3 ms·

Why is everyone working on internet satellites? There's no way this is profitable, and people using competitors' solutions still means they can access the inter

Why is everyone working on internet satellites? There's no way this is profitable, and people using competitors' solutions still means they can access the internet. Maybe it's easier than starting a regular ISP (to vacuum up data)?

clSTophEjUdRanu 7y ago
The process of running wires in the US is a massive uphill battle of regulations and monopolies. With junk like this it's easy to see the appeal of wireless: https://www.tennessean.com/story/money/2017/11/22/judge-rules-against-metro-blocks-google-fiber-backed-utility-line-policy-at-t-poles/889313001/ https://www.tennessean.com/story/money/2017/11/22/judge-rule... https://m.slashdot.org/story/313165 https://m.slashdot.org/story/313165
- magicsmoke 7y ago
  To add to your point about how satellite internet connected smartphones negate the problems with building physical networks in the US, this could also have major effects for how US software services can reach foreign markets. In developing areas without stable cellular backbone like parts of Africa, South America, Central Asia etc anyone with a smartphone can get access to Google, Facebook, or Twitter as long as they're within line of sight of a satellite. More people using US software, more data to mine and more profits. But even more interesting is that now US software services can't be censored in places like China, Iran, Vietnam, Cuba, etc. Anyone with a smartphone can access US internet satellites without going through the firewalled cellular backbone of their home country. The CIA and NSA would have a field day with the data they could mine and media they could push. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lot of government money being funneled towards development of a uncensorable satellite network to defray R&D costs or keep it running even if it never makes a profit. The key to making this work though would be to have an internet satellite network where the satellites can do all the beamforming and signal processing well enough that smartphone antennas don't have to be significantly more powerful than they are today.
  - Aperocky 7y ago
    A satellite will not have that amount of bandwidth. Period. It is all based on science too, check out information theory. You either need to beam in multiple specific direction resulting in technical challenges and impossible energy cost. Or you’re limited to one large broadcast where your signal to noise ratio dictate the upper cap of amount of information you can transfer - its going to look like a wifi that had one million people connected to it. Imagine the speed.
  - mantap 7y ago
    I'm pretty sure it would be censored in China, they would simply threaten to shoot down the satellites.
scarface74 7y ago
Well, Iridium Communications is profitable https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/08/06/iridium-communications-new-satellites-are-already.aspx https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/08/06/iridium-communicat...
- shaklee3 7y ago
  The link you sent says they're not profitable. They had their best quarter, and it was still a loss.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    You are correct. I looked at this statement. “On an adjusted basis, Iridium said its operational profit rose 20% from a year ago to $78.7 million.” Rookie mistake. I knew better.

clSTophEjUdRanu 7y ago

The process of running wires in the US is a massive uphill battle of regulations and monopolies. With junk like this it's easy to see the appeal of wireless: https://www.tennessean.com/story/money/2017/11/22/judge-rules-against-metro-blocks-google-fiber-backed-utility-line-policy-at-t-poles/889313001/ https://www.tennessean.com/story/money/2017/11/22/judge-rule... https://m.slashdot.org/story/313165 https://m.slashdot.org/story/313165

magicsmoke 7y ago
To add to your point about how satellite internet connected smartphones negate the problems with building physical networks in the US, this could also have major effects for how US software services can reach foreign markets. In developing areas without stable cellular backbone like parts of Africa, South America, Central Asia etc anyone with a smartphone can get access to Google, Facebook, or Twitter as long as they're within line of sight of a satellite. More people using US software, more data to mine and more profits. But even more interesting is that now US software services can't be censored in places like China, Iran, Vietnam, Cuba, etc. Anyone with a smartphone can access US internet satellites without going through the firewalled cellular backbone of their home country. The CIA and NSA would have a field day with the data they could mine and media they could push. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lot of government money being funneled towards development of a uncensorable satellite network to defray R&D costs or keep it running even if it never makes a profit. The key to making this work though would be to have an internet satellite network where the satellites can do all the beamforming and signal processing well enough that smartphone antennas don't have to be significantly more powerful than they are today.
- Aperocky 7y ago
  A satellite will not have that amount of bandwidth. Period. It is all based on science too, check out information theory. You either need to beam in multiple specific direction resulting in technical challenges and impossible energy cost. Or you’re limited to one large broadcast where your signal to noise ratio dictate the upper cap of amount of information you can transfer - its going to look like a wifi that had one million people connected to it. Imagine the speed.
- mantap 7y ago
  I'm pretty sure it would be censored in China, they would simply threaten to shoot down the satellites.

scarface74 7y ago

Well, Iridium Communications is profitable https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/08/06/iridium-communications-new-satellites-are-already.aspx https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/08/06/iridium-communicat...

shaklee3 7y ago
The link you sent says they're not profitable. They had their best quarter, and it was still a loss.
- scarface74 7y ago
  You are correct. I looked at this statement. “On an adjusted basis, Iridium said its operational profit rose 20% from a year ago to $78.7 million.” Rookie mistake. I knew better.