4 ms·

Are they speaking for the hundreds of millions of people who may get internet access for the first time though satellite based internet?

ben_w 6y ago
I write this with the upmost hope in the future success of private space sector, and with a desire to live to see Mercury turned into a Dyson swarm and to be part of the initial colonisation of Mars or Luna: There are other ways to get cheap internet, and these satellites serve low-population rural areas much better than they serve cities where most people live. (Also: Musk does seem to care about the effect on astronomy, presumably because his drive is “prevent human extinction” and astronomy can help with that).
- googlryas 6y ago
  There are other ways to get cheap internet...but Musk et al are actually doing this. No one else is working on some earth-based plan for getting the last few billion people on the internet AFAICT. Google and facebook did some things with balloons and aircraft but that was more of a tech demo than an actual attempt to provide internet service.
  - emosenkis 6y ago
    Loon is not a tech demo: https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/7/21315961/alphabet-loon-balloons-internet-kenya-telkom-4g-remote-areas https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/7/21315961/alphabet-loon-bal...
  - Trombone12 6y ago
    The fact that your disinterest for rural infrastructure projects in Ghana mean you don't know about them doesn't mean they don't exist. It just tells the reader you haven't bothered to search for something like "Uganda rural internet project"; unsurprisingly for large infrastructure projects in a poor country, it's being done bit by bit and so there are in fact dozens of projects.
    - googlryas 6y ago
      The ad hominem is unnecessary and misplaced. I was talking about one large project to give the final billions access, not piecemeal projects helping out a few million people here and there (and disregarding another few million people here and there). I understand that rural infrastructure projects occur. So what's the realistic timeline for, say, 99% coverage? My question is: How long should rural people have to wait, and how much should they pay for internet access, so that astronomers can have 5% of their observations unaffected by satellites?
      - abdullahkhalids 6y ago
        There are other good reasons for doing piecemeal projects. Paying SpaceX for internet, transfers money out of already economically backwards areas to a far away private company in another country. Some people will argue that these are neocolonist attempts by West into East.
  - ben_w 6y ago
    I can’t find real pricing for Starlink, only guesses. These are the targets to beat: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cost-of-mobile-data-worldwide/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cost-of-mobile-data-worldwi...
- Cyphase 6y ago
  > I write this with the upmost hope in the future success of private space sector, and with a desire to live to see Mercury turned into a Dyson swarm and to be part of the initial colonisation of Mars or Luna: I agree with this sentiment! > There are other ways to get cheap internet, and these satellites serve low-population rural areas much better than they serve cities where most people live. Ironically, people who live in cities will be much less affected by impingement on their night sky because they already deal with light pollution, whereas people in low-population rural areas have a much nicer night sky. Astronomy is done more in rural and remote areas than in cities, for the same reasons.
- wffurr 6y ago
  If the numbers about bandwidth per satellite and the size of the constellation are right, this type of service could be competitive in urban areas too where the only alternative is a sub-gigabit cable monopoly.
  - wffurr 6y ago
    Note that DOCSIS 3.0/3.1 have a 10 msec latency just to talk to the CMTS at the end of the street. LEO (500km) latency is only 1.8 light-milliseconds.
guhidalg 6y ago
Probably not, but satellites are not the only choice for connecting people to the internet. Sure, they win at the rule-of-cool contest, but traditional terrestrial copper and fiber optics (maybe with some RF backhaul for the really remote places) would have also worked without the complexity of launching spacecraft and building a network of ground stations.
- googlryas 6y ago
  And yet no one wants to or can pay for fiber optics going to all of the rural places that billions of people live. Maybe the astronomers who complain about starlink can start a fund where they pay to build out rural internet access for the few billion people who don't have access right now.
pharke 6y ago
Let alone the billions that will benefit from the opening of Earth orbit as a new frontier of industry. Good satellite internet is the profitable usecase that will drive development of space. The article already points out that we're already seeing a rush of private and national interests, it's got legs. Start looking for real estate and industries that will be in a postion to support this.
abdullahkhalids 6y ago
Their job is to argue why satellites are bad for astronomy. It is other people's job to argue for why internet access via satellites is good for certain parts of society. It is the government's job to weigh the various arguments and come up with a ruling that best helps society.

