6 ms·

the biggest win here are productivity gains. After high speed internet is available, you'll be able to work in the bush with a laptop. away from ridiculous rent

by dzonga 8y ago

the biggest win here are productivity gains. After high speed internet is available, you'll be able to work in the bush with a laptop. away from ridiculous rents and rent-seekers.

sneak 8y ago
Yes, this is going to change the world in a big way. High speed global communication is a paradigm shift. If SpaceX cheap reusability and Tesla all-electric really end up doing the things they promise on a huge scale, then Elon will be 3 for 3 on truly world-changing advancements.
- shaklee3 8y ago
  There are at least 5 competing constellations that will be higher throughout and/or out first. Spacex's is not new.
  - mrep 8y ago
    Your going to have to give a lot more details than that blanket statement because I have been following starlink closely ever since it was announced. Oneweb is their main competitor who has already launched test satellites but they are going to launch on other companies rockets which are much more expensive than spacex's especially now that spacex is getting reusability down. Amazon just announced their constellation plans and they either have to launch on expensive non-spacex rockets or have to use blue origin which while they are planning to have fully reusable rockets, those are still years out. What are the other 3 companies that will be out first and/or have higher throughput and/or how are Amazon/Oneweb better?
    - shaklee3 8y ago
      Oneweb, telesat, ViaSat, o3b (mpower), and Boeing have all announced. A study from MIT showed telesat's to be the most cost effective from the LEO bunch [1], which is important since it's not clear SpaceX has a path to revenue [2]. and if you've been following starling closely, you know that they will not have anywhere near their full deployment for over 5 years after the first launches. the entire fleet is required for the capacity they have been touting, not to mention the coverage. And the argument that SpaceX has some kind of moat because of their launch business is simply not true. there are many launch providers out there, and launch costs have gone way down partly due to SpaceX, but also because satellite orders have decreased significantly. SpaceX as a company, needs as much revenue as possible to fund the satellite venture, since their entire company is depending on it. The launch business is not sustainable in providing enough revenue in the future to keep them in business. so SpaceX will have to fight for business from all the other satellites just as much as any other company. 1)https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.mit.edu/~portillo/files/Comparison-LEO-IAC-2018-slides.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi00Kjv0_bhAhXNu54KHcnuA6sQFjAAegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw07haQ4In4XKLe0tB0IiviQ&cshid=1556587401142 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://... 2)http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2019/04/08/high-times/ http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2019/04/08/high-times/
      - mrep 8y ago
        > A study from MIT showed telesat's to be the most cost effective from the LEO bunch [1] I just read that article and it makes no claims whatsoever in relation to costs. > which is important since it's not clear SpaceX has a path to revenue [2]. Path to revenue? What does that even mean? > if you've been following starling closely, you know that they will not have anywhere near their full deployment for over 5 years after the first launches. the entire fleet is required for the capacity they have been touting, not to mention the coverage. US/Europe coverage is going to be their primary initial target as that is where the most money is and that requires a significantly smaller amount of satellites. Care to enlighten us on what other companies are planning to launch production satellites like spacex is doing next month because the only company I am aware of that has even launched test satellites is oneweb.
        shaklee3 8y ago
        It gives a bandwidth efficiency ratio, which is directly tied to cost since the more efficient per bit the system is, the cheaper it is to run. If telesat's is 4x cheaper per bit, how would SpaceX compete? Path to profit. You are saying SpaceX launch a handful of these satellites is really going to have any effect?They already launched some and they had propulsion problems. They need upwards of 500 of these in the air just to compete with satellites that have been up for multiple years already.
        mrep 8y ago
        > It gives a bandwidth efficiency ratio, which is directly tied to cost since the more efficient per bit the system is, the cheaper it is to run. The source you linked said Telesat had a 4x Gbps/satellite bandwidth over spacex which is not directly tied to cost. Telesat has no mention of satellite weight and spacex plans to launch 40x the amount of satellites as Telesat for their initial constellation and 100x at full capacity if I recall correctly. > Path to profit. Spacex has reusable first stage rockets. I don't see how any of the other mass satellite constellation companies that you mentioned can have better margins than spacex. > They need upwards of 500 of these in the air just to compete with satellites that have been up for multiple years already. Do those 5 companies you just mentioned somehow don't?
