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

FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

fcc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 331 posts

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#171

Post by fwgwgwgch »

natethinks wrote: post #98
ArlenBales wrote: post #88

As a hiker who likes to spend many nights camping out in the remote wilderness, this will be a blessing but also a curse. I'll be able to stay connected to family and friends, and have emergency services and information available if necessary, but at the same time I'll have Hacker News and Reddit distractions - but inevitably this is the way the future will be, so it's time to get used to it. At least when going on a…

This is where I would love my old Samsung's "ultra power saving" mode. Nothing but calls and texting on a black and white screen. Almost a week of battery life.

What phone is that?

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#172

Post by olympus »

lev99 wrote: post #155
olympus wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Satellite is worse, so if you can't get it done with 4G you won't be doing it with satellite.

This new tech is going to be better than 4G

It won't be as good as you think. This one is going right next to the Model 3 in Elon's book of things he'll technically deliver but will progressively dial back the claims before and after delivery.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#173

Post by walrus01 »

joering2 wrote: post #145
hinkley wrote: post #108

Background section from one of the attachments to that announcement: On November 15, 2016, SpaceX filed an application requesting authority for its proposed NGSO FSS satellite system, comprising 4,425 satellites in 83 orbital planes, at an approximate altitude of 1,110 to 1,325 kilometers. In this application, SpaceX proposes to operate in the 10.7-12.7 GHz, 13.85-14.5 GHz, 17.8-18.6 GHz, 18.8-19.3 GHz, 27.5-29.1 GHz…

Out of curiosity, dont they have to ask other bodies like European Union or other countries for permission as well? Those satellites wont fly over usa only, which is fcc oversight. Also reversing my question - if they would get denied, could they form company in EU and still shoot satellites from there based on EU permission? Just curiosity of a hacker in me pushes out these questions ;)

It is not entirely impossible to have satellites where the legal owner is incorporated somewhere for regulatory purposes. There are a few geostationary, traditional style C/Ku-band transponder capacity satellites which are owned by companies in the Isle of Man. Huge numbers of satellites are owned by a Luxembourg based company (SES), one of the top-4 largest satellite operators worldwide, not because they particularly love Luxembourg so much, but because it has regulatory and tax advantages. The majority of SES' earth stations and facilities are not located in Luxembourg.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#174

Post by fwgwgwgch »

walrus01 wrote: post #127
aphextron wrote: post #125

I’m curious to what layer SpaceX will allow application developers access to. If there is to be any hope of having cryptographically secure communications using this network, it will be essential that the whole stack is open source. Putting blind faith in SpaceX seems foolish.

satellite (earth station) systems engineer here: I highly doubt that there will be access at anything other than layer 3. The CPE will have a 1000BaseT port on it, when you connect to it, it'll hand out a DHCP v4 and v6 IP address on it. Maybe if you pay an extra $15 per month you can get a single static v4 address. I am very doubtful that it will be possible for an individual end user with a rooftop terminal to get…

Thank you. You're the only "hacker" here among evangelicals and dreamers. Thanks for your informative comments on "hacker" news.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#175

Post by fwgwgwgch »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #109
ArlenBales wrote: post #88

As a hiker who likes to spend many nights camping out in the remote wilderness, this will be a blessing but also a curse. I'll be able to stay connected to family and friends, and have emergency services and information available if necessary, but at the same time I'll have Hacker News and Reddit distractions - but inevitably this is the way the future will be, so it's time to get used to it. At least when going on a…

This service won't do that. This is not for satellite phones, that would be Iridium (or more accurately, Iridium NEXT which will come online soon), this is for fixed installation or perhaps vehicle based broadband. It'll require a fairly substantial, sophisticated, and expensive antenna (think pizza box sized) to use, and a lot of power as well. This won't connect directly to handsets. It'll be helpful for providing…

Answering the only question that matters, thanks.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#176

Post by walrus01 »

fwgwgwgch wrote: post #174
walrus01 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

satellite (earth station) systems engineer here: I highly doubt that there will be access at anything other than layer 3. The CPE will have a 1000BaseT port on it, when you connect to it, it'll hand out a DHCP v4 and v6 IP address on it. Maybe if you pay an extra $15 per month you can get a single static v4 address. I am very doubtful that it will be possible for an individual end user with a rooftop terminal to get…

Thank you. You're the only "hacker" here among evangelicals and dreamers. Thanks for your informative comments on "hacker" news.

