7 ms·

They are actively working on reducing reflectivity but there will always be an impact and honestly any effort to improve it will be well appreciated by me. Howe

by Slikey 7y ago

They are actively working on reducing reflectivity but there will always be an impact and honestly any effort to improve it will be well appreciated by me. However, even though I love the work astronomers do and the view of a clear sky into the stars, I must say I prefer global Internet availability over making astronomers clean their data from satelite datapoints. Most discussions about this leave the goal of Starlink out of the picture. If this can bring Internet access to every spot on Earth, the immediate benefit for humanity is clear.

izacus 7y ago
> If this can bring Internet access to every spot on Earth, the immediate benefit for humanity is clear. In which part of the earth are you missing the internet coverage so horribly?
- Slikey 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage#/media/File:Broadband_Affordability.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage#/media/F... More supply drives down prices. Don't even mention current satelite Internet. Those operate via GSO satelites with seconds of ping and a way higher pricing considering SpaceX wants to be competitive with broadband pricing.
- nexuist 7y ago
  Forests, the Arctic, much of Africa, Asia, every ocean?
  - monk_e_boy 7y ago
    Vallies. Villages. Beaches.... Has this person never traveled?
    - runarberg 7y ago
      Usually you are able to save the tasks that require fast internet connection for later. If you find your self on a slow internet connection while uploading a large video file, you can hold that up until you find somewhere that has a fast connection. You also often have the option of lowering the bandwidth requirements (e.g. switch of the video call for a voice call at a lower quality). I find fast internet a luxury rather then anything while traveling.
      - nickik 7y ago
        And you can also not use wireless ever until you can connect to a cable. What kind of logic is that? Sure, humanity has existed before global internet. But now that we can have it, there are 100s of reason to do so. You see it as a luxury, but so is the ability to buy clean water or even get it of the tab. Things that are luxury in the beginning get cheap enough so many can use it and that whats called progresses.
  - logosmonkey 7y ago
    My mom's house in rural Arkansas. I mean basically if you live outside of a large city you have 1 choice of internet access and it's usually hot garbage and over priced.
  - 6nf 7y ago
    About 90% of Australia too
  - positr0n 7y ago
    I don’t think it will be available in the Arctic. https://streamable.com/3lbqj https://streamable.com/3lbqj
  - runarberg 7y ago
    Is there a reason you need fast internet connection in forrests/on the Arctic/while sailing in the middle of the ocean?[1] Is there a reason why much of Africa or Asia can’t invest in similar infrastructure as Europe has done to provide internet to where people live? 1: Maybe it could be handy to transmit large amount of science data I suppose, but they seemed to be able to cope with this limitation while photographing the black holes
    - sigstoat 7y ago
      > Is there a reason you need fast internet connection in forrests/on the Arctic/while sailing in the middle of the ocean?[1] is there a reason you need fast internet at home? now imagine being some place that isn't home. > Is there a reason why much of Africa or Asia can’t invest in similar infrastructure as Europe has done to provide internet to where people live? crushing poverty? come on, just tell them to eat cake while you're at it.
      - runarberg 7y ago
        > is there a reason you need fast internet at home? now imagine being some place that isn't home. My internet needs away from home are vastly different then at home, so I don’t understand how this is an answer. > crushing poverty? It is highly likely that the same poverty is going to prevent locals from using Starlink. Besides lacking infrastructure in large parts of Africa and Asia has often been the result of bad policy, or wars, not poverty (or poverty as a result of war). A lot of African nations are catching up on their infrastructure projects, and I see no reason why they will skip internet connectivity as they build up their infrastructure (given that most African nations have infinitely better policy—and a lot fewer wars—now then say 30 years ago).
    - kirrent 7y ago
      I used to live on a boat. It'd be nice to have access to the internet when I do so again even coastally. I can't even imagine how much of a boon getting internet access across an ocean would be. Not only to help with boredom, but also to get heaps of up to date weather observation and prediction data to do routing.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- stickfigure 7y ago
  California, about an hour outside of SF. The quality of internet service falls off precipitously as you leave urban city limits. It's better than it could be - when we decided to move "to the country", we almost bought a property where the only internet option was HughesNet. From all reports, HughesNet is incredibly expensive and barely usable. A big plus for the place we landed is that we can get "rural wireless broadband" - basically a point-to-point wifi signal bounced off of a solar-powered relay on a hill, to a set of towers on a faraway ridge, run by a folksy two-man ISP. It's expensive, unreliable, and slow compared to what I left in SF. But it's better than HughesNet and there's no data cap. I don't know what to expect from Starlink, but I'm hopeful. Even if it's just a reliable 10Mbit connection I'll be ecstatic.
  - markvdb 7y ago
    I feel for you. Our holiday house is about 30km beyond the middle of nowhere, but the 4g uplink is reliable. Plus we have to share it with very very few others... If we ever need more, I'll probaby do just like the folksy two-man ISP you describe...
