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

SpaceX just got FCC approval to launch 7,518 satellites

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 290 posts

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

#261

Post by diamondlovesyou »

russdill wrote: post #221
nugga wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink could be a godsent for online gamers. Anything under 100 ms for fps games is quite playable and you don't need much bandwidth for those udp packets. Just guarantee some minimum bandwidth allotment of say 1 mbps and make sure the satellites are not so oversubscribed as to cause unnecessarily long or unoptimized routing. Games between west coast usa and eu or eu and asia would be playable.

If you're going to another continent, you're going to see a big latency savings. If your going to another state, you're probably going to get lower latency on fiber. But really, a 60Hz frame is 33.3ms, and many online games advance their world state at 60Hz too, so it's easy to get up to 67 ms of latency just sitting still.

A lot of people play with 144hz (what I play on) and some even higher (240hz). Which is just under 7ms and just over 4ms, respectively.

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

#262

Post by deftnerd »

shaklee3 wrote: post #217
ryanmarsh wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Current US satellite internet adoption is at 6.7% percent Current US satellite adoption doesn't matter in this case because the new product would not suck. Satellite internet is not a viable competitor today for the various reasons others have stated here. Starlink however would compete directly with my DSL service and since I (and pretty much everyone else) hate our telco, the sky is the limit as they say.

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.

Someone could have made the same argument against mobile phones, saying that they wouldn't compete with landlines because of the increased handset costs.

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

#263

Post by de_watcher »

diamondlovesyou wrote: post #261
russdill wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're going to another continent, you're going to see a big latency savings. If your going to another state, you're probably going to get lower latency on fiber. But really, a 60Hz frame is 33.3ms, and many online games advance their world state at 60Hz too, so it's easy to get up to 67 ms of latency just sitting still.

A lot of people play with 144hz (what I play on) and some even higher (240hz). Which is just under 7ms and just over 4ms, respectively.

He's talking about network frames, not graphics frames.

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

#264

Post by nugga »

shaklee3 wrote: post #205
nugga wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink could be a godsent for online gamers. Anything under 100 ms for fps games is quite playable and you don't need much bandwidth for those udp packets. Just guarantee some minimum bandwidth allotment of say 1 mbps and make sure the satellites are not so oversubscribed as to cause unnecessarily long or unoptimized routing. Games between west coast usa and eu or eu and asia would be playable.

is this really true? I haven't played video games in a long time, but I remember when playing counter strike that someone with a 20ms ping was at a significant advantage over someone with an 80ms ping.

Sure, I'm using 4 G mobile internets now and occasionally have to play call of duty at around 80 ms and I can still kick ass. There's no place like LAN for hardcore competitive gaming but if the game's netcode is done well 80 ms is good enough. The trick is to have some sort of lag compensation, which cs should have as far as I know, where you don't have to lead your shots so the feel of the game is mostly the same, you just get the reports a bit later than you would at 20 ms.

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

#265

Post by buboard »

icelancer wrote: post #241
buboard wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

my question is if the slight improvement in latencies makes the investment worthwhile

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

#266

Post by nugga »

russdill wrote: post #221
nugga wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink could be a godsent for online gamers. Anything under 100 ms for fps games is quite playable and you don't need much bandwidth for those udp packets. Just guarantee some minimum bandwidth allotment of say 1 mbps and make sure the satellites are not so oversubscribed as to cause unnecessarily long or unoptimized routing. Games between west coast usa and eu or eu and asia would be playable.

If you're going to another continent, you're going to see a big latency savings. If your going to another state, you're probably going to get lower latency on fiber. But really, a 60Hz frame is 33.3ms, and many online games advance their world state at 60Hz too, so it's easy to get up to 67 ms of latency just sitting still.

You are right in that games have latency inherent to the processing of game engine ticks and depending on when you press the button the server might have just advanced to the next frame when your input gets processed and you're looking at another delay of potentially tens of milliseconds on top of network round trip and of course however long it takes the game to draw the updated info on your screen once the information gets back.

Wonder if it would make sense nowadays to send world state updates to clients at 1000 Hz or if it's even feasible?

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

#267

Post by SmellyGeekBoy »

jordanthoms wrote: post #191
Denzel wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You misunderstand just slightly, and through no fault of your own I might add since SpaceX’s messaging is deliberately murky here. SpaceX has no plans right now to colonize Mars. In fact, they keep saying, “Look! We want other companies or nations to step up and plan for how to establish a colony. We’re only going to do it if we absolutely have no other choice.” SpaceX is truly establishing a financially viable solar…

I agree SpaceX is way ahead, but I wouldn't say they have no competition. Blue Origin is making some very interesting moves.

I'm not sure what's "interesting" about having been around for longer and still having achieved absolutely nothing.

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

#268

Post by ahje »

ceejayoz wrote: post #115
zackbloom wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think how big the Earth is. How hard it would be to find a Xerox machine in the Amazon or the middle of the Atlantic if someone stuck it there. Space is much, much, bigger.

> How hard it would be to find a Xerox machine in the Amazon or the middle of the Atlantic if someone stuck it there. Part of the problem, though, is that said Xerox machine is traveling at 17,000 miles per hour . We've already had a collision ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_satellite_collision ) between two of the ~3-4k satellites in orbit. SpaceX's constellation is planned to be double that number. That single…

> That single collision turned two satellites into two thousand high-velocity projectiles, too.

Just to add to that point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envisat#Space_safety

A single 10kg. chunk of debris could result in over 8 tonnes of additional debris, triggering a rather nasty chain reaction.

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

#269

Post by SmellyGeekBoy »

jandrese wrote: post #147
bargl wrote: post #33

This is such a cool problem. We already have a ton of Geo sat which can do this kind of communication but they are super expensive and have a limited bandwidth. These satellites will actually have a ton of limitations in how much data they can send around and how they'll have to balance out their signals. Geo are easier to point to because, well they don't move. But these are going to be moving and changing all the t…

Motorola solved this problem with its Iridium constellation back in the 90s. Handoff between satellites isn't really that hard. Your phone knows where it is and what birds are overhead (and which are about to appear/disappear) so they can adjust automatically. Routing through the satellite constellation gets kind of hairy, but is also solvable via orbital mapping and some arcane routing algorithms. The real trick is…

> nobody wants a cell phone with a little cartoon satellite dish on top

Speak for yourself! ;)

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

#270

Post by bkor »

SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #267
jordanthoms wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree SpaceX is way ahead, but I wouldn't say they have no competition. Blue Origin is making some very interesting moves.

I'm not sure what's "interesting" about having been around for longer and still having achieved absolutely nothing.

The rocket that Blue Origin has developed is very powerful. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BE-4. It'll be used by various companies for their rockets.

The SpaceX rocket has certain trade-offs. Basically the upper stage is not that powerful compared to various other rockets. This is usually not too bad because they go for the cheapest option. Blue Origin might have a huge advantage there though.

Blue Origin is not in a need of money, this drastically changes things. It seems they went first for nailing a super powerful rocket, then to develop something close to the SpaceX BFR called New Glenn (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Glenn).

Note that in various cases people compare expendable versions with reusable versions. Further, SpaceX is often better for lower orbits.

Suggest to follow /r/spacex on reddit. Above is what I learned from reading discussions there.

Post reply on HN