Without evangelicals and dreamers major new ISP infrastructure wouldn't get built. But it has to run into practical realities of what a network will look at all the way down the OSI model stack. People want gigabit FTTH to every home in the USA but the construction costs could be $5,000 per house on average.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#177

Post by Retric »

walrus01 wrote: post #50
Retric wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can get a 1Gbps up-link and VPN within China that's going to be harder to track down and could service a lot of people. However, I suspect SpaceX will however allow China to monitor/limit connections. Further, China has a lot more power to crack down on purely internal operations would deter many.

The problem is twofold from a China perspective: a) the rooftop CPE needs to be reasonably large and have high gain to be used effectively, and needs clear unobstructed line of sight to as much of the sky and horizon as possible. and b) It needs to transmit, it will transmit in very known frequency ranges, and the chinese authorities have plenty of budget to buy portable spectrum analyzers, horn antennas and to reach…

A) A thin tarp or pant etc could obscure the shape without blocking radio waves.

B) These things need to transmit up, so you can reasonably block most signals in other directions. Aircraft would work, but again not cheap.

The real issue is more on the human side and network monitoring. Lots of encrypted network traffic to a ransom location would be suspect.

PS: For once tinfoil might actually be useful vs government spying :)

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#178

Post by gnarbarian »

bpd1069 wrote: post #4

This is monumental - I claim every major advance in communication technology immediately precedes a major progress for society. This will make the 'Internet' truly global and ubiquitous. So excited for the developing world.

not just the developing world. there are large swaths of the US without decent broadband either. Also large areas with no internet whatsoever beyond satellite. (and I mean really shitty really expensive satellite)

ubiquitous internet will make remote weather stations, drones and a multitude of other things far more cost effective or possible. (especially here in Alaska)

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#179

Post by walrus01 »

olympus wrote: post #169
briffle wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should read some RV forums for the hoops they need to jump through to get coverage, and deal with data caps

I'm doing it (mobile internet, not van life). The conversations on RV forums deal with stuff like unlimited data in the middle of Wyoming for less money, or how to get a SIM card and plan from a connected car device that AT&T discontinued because RVers were using for other than it's intended purpose. What the RVers are too cheap to do is pay for the product they want. Go to unlimitedville.com, pay $200 a month, and y…

T-Mobile (or their wholly owned metroPCS MVNO which rides the same network) has plans which are "unlimited" up to about 50GB/month of usage, for a lot less than $200/mo... It's not a lot, but can be stretched pretty far if you're willing to refrain from watching a lot of youtube and netflix video. It used to have a 22GB soft-cap limit after which it rate limited to 128kbps x 128 kbps, they recently changed it to 50.

Re: FCC Authorizes SpaceX to Provide Broadband Satellite Services

#180

Post by lovemenot »

lev99 wrote: post #149
adventured wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No chance it's going to be more expensive than comparable wired - fiber or cable - Internet. You're leaving out the vast cost to build & maintain the wired infrastructure. Tax payers & consumers in those developing nations have to pay for that. That cost has to be included with the monthly fees to do a serious comparison.

The cost of building wired infrastructure has an inverse relationship with population density. This might be more expensive than wired internet in dense cities. The metal of city buildings and the high density of transmitters might make the performance lower in cities than suburban/rural areas. The Manhattan and Tokyo speed tests are more important to me personally than The Grand Canyon and Indian Ocean speed test.

A key strength of the proposed network is its ubiquity, which makes it most competitive in un(der)served markets than in high-density cities. They can't just hover more satellites over Tokyo, so the service would inevitably become fully loaded there.
Post reply on HN