- Mountain_Skies 7y ago
  Most airlines will end up using it to stream telemetry as a backup and for areas where primary telemetry communication channels aren't viable. IIRC, it doesn't work near the poles but for everywhere else it would be good for knowing the last position when a flight vanishes.
- penagwin 7y ago
  Something like over 40% of the world's population doesn't have internet access.
- daedalus_j 7y ago
  30 minutes away from Microsoft main campus in Redmond WA, (and just a bit further away from Google/Amazon campus' in the area) Best available internet is a 3mbit down, 1-if-you're-lucky-mbit up DSL connection from CenturyLink with latency that jumps into the 2.5+ second range when it rains hard. Which, fortunately it never does in the pacific northwest. :-D And no, traditional satellite is a no-go, even if it was an affordable option. We have these things called "mountains" you see, and the satellites are only at certain spots in the sky, sadly occluded by a couple billion tons of rock and tree. To reiterate, this is within commuting distance of "big tech" HQs. Starlink can't come fast enough. Existing ISPs need to feel the pain of screwing their customers so bad for so long.
  - semi-extrinsic 7y ago
    Sounds like a mostly-US problem that would be better solved by proper regulation of markets. But nah, that'd be crazy socialism stuff.
    - antepodius 7y ago
      It's all local state-enforced monopolies, man. The current internet situation is pretty close to socialist paradise.
    - NikolaNovak 7y ago
      ... poor internet bandwidth or accessibility in remote region... is a "US only problem"?? I make it a point to not sound snarky or sarcastic on HN, we have a pretty good standard of discourse here - but that just seems a ludicrous statement to make, and I'm frankly curious what consideration went into it, as opposed to a knee-jerk reaction? I don't think technology will solve all the world's ills; I agree that regulation of markets is a useful measure to undertake in certain situations; I don't find "Socialist" a swear word; but if ever there was a problem with a technical solution, then accessibility of internet in remote solution is almost the canonical use-case. Regulation of markets will not bring the Interwebs to remote or underdeveloped parts of the world. Now... if we want to discuss whether bringing the Intertubes to all the world is a worthy goal or not; whether it is worth the compromises and risks a massive constellation of satellites will impose; sure, that's a productive tops to examine. But if we accept for sake of argument that internet in remote or underdeveloped parts of the world is a goal, I'm curious to see how market regulation will make that happen better and faster than a giant freakin' laser... I mean, giant freakin' constellation of satellites :).
- gameswithgo 7y ago
  east texas
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
monadic2 7y ago
> However, even though I love the work astronomers do and the view of a clear sky into the stars, I must say I prefer global Internet availability over making astronomers clean their data from satelite datapoints. That’s great because apparently nobody but SpaceX has any say in what happens.
- dtparr 7y ago
  Are you unaware of the federal licenses required for these satellites to be deployed, or do you just mean they were granted without taking astronomers' wishes into account? Edit: This is a sincere question. Several comments on this story indicate people don't believe there's any regulation as to what happens in space. Edit 2: While I'm editing things, here's the FCC Record for the original Starlink proposal in case you're curious what some of the objections brought up during the original comment period were. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-18-38A1.pdf https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-18-38A1.pdf Mostly it looks like other satellite operators worried about interference, orbital debris concerns, and there was a note about potential impacts on radio astronomy.
  - monadic2 7y ago
    Evidently the federal licenses didn’t work. It seems like you can simply buy approval and override public interest. Secondly, the problem is not just in federal air space.
  - Alupis 7y ago
    > Are you unaware of the federal licenses required for these satellites to be deployed Astronomers are in other countries besides the US... and these satellites are going to span the globe impacting everyone everywhere.
    - dtparr 7y ago
      To be clear, I'm not actually saying this is all the fine. I think there are discussions to be had about the obviously worldwide impact. However, the point that I'm making was that "nobody but SpaceX has any say in what happens" is not true. Certainly people can complain that current international treaties, federal regulations and so on aren't sufficient, that the decisions reached by regulatory bodies were incorrect, or ill informed, etc. But first they should be aware those decisions existed and did take into account input from a variety of sources, and it's not just 'if you can get it to space, do whatever you want'.
justapassenger 7y ago
You can view that as benefit to humanity. Or you can view that as private, for profit corporation trying to make money in a way that’s impacting our ability to do a scientific research.
- maccam94 7y ago
  On the other hand, Starlink is going to make use of their next-gen Starship, and with a viable amount of business space launches will become cheap enough for launching lots of cheap specialized space telescopes.

by Slikey 7y ago

izacus 7y ago

> If this can bring Internet access to every spot on Earth, the immediate benefit for humanity is clear. In which part of the earth are you missing the internet coverage so horribly?

