311–320 of 773 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can arrive at your own conclusion. I think its pretty obvious whats happening here (the commissioners voted along party lines right down the middle). And theres no other company thats even close to Starlink now or in the medium term future. So I dont know who would practically fill this spot. For below comment: This is for "rural" connection. You're not laying wire for that regardless of what Comcast wants you to…
I'd rather the federal government just roll out fiber and not put Starlink and Elon in a position of power. That fiber will always be in the ground and available. Elon has shown himself to be unworthy of any position where trust and good judgement is required. If it costs more, that is a premium worth paying. Fool me once. https://www.internetforall.gov/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...…
As if this were a trivial task
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Starlink (and Musk in general) have been over-promising and under-delivering for years now. Starlink claimed 150Mbps back in 2020 and that speeds would double to 300Mbps by the end of 2021.[1] Instead, speeds have halved.[2] At this point, T-Mobile is likely serving more rural high speed internet customers with greater speeds (T-Mobile has 4.2M home internet customers and Ookla's stats show 34% to be rural for 1.4M;…
As a Montanan with T-Mobile, I promise that those "rural" T-Mobile ones are not the same type of rural that Starlink can serve.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any truth to the statement from two of the five FCC commissioners that SpaceX was not required to meet those benchmarks until 2025, and this is a political action?
As with all government projects, it’s a highly technical (in the bureaucratic sense) process. You can find the relevant documents on their website[0]. That said, how the dissenters characterize it is nowhere near how it works. They’d like you to believe that you won a bid, and from then on, it’s “OK, talk to you at the deadline, enjoy our money!” Instead, it seems to me that it’s a continuous process where you must p…
RDOF requires speed testing of the devices deployed under RDOF, not the entire network.
If say you have a 900Mhz network and you plan to deploy 5GNR for fixed wireless, they don't get to tell you you can only achieve 1 Mbps right now.
You don't need to start deployment till you get the money. And there's deployment and testing steps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't feel knowledgeable enough about the expected process to comment on that. Two points of speculation though: 1. It looks like the commission believes Starlink is trending away from the targets rather than toward them, and that can't help their case. 2. It's hard for me to see how there would not be at least some political considerations here. The fact that this program exists at all is a political decision. So…
I think #1 is what really strikes me here. It's like standing in front of a train and not moving because you asked the conductor to stop. What happens when they reach 2025 and billions of dollars have gone down the drain? Why wait?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any truth to the statement from two of the five FCC commissioners that SpaceX was not required to meet those benchmarks until 2025, and this is a political action?
I don't feel knowledgeable enough about the expected process to comment on that. Two points of speculation though: 1. It looks like the commission believes Starlink is trending away from the targets rather than toward them, and that can't help their case. 2. It's hard for me to see how there would not be at least some political considerations here. The fact that this program exists at all is a political decision. So…
I'm glad to see the FCC sticking to its requirements and having a testing regime for them. Starlink's own service specifications are far below the 100/20Mbps requirements. They currently are promising 25-100Mbps down, 5-10Mbps up. In congested areas they often don't even deliver that in the evenings. [1] I use Starlink in my rural area and am grateful for it. But hopefully the $900M will be better spent on other ISPs…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Because if you use the service you know it is capable of that and more today. If you use their service, you know that it's capable of serving X amount of people at Y up and Z down with N latency? C'mon...
Yes, but that is a function of satellite density or so the argument seems to suggest. SpaceX is launching rockets multiple times a week and has put more satellites into orbit that any entity in the history of human kind by an order of magnitude or more. Betting they won't be able to meet these speed goals is not a rational conclusion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Are they wrong about these details then? Or is that the defense: “doesn’t matter if I’m actually doing that or not. The government is out to get me.”
[1] https://www.theverge.com/23558736/elon-musk-securities-fraud...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Starlink was never designed to be faster than fibre, and it was certainly never designed or intended for use by people that ave access to fibre (or cable, or LTE for that matter). SpaceX have re-iterated this on many, many occasions. Anyone who things otherwise simply doesn't understand the product. Starlink is designed for people who live in remote areas that have no access to any of that. Go out right now and see h…
It was. The V2 that they are deploying is supposedly communicating directly between satellites, making it faster than fiber over long distances. Elon advertised that in 2019 or something already. I don't deny it is life changing for those people ! All I'm saying is that it's not economically viable to provide that to those people. And the only way it is, it's because it's either a business bleeding money, or supporte…