On one hand, Musk.
On the other hand… Telecos.
You can either give billions more to the world’s richest asshole, or you can give billions to companies that already received that money last time and did absolutely fuckall with it.
Lose-lose
Not really. Most of the rural plans in the US are run by utilities companies that are local.
Third option: municipal fibre
lol. Of course it does.
“Humans should give me chicken” says Cat.
Except StarLink cannot possibly provide the same bandwidth, latency, and throughput a fiber connection can. Because of physics.
I can either share my 10G symmetrical connection with nobody, or with 200 others.
And, Fiber costs me $70 a month. Starlink, with worse performance, costs 4x more.
That’s good for Starlink and all other ISPs, intuitively, the less internet people have, the more they will pay for more, simple supply and demand !
The best financial move for SpaceX and Starlink would be to have a few “unfortunate accidents” where tesla crash into telephone poles which happen to also hold critical fiber junctions.
Now that is profit driven innovation !
Starlink is 120/mo. Over the past 30 days my average DL is 144Mb, UL 18Mb, with a 27ms ping. It suuuuuuuuuuuuucks, but the only other option is a literal 4Mb DSL for 80$/mo
And, wait until Starlink hits saturation… Your speeds will be 1mb down, 300kb up, and latency hitting 100ms…
You’re only benefiting from early adoption at this time. It can only get worse the more they onboard.
Starlink is 120/mo.
How much for install?
It’s not secure either. The next world war will involve efforts to sabotage satellites.
That’s the point. Musk wants control over the entire internet.
If all the other internet infrastructure was abandoned, he would be the most powerful person in history. Want to regulate him afterwards? He could just shut down the internet in your region until you accept his terms.
Starlink has no answer to dark fiber.
TIL 120 is 4 x 70…
Edit to add everything below this line
Downvotes for facts. I pay 120/mo. It’s either this, 3Mbps DSL, or T-Mobile home 5G that works when it feels like it.
So, not 4x, but 2x.
BTW, did you know HughesNet is cheaper, and works just as well. Or, it will work just as well once Starlink reaches the saturation HughesNet faces.
deleted by creator
I’ve been WFH for at least 10 years and live in rural area. Starlink was like 150-200$ a month for an unpredictable 5-150mbps and did meh. When I finally got fiber it was sub 100$ a month for 2gbps stable. Not a hard decision :)
what do you mean fiber “plans”? do you guys not have fiber?
I live in a backwater northern U.K. town. We have fibre. I’d have thought somewhere like USA was rolling it out to most places.
Nope… i don’t have cable or even great cell service and I live 45 minutes from a major city. Current ETA on fiber is mid 26.
I’m so glad other countries are coming up with their own satellites just for the expressed interest to boycott musk.
Kessler syndrome here we come!
Ok then Go yell at musk about it.
Why? That won’t accomplish much.
I just want people to know we are Fucked. This stupid fucking satellite Internet race is going to destroy Earth’s orbital infrastructure.
Oh hell no. Fuck off with this won’t stand up to the bully but will stand on everyone else you think you can bully bullshit.
You are being the exact reason we are fucked.
Coward.
We have to stand up together, there’s literally nothing I can do by myself. That’s why I need to let people know, so they stand with me.
I’m sorry if you feel like you’re being bullied.
No, please no
We don’t need thousands of satellites to provide internet, the entire idea and design of Starlink is utterly stupid.
I can look up at the sky not and see stars and… Those fucking star link satellites.
We’re already close enough to a Kessler effect scenario without adding thousands of satellites, and with governments world wide now ready to just shoot satellites (seriously, can everyone please stop voting for dumb fucks while we’re at it?) can we please PLEASE stop this?
Just use fiber internet or where not possible, use geostationary satellites. We don’t need semi low latency everywhere
There are areas of the planet where there is no signal or fibre. Clearly as you and I are capable of posting on an online social; you and I are not in one of these dead spots but they do exist. And some of these areas have to exist in order to provide sustainable lifestyle for the other more built up areas (farmland gets left in the dark much of the time)
Just something to think about before you run around running your mouth talking down with privilege of where you’re speaking about it.
And before you even utter the phrase ‘they should…’ or ‘someone should’
No. Stop. You first. you’re someone. You up end your life and go live there and fix it ‘sustainably’ and bump into all the problems with your online solutions and work it out and fix it before you talk about what everyone else should be doing in areas and lifestyles you don’t care to exist in enough to empathize or understand yet still benefit from.
And why is it only a problem with OTHER COUNTRIES do it while you sit there mute as musk does it?? So it’s all ok that he does it under the name of capitalism but should any other country act in their own agency you suddenly get all crunchy about it?
No. Absolutely not buying this ‘ok for me but not ok for thee’ bull rap.
There are areas of the planet where there is no signal or fibre.
So, we should take the billions per train launch, and install microwave backhauls and cellular service to cover those dead zones.
Hey uh Musk how’s that there hyperloop comin’?
That’s insane.
SpaceX should dump all their space plans and give back their grant money.
Nah we don’t support nazis
glances at the state of the nation
What would things look like if we did?
SpaceX can suck my cock including the biggest welfare queen Elon Musk.
“Give me all your money” says world’s richest person, in a fit of originality.
Fiber all the way, especially if it is owned by the community. That would simply ensure that Musk nor TelCos can’t fuck around with people. Fast speed, no data caps, low prices, and not being at the mercy of some wealthy jackhole would be wins across the board.