  - Seanambers 8y ago
    So who else is planning to have 1600+ satellites in orbit by mid 20's? And can any of these competitors compete on orbital insertion price / rocket availability with SpaceX? The entire concept is that SpaceX is basically going for backbone global fiber delivery, not end users as first customers at first at least. As long as SpaceX can do the Satellite tech needed, I can't see how they can loose long term. Elon does not think small.
    - shaklee3 8y ago
      The number of satellites is not relevant. It's a single parameter a large number of them which describe how well the constellation will perform. Please see here for more detail: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.mit.edu/~portillo/files/Comparison-LEO-IAC-2018-slides.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi00Kjv0_bhAhXNu54KHcnuA6sQFjAAegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw07haQ4In4XKLe0tB0IiviQ&cshid=1556587401142 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://... The satellites are not the hard part, even though they are extremely hard. The hard part is going to be getting a suitable user antenna for a low enough cost that they will make the money back. So far they have not spoken publicly about their user terminal or cost, other than a couple sound bites musk said years ago about how low he wants the cost.
    - derekp7 8y ago
      I can actually see this working as a backbone provider. Take any underserved area, rent space on cell phone towers or water towers or grain silos, and deploy an all-in-one kit that has the Starlink antenna along with a WISP transmitter and solar power. Also would work for apartment owners who want to get an additional revenue stream by being the sole provider of internet to their tenants.
  - philwelch 8y ago
    So what? The entire purpose of Starlink is to increase global demand for launch capacity. That's the only way they're going to reach the economy of scale to be able to actually reduce launch costs as much as they're capable of. They can break even or even take a loss on Starlink and still achieve a valuable strategic goal.
- dzhiurgis 8y ago
  Internet was supposed to change everything yet we are stuck in cesspool of misinformation. 100% sure Tesla will either apply great firewall in China or just shut sats down while they are there, because China will threaten shutting gigafactory.
  - sneak 8y ago
    The internet did change everything, despite its being used to spread misinformation. They are orthogonal. It is no surprise that an ISP operating in China will be subject to Chinese law. The last-mile method is not really relevant.
    - dzhiurgis 8y ago
      It haven't really changed law and politics like cyberphunks hoped. You can't change law with technology...
make3 8y ago
and with 600 ms ping you can't game, so that's even more productivity right there
- avmich 8y ago
  600 ms is for those with geosats Internet. Low flying constellations offer 10-100 times lower latency, see other comments here.
heavenlyblue 8y ago
Are you implying your laptop is going to have a phased array antenna mounted on top of it?
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  They already make Inmarsat (BGAN)/Iridium WiFi hotspots. This would be no different. Power and view of sky go in, Internet comes out.
  - gesman 8y ago
    What about rainy clouds and thunderstorms? While i want to be outside in sunny weather and work on my laptop during rainy day - that's when the connection quality is worst?
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      Heavy weather will almost always diminish satellite connectivity. Will depend on what Ka/Ku bands will be used between satellite and terminal.
  - shaklee3 8y ago
    Those antennas are extremely expensive and large, so the OP's dream is largely just a dream.
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      Google image search "iridium hotspot" and "bgan". They range in size from a small ipad to a large ipad. Pretty reasonable for global connectivity (although not built into a laptop's frame).
      - Rebelgecko 8y ago
        Those small iridium hotspots are also much lower bandwidth
beenBoutIT 8y ago
This could pipe unfiltered Internet into places like China/NKorea/Iran.
- JohnJamesRambo 8y ago
  One of my favorite features of it. No one can stop the dissemination of a free internet then.
  - zizee 8y ago
    It will be difficult to hide the dish that sits on your roof, blasting signals into space.
- intrasight 8y ago
  Sure - if the want to risk China/NKorea/Iran shooting those satellites out of space. Seems a bad gamble so I doubt they'll provide service to those countries.
  - diminoten 8y ago
    No one has ever shot down a satellite that wasn't theirs in human history, I don't believe.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - intrasight 8y ago
      Not yet ;)
- mortenjorck 8y ago
  While the DPRK would have no means of doing this, the PRC could quite plausibly launch its own jammer constellation if it became enough of an issue. The most interesting aspect is that an import ban on LEO satellite modems becomes exponentially harder to enforce when you’re the only country that can manufacture them at scale in the first place.
wuunderbar 8y ago
What's going to be the power and size requirements of the ground transceiver? Do we have details on that?

