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

91–100 of 831 posts

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#91

Post by rblatz »

mrtksn wrote: post #57
bitmasher9 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can make a rocket that reaches a Starlink Satellite then there are many other targets the same rocket can hit that would be more damaging. Rockets are a military technology, and are treated as such.

Lot's of conspiracy theorists have become quite wealthy with the raise of Bitcoin, as it was very popular among them early on. Military tech or not, its just atoms. Very interesting people are quite rich now, they will have access to precision machining advanced materials and chemicals if they have the motivation.

This is such an unhinged take, what if a super villain decided to build missiles to attack satellites? You understand that’s something nation states struggle with, that billionaire status doesn’t even guarantee success on.

Some bitcoin bro with a net worth in the millions is not building orbit reaching guided missiles in their garage. And if they were the satellites would be the least of our concerns.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#93

Post by paxys »

charliebwrites wrote: post #6

I wish I could pay Starlink directly and have global satellite based LTE instead of having to go through a specific carrier and be limited by other carriers’ reciprocity to specific countries and bands One space based cell plan for the whole world

Are you planning to be in direct line of sight to a Starlink satellite 24x7?

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#94

Post by [deleted] »

ggernov wrote: post #58
charliebwrites wrote: post #6

I wish I could pay Starlink directly and have global satellite based LTE instead of having to go through a specific carrier and be limited by other carriers’ reciprocity to specific countries and bands One space based cell plan for the whole world

I was curious about this! I wish this was a perk of owning / purchasing a Tesla or a more expensive option of Starlink terminal.

[deleted]

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#95

Post by navigate8310 »

mise_en_place wrote: post #51
daRealDodo wrote: post #25

Can anyone explain how upload would work? How can an unmodified cellphone upload data to a satellite?

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

Aren't those satellites going to generate simulated cell tower signals so you won't require any modification whatsoever?

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#96

Post by nordsieck »

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?

It's not very likely.

USC students just broke the non-government, non-corporate rocket launch altitude record, reaching 143.25km[1]. But that is still a long way from the ~500km that Starlink operates at.

On top of that the person would have to develop a guidance system and payload capable of targeting and sufficiently damaging one of these satellites - not an easy feat.

Finally, it seems unlikely that a single hit would cause a chain reaction. There aren't that many satellites that are part of Starlink. Imagine 6000 cars spread over the surface of the Earth. Except that they're even more sparse than that because many of them are at different altitudes.

Additionally, SpaceX has already had to deal with the result of the debris field from the Russian Cosmos satellite that was destroyed by a Russian anti-satellite missile.[2]

Starlink has a lot of protection compared to other constellations since the satellites occupy such low orbits that most debris spontaneously deorbits in 5-10 years.

---

1. https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2024/11/usc-student-rocke...

2. https://spacenews.com/starlink-satellites-encounter-russian-...

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#97

Post by skissane »

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…

> His empire is divided into so many corporate entities, but they all cross-pollinate and are clearly under his direct control for the most part.

My understanding is that, given Tesla is a public company, any collaboration between Tesla and other Musk companies needs to be approved by the board (or maybe by other C-suite executives) without Musk in the room. Musk can come up with the idea for a collaboration, but then the decision that it is in the best interests of Tesla and all its shareholders to proceed with the collaboration needs to be made independently of him.

By contrast, I don't think the rules apply as strictly to his other companies since they are privately held. The law cares a lot more about protecting shareholder rights in public companies than in private ones.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#98

Post by kortilla »

unsnap_biceps wrote: post #63
echelon wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 think it's fair to be concerned about what we're losing without being labeled as a Misanthrope. I think the progress, in its entirety, is worth it, but I'm still a little sad at the night sky having even more artificial things that take attention away from the stars. Looking at the night sky as a child seemed timeless to me, and that's no longer the case.

You can’t see Starlink satellites in the night sky except shortly after sunset or before sunrise when they are still in daylight and you aren’t. They don’t produce visible light on their own.

The night sky will be exactly the same otherwise so you’re doing a lot of handwringing over nothing.

Real astronomers are complaining about many other things. Streaking in long exposures and noise in other spectrums. But that’s not relevant to anyone looking at the sky with the naked eye or an amateur telescope.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#100

Post by jebarker »

kortilla wrote: post #84
jebarker wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

With an inReach I have the option of periodically tracking my position and uploading that to a site my loved ones can check. Even whilst doing this I can leave the device on for a multi-day trip without worrying about battery drain. I'm not saying you couldn't do this with a cell phone, but the inReach is just a more robust solution for a safety critical application.
Post reply on HN