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

Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

businesswire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 124 posts

Re: Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

#91

Post by ericmay »

iso1631 wrote: post #86
ericmay wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting for a fact that Iran as the guidance and targeting systems to identify specific LEO objects, and fire missiles at those targets with accuracy?

I'm saying that it's far easier for them to take out an LEO satellite than an underground data centre, or even a surface one, in the centre of the US. Are you saying it's not?

I'm saying I don't think Iran has the capability and the difference in capabilities between America and China on one hand, and Iran on the other is so different that I'm perplexed as to why they would even be mentioned in the same sentence.

I'm actually not even sure your suggestion is true. Theoretically they don't need to launch a missile and could attempt to infiltrate a data center instead. They're secure but not that secure against a determined enemy with any amount of real training.

Re: Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

#92

Post by mandeepj »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #70
supernova87a wrote: post #38

I remain convinced that the main successful business model in the satellite communications industry is to wait for the first incarnation of the satellite company to fail / go bankrupt / flounder, and then be part of the 2nd round of financing or ownership that comes in to buy it out and operate it... I don't know why this is the pattern but it seems to have played out several times over the last 2 decades that I've c…

> to fail / go bankrupt / flounder This is exactly what "the Internet" said about spacex when they announced Starlink. Oh, it never worked. LEO constellations were tried in the 90s, ALL of them failed. Haha, it will never work. 14k satellites, that's insane, dreams, lies, hahaha. ... and yet, they are now at ~10k satellites launched, and are serving 9+mil customers, for some unknown billions/year in revenue (should b…

> for some unknown billions/year in revenue

Read here on HN yday: they’ve $20B in revenue, but xAI is a drag.

Re: Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

#93

Post by krisroadruck »

AshleyGrant wrote: post #84
krisroadruck wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be incredibly unlikely for there to be enough competition at a grand enough scale for it to become a problem. Space is just very big. Earth's surface is ~197 million sq miles. If you move up to a LEO shell at around 550 miles up, the surface area of that sphere is 34% larger than that. If you were to distribute 100,000 satellites across that shell, each one would have 2,600 square miles to itself. That's lik…

> Mind you, that's if we are only considering a 2-D sphere, but space isn't 2-D you can space your orbits between 550 and 650 miles, with each 1 mile vertical increment acting as a "floor" or passing lane. Sure, but satellites in a higher plane will need to navigate satellites below them during de-orbit. Conversely, satellites in a lower plane will likely need to avoid non-functional satellites that are uncontrolled…

How much mental bandwidth do you put into not hitting a car that's in a different city? Even if all 100 layers collapsed to one, that's still only 100 satellites in 2600 square miles. NYC is ~300 sq miles. There are about 2.2 million cars there. I feel like you still aren't grasping how much space we are talking about.

Re: Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

#94

Post by joezydeco »

krisroadruck wrote: post #72
crowcroft wrote: post #54

Naive question - let's assume this all becomes a really competitive market and 10+ companies are pumping satellites into orbit. Are we going to run out of space? At some point it probably makes the most sense for there to be one wholesaler of satellite connections and then many retailers right? The market skews towards being an international natural monopoly, right?

It would be incredibly unlikely for there to be enough competition at a grand enough scale for it to become a problem. Space is just very big. Earth's surface is ~197 million sq miles. If you move up to a LEO shell at around 550 miles up, the surface area of that sphere is 34% larger than that. If you were to distribute 100,000 satellites across that shell, each one would have 2,600 square miles to itself. That's lik…

The Crash Clock is currently at 5.5 days.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/kessler-syndrome-crash-clock

Re: Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

#95

Post by fckgw »

bequanna wrote: post #90
lxgr wrote: post #56

See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47770323 My comment from there: Interesting, I was expecting Apple to eventually buy them. Still, makes sense to me: The aging Globalstar satellite constellation itself is probably not very interesting to Amazon, but their global L-band and S-band spectrum is, as are their existing licenses to operate a mobile satellite service in most countries.

Post-Jobs Apple seems paralyzed and unable to commit to any big moves. It is impossible to overstate the success of the iPhone, but there are so many recent examples where they dipped their toes in only to fail or be left behind (autos, VR, AI, etc). What will the next 20 years of Apple look like? Just more iPhones?