by dzonga 8y ago

the biggest win here are productivity gains. After high speed internet is available, you'll be able to work in the bush with a laptop. away from ridiculous rents and rent-seekers.

sneak 8y ago

Yes, this is going to change the world in a big way. High speed global communication is a paradigm shift. If SpaceX cheap reusability and Tesla all-electric really end up doing the things they promise on a huge scale, then Elon will be 3 for 3 on truly world-changing advancements.

shaklee3 8y ago
There are at least 5 competing constellations that will be higher throughout and/or out first. Spacex's is not new.
- mrep 8y ago
  Your going to have to give a lot more details than that blanket statement because I have been following starlink closely ever since it was announced. Oneweb is their main competitor who has already launched test satellites but they are going to launch on other companies rockets which are much more expensive than spacex's especially now that spacex is getting reusability down. Amazon just announced their constellation plans and they either have to launch on expensive non-spacex rockets or have to use blue origin which while they are planning to have fully reusable rockets, those are still years out. What are the other 3 companies that will be out first and/or have higher throughput and/or how are Amazon/Oneweb better?
  - shaklee3 8y ago
    Oneweb, telesat, ViaSat, o3b (mpower), and Boeing have all announced. A study from MIT showed telesat's to be the most cost effective from the LEO bunch [1], which is important since it's not clear SpaceX has a path to revenue [2]. and if you've been following starling closely, you know that they will not have anywhere near their full deployment for over 5 years after the first launches. the entire fleet is required for the capacity they have been touting, not to mention the coverage. And the argument that SpaceX has some kind of moat because of their launch business is simply not true. there are many launch providers out there, and launch costs have gone way down partly due to SpaceX, but also because satellite orders have decreased significantly. SpaceX as a company, needs as much revenue as possible to fund the satellite venture, since their entire company is depending on it. The launch business is not sustainable in providing enough revenue in the future to keep them in business. so SpaceX will have to fight for business from all the other satellites just as much as any other company. 1)https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.mit.edu/~portillo/files/Comparison-LEO-IAC-2018-slides.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi00Kjv0_bhAhXNu54KHcnuA6sQFjAAegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw07haQ4In4XKLe0tB0IiviQ&cshid=1556587401142 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://... 2)http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2019/04/08/high-times/ http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2019/04/08/high-times/
    - mrep 8y ago
      > A study from MIT showed telesat's to be the most cost effective from the LEO bunch [1] I just read that article and it makes no claims whatsoever in relation to costs. > which is important since it's not clear SpaceX has a path to revenue [2]. Path to revenue? What does that even mean? > if you've been following starling closely, you know that they will not have anywhere near their full deployment for over 5 years after the first launches. the entire fleet is required for the capacity they have been touting, not to mention the coverage. US/Europe coverage is going to be their primary initial target as that is where the most money is and that requires a significantly smaller amount of satellites. Care to enlighten us on what other companies are planning to launch production satellites like spacex is doing next month because the only company I am aware of that has even launched test satellites is oneweb.
      - shaklee3 8y ago
        It gives a bandwidth efficiency ratio, which is directly tied to cost since the more efficient per bit the system is, the cheaper it is to run. If telesat's is 4x cheaper per bit, how would SpaceX compete? Path to profit. You are saying SpaceX launch a handful of these satellites is really going to have any effect?They already launched some and they had propulsion problems. They need upwards of 500 of these in the air just to compete with satellites that have been up for multiple years already.
        mrep 8y ago
        > It gives a bandwidth efficiency ratio, which is directly tied to cost since the more efficient per bit the system is, the cheaper it is to run. The source you linked said Telesat had a 4x Gbps/satellite bandwidth over spacex which is not directly tied to cost. Telesat has no mention of satellite weight and spacex plans to launch 40x the amount of satellites as Telesat for their initial constellation and 100x at full capacity if I recall correctly. > Path to profit. Spacex has reusable first stage rockets. I don't see how any of the other mass satellite constellation companies that you mentioned can have better margins than spacex. > They need upwards of 500 of these in the air just to compete with satellites that have been up for multiple years already. Do those 5 companies you just mentioned somehow don't?
- Seanambers 8y ago
  So who else is planning to have 1600+ satellites in orbit by mid 20's? And can any of these competitors compete on orbital insertion price / rocket availability with SpaceX? The entire concept is that SpaceX is basically going for backbone global fiber delivery, not end users as first customers at first at least. As long as SpaceX can do the Satellite tech needed, I can't see how they can loose long term. Elon does not think small.
  - shaklee3 8y ago
    The number of satellites is not relevant. It's a single parameter a large number of them which describe how well the constellation will perform. Please see here for more detail: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.mit.edu/~portillo/files/Comparison-LEO-IAC-2018-slides.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi00Kjv0_bhAhXNu54KHcnuA6sQFjAAegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw07haQ4In4XKLe0tB0IiviQ&cshid=1556587401142 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://... The satellites are not the hard part, even though they are extremely hard. The hard part is going to be getting a suitable user antenna for a low enough cost that they will make the money back. So far they have not spoken publicly about their user terminal or cost, other than a couple sound bites musk said years ago about how low he wants the cost.
  - derekp7 8y ago
    I can actually see this working as a backbone provider. Take any underserved area, rent space on cell phone towers or water towers or grain silos, and deploy an all-in-one kit that has the Starlink antenna along with a WISP transmitter and solar power. Also would work for apartment owners who want to get an additional revenue stream by being the sole provider of internet to their tenants.
- philwelch 8y ago
  So what? The entire purpose of Starlink is to increase global demand for launch capacity. That's the only way they're going to reach the economy of scale to be able to actually reduce launch costs as much as they're capable of. They can break even or even take a loss on Starlink and still achieve a valuable strategic goal.
dzhiurgis 8y ago
Internet was supposed to change everything yet we are stuck in cesspool of misinformation. 100% sure Tesla will either apply great firewall in China or just shut sats down while they are there, because China will threaten shutting gigafactory.
- sneak 8y ago
  The internet did change everything, despite its being used to spread misinformation. They are orthogonal. It is no surprise that an ISP operating in China will be subject to Chinese law. The last-mile method is not really relevant.
  - dzhiurgis 8y ago
    It haven't really changed law and politics like cyberphunks hoped. You can't change law with technology...