Also, if America has a 2nd Civil War, fiber will be much more safe than relying on sats - those can be shot down, or worse, Musk can cut off the good guys from having internet. It is simply harder to sabotage if the wires are underground and cannot be readily seen by hostile actors. As seen in Ukraine, the fucker has absolutely no compunctions against disabling the internet at key moments.
“fiber will be much more safe than relying on sats”
Spoken like someone who has never had some idiot in a backhoe chop a fiber bundle…multiple times in a week.
We have a saying in IT. Always carry a 1ft section of single-mode fiberoptic when hiking. If you ever get lost, just bury that sucker and some dipshit in a backhoe will be out there in a hour to cut it in half.
Spoken like someone who has never had some idiot in a backhoe chop a fiber bundle…multiple times in a week.
And, when it happens, it generally gets repaired in hours. You cannot launch a new constellation in hours.
True, but your’re comparing a single fiber optic line to an entire network of satellites. Blow up one, and they simply route traffic around it. Blow up 10, and you might have a small moving deadzone that removes service for a few minutes.
If you want to compare accurately, look at the time it takes to replace the cable infrastructure for an entire nation vs the time it takes to relaunch all the star link satellites. We started using satellites in the first place because it was the fastest (and in many cases, cheapest) way to get TV coverage anywhere on the planet.
You understand EMPs wouldn’t affect one sat, right? Or a capture net can hit an entire train?
If you want to compare accurately, look at the time it takes to replace the cable infrastructure for an entire nation vs the time it takes to relaunch all the star link satellites.
That can, and has been done in a couple of weeks. It happens somewhat regularly.
https://www.leadventgrp.com/blog/submarine-cable-damage-and-repair-claims-and-remedial-measures
10-20 days to launch a repair crew, and another week to affect the repair. At a few hundred million in costs.
A single rocket launch it minimally a year of planning. And BILLIONS in costs.
We started using satellites in the first place because it was the fastest (and in many cases, cheapest) way to get TV coverage anywhere on the planet.
Well, yes, because they are placed in a high orbit (Not LEO) generally, in order to cover massive patterns with ONE WAY signalling (Aside from the one uplink).
This is a host of difference between myriad 2-way ground stations.
That can, and has been done in a couple of weeks. It happens somewhat regularly.
https://www.leadventgrp.com/blog/submarine-cable-damage-and-repair-claims-and-remedial-measures
Whoops, there you go again comparing the impact and resolution of a single cable to an entire national network.
Whoops, there you go again comparing the impact and resolution of a single cable to an entire national network.
That’s… um… how it works? It’s generally one, maybe two, cables connecting continents: https://dabrownstein.com/2015/06/30/charting-interconnectedness-in-undersea-internet-cables/
I mean, some continents, like the US, have myriad cables connecting. And purposefully sabotaging these is almost as challenging as repairing them.
So, generally, “nations” are not connected via undersea cables, continents are.
So, yes, repairing one, maybe two, would be reconnecting an entire national network. Which is STILL cheaper than replacing a mass of Starlink sats… Which, btw, need replacing routinely anyways, because their orbits decay purposefully.
So, every 5 years, we need spend tens of billions to launch another set of trains, just to have them fall into the ocean after 5 years of service. Just to obtain a service that is cheaper, and doesn’t require nearly as much regular investment if we just used fiber.
https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-satellites.html
I get the feeling you don’t understand the economics, physics, and infrastructure of various connectivity systems. And, you also don’t understand that without connected ground stations, served by those “at risk fiber networks on the ground” (That you purport as very risky), Starlink doesn’t work, either.
That’s… um… how it works? It’s generally one, maybe two, cables connecting continents: https://dabrownstein.com/2015/06/30/charting-interconnectedness-in-undersea-internet-cables/
I mean, some continents, like the US, have myriad cables connecting. And purposefully sabotaging these is almost as challenging as repairing them.
I think you didn’t quite understand. I’m not talking about just undersea cables. An accurate comparison for the impact of blowing up the entire Starlink constellation would be to remove ALL the fiber optic cables in an entire nation, not just the undersea cables. That is a more accurate comparison.
I may not have an expert level of economic knowledge, but the fact that Starlink exists and it can provide better service than rural broadband programs or the extensive terrestrial mobile broadband networks (which still use satellites BTW) is a pretty good indicator that it is viable.
Frankly this entire statement is insulting, and you should retract it.
I get the feeling you don’t understand the economics, physics, and infrastructure of various connectivity systems.
So, just to clarify, are you in favor of replacing all fiber with Starlink?
Nope. But I think it would faster and easier to replace all fiber with Starlink than it would to replace all fiber with fiber again.
Okay, so to clarify, are you in favor of ending all new fiber installation projects in favor of Starlink?
No. That’s not what I said. Please stop trying to frame this like I am pro-starlink. I’m not.
I’m just trying to understand why this argument is even happening.
You seem to basically agree with them. What’s even the point?
It is simply harder to sabotage if the wires are underground and cannot be readily seen by hostile actors.
This statement is not correct. It is the topic being discussed. Fiber network are more vulnerable than satellite networks. It takes specialized weapons to take out a single satellite link. Any idiot with wire clippers can take out a fiber link, and it happens all the time. Fiber networks are more difficult to replace at scale than a satellite network, and individuals links are more important to fiber network than they are to satellite networks.
And blockchain DNS?
What’s dumb about this statement is all Elon would have to do is market to all the places where broadband companies refuse to go and be affordable. tRump already killed the rural broadband initiatives. There’s literally no competition and word-of-mouth could probably pull in more who are unhappy with their broadband provider.
However, capitalism and greed are cancers that know no limit…
