Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

fastcompany.com

241–250 of 290 posts

Re: SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

#241
post #56

This video [0] really puts into perspective what SpaceX is trying to accomplish. Incredible stuff if they pull it off! [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=AdKNCBrkZQ4...

80msec is not a good outcome considering the cost and complexity of the investment. Aren't there alternative technologies to achieve this connectivity?

It is a good outcome considering the speed of light and existing technologies. I don't know what you rightfully expected if you were hoping for serious improvement on that number, other than breaking the laws of physics.

Re: SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

#242
post #11

Too bad the public markets have given Elon such a lashing with Tesla, because I would love to buy into SpaceX. But then, I’m not the only one; “There is an unlimited amount of funding that the company could probably access globally in private markets," Hilmer said, adding that he has personally met many of "a diverse group" interested in SpaceX. Everywhere I travel around the world, investors of all types — individua…

You can buy into them. They are allowed to sell on secondary markets.

Re: SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Think about switching your router every 10 minutes. Cellular and WiFi AP roaming are solved problems. For SpaceX, this will be rather straightforward as the design specifies fixed ground stations that will handle negotiating/maintaining upstream connection(s). > Or you get a rainy day and your signal clarity goes down. That's more likely to be an issue, but having multiple satellites overhead, plus the fact that th…

> Cellular and WiFi AP roaming are solved problems. While you may be right regarding the context in which you said this — satellites — as a blanket statement, that's not true: my smartphone loses Internet connectivity when I leave my house, and takes a few seconds before it connects to the cellular data network. I'm surprised that phones don't establish a backup 4G connection when Wifi signal strength decreases sudde…

Sorry that wasn't clear. I meant cellular roaming between towers, and WiFi roaming between access points -- not roaming between the two technologies.

It's currently possible to maintain a single connection (including IP address, open sockets, ip tables, etc.) while roaming between cell towers and WiFi APs. That's not true when switching carriers/providers/technologies, although I agree that would be a great next step for cell phones.

Re: SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

#244
post #11

Too bad the public markets have given Elon such a lashing with Tesla, because I would love to buy into SpaceX. But then, I’m not the only one; “There is an unlimited amount of funding that the company could probably access globally in private markets," Hilmer said, adding that he has personally met many of "a diverse group" interested in SpaceX. Everywhere I travel around the world, investors of all types — individua…

Anybody who sees a ceo who plans to spend a large chunk of company profits on colonizing mars for the sake of humanity might think to themselves, "I wonder if I can start a similar company, avoid the mars colonization expenses and undercut them on price."

Once you have full scale mining of space materials and infinite automated production of anything, why “on earth” would you need to sell anything to anyone ever? Wealth is something you need only if you lack something else.

Re: SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

#245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anybody who sees a ceo who plans to spend a large chunk of company profits on colonizing mars for the sake of humanity might think to themselves, "I wonder if I can start a similar company, avoid the mars colonization expenses and undercut them on price."

Once you have full scale mining of space materials and infinite automated production of anything, why “on earth” would you need to sell anything to anyone ever? Wealth is something you need only if you lack something else.

Wealth? Isn't that just capital? Just like the infinite automated production would be capital as well.

I would rephraze this as what need is there for markets and money?

It's not about personal gain. It'd about how to manage the resource pools of an entire civilaztion.

What you are describing is the perfectly planned economy. From empirical experience national economies cannot be efficiently planned. USSR did not have the computational capability we have now - but we don't know is there any way to control a national - lest a planetary or solar economy by any other means than markets.

So, the question to me is - if solar ecomony can be planned then there is no need for markets and money, but if it's computationally intractable, or, the market way of organization is the cheapest and best way to do it, then we are stuck with markets and money up to the heat death of the universe.

Interestingly, if from algorithmic point of view markets and money is the best way to organize a civilizations resources, then it's likely alien civilizations (if they exist) will have a market economy too.

I would hope the question of reaource allocation is tractable and that the future of mankind is more like Iain Banks's Culture rather than "robber barons of the Oort cloud".

Re: SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's completely wrong. It's 100% not going to compete with DSL. It will be used by enterprise, or people who pay $100+/more to offset equipment costs. The reason satellite internet costs so much is equipment cost.

I agree with you but on second thoughts, maybe that's okay if it pays for itself over time? I pay my ISP ₹3K a month. I wouldn't mind buying SpaceX's router for say ₹30K if my bill drops to ₹1K a month.

I don't think they'll be able to sell in India. ISRO and the government are typically not friendly to other countries providing services like this.

Re: SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

#247
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpaceX recently updated their plans to put most satellites between 300 and 400km. That ensures a quick deorbit of the satellites and debris and cuts down the ping times.

they filed that because it's believed that they have mechanical problems on the satellite. Not because they wanted to: https://mobile.twitter.com/TMFAssociates/status/106076080100...

Isn't the lower orbit even better for them in terms of latency though? So long as the orbit doesn't decay faster than the planned 5 year life span of the sats, it's actually a win.

Re: SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You completely forgot the ground cpe equipment cost. That will be a substantial adder.

I was also wondering about this — will it be significantly costlier than a commodity fiber / cable/ VDSL router? If it's going to cost say $500, far fewer people around the world will be able to afford one.

The lowest estimate I've seen for the cpe cost is around $1000. I think it will be closer to $2-3K.

Re: SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

#249
post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why. China can just force SpaceX to turn off over China. Unless this is part of a political 'Radio Free Europe' style operation China will control this as much as everything else.

Why. China can just force SpaceX to turn off over China. How? By shooting down satellites?

As others have pointed out regulations. I believe Musk also really wants Tesla to succeed there (it is a very large market for them) and I have no doubt the Chinese government would punish another company of Musk's if they wanted to.

Re: SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they filed that because it's believed that they have mechanical problems on the satellite. Not because they wanted to: https://mobile.twitter.com/TMFAssociates/status/106076080100...

Isn't the lower orbit even better for them in terms of latency though? So long as the orbit doesn't decay faster than the planned 5 year life span of the sats, it's actually a win.

The lower orbit means the satellite coverage on Earth is smaller now, so they need more satellites to compensate for delivering the same capacity in a given area. It's better in terms of latency, but it's not a significant difference.
Post reply on HN