Earlier quoted context omitted.
Starlink was funded internally by SpaceX. What investors are you talking about?
those who buy & sell stocks & options & provide exit liquidity.
Starlink existed before SpaceX was a public company
SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth
741–750 of 1001 posts
Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth
#742Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kessler is much less of a problem at their altitude (480km). Debris has too much drag and would get pulled down too quick to have a sustained Kessler situation. It's possible, but very very unlikely at that altitude.
You could still generate a mess for 5-10 years at that altitude. Even if it self-clears you still destroy the constellation and deny access to LEO for years.
That's not Kessler syndrome though. Is a cascade
Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth
#743Earlier quoted context omitted.
* only when you’re outdoors with good line of sight and only in geographic areas they allow.
I’m not sure if that’s true of these use cellular frequencies.
You can already try it with T-Mobile and it’s pretty limited. Great if you need sms and there’s no other towers around. Still requires line of sight.
Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth
#744Earlier quoted context omitted.
More than 2/3 of all active satellites are part of the SpaceX/Starlink constellation, and it's a full 3/4 of those in LEO, which are the biggest contributor to the glints we can see in the night sky. They're such an enormous part of the problem that it does a disservice to the problem to not metaphorically shine a spotlight on them. I had trouble finding another source that summed up the data so nicely, but other sou…
>which are the biggest contributor to the glints we can see in the night sky. >They're such an enormous part of the problem What an incredible life of privilege you must live to perceive a few glints in the sky as a huge problem.
I didn't say whether I thought it was a huge problem. I just said it was a problem, and identified the largest contributor to that problem.
But really, what point are you trying to make? I don't need to think that satellites glinting in the night sky are the literal worst problem facing humanity for that to be a valid topic of discussion.
Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth
#745Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It feels different when it’s the government that theoretically represents people but when it’s one person that feels truly depressing. I worked on technology for years that the FCC effectively killed for stupid reasons. So it’s heartening to me that someone can still just do stuff and build things. It’s amazing. If you asked me 10 years ago I would have thought that getting something like Starlink off the ground wo…
People can still "do stuff and build things" while having consideration for environmental impacts.
The thing is, everyone's interpretation of "environmental impact" is different. To one person it can mean, "don't put the construction garbage in the river." To another it can mean "not one single Delta Smelt can be scared because of this construction."
And because it's so flexible, in states like California where we have aggressive environmental laws, it's leveraged as the NIMBY trump card. When it can't block a project, the process is used to make it inordinately expensive and take decades. One example would be the environmental studies for the CA High Speed Rail.[1]
[1] - https://ifp.org/fast-track-democratically-approved-transit-p...
Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth
#746Earlier quoted context omitted.
More than 2/3 of all active satellites are part of the SpaceX/Starlink constellation, and it's a full 3/4 of those in LEO, which are the biggest contributor to the glints we can see in the night sky. They're such an enormous part of the problem that it does a disservice to the problem to not metaphorically shine a spotlight on them. I had trouble finding another source that summed up the data so nicely, but other sou…
>which are the biggest contributor to the glints we can see in the night sky. >They're such an enormous part of the problem What an incredible life of privilege you must live to perceive a few glints in the sky as a huge problem.
[deleted]
Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth
#747Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is one person who controls it, at his discretion who gets to share in the utility. What your saying can also be true without such an ownership model, right?
No. We’ve tried that for decades now and it hasn’t worked out very well for getting the world connected. The entire rural earth has been neglected. Even in silicon valley my neighborhood only got fiber this year and its saddled with crappy TV bundle deals, bad mobile apps built with wrapped web pages, poor service, and we-will-sell-your-data anti privacy provisions. Starlink has none of that.
Yeah, I don't know how this whole ARPANET thing is really going to play out...
Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth
#748My understanding is that Starlink can only service ~6-7 houses per square mile today. The US is ~95/sq. mile on average. 80% of Americans live in "cities." Anchorage metro is ~15/sq. mile; Yuma, AZ is ~36. The Nashville metro is ~250. Also, Starlink satellites spend ~70% of their time over the ocean. This will impact the utilization ratio of their gear and force them to launch still more satellites.
The new satellites are like 100x better.
That's great, they still are bound by physics to spend ~70% of their time over the ocean. I would guess ~80%+ of their time is spent where there are effectively no people.
Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth
#749My understanding is that Starlink can only service ~6-7 houses per square mile today. The US is ~95/sq. mile on average. 80% of Americans live in "cities." Anchorage metro is ~15/sq. mile; Yuma, AZ is ~36. The Nashville metro is ~250. Also, Starlink satellites spend ~70% of their time over the ocean. This will impact the utilization ratio of their gear and force them to launch still more satellites.
Simultaneously though, those 80% of Americans that live in cities/within the typical commuting distance of a metropolitan area are also the ones that are usually serviced by at least one broadband or fiber provider. Because of this: - Having slowly-increasing pressure on those often-monopoly broadband/fiber carriers because people have the option to swap to Starlink, adds competitive pressure for them to improve thei…
Those are solid points. They also describe Starlink as a niche service with a structurally low TAM.
Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth
#750Earlier quoted context omitted.
To anyone thinking that 18m² isn't that big for how large the space is, please recall how bright reflective things shine during the day when you hit the right angle.
18x18 is 324m^2
Whoops, I overcooked my last minute edits while almost asleep. Yeah, I'm was off by 18x there.