make3 8y ago

and with 600 ms ping you can't game, so that's even more productivity right there

avmich 8y ago
600 ms is for those with geosats Internet. Low flying constellations offer 10-100 times lower latency, see other comments here.

heavenlyblue 8y ago

Are you implying your laptop is going to have a phased array antenna mounted on top of it?

toomuchtodo 8y ago
They already make Inmarsat (BGAN)/Iridium WiFi hotspots. This would be no different. Power and view of sky go in, Internet comes out.
- gesman 8y ago
  What about rainy clouds and thunderstorms? While i want to be outside in sunny weather and work on my laptop during rainy day - that's when the connection quality is worst?
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    Heavy weather will almost always diminish satellite connectivity. Will depend on what Ka/Ku bands will be used between satellite and terminal.
- shaklee3 8y ago
  Those antennas are extremely expensive and large, so the OP's dream is largely just a dream.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    Google image search "iridium hotspot" and "bgan". They range in size from a small ipad to a large ipad. Pretty reasonable for global connectivity (although not built into a laptop's frame).
    - Rebelgecko 8y ago
      Those small iridium hotspots are also much lower bandwidth

beenBoutIT 8y ago

This could pipe unfiltered Internet into places like China/NKorea/Iran.

JohnJamesRambo 8y ago
One of my favorite features of it. No one can stop the dissemination of a free internet then.
- zizee 8y ago
  It will be difficult to hide the dish that sits on your roof, blasting signals into space.
intrasight 8y ago
Sure - if the want to risk China/NKorea/Iran shooting those satellites out of space. Seems a bad gamble so I doubt they'll provide service to those countries.
- diminoten 8y ago
  No one has ever shot down a satellite that wasn't theirs in human history, I don't believe.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - intrasight 8y ago
    Not yet ;)
mortenjorck 8y ago
While the DPRK would have no means of doing this, the PRC could quite plausibly launch its own jammer constellation if it became enough of an issue. The most interesting aspect is that an import ban on LEO satellite modems becomes exponentially harder to enforce when you’re the only country that can manufacture them at scale in the first place.

wuunderbar 8y ago

What's going to be the power and size requirements of the ground transceiver? Do we have details on that?