100 per month per customer is like 1.8 billion cashflow in per year, seems possible to me.
They are closer to 2 million now. And many costumers, like planes, ships, RV and so on actually pay considerably more. Plus, while they were selling terminals at a loss, they are close to even now and some of the more fancy terminals are likely making some money. So its really not that crazy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Starlink is comparable to Iridium if you are discussing ‘internet from the sky’ but the details are more complex.
They are not comparable. Starlink offers highspeed (actually, not marketing gibberish), low latency internet around the world at a price people can actually afford and without unreasonable datacaps. This is possible because they are mass producing phased array antennas, something that was out of reach of common affordability before Starlink. Starlink is comparable to Iridium like dial-up internet is comparable to fib…
You should check out the proposed pricing for Starlink's maritime and aviation offerings...
Marine is a $10K one-time fee plus $5K/month.
Aviation, $150K plus $25K/month.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't bother with facts for the elon haters, they are emotionally invested in Elon being an evil billionaire right winger, who is only around because of government tax incentives. Oh and it's his employees that did all the work, he just had money... (why didn't SLS, arianespace and blue origin work then? oh and the N1 russian rocket) Never mind the hundreds of data points to the contrary, the media now hates Elon, an…
>it's surprising just how effective they've been at turning many people against him. He's done plenty of it himself, retweeting nazi shit and great replacement shit and all types of horrible shit he supports on twitter. It takes a real boot licker to not recognize his overt evil he believes politically, and believe it's some media conspiracy. The fact he takes government money isn't a question, whether giving elon th…
> The problem with people like elon isn't that they get tax payer money, it's that they act afterwords like they bootstrapped themselves alone in to success and then dodge billions in taxes.
Precisely. Elon has stood up and acted like multiple ventures of his either haven't received tax payer funding, or grants, or loans, or subsidies. He and his companies are perfectly entitled to do so. And we are perfectly entitled to call out bullshit when he goes on an interview/Twitter to talk about "without government assistance".