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

621–630 of 773 posts

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

#621

Post by TaylorAlexander »

medvezhenok wrote: post #492
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watched a panel discussion on self driving cars in 2015 with several legit experts in the technology (I believe Sebastian Thrun was one of them). There were also some CEOs. The experts all said there’s no way the tech would deploy before 2025, potentially later. The CEOs were saying 2018 or 2019. The experts had a clear view way back then, the CEOs just don’t want to listen.

Not many people, even experts, predicted the success of ChatGPT even five years ago - and most have moved their timeline for AGI up significantly because of its release. AI is a hard field to make predictions in.

> AI is a hard field to make predictions in.

Right but "hard to predict" does not mean "it will happen whenever I want it to happen". You can't look at a very hard problem, where a good sample of the world's experts say it will take more than 10 years to solve, and just say "I bet we can do it in 4 years" just because you want that to be true.

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

#622

Post by wolverine876 »

User23 wrote: post #589
tw04 wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, no. That's why there are laws against pyramid schemes, and false advertising. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/truth-advertising https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/investor_protection_guide_py...

Unless you're running for office. In that case you can lie to your heart's content about what you're offering.

For good reason: We can't have politicians regulating the speech of the critics and opponents. Nothing is more protected in the US than political speech, esp (afaik) by someone running for office.

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

#623

Post by advael »

czl wrote: post #620
advael wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we assess a person's intelligence by what their frothing fanboys think of them now, or is that only for rich celebrities?

Hater or fanboy does it matter? Do you not understand the concept of reflexivity? Intelligence can show truth. Intelligence can support some existing bias and hide truth. How does your intelligence serve you?

When someone's entire argument is "doing x would be dumb, and we know this guy isn't dumb", I see value in pointing out that this is a rather circular logic

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

#624

Post by czl »

DonHopkins wrote: post #569
czl wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The lying is clearly aimed at gaining investment money and preorders, though, not at some bizarre attempt at motivating engineers. It would be dumb to be caught "lying" over and over and Musk is not know to be dumb. Consider the possibility Musk is using reflexivity to accelerate progress. When people become convinced something is possible and work towards that goal their strong belief changes reality because there…

It would be dumb to be caught agreeing with anti semitic tweets, and telling advertisers to "go fuck yourself", yet here we are. Your argument is invalid.

Intelligent people have faults and make mistakes like the rest of us. What sets them apart is they are often better at seeing this and fixing things. Did Musk not make amends for that tweet? Do you think advertising should control social media? Do you genuinely believe Musk is dumb?

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

#625

Post by grecy »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #619
grecy wrote: post #611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just roll out fiber I worked provisioning internet for the Telco that serves basically all of Northern Canada. 33% of Canada's landmass and only 0.3% of its population. We're not talking about cities or even towns here, we're talking about very rural customers. Have you been to rural Alaska, or Montana or Wyoming? I have, and you drive for hours with no cell service, let alone wires in the ground. You are seriously…

Indeed, satellite or long haul fixed wireless will be the only option for some locations. I have been to rural Montana and Wyoming, but not Alaska. Customers will have to pay for their own StarLink where the FCC won’t. Perhaps we should not be subsidizing folks where it costs $1M to deliver terrestrial connectivity to you. Cheaper to pay them to move.

> Cheaper to pay them to move

They are not going to move. Period. I know this sounds snarky, but in all honesty if you had been to Alaska you would understand.

> Perhaps we should not be subsidizing folks where it costs $1M to deliver terrestrial connectivity to you

Or serve them with fast, reliable internet that is not terrestrial, and does not cost anything remotely close to $1M.

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

#626

Post by omgwtfbyobbq »

JohnFen wrote: post #458
MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it still leaves a bad taste in people's mouths It definitely does, although I don't understand why. One thing making bold forecasts does is motivate your people. JFK told us we'd get to the moon this decade which is absolutely nuts. Would we have got there as soon if he had said we'd get to the moon eventually ? To the other responder: JFK also had no tangible justification to say we'd get there so soon, and the mo…

> It definitely does, although I don't understand why. Maybe because it's a kind of lying, and people who do it on a regular basis are untrustworthy people? > JFK told us we'd get to the moon this decade which is absolutely nuts. Remember that he didn't phrase it as "we will do this", he phrased it as "this is our goal". He referred to it as a goal we're choosing, not as an inevitability. Musk isn't goal-setting, he'…

If that's lying, then the c-suite of every large auto manufacturer does it on a fairly regular basis.

In general, they don't seem to get as much negative attention in the media, and I'm guessing that's because they pay a fair bit for advertising.

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

#627

Post by tempestn »

czl wrote: post #624
DonHopkins wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be dumb to be caught agreeing with anti semitic tweets, and telling advertisers to "go fuck yourself", yet here we are. Your argument is invalid.

Intelligent people have faults and make mistakes like the rest of us. What sets them apart is they are often better at seeing this and fixing things. Did Musk not make amends for that tweet? Do you think advertising should control social media? Do you genuinely believe Musk is dumb?

I believe Musk is smart, but also bipolar and narcissistic, and likely often on stimulants, which makes him regularly do dumb things.

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

#628

Post by czl »

advael wrote: post #623
czl wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hater or fanboy does it matter? Do you not understand the concept of reflexivity? Intelligence can show truth. Intelligence can support some existing bias and hide truth. How does your intelligence serve you?

When someone's entire argument is "doing x would be dumb, and we know this guy isn't dumb", I see value in pointing out that this is a rather circular logic

I suspect you did not understand what I said and your bias affected your judgement. Please explain what you think I meant.

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

#629

Post by nomel »

pmorici wrote: post #608
bmitc wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the requirements set out however long ago that Starlink agreed to and now isn't meeting is political retribution? How so?

Because the obligation was to meet the requirements in 2025 and FCC basically just subjectivity said 2 years before the deadline they don’t think they will.

I'm curious what happens if they actually do hit the targets, in 2 years.

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

#630

Post by czl »

tempestn wrote: post #627
czl wrote: post #624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intelligent people have faults and make mistakes like the rest of us. What sets them apart is they are often better at seeing this and fixing things. Did Musk not make amends for that tweet? Do you think advertising should control social media? Do you genuinely believe Musk is dumb?

I believe Musk is smart, but also bipolar and narcissistic, and likely often on stimulants, which makes him regularly do dumb things.

Compared to a same aged person does Musk do more dumb things each day? Perhaps his few dumb things get amplified by his haters?

Any normal person that manages to earn themself what Musk has earned might that affect their personality? Maybe make them more narcissistic etc? Large wealth would not affect your psychology?

Regarding bipolar: It would not surprise me but is there evidence? Did he admit it?

Post reply on HN