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

Starlink Direct to Cell

starlink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 831 posts

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#81

Post by paxys »

cj wrote: post #38

> ENGINEERED BY SPACEX It would be very interesting to see some kind of diagram depicting all of the corporate entities Musk is involved in and how each entity does business with one another. xAI just raised billions to help Tesla build out FSD (or at least that was part of the pitch). His empire is divided into so many corporate entities, but they all cross-pollinate and are clearly under his direct control for the…

While your overall question is valid, Starlink is simply a division of SpaceX. There's no "relationship" to consider. They are one and the same.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#82

Post by nordsieck »

travisjungroth wrote: post #39
kylebenzle wrote: post #2

So they now offer direct cellular coverage whereas before only offered internet? This is great for regions that need to be connected and the power elites, but for the rest of us it wouldn't change much. I disagree with almost all of Elon's "politics" but Starlink still has huge potential. Hopefully, he doesn’t abuse the power too much and focuses on making the world more connected, in the hands of the us government a…

> This is great for regions that need to be connected That's at least a billion people. I don't know what the intersection of that with the affordability is, though. I'm writing this from an Ayahuasca center in rural Peru connected with Starlink. Before, internet was a ten minute drive into town away. We're now connected when at one side of the center. It would be nice to have it all the way into the jungle. And when…

> I don't know what the intersection of that with the affordability is, though.

My understanding is that the monthly cost for Starlink varies pretty wildly across the world. Presumably the same would be true for this cell service - idle satellites have the same huge fixed cost and don't generate any revenue.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#83

Post by rootusrootus »

neilalexander wrote: post #65
rootusrootus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why switch carriers for that, you can get the same functionality built-in to iPhones and it's not dependent on carrier.

If you aren't on an iPhone already, switching carriers might be easier.

That's a fair point. I did make some assumptions.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#84

Post by kortilla »

jebarker wrote: post #5
bhauer wrote: post #3

I switched to T-Mobile at the last upgrade interval because of this. My family looks forward to no longer relying on Garmin InReach devices when out hiking.

Initially I thought the same re: hiking, skiing etc. The only issue I see is that cellphone battery life is terrible compared to inReach like devices. Not sure I'd want to depend on it for longer than a few hours.

Turn off your phone?

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#85

Post by Gare »

rblatz wrote: post #72
mise_en_place wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your cell phone uses the nearest base station, the base station will handover to the satellite infra.

No, that’s just satellite backhaul for a cell tower. That’s not hard, but also typically if you can get power to a base station you can run fiber along the same poles the power runs on. This is direct from handset to satellite, it’s clearly explained in the link.

> That’s not hard, but also typically if you can get power to a base station you can run fiber along the same poles the power runs on.

Or a directional microwave link to the next station in sight.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#86

Post by kortilla »

rootusrootus wrote: post #23
bhauer wrote: post #3

I switched to T-Mobile at the last upgrade interval because of this. My family looks forward to no longer relying on Garmin InReach devices when out hiking.

Why switch carriers for that, you can get the same functionality built-in to iPhones and it's not dependent on carrier.

iPhone sos does not allow you to just text random stuff to arbitrary people. It’s emergency only and a preselected “family group”

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#87

Post by Tostino »

mrtksn wrote: post #20

What I wonder about the Starlink constellation is, how secure it is physically? There are people burning down 5G towers. How plausible would be for a conspiracy nut to create a rocket to take out the satellites? Maybe starting a cascading effect?

At the level of nation-state funding, sure thing that's possible.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#88

Post by carstenhag »

echelon wrote: post #35
yfw wrote: post #8

[flagged]

Misanthropes [1] look at human civilization as a disease. Look instead at what we've accomplished. Think about the hard steps to life and intelligent life. About how silent the universe appears. Consider then how we're taking leaps towards making the cold and bleak universe self-aware. We are a part of evolution. What would be tragic would be for this earth to simply boil away. Its life giving gasses and materials to…

I'm sort of undecided here. Yeah it's great for some use cases & many people, we should probably do it, seems worth it.

But also, before having 40k thingies on the orbit that will decay/break within years, why not think of a better strategy or the implications of this? We shouldn't repeat all the mistakes we have made in the past.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#89

Post by LeoPanthera »

kortilla wrote: post #86
rootusrootus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why switch carriers for that, you can get the same functionality built-in to iPhones and it's not dependent on carrier.

iPhone sos does not allow you to just text random stuff to arbitrary people. It’s emergency only and a preselected “family group”

That is not true. If you don't know, don't guess.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/120930

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#90

Post by kortilla »

CtrlAltmanDel wrote: post #42

How can it be that a LTE smartphone, costing ~$100 and doing all the things a smart phone can do, and being designed to connect to a cell network via a tower a few miles away, can somehow also function as the pizza sized $500 Starlink dish?

It doesn’t. The throughput here is multiple orders of magnitude lower than what you get from Starlink
Post reply on HN