ben_w 6y ago

I write this with the upmost hope in the future success of private space sector, and with a desire to live to see Mercury turned into a Dyson swarm and to be part of the initial colonisation of Mars or Luna: There are other ways to get cheap internet, and these satellites serve low-population rural areas much better than they serve cities where most people live. (Also: Musk does seem to care about the effect on astronomy, presumably because his drive is “prevent human extinction” and astronomy can help with that).

googlryas 6y ago
There are other ways to get cheap internet...but Musk et al are actually doing this. No one else is working on some earth-based plan for getting the last few billion people on the internet AFAICT. Google and facebook did some things with balloons and aircraft but that was more of a tech demo than an actual attempt to provide internet service.
- emosenkis 6y ago
  Loon is not a tech demo: https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/7/21315961/alphabet-loon-balloons-internet-kenya-telkom-4g-remote-areas https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/7/21315961/alphabet-loon-bal...
- Trombone12 6y ago
  The fact that your disinterest for rural infrastructure projects in Ghana mean you don't know about them doesn't mean they don't exist. It just tells the reader you haven't bothered to search for something like "Uganda rural internet project"; unsurprisingly for large infrastructure projects in a poor country, it's being done bit by bit and so there are in fact dozens of projects.
  - googlryas 6y ago
    The ad hominem is unnecessary and misplaced. I was talking about one large project to give the final billions access, not piecemeal projects helping out a few million people here and there (and disregarding another few million people here and there). I understand that rural infrastructure projects occur. So what's the realistic timeline for, say, 99% coverage? My question is: How long should rural people have to wait, and how much should they pay for internet access, so that astronomers can have 5% of their observations unaffected by satellites?
    - abdullahkhalids 6y ago
      There are other good reasons for doing piecemeal projects. Paying SpaceX for internet, transfers money out of already economically backwards areas to a far away private company in another country. Some people will argue that these are neocolonist attempts by West into East.
- ben_w 6y ago
  I can’t find real pricing for Starlink, only guesses. These are the targets to beat: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cost-of-mobile-data-worldwide/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cost-of-mobile-data-worldwi...
Cyphase 6y ago
> I write this with the upmost hope in the future success of private space sector, and with a desire to live to see Mercury turned into a Dyson swarm and to be part of the initial colonisation of Mars or Luna: I agree with this sentiment! > There are other ways to get cheap internet, and these satellites serve low-population rural areas much better than they serve cities where most people live. Ironically, people who live in cities will be much less affected by impingement on their night sky because they already deal with light pollution, whereas people in low-population rural areas have a much nicer night sky. Astronomy is done more in rural and remote areas than in cities, for the same reasons.
wffurr 6y ago
If the numbers about bandwidth per satellite and the size of the constellation are right, this type of service could be competitive in urban areas too where the only alternative is a sub-gigabit cable monopoly.
- wffurr 6y ago
  Note that DOCSIS 3.0/3.1 have a 10 msec latency just to talk to the CMTS at the end of the street. LEO (500km) latency is only 1.8 light-milliseconds.

guhidalg 6y ago

Probably not, but satellites are not the only choice for connecting people to the internet. Sure, they win at the rule-of-cool contest, but traditional terrestrial copper and fiber optics (maybe with some RF backhaul for the really remote places) would have also worked without the complexity of launching spacecraft and building a network of ground stations.

googlryas 6y ago
And yet no one wants to or can pay for fiber optics going to all of the rural places that billions of people live. Maybe the astronomers who complain about starlink can start a fund where they pay to build out rural internet access for the few billion people who don't have access right now.

pharke 6y ago

Let alone the billions that will benefit from the opening of Earth orbit as a new frontier of industry. Good satellite internet is the profitable usecase that will drive development of space. The article already points out that we're already seeing a rush of private and national interests, it's got legs. Start looking for real estate and industries that will be in a postion to support this.

abdullahkhalids 6y ago

Their job is to argue why satellites are bad for astronomy. It is other people's job to argue for why internet access via satellites is good for certain parts of society. It is the government's job to weigh the various arguments and come up with a ruling that best helps society.