4 ms·
“These people have no vision.” I think you’re reading too much into it. It reads a lot more like “we hear that you would like a better network, but we already
by headmelted 6y ago
“These people have no vision.”
I think you’re reading too much into it.
It reads a lot more like “we hear that you would like a better network, but we already make money. There’s no good reason to spend a lot of time, money and effort to build the same network most other developed countries are building when we get paid either way. I’m sure you understand. Just tell everyone else in the house to switch off their video calls when you want to play your game and it might work.”
The reason Starlink exists is most probably because they realised early on that not only could they build a useful product for rural users, but that building out wired/fiber networks was so expensive - and so marred in politics and lobbying - that traditional players have zero prospect of getting their act together in a way that would be competitive.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jcpham2 6y agoAbsolutely
- mrjin 6y agoI absolutely agree with the first half of your comments but imo Starlink is just an amazing way to make staggering amount of space junks which we already had way too many in the orbit.
- headmelted 6y agoAbsolutely. I’m not at all defending the extent to which they keep throwing more of those things out up there (although they at least seem to have a plan for bringing them down at the end of their life).
- dencodev 6y agoSpace junk isn't a problem at the altitude that Starlink operates at and they harmlessly fall back into the atmosphere after a given number of years. Please take the Musk-bashing astroturfing elsewhere.
- danaris 6y agoStarlink pollutes the sky, making it hard for astronomers to do their work. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/10/starlink-already-threatens-optical-astronomy-now-radio-astronomers-are-worried https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/10/starlink-already-thr...
- etripe 6y agoThere is a good reason: the money they got from the government for exactly this purpose.
- ryandrake 6y agoThat's not a good reason. If the government gave you $100 million to do some very difficult task, but never actually cared if you did that task and never made you do it, would you have a reason to do it? Or just pocket the money? This seems like a no brainer.
- headmelted 6y agoIncidentally this also applies to quantitative easing with similar outcomes.