5 ms·

It's actually surprising Ajit Pai would publicly support competition when his entire schtick seems to be locking down on it.

cryptonector 9y ago
Maybe... you've misunderstood him?
shmerl 9y ago
It probably indicates he thinks the project is a pipe dream. Since otherwise, it's a major threat to his monopolistic bosses.
- JumpCrisscross 9y ago
  > it's a major threat to his monopolistic bosses I don't think he's being this cynical, but in what world is SpaceX competition to Verizon et al? SpaceX's satellites won't beam Internet to your phone. They'll beam it to the towers.
  - shmerl 9y ago
    > but in what world is SpaceX competition to Verizon et al? In the world of their fiber optic networks, which they refuse to build out.
    - madamelic 9y ago
      Verizon might be one of the good ones. They've at least started to build them out and actually, in my opinion, is very good.
      - shmerl 9y ago
        Sure, what they already built is decent, except for the lack of IPv6. But they simply don't want to expand anything.
- Tuna-Fish 9y ago
  It isn't, really. It's actually going to save them money. The system will not have enough aggregate bandwidth to really compete for any dense areas. Right now, for the major ISPs the dense areas are profit centers that are used to subsidize the rural areas in the states and counties that require an ISP to serve both if it wants to serve the cities. Starlink will not be able to meaningfully compete in the cities, while it will ease the burden of the rural net-negative customers.
  - nerpderp83 9y ago
    Right, and it takes off the monopoly burden from those telcos so they are then free under the same Pai to ratchet up their underhanded techniques. If I were ATT and Verizon, I would fund Starlink.
halfjoking 9y ago
Notice he says he's excited about providing high-speed internet to "rural Americans." So it's not for anyone who lives in an urban area. He'll be sure to outlaw it because radio signals might interfere with "emergency services" or some BS like that.

cryptonector 9y ago

Maybe... you've misunderstood him?

shmerl 9y ago

It probably indicates he thinks the project is a pipe dream. Since otherwise, it's a major threat to his monopolistic bosses.

JumpCrisscross 9y ago
> it's a major threat to his monopolistic bosses I don't think he's being this cynical, but in what world is SpaceX competition to Verizon et al? SpaceX's satellites won't beam Internet to your phone. They'll beam it to the towers.
- shmerl 9y ago
  > but in what world is SpaceX competition to Verizon et al? In the world of their fiber optic networks, which they refuse to build out.
  - madamelic 9y ago
    Verizon might be one of the good ones. They've at least started to build them out and actually, in my opinion, is very good.
    - shmerl 9y ago
      Sure, what they already built is decent, except for the lack of IPv6. But they simply don't want to expand anything.
Tuna-Fish 9y ago
It isn't, really. It's actually going to save them money. The system will not have enough aggregate bandwidth to really compete for any dense areas. Right now, for the major ISPs the dense areas are profit centers that are used to subsidize the rural areas in the states and counties that require an ISP to serve both if it wants to serve the cities. Starlink will not be able to meaningfully compete in the cities, while it will ease the burden of the rural net-negative customers.
- nerpderp83 9y ago
  Right, and it takes off the monopoly burden from those telcos so they are then free under the same Pai to ratchet up their underhanded techniques. If I were ATT and Verizon, I would fund Starlink.

halfjoking 9y ago

Notice he says he's excited about providing high-speed internet to "rural Americans." So it's not for anyone who lives in an urban area. He'll be sure to outlaw it because radio signals might interfere with "emergency services" or some BS like that.