Slikey 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage#/media/File:Broadband_Affordability.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage#/media/F... More supply drives down prices. Don't even mention current satelite Internet. Those operate via GSO satelites with seconds of ping and a way higher pricing considering SpaceX wants to be competitive with broadband pricing.
nexuist 7y ago
Forests, the Arctic, much of Africa, Asia, every ocean?
- monk_e_boy 7y ago
  Vallies. Villages. Beaches.... Has this person never traveled?
  - runarberg 7y ago
    Usually you are able to save the tasks that require fast internet connection for later. If you find your self on a slow internet connection while uploading a large video file, you can hold that up until you find somewhere that has a fast connection. You also often have the option of lowering the bandwidth requirements (e.g. switch of the video call for a voice call at a lower quality). I find fast internet a luxury rather then anything while traveling.
    - nickik 7y ago
      And you can also not use wireless ever until you can connect to a cable. What kind of logic is that? Sure, humanity has existed before global internet. But now that we can have it, there are 100s of reason to do so. You see it as a luxury, but so is the ability to buy clean water or even get it of the tab. Things that are luxury in the beginning get cheap enough so many can use it and that whats called progresses.
- logosmonkey 7y ago
  My mom's house in rural Arkansas. I mean basically if you live outside of a large city you have 1 choice of internet access and it's usually hot garbage and over priced.
- 6nf 7y ago
  About 90% of Australia too
- positr0n 7y ago
  I don’t think it will be available in the Arctic. https://streamable.com/3lbqj https://streamable.com/3lbqj
- runarberg 7y ago
  Is there a reason you need fast internet connection in forrests/on the Arctic/while sailing in the middle of the ocean?[1] Is there a reason why much of Africa or Asia can’t invest in similar infrastructure as Europe has done to provide internet to where people live? 1: Maybe it could be handy to transmit large amount of science data I suppose, but they seemed to be able to cope with this limitation while photographing the black holes
  - sigstoat 7y ago
    > Is there a reason you need fast internet connection in forrests/on the Arctic/while sailing in the middle of the ocean?[1] is there a reason you need fast internet at home? now imagine being some place that isn't home. > Is there a reason why much of Africa or Asia can’t invest in similar infrastructure as Europe has done to provide internet to where people live? crushing poverty? come on, just tell them to eat cake while you're at it.
    - runarberg 7y ago
      > is there a reason you need fast internet at home? now imagine being some place that isn't home. My internet needs away from home are vastly different then at home, so I don’t understand how this is an answer. > crushing poverty? It is highly likely that the same poverty is going to prevent locals from using Starlink. Besides lacking infrastructure in large parts of Africa and Asia has often been the result of bad policy, or wars, not poverty (or poverty as a result of war). A lot of African nations are catching up on their infrastructure projects, and I see no reason why they will skip internet connectivity as they build up their infrastructure (given that most African nations have infinitely better policy—and a lot fewer wars—now then say 30 years ago).
  - kirrent 7y ago
    I used to live on a boat. It'd be nice to have access to the internet when I do so again even coastally. I can't even imagine how much of a boon getting internet access across an ocean would be. Not only to help with boredom, but also to get heaps of up to date weather observation and prediction data to do routing.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
stickfigure 7y ago
California, about an hour outside of SF. The quality of internet service falls off precipitously as you leave urban city limits. It's better than it could be - when we decided to move "to the country", we almost bought a property where the only internet option was HughesNet. From all reports, HughesNet is incredibly expensive and barely usable. A big plus for the place we landed is that we can get "rural wireless broadband" - basically a point-to-point wifi signal bounced off of a solar-powered relay on a hill, to a set of towers on a faraway ridge, run by a folksy two-man ISP. It's expensive, unreliable, and slow compared to what I left in SF. But it's better than HughesNet and there's no data cap. I don't know what to expect from Starlink, but I'm hopeful. Even if it's just a reliable 10Mbit connection I'll be ecstatic.
- markvdb 7y ago
  I feel for you. Our holiday house is about 30km beyond the middle of nowhere, but the 4g uplink is reliable. Plus we have to share it with very very few others... If we ever need more, I'll probaby do just like the folksy two-man ISP you describe...
Mountain_Skies 7y ago
Most airlines will end up using it to stream telemetry as a backup and for areas where primary telemetry communication channels aren't viable. IIRC, it doesn't work near the poles but for everywhere else it would be good for knowing the last position when a flight vanishes.
penagwin 7y ago
Something like over 40% of the world's population doesn't have internet access.
daedalus_j 7y ago
30 minutes away from Microsoft main campus in Redmond WA, (and just a bit further away from Google/Amazon campus' in the area) Best available internet is a 3mbit down, 1-if-you're-lucky-mbit up DSL connection from CenturyLink with latency that jumps into the 2.5+ second range when it rains hard. Which, fortunately it never does in the pacific northwest. :-D And no, traditional satellite is a no-go, even if it was an affordable option. We have these things called "mountains" you see, and the satellites are only at certain spots in the sky, sadly occluded by a couple billion tons of rock and tree. To reiterate, this is within commuting distance of "big tech" HQs. Starlink can't come fast enough. Existing ISPs need to feel the pain of screwing their customers so bad for so long.
- semi-extrinsic 7y ago
  Sounds like a mostly-US problem that would be better solved by proper regulation of markets. But nah, that'd be crazy socialism stuff.
  - antepodius 7y ago
    It's all local state-enforced monopolies, man. The current internet situation is pretty close to socialist paradise.
  - NikolaNovak 7y ago
    ... poor internet bandwidth or accessibility in remote region... is a "US only problem"?? I make it a point to not sound snarky or sarcastic on HN, we have a pretty good standard of discourse here - but that just seems a ludicrous statement to make, and I'm frankly curious what consideration went into it, as opposed to a knee-jerk reaction? I don't think technology will solve all the world's ills; I agree that regulation of markets is a useful measure to undertake in certain situations; I don't find "Socialist" a swear word; but if ever there was a problem with a technical solution, then accessibility of internet in remote solution is almost the canonical use-case. Regulation of markets will not bring the Interwebs to remote or underdeveloped parts of the world. Now... if we want to discuss whether bringing the Intertubes to all the world is a worthy goal or not; whether it is worth the compromises and risks a massive constellation of satellites will impose; sure, that's a productive tops to examine. But if we accept for sake of argument that internet in remote or underdeveloped parts of the world is a goal, I'm curious to see how market regulation will make that happen better and faster than a giant freakin' laser... I mean, giant freakin' constellation of satellites :).
gameswithgo 7y ago
east texas

