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

SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

#721

Post by RetpolineDrama »

delecti wrote: post #640
gus_massa wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to find hard numbers, but IIUC even ignoring Elon's Space Program: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/sp/gx04-who-owns-the-most-s... * Most satellites were private owned, for communications or resource. * Most government owned satellites have military use, the people that is trying to spy or nuke you or your neighbor. * A small part is used for science and altruistic activities.

More than 2/3 of all active satellites are part of the SpaceX/Starlink constellation, and it's a full 3/4 of those in LEO, which are the biggest contributor to the glints we can see in the night sky. They're such an enormous part of the problem that it does a disservice to the problem to not metaphorically shine a spotlight on them. I had trouble finding another source that summed up the data so nicely, but other sou…

>which are the biggest contributor to the glints we can see in the night sky.

>They're such an enormous part of the problem

What an incredible life of privilege you must live to perceive a few glints in the sky as a huge problem.

Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

#722

Post by rsynnott »

petterroea wrote: post #446
consumer451 wrote: post #5

When Starlink first became available here in poor-ish Central-EU, I was excited. Then, only months later, but after years of planning: EU funding brought fiber to my farm area, at ~$25/900mbps 10ms. While my story is just n=1, I don't understand the huge upside for Starlink outside of Africa or India, where they have However, I am dumb, and very open to be convinced.

Starlink has its uses, but I really don't understand those who get starlink while living in built-up areas. Starlink is just a re-skin of the "Wireless optic" thing a lot of ISPs are pushing because they would prefer not having to lay cables and instead have everyone use 5g routers. Of course, the service isn't comparable, but regular people don't necessarily know it. Fiberoptic is still king, and probably will be fo…

I don’t see why it would be different in 100 years. The fibre might be slightly better (hollow core fibre will increase speed from 2/3c to nearly c), but, absent new physics, it’s hard to imagine anything beating _that_.

Maybe neutrino comms for long distance? :)

Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

#723

Post by inemesitaffia »

rzerowan wrote: post #29
consumer451 wrote: post #5

When Starlink first became available here in poor-ish Central-EU, I was excited. Then, only months later, but after years of planning: EU funding brought fiber to my farm area, at ~$25/900mbps 10ms. While my story is just n=1, I don't understand the huge upside for Starlink outside of Africa or India, where they have However, I am dumb, and very open to be convinced.

Eeh even ther its a stretch , when people talk about Africa - they should really specify where exactly. PLaces like SouthAfrica [1] already have a robust Fiber network with accelerated buildout of FTTH. Ditto for most of Eastern Africa countries which have FTTH to most of the major cities and subururbs with accelerated buildouts ongoing. Unless its a conflict area most regions are getting wired up pretty fast to enha…

Still no 100% coverage and export promotion is part of Foreign Affairs work.

Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

#724

Post by RadiozRadioz »

BurningFrog wrote: post #717
digitaltrees wrote: post #379

I have started to see what I think are star link satellites at night on walks with my kids. It actually makes me sad to see that on person owns the night sky and is changing the literal stars my kids will grow up with. It feels different when it’s the government that theoretically represents people but when it’s one person that feels truly depressing.

"I saw something I didn't like, so I assumed it was the fault of a billionaire I don't like" didn't use to be the top voted comment on HN. Starlink satellites have low orbits and only reflect sunlight around sunrise and sunset.

Very untrue. Go somewhere with low light pollution and you'll see them in the dead of night. I was out in rural Australia and used a satellite tracker app to confirm what I was seeing - they are very distinctive and definitely visible.

They are not overwhelming, mind you, but I did notice them immediately. They stood out enough that I wondered what they were and started researching, that alone says something about the prevalence.

Edit: An LLM tells me that this is partly unique to how far South Australia is and the positioning of the sun in Australia's Summer. But I lack the physics knowledge to confirm that.

Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

#725

Post by AlecSchueler »

rayiner wrote: post #683
digitaltrees wrote: post #379

I have started to see what I think are star link satellites at night on walks with my kids. It actually makes me sad to see that on person owns the night sky and is changing the literal stars my kids will grow up with. It feels different when it’s the government that theoretically represents people but when it’s one person that feels truly depressing.

> It feels different when it’s the government that theoretically represents people but when it’s one person that feels truly depressing. I worked on technology for years that the FCC effectively killed for stupid reasons. So it’s heartening to me that someone can still just do stuff and build things. It’s amazing. If you asked me 10 years ago I would have thought that getting something like Starlink off the ground wo…

People can still "do stuff and build things" while having consideration for environmental impacts.

Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

#726

Post by watwut »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #578
digitaltrees wrote: post #379

I have started to see what I think are star link satellites at night on walks with my kids. It actually makes me sad to see that on person owns the night sky and is changing the literal stars my kids will grow up with. It feels different when it’s the government that theoretically represents people but when it’s one person that feels truly depressing.

Change is inevitable. I love seeing artificial objects in space, because it shows that we, humanity, are finally getting there. Elon doesn't own space, he just happens to be the one who is currently best at making it reachable. There is plenty of space for everyone else, and others will get there, eventually. I could eat myself up with envy over the money he's making from it... or be glad that it's at least someone g…

> or be glad that it's at least someone getting rewarded for moving humanity forward

Forward back to fascism. No thanks. He already caused astonishing harm.

Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

#727

Post by inemesitaffia »

jordanb wrote: post #719
JumpinJack_Cash wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Space Bears have been saying this forever.

And the satellite internet business has been a dog since forever. Even starlink only makes sense if you ignore the absolutely immense capital investment in it. And they're probably hiding losses in the launch division considering it's losing money despite 80% of its business being launching starlink satellites (they blame starship but that was supposed to be funded by NASA).

NASA isn't paying for Starship.

They are paying for HLS.

You can't (according to old space companies) build a lunar lander and its launch system for under $10B

The S1 says they SpaceX is providing launch to Starlink at cost. ~$20MM per Tim Farrar and Lionett Pierre. Two industry analysts.

Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

#728

Post by newaccountman2 »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #578
digitaltrees wrote: post #379

I have started to see what I think are star link satellites at night on walks with my kids. It actually makes me sad to see that on person owns the night sky and is changing the literal stars my kids will grow up with. It feels different when it’s the government that theoretically represents people but when it’s one person that feels truly depressing.

Change is inevitable. I love seeing artificial objects in space, because it shows that we, humanity, are finally getting there. Elon doesn't own space, he just happens to be the one who is currently best at making it reachable. There is plenty of space for everyone else, and others will get there, eventually. I could eat myself up with envy over the money he's making from it... or be glad that it's at least someone g…

> I love seeing artificial objects in space,

Kind of fucked up lol

> rather than someone who is starting wars to profit from insider trading...

Your moral and ethical bar is Trump?

Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

#729

Post by rayiner »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #725
rayiner wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It feels different when it’s the government that theoretically represents people but when it’s one person that feels truly depressing. I worked on technology for years that the FCC effectively killed for stupid reasons. So it’s heartening to me that someone can still just do stuff and build things. It’s amazing. If you asked me 10 years ago I would have thought that getting something like Starlink off the ground wo…

People can still "do stuff and build things" while having consideration for environmental impacts.

Empirically, we can't. We can barely even build EV chargers.

Re: SpaceX wants to launch 100k more Starlink satellites for 100x the bandwidth

#730

Post by rayiner »

stringfood wrote: post #701
rayiner wrote: post #694

A couple of billion people are doing to join the global middle class over the coming decades. They don’t have pre-existing cable and phone networks that have been in the ground for 50+ years they can incrementally upgrade to broadband. Rich countries spend trillions getting to the point where most people have some sort of wired broadband option. If newly middle income countries want to pursue the same route, it will…

but is providing access to internet for billions of people worth not being able to see the big dipper as clearly at night? I say yes, but only just barely

That's a ghoulish thing to say.
Post reply on HN