SpaceX says states should dump fiber plans, give all grant money to Starlink
Technology
253
Beiträge
138
Kommentatoren
2
Aufrufe
-
One day he's gonna get assassinated and it will be a global holiday
I’m going to start the celebration from now
-
Third option: municipal fibre
We have that here. 🥰
-
You'd be instantly banned on reddit for this comment lol
i like the alternative saying
Some make the world better by their passing, others make the world better by their passing.
it's vague and passive enough that you have plausible deniability, but the meaning is clear. plus I like the poetry of it.
-
Going from the most secure, hard wired formats to a con man's satellites would be a fatal error. Any sort of military conflict and the network is all down, atleast broadband keeps secure networks intact.
Gotta gear up for America's century of humiliation.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I say that Emma Stone should divorce her husband and marry me instead.
-
You'd be instantly banned on reddit for this comment lol
Which is why I’m here and not there. It’s the internet: I hope nobody posts their hot takes! Reddit needs to lighten up. Or even better, fuck off.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I sure am sick of super fast, stable internet connections. Let’s all get something that fucks up when it’s cloudy.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Yeah, please..... give me shitty satellite internet instead of a fast fiber line...
-
This post did not contain any content.
The term "tech neutral' brings back terrible memories of the conservative Liberal successful campaign in #auspol against the #NBN (national broadband network)
The Coalition’s NBN failure: political sabotage and the threat of privatisation continues. - Paul Budde Consultancy
For over 15 years, I have watched the National Broadband Network (NBN) become one of the most politicised infrastructure projects in Australia’s history. What was supposed to be a game-changing, future-proof national interest project has instead been used as a political football, with disastrous consequences for the country’s digital future. The Liberal Party’s decision to […]
Paul Budde Consultancy (paulbudde.com)
-
Low orbit satellites will never replace fiber because physics of latency, bandwidth and error correction.
As far as things go today well never need less fiber. Even if we cover the sky with satellites eventually we'd need to upgrade to fiber because its literally impossible to beat. Except for scifi tech like quantum entanglement networks which might not even be possible or practical and wouldn't need the satelites anyway.
As an infrastructure bet it makes absolutely zero sense except for covering rare niches like war zones or oceans.
Fiber is like rail transport for the internet: expensive, high throughput infrastructure along a defined path. But when it's already there, it's very hard to beat.
Oh right, Musk stopped the discussion of proposed rail expansion with his Boring tunnels and Hyperloop, now he is doing the same thing to the internet.
-
This post did not contain any content.
SpaceX should deliver the service and access at the cost given and complete before the fiber team put a shovel in that ground.
-
That's what the subsidies are for. Plus, fiber does not necessarily need to be upgraded after installation (especially rural, where there's less customers in general). It's not copper or coax, it doesn't have the same limits, and can usually handle huge amounts of data (the limit primarily being the transceivers at both ends). The costs of upgrading would also likely be lower than the initial install, something that couldn't be said about providers like Starlink. Fiber is about the most efficient, cost effective (especially in the long term), and future proof way to provide internet. Starlink is overall much more expensive to maintain.
But yes, without the local, state, and/or federal governments supporting it, people in rural areas won't have a choice.
That's what the subsidies are for.
Yeah I'm not in favor of that, not again. The US has provided funding to ISPs to be used explicitly in expanding rural broadband access, we've done it on multiple occasions. Every time ISPs simply pocket the money and do nothing.
Fool me once, twice, three times...
So hey, if the US wants to have the FCC do it themselves, just hire crews to lay fiber, then sure. It'll be inefficient and expensive, but it would at least get done. But I'm not in favor of giving a dime to the existing ISPs...
-
Previous satellite Internet using satellites in geosynchronous orbit had 1500ms latency, for comparison.
Yes, and are far more stable, not hyped, and are already at pretty much peak congestion. Starlink will get progressively worse, the more people use it. Right now, it's over provisioned.
The point is, unless you’re playing some hyper competitive game where a 30ms difference in reaction time is noticeable (
Ever try a voice call with 30ms of latency?
Yes, and are far more stable, not hyped, and are already at pretty much peak congestion. Starlink will get progressively worse, the more people use it. Right now, it’s over provisioned.
They were not more stable. Any occlusion, including thick clouds, would degrade the signal to being unusable. I used Hughsnet for years, then swapped to cellular (100ms+ latency) and finally to Starlink. Starlink is a pretty solid 100Mb/s, with low jitter, packet loss and latency.
Ever try a voice call with 30ms of latency?
Yeah, I use voice chat every day, it's not noticeable.
-
It shouldn’t be all or nothing. It should be diversified.
Yeah, there are rural locations where Starlink makes sense but also there are a lot of urban places that it would never work in.
Problem with Starlink is that the satellites need to be replaced every 5 years or so.
-
That's what the subsidies are for.
Yeah I'm not in favor of that, not again. The US has provided funding to ISPs to be used explicitly in expanding rural broadband access, we've done it on multiple occasions. Every time ISPs simply pocket the money and do nothing.
Fool me once, twice, three times...
So hey, if the US wants to have the FCC do it themselves, just hire crews to lay fiber, then sure. It'll be inefficient and expensive, but it would at least get done. But I'm not in favor of giving a dime to the existing ISPs...
You miss my point. My original comment says as much, that the subsidies all went to big telecom, but it should have gone to local utility districts for local buildouts of fiber. I'm literally sending this message from my LUD-funded fiber that my state subsidized, and my ISP is a local company exclusive to my county's fiber network. It's fantastic, and what should be getting the funding instead of Comcast, Time Warner, and now SpaceX.
Most of the addresses my LUD serves are unincorporated, including mine. So, it actually is possible, if your state and county give enough of a shit.
-
You'd be instantly banned on reddit for this comment lol
Some of us were already banned for such comments, but now we are here being bloodthirsty dickheads. I want to put Musks head in a vice and tighten it till the two plates are dry.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I have a better idea: don’t do that.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I got a better idea: a civil war against oligarchs
-
One day he's gonna get assassinated and it will be a global holiday
We should always celebrate whenever male supremacists meet their demise. People who use the term “misandry” unironically, for example.
-
This post did not contain any content.
You cannot actually serve hundreds of millions in the US even if you invested the 75B it would cost to give every household a satellite it just can't support the bandwidth.