Apple Watch and Airpods are two of the largest consumer product launches of the last 10 years and they're both post-Jobs.

Re: Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

#96

Post by mrguyorama »

bequanna wrote: post #90
lxgr wrote: post #56

See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47770323 My comment from there: Interesting, I was expecting Apple to eventually buy them. Still, makes sense to me: The aging Globalstar satellite constellation itself is probably not very interesting to Amazon, but their global L-band and S-band spectrum is, as are their existing licenses to operate a mobile satellite service in most countries.

Post-Jobs Apple seems paralyzed and unable to commit to any big moves. It is impossible to overstate the success of the iPhone, but there are so many recent examples where they dipped their toes in only to fail or be left behind (autos, VR, AI, etc). What will the next 20 years of Apple look like? Just more iPhones?

The same as it has for about the past 20 years? Take a 30% cut of all transactions that ever happen as long as an iPhone was somewhere in the process.

Charging a high fee to be a middleman is insanely profitable. People shouldn't be surprised that companies that get there don't do anything else.

Re: Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

#97

Post by toast0 »

supernova87a wrote: post #38

I remain convinced that the main successful business model in the satellite communications industry is to wait for the first incarnation of the satellite company to fail / go bankrupt / flounder, and then be part of the 2nd round of financing or ownership that comes in to buy it out and operate it... I don't know why this is the pattern but it seems to have played out several times over the last 2 decades that I've c…

> I don't know why this is the pattern but it seems to have played out several times over the last 2 decades that I've casually watched this syndrome.

This is a pretty common pattern in capital intensive businesses. It's often the case that revenue is inline with operating costs, but revenue can't really ever pay for the start up costs. That dooms the initial business, but after bankruptcy it can be viable.

Depending on circumatances, the very visible bankruptcy also helps deter other businesses from joining the market. But if the cost was high due to technology, doing the same business 10-20 years later can work out because the start up costs may be significantly less.

Re: Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

#98

Post by toast0 »

hrimfaxi wrote: post #83
Zigurd wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll try. But they are between two forces squeezing the TAM: The anvil: satellites can't serve most people in a densely populated area, whereas terrestrial wireless can be engineered and deployed to serve any population density, even tens of thousands of people in a stadium. The hammer: electronics get cheaper faster when they don't have to be space grade, and electronics get cheaper faster than rockets. As they g…

> The anvil: satellites can't serve most people in a densely populated area, whereas terrestrial wireless can be engineered and deployed to serve any population density, even tens of thousands of people in a stadium. That's if everyone is trying to connect to the satellite. Would it be possible to have regional hubs that connect and distribute the connection via a local wireless link like 5G?

You can use satellite backhaul for a 5G tower. And I'm sure there are many towers with satellite backhaul.

But, once you start having multiple towers near by, you are going to link those up terrestrially (wireless or not) and pretty soon you'll end up with terrestrial backhaul.

Re: Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

#99

Post by pstuart »

brandon272 wrote: post #87
readitalready wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only real viable long-term business model for these constellations are for the military or other socialized use. They are completely unprofitable otherwise. Eventually even Starlink will lose money, as more and more rural regions around the world are wired for fiber.

I find this hard to imagine. There are so many rural customers where it is totally uneconomical to run fiber vs. just paying for Starlink.

5G internet seems to be a decent compromise for that -- much simpler infra at least.

Re: Amazon to acquire Globalstar and expand Amazon Leo satellite network

#100

Post by Zigurd »

toast0 wrote: post #98
hrimfaxi wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The anvil: satellites can't serve most people in a densely populated area, whereas terrestrial wireless can be engineered and deployed to serve any population density, even tens of thousands of people in a stadium. That's if everyone is trying to connect to the satellite. Would it be possible to have regional hubs that connect and distribute the connection via a local wireless link like 5G?

You can use satellite backhaul for a 5G tower. And I'm sure there are many towers with satellite backhaul. But, once you start having multiple towers near by, you are going to link those up terrestrially (wireless or not) and pretty soon you'll end up with terrestrial backhaul.

Satellite backhaul really only happens in mobile disaster recovery truck-mounted cell sites, and the fairly rare occasions where a rural site can't use terrestrial wireless backhaul.
Post reply on HN