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

131–140 of 831 posts

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#131

Post by briandear »

elAhmo wrote: post #128
skissane wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 the…

The board at Tesla is basically Elon’s buddies. There is no oversight or independence there, they do what he wants. If law was applied equality to billionaires as it does to regular people, he would be in jail for fraud.

If shareholders are happy, what business is it of yours? If they aren’t happy, they can sell the shares.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#132

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #122
rlt wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s kind of crazy Tesla hasn’t partnered with SpaceX to provide Starlink as an option.

Kinda not. Generally if you got road you got reception. Only wilderness areas don’t. For few people who go camping, etc the standalone miniterminal makes most sense.

> Generally if you got road you got reception.

Er, if you got highway, maybe? I assure you there are plenty of roads that have poor cell reception.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#133

Post by [deleted] »

Onavo wrote: post #124
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…

Berkshire is very different, they are a hedge fund/holding company and their main business is trading companies.

[deleted]

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#134

Post by OutOfHere »

inglor_cz wrote: post #55
OutOfHere wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wait until they initiate Kessler syndrome, sending junk upward, polluting the entire orbit, up and down. It's just a matter of time.

Kessler syndrome is a theoretical construction, yet too many people speak of it as a certainty-beyond-any-doubt, like you do.

Some people aren't smart enough to appreciate theory. These people don't even learn the hard way either. They take their disbelief and excuses to their grave. For the rest of us, good theories aren't just admired from afar, they're acted upon before they materialize.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#135

Post by Reason077 »

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

Starlink would need to license LTE spectrum in every country it operated. Much easier to work with local carriers and piggyback on their existing bandwidth.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#136

Post by samwillis »

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…

It's similar (ish), but I think unfortunately the comparison distracts from your core point and observation.

Musk Inc. is, in essence, a privet equity company. He raises a fund, and invests it along with his own cash into a business he knows well, and with which he believes he can disrupt the status quo.

He's very hands on, understanding all the important core details, setting culture, and pushing hard. But he also delegates to experts he brings in to run his businesses.

It's obviously not the same as PE, but there are distinct similarities. With each of his companies he clearly can't take an active role all the time, but what his team are experts at is identifying the areas he needs to be on top of, and they will quite literally fly him in for it. It seems to me it's always the start of something, be it a new company or project. He will be there 24/7 getting it off the ground, but then hand over to lieutenants to run.

It's a formula that seems to work again and again. We're (well those of you in the US) are in for an interesting time over the coming year as he has a new project to kick start.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#139

Post by seb1204 »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #132
dzhiurgis wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinda not. Generally if you got road you got reception. Only wilderness areas don’t. For few people who go camping, etc the standalone miniterminal makes most sense.

> Generally if you got road you got reception. Er, if you got highway, maybe? I assure you there are plenty of roads that have poor cell reception.

100% speak to A German high speed rail traveller and she will tell you all about the white spots

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#140

Post by nradov »

carstenhag wrote: post #88
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'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.

A lot of smart people have been trying to think of a better strategy for decades. This appears to be the best we can do within our current understanding of physics. A better strategy would require antigravity technology or faster than light communications or something similarly unlikely.
Post reply on HN