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

271–280 of 290 posts

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

#271

Post by buboard »

elteto wrote: post #236
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?

I think you might be underestimating latencies in the real world. These [0] are statistics from Verizon showing 90ms RTT for trans-atlantic connections. Trans-pacific is > 100ms. 80ms seems highly competitive for me in this context. [0] https://enterprise.verizon.com/terms/latency/

there is a video posted in the comments that compares latencies to cables. spacex advertises latencies from 50-80 , but cable is in all cases fasters (rather obvious i think).

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

#272

Post by jonplackett »

russellbeattie wrote: post #145
jessriedel wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI, the constellation was revised and an updated video was made. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEIUdMiColU&feature=youtu.be

That is amazing. Seeing the complexity of the grid is mind blowing - and the realization the blocks representing the satellites are the size of cities makes you realize how big space is. That said, future launches are going to have to run a gauntlet...

It seems like that doesn't it, but space is MASSIVE. Imagine if there were only 7000 people spread out on the face of the earth, would you be worried you'd accidentally run into one of them? These things are up another few hundred miles so are even more spaced out than that.

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

#273

Post by nickik »

natechols wrote: post #218
nickik wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regulation. Do you think SpaceX would operate an illigal network in a foreign company? Do you not think China had the pull to tell the US to keep SpaceX in line? The can ban the sale of terminals. They can scan waves.

One of the consequences of the Sputnik launch was that it basically enshrined the principle that overflying another country with an active satellite was not an illegal act. (That is, the US government decided not to protest, because it meant they wouldn't have to apologize for their own future spy satellites.) I doubt China wants to break this precedent.

No. There is a difference between flying over and operating communication satilliets.

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

#274

Post by Tepix »

kartickv wrote: post #240
elteto wrote: 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...

If Starlink didn't route data in space and instead used space only as a last mile, would it be significantly cheaper, or have higher bandwidth, or be feasible to provide without data caps? What are the economic and technical tradeoffs here? I don't mind the latency of today's fiber or cable Internet, and if it's problem, it can be solved by moving servers closer to users. That is, what if, instead of bypassing the fi…

If you're in the middle of the Pacific it won't work unless the satellites talk to each other and route the data to a ground station that may be thousands of miles away.

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

#276

Post by [deleted] »

penagwin wrote: post #224
ALurchyBeast wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So whats your solution? Never put a bunch of satellites in space?

He's not necessarily saying he know's a solution, just that such a problem should be considered. Satellites do collide - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_satellite_collision The idea of satellite collisions and space junk is an actual concern https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome . Sure a few washing machines in space isn't a big concern. Now imagine a few collide, hundreds of bits and bolts flying around…

[deleted]

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

#277

Post by vidanay »

lccarrasco wrote: post #8
mtgx wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$29 (or less) for 1Gbps would probably give American ISP executives night sweats.

I live in Bolivia, South America, the impact a global ISP would have cannot be overstated, in developing countries internet prices are still extremely expensive, up until a month ago I was paying around USD 60 for 10Mbps, and that was the best price I could find in my city, the second largest in the country.

I live less than 100 km outside the third largest city in the United States (Chicago), and I pay $100USD per month for 5/20 terrestrial wireless (my only option other than satellite.)

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

#278

Post by JanSolo »

bkor wrote: post #270
SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

New Glenn is not really a BFR-class design. It falls somewhere between Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy.

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

#279

Post by shaklee3 »

kartickv wrote: post #257
shaklee3 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It didn't work out for Facebook, so I'm not sure it will. SpaceX isn't trying to connect people below they poverty line, so unless they convince India that the rich need it, I can't see it happening. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/12/facebook-...

Starlink wouldn't be in violation of net neutrality, so the comparison with Free Basics isn't the right one. It will take off if it's better bang for the buck at any market segment. That can be Rs. 100 a month or Rs.2000 a month. If it's better than the alternatives people can get at that price, they'll use it.

More context:

https://www.televisionpost.com/dosisro-initiating-efforts-to...

FB was net neutrality, but they want to keep as much as possible, including all communications, with their own technology.

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

#280

Post by greedo »

stcredzero wrote: post #178
mrep wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they can do that [0]. However, the easier option is to just scan for the right EM waves on the ground and go after the people using the illegal network. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_mi...

Yes, they can do that [0]. But it's a crappy enough move, it's not certain they would. However, the easier option is to just scan for the right EM waves on the ground and go after the people using the illegal network. So someone just has to figure out a way to hide the uplink.

"not certain they would."

This is a country that has the GF. One that routinely oppresses its citizens. One that gives its citizens a social rating that can prevent them from traveling etc etc. If there's one thing I'm sure of, it's that the CCP will find a way of stopping access to this. If it takes hacking into SpaceX, shooting down 12K satellites, etc, it will. Maintaining power is what the CCP does.

"hide the uplink"

Kind of hard to hide EM transmitters that aren't going to be designed for special ops teams...

Post reply on HN