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

monadic2 7y ago

> However, even though I love the work astronomers do and the view of a clear sky into the stars, I must say I prefer global Internet availability over making astronomers clean their data from satelite datapoints. That’s great because apparently nobody but SpaceX has any say in what happens.

dtparr 7y ago
Are you unaware of the federal licenses required for these satellites to be deployed, or do you just mean they were granted without taking astronomers' wishes into account? Edit: This is a sincere question. Several comments on this story indicate people don't believe there's any regulation as to what happens in space. Edit 2: While I'm editing things, here's the FCC Record for the original Starlink proposal in case you're curious what some of the objections brought up during the original comment period were. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-18-38A1.pdf https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-18-38A1.pdf Mostly it looks like other satellite operators worried about interference, orbital debris concerns, and there was a note about potential impacts on radio astronomy.
- monadic2 7y ago
  Evidently the federal licenses didn’t work. It seems like you can simply buy approval and override public interest. Secondly, the problem is not just in federal air space.
- Alupis 7y ago
  > Are you unaware of the federal licenses required for these satellites to be deployed Astronomers are in other countries besides the US... and these satellites are going to span the globe impacting everyone everywhere.
  - dtparr 7y ago
    To be clear, I'm not actually saying this is all the fine. I think there are discussions to be had about the obviously worldwide impact. However, the point that I'm making was that "nobody but SpaceX has any say in what happens" is not true. Certainly people can complain that current international treaties, federal regulations and so on aren't sufficient, that the decisions reached by regulatory bodies were incorrect, or ill informed, etc. But first they should be aware those decisions existed and did take into account input from a variety of sources, and it's not just 'if you can get it to space, do whatever you want'.

justapassenger 7y ago

You can view that as benefit to humanity. Or you can view that as private, for profit corporation trying to make money in a way that’s impacting our ability to do a scientific research.

maccam94 7y ago
On the other hand, Starlink is going to make use of their next-gen Starship, and with a viable amount of business space launches will become cheap enough for launching lots of cheap specialized space telescopes.