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

US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 773 posts

Re: US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

#521

Post by qarl »

inemesitaffia wrote: post #336
qarl wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well - I may be biased, but I've been seeing a lot of claims from Republicans lately which do not closely match reality. Until there's actual evidence, I would be inclined to dismiss them.

You can read the requirements, then read the denial letter, the appeal (and denial) and dissents.

That doesn't much help. Their main claim is that it is not normal (and hence political) for a subsidy to be canceled based for failure to make progress.

I've seen no evidence supporting that claim, and lots of evidence to counter it.

Re: US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

#522

Post by oittaa »

toss1 wrote: post #69
belltaco wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From one of the dissenting opinions: > the majority points to delays in the development of SpaceX’s Starship launch platform—the largest, most powerful rocket ever built—as evidence that SpaceX would be unable to launch enough Starlink satellites to meet its 2025 commitments. The trouble with this argument is that SpaceX never indicated that it was relying on the Starship platform to meet its RDOF obligations, and in…

Sure. Neither you nor I were in the room, and the evidence is that the committee that was in the room evaluated those plans and it seemed more unlikely to meet the goals. Given Musk's track record, it is very reasonable to treat any timeline with a shipload of salt. He literally took $thousands from thousands of customers for Full-Self-Driving upgrades that were to transform their Teslas into self-driving Uber/Lyft g…

How do I block/mute these trolls on this website? I tried searching the FAQ but didn't see anything.

Re: US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

#523

Post by DoesntMatter22 »

NotACop182 wrote: post #442
DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This question was not asking about when FSD was going to work but when Enhanced Autopilot would noticeably depart from FSD. No where in there did it say "FSD will be working completely in 6 months". They did in fact diverge, no where was that a statement that FSD would be complete by then. It's ironic you are calling him a liar when your response seems to either be completely dishonest itself or you are not aware of…

I never understood someone so determined to ignore all the evidence. Yet when confronted doubles/triples down with excuses.

There is no proof. He never said it. People keep posting other quotes but none where he says what they claim.

If you have proof of a direct quote where he says that FSD will be done withing 6 or 3 months for certain than please post it.

Otherwise, attacking me is dishonest

Re: US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

#524

Post by bsder »

jandrese wrote: post #275
I_Am_Nous wrote: post #15

When applying for RDOF you say what service tier you are targeting and instead of shooting for the minimum 25/3, Starlink applied for 100/20. When they didn't reach those speeds[1], they were ineligible but not just because they didn't hit the required speeds on their existing network. There are more details here[2] but the jist is that Starlink bid to supply 100/20 internet to over half a million subscribers and the…

I find it impressive that the government is actually punishing a project for running late and underdelivering. They should expand this to all parts of the government. Can you imagine if the F-35 was cancelled the first time it fell behind schedule? The Space Launch System? The Littoral Combat System? The USS JFK? So many boondoggles could be killed off before they spend money. Maybe contractors would have to start pr…

> So many boondoggles could be killed off before they spend money.

This is, in fact, precisely the issue with government contracting. But not in the way you think.

For all practical purposes, every single government contract can be cancelled without warning and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Consequently, every single government contract is executed with that in mind.

This leads to all the pathological behaviors that everybody bitches about.

Re: US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

#525

Post by pyrale »

serf wrote: post #356
DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair FSD is the hardest software problem that man has ever attempted.

who in their right mind would look at any problem in any field with the title of "hardest problem" and then put a schedule to it?

A deluded narcissist?

Re: US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

#526

Post by _ea1k »

constantly wrote: post #454
alephnan wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> yet many other award recipients have no service and no rollout and no speeds to even measure: Unfortunately, most of the public won’t know or care about this blatant corruption and crony capitalism The revolving door between regulators and industry keeps on turning

As far as I can tell in a cursory reading, SpaceX Starlink applied for subsidies with enumerated requirements. They cannot meet those requirements, so the subsidy is rescinded. Seems straightforward and doesn’t seem to matter, as far as I can tell, how many other companies couldn’t meet the requirements or don’t have the hardware to meet those requirements or whatever. Unclear why this is “blatant corruption” or “cro…

I'm getting the impression that some of the competitors haven't built anything to test yet. Based upon that, using the current performance of Starlink and comparing it to the hypothetical performance of others might not be fair. If Starlink is losing an award because of supposition, that's bad.

But I must admit that I haven't read all of the history here.

Re: US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

#527

Post by _ea1k »

intrasight wrote: post #434
lolbase wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government shouldn’t give out billion dollar participation trophies. There’s a set of metrics to meet. Starlink is moving the wrong way against those metrics. As such, they’ll need to succeed unaided in the marketplace, instead of getting a government handout.

Agreed. The FCC shouldn't be giving out any funds. They should stick to their role as regulator. Starlink as a properly grounded libertarian outfit should have lobbied to have any subsidy role by the FCC discontinued. Starlink should have just competed in the broadband marketplace - as should have everyone else. In such a level playing field, I think Starlink would do just fine.

I agree with this. But we have to operate in the world that exists and not necessarily the one that we wish to exist.

Re: US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

#528

Post by TaylorAlexander »

mcguire wrote: post #376
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hell I work at a farm on the coast near Silicon Valley in San Gregorio (designing a farming robot) and Starlink is the only decent internet option we’ve ever had.

What speeds do you get? Edit: That's weird. San Gregorio is like 15-20 miles from Cupertino. Here in Jackson County, AL, Farmers Telecom Coop has gigabit or half-gigabit fiber to much of the county.

I've lived in lots of locations around the Bay Area over the last 20 years and I didn't have fiber until a year ago when I moved to Oakland.

According to three speed tests with the command line speedtest application I am getting these speeds with Starlink:

Download: 59.79, 88.52, 104.76 Mbit/s

Upload: 6.45, 11.42, 15.79 Mbit/s

Re: US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

#529

Post by NovemberWhiskey »

trident5000 wrote: post #20
I_Am_Nous wrote: post #15

When applying for RDOF you say what service tier you are targeting and instead of shooting for the minimum 25/3, Starlink applied for 100/20. When they didn't reach those speeds[1], they were ineligible but not just because they didn't hit the required speeds on their existing network. There are more details here[2] but the jist is that Starlink bid to supply 100/20 internet to over half a million subscribers and the…

These are future speed metrics, not current speed thresholds. And the performance metrics have been a constant shifting goalpost. You can read FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr's letter on this matter here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-105A2.pdf This is most likely political.

Just FYI, in case it makes a difference to your assessment of credibility, but this is the same commissioner who opposes net neutrality, wants to rework the CDA to deal with the way "the far left has worked to weaponize social media platforms", hopes to have TikTok banned in the interest of national security, and appeared on Fox News to talk about how "the far-left has hopped from hoax to hoax to hoax to explain how it lost to President Trump at the ballot box".

When you say it is most likely political, it certainly is, because Carr and Simington (who was rammed through the Senate at the last moment by the Trump administration) are pretty much the definition of partisan. People who were paying attention to the development of this situation back in 2020/21 saw it coming.

Re: US agency will not reinstate $900M subsidy for Starlink

#530

Post by I_Am_Nous »

newaccount74 wrote: post #433
dboreham wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Fiber as a last mile solution for true rural areas is a non-starter. Source: I also built a small WISP and still maintain my own microwave service, and use Starlink as a backup.

Why? We managed to get power lines and phone lines to pretty much every house even in rural areas. Why should laying fiber be a "non-starter"?

Fiber can even run aerial on those same power lines. It doesn't have to be buried, which could help some of the more remote areas that already have power.
Post reply on HN