3 ms·

A key point from https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1072/992 https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1072/9... is that wired te

by btilly 6y ago

A key point from https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1072/992 https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1072/9... is that wired technologies are inherently natural monopolies and you only get competition when government intervenes, while wireless is inherently NOT a natural monopoly so you get competition UNLESS government intervenes. The behavior that you observed is perfectly rational when connectivity is delivered over a wire. The goal is to make it clear to the competitor that they can't make money anywhere that they try to compete. But in this case SpaceX will be delivering connectivity to everywhere, all at once. The targeted efforts that incumbents can use to shut down local upstarts don't work when the location to exert extra effort in is "everywhere".

m463 6y ago
That's an interesting observation about government intervention. It's usually only possible for the public to see overt government intervention, but once in a while you see a situation where a government drops a case.
pishpash 6y ago
Wireless spectrum is not an infinite resource.
- HALtheWise 6y ago
  Directional antennas make wireless spectrum a lot closer to infinite. For example, I believe that SpaceX has committed that their ground stations will never transmit straight towards geostationary orbit, meaning that Starlink can use the same frequency bands as geostationary satellite services. With proper coordination, increasingly narrow beams can transmit increasingly more data over the same spectrum.
sunstone 6y ago
So in this case the entrenched providers would typically try to influence at the regulatory level. For example, no spectrum, no business license etc. We, the public, weren't invited to those closed door meetings but I'd sure like to read the transcripts.
nickik 6y ago
Without a sanctioned monopoly and a gigantic head start, often because of government privatization, this natural monopoly story doesn't really hold up that well. Its unlikely that one company would capture the whole market.

by btilly 6y ago

m463 6y ago

That's an interesting observation about government intervention. It's usually only possible for the public to see overt government intervention, but once in a while you see a situation where a government drops a case.

pishpash 6y ago

Wireless spectrum is not an infinite resource.

HALtheWise 6y ago
Directional antennas make wireless spectrum a lot closer to infinite. For example, I believe that SpaceX has committed that their ground stations will never transmit straight towards geostationary orbit, meaning that Starlink can use the same frequency bands as geostationary satellite services. With proper coordination, increasingly narrow beams can transmit increasingly more data over the same spectrum.

sunstone 6y ago

So in this case the entrenched providers would typically try to influence at the regulatory level. For example, no spectrum, no business license etc. We, the public, weren't invited to those closed door meetings but I'd sure like to read the transcripts.

nickik 6y ago

Without a sanctioned monopoly and a gigantic head start, often because of government privatization, this natural monopoly story doesn't really hold up that well. Its unlikely that one company would capture the whole market.