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

271–280 of 831 posts

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#271

Post by threeseed »

chroma wrote: post #268
threeseed wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's at least a billion people a) Based on what we've seen in China, India etc many of those will shift towards densely populated cities or will stay and those locations will become industrialised, densely populated cities. b) In densely populated cities it doesn't make sense to use Starlink when fibre is far cheaper, has limited congestion issues and can provide gigabit speeds at a minimum. c) It's great that yo…

All those points are true, but it doesn't change the fact that Starlink will be quite profitable for SpaceX. Currently, each launch of 23 Starlink satellites costs SpaceX around $50 million. To get 1,000 direct to cell satellites in orbit, they'll need to launch 44 times, costing them $2.2 billion. Due to the low orbits, air resistance causes the satellites to reenter within 5-10 years, so to maintain the constellati…

> Now let's say only 1% of the population wants Starlink direct to cell

Why not 5%, 10%, 100%. It's just made up numbers.

Will it be a good business for Starlink, sure. Will it change the world, probably not.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#272

Post by mmaunder »

paxys wrote: post #252
acrophiliac wrote: post #251

A quick glance at these comments indicates the majority are excited about Starlink. I must be in the minority. Is anyone else here on HN very unhappy with the prospect of having no place to escape internet access? I love the idea of no-rescue zones. https://www.pennstatelawreview.org/print-issues/hike-at-your... Not trying to change anyone's mind, just wondering if I'm a complete outlier.

You already have the option of escaping internet access, anywhere in the world – by turning off your device.

And you’ve already had comms in most places in the world including the polar regions for some time now. This is about lower cost and ubiquitous access.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#273

Post by chrisco255 »

numpad0 wrote: post #126
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.

I think the fact that they haven't may be kind of indicative. Last I searched it had supported maximum local device density of just handful in miles.

That can't be true. I've stayed in campgrounds with dozens of Starlink dishes deployed.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#274

Post by signatoremo »

Spooky23 wrote: post #257
m463 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, yet in a somewhat different way. He is an investor investing in science fiction. This isn't even implied, he comes out and says it again and again. I'm reminded of xerox parc's "The best way to predict the future is to invent it" and I think that's his philosophy. As to "businesses he knows well" I do not agree. He didn't go into electric vehicles, rockets, robots or neural interfaces as "business h…

[flagged]

> The danger is his focus on living on Mars with no accountability.

What is an example of this non accountability?

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#275

Post by quailfarmer »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #248
joecool1029 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not acquiring the spectrum that's an issue right now. It's it not interfering with terrestrial networks. Euro carriers already pushing back against relaxing emissions restrictions for DTC specifically: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/10930985930353/1

Help me: Is DTC "direct-to-consumer"? I tried to Google for it, but I didn't find anything obvious. Else, hat tip for this FCC find! What a great share on HN.

“Direct to cell”

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#276

Post by iknowstuff »

chasd00 wrote: post #242
cprayingmantis wrote: post #192

If anyone from Starlink or SpaceX is reading these comments here’s what you want to do: Sell your own branded trail cam with solar charging and LTE from orbit. You can charge $25-$40 a month for unlimited pictures sent from the cam. This would open up hunters, nature enthusiasts, and researchers to be able to place their hardware anywhere in the field without worrying about connectivity. Here in SWVA we have deep hol…

Off grid cabins could use this too.

Nah, those should use a proper Starlink dish.

Direct to cell bandwidth is obviously very limited.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#277

Post by chrisco255 »

schiffern wrote: post #127
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

Not really feasible. The only reason Starlink DTC works is because it's not trying to supply coverage inside dense cities. Musk mentions this in the very first announcement of Starlink. https://youtu.be/AHeZHyOnsm4?t=191

That was 9 years ago and a lot has changed since then. They're moving to 3rd generation devices which have higher bandwidth and now have thousands of satellites deployed. Once Starship is able to deploy payloads, they'll increase the number of satellites even more quickly.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#278

Post by throwaway69123 »

Spooky23 wrote: post #255
morpheuskafka wrote: post #245

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. It's not unusual for large companies to have a large web of corporate entities, but what's problematic is that they have different ownership rather than the same owners/owned by each other. (I started to say that one is public and others private, but it would be the same is…

Recall that Elon re-domiciled from “activist” Delaware to… whatever you call Texas and it’s reputation for corporate governance. And now, he’s becoming some sort of circus act to disrupt the bureaucracy of the Federal government. So I wouldn’t count on the SEC doing anything.

If it ends up creating more Elon musk style success stories it can only be good for America.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#279

Post by chrisco255 »

skissane wrote: post #97
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 the…

Collaboration is handled by the executive team. The Board of major companies is not so active as to negotiate deals. One may be an activist board member and hold sway over the CEO, but ultimately it's the CEO's job. The Board simply picks the executive team.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#280

Post by Nextgrid »

cprayingmantis wrote: post #192

If anyone from Starlink or SpaceX is reading these comments here’s what you want to do: Sell your own branded trail cam with solar charging and LTE from orbit. You can charge $25-$40 a month for unlimited pictures sent from the cam. This would open up hunters, nature enthusiasts, and researchers to be able to place their hardware anywhere in the field without worrying about connectivity. Here in SWVA we have deep hol…

As long as it doesn't need near-real-time viewing (or if it does, said viewing can be billed for as a separate per-user fee), it wouldn't cost anything extra to SpaceX in the sense that those cameras could use free capacity, only transmitting when nothing else is.
Post reply on HN