3 ms·

> This future satellite constellation infrastructure will allow for synergies with private sector to develop commercial services and provide with high-speed int

by gizmo 4y ago

> This future satellite constellation infrastructure will allow for synergies with private sector to develop commercial services and provide with high-speed internet and communication in all EU territory. Satellite internet isn’t great for speed. Europe is also so densely populated that full 4g coverage is totally doable. I think satellite internet is cool, but it doesn’t serve a real need and I expect this project to flounder. Also, notice that an entire continent has less ambitious goals and merely tries to keep up with one guy.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> satellite internet is cool, but it doesn’t serve a real need Starlink’s 100 Mbps [1] is faster than many European countries fixed averages and most’s mobile medians [2]. Also, the second sentence of this article cites the need: “critical scenarios where terrestrial networks are absent or disrupted, as observed, for instance, in the unfolding war in Ukraine.” [1] https://bigtechquestion.com/2022/01/10/broadband/how-fast-is-starlink-uk/ https://bigtechquestion.com/2022/01/10/broadband/how-fast-is... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_Internet_connection_speeds https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_...
- the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
  > Starlink’s 100 Mbps [1] is faster than many European countries fixed averages and most’s mobile medians [2]. But Starlink also doesn’t deliver those 100 Mbps reliably. Starlink is an awesome choice if you are in an underserved region but in most EU countries most people have better alternatives. The capacity of Starlink is very low for many countries in the EU. If people were to actually use it at scale it wouldn’t work.
- microtonal 4y ago
  I am not sure how fair that comparison is. E.g., in my country most people can get 1GiB downstream/50 MiB upstream through cable internet (even in small villages), more than 50% of the households can get fiber with 1GiB downstream/1GiB upstream. Yet the average fixed download/upload speed is 123/40 MiB. Why? Most people just want enough bandwidth for Netflix (TV is reserved separately), Youtube, and basic surfing. So, they'll go with the cheapest subscription, which is usually 100MiB downstream (except on budget providers), pulling down the averages. Starlink-like bandwidth is really cheap on cable/fiber. Heck, I have unlimited 5G and I think it's only 25 Euro per month, less than a third of a Starlink subscription and the bandwidth is usually much better. Even in the small village my parents live I get 100-200MiB downstream. At any rate, it is no problem at all to get 1GiB downstream in most of the country and much cheaper than Starlink (we currently pay 35 Euro p/m for 1GBit up/down). For European countries that can't offer this yet, it makes more sense to invest in 5G and wired broadband. That said, I think the EU should also do this. Satellite internet is good for remote areas and in the case of calamities (war, disaster, etc.) and crucial infrastructure should be in European hands.
- scotty79 4y ago
  Up to 100Mbps Good luck getting half of that. Especially if you want to service any significant number of customers. Meanwhile I get 600Mbps for about $30 in Poland.
luckylion 4y ago
> Europe is also so densely populated that full 4g coverage is totally doable. Broadband via fiber (fine, let's save money and use VDSL for the last mile) is totally doable for the population centers. But we can't even manage that reliably at scale. In Germany, mobile internet of any speed gets spotty once you're outside of the cities. It's just a sad state of affairs.
- peterfirefly 4y ago
  Germany's problem is German, not European. Germany also used to have waiting lists of many months for getting an extra line (+ they were expensive). Apparently, that was a Good Thing because it was because the state monopoly was protected against competition from Evil Capitalism (usually Foreign as well). Allow competition and good things will happen.
  - luckylion 4y ago
    > Germany's problem is German, not European. I'm not sure if you've noticed who's calling the shots in the EU. Germany's problem is the EU's problem. I often feel like there's a fundamental misunderstanding in German politics which then spreads to EU politics. They make the same basic mistake the Soviets made: believing that people are perfectly rational, don't react to incentives, and will do what's best for everyone if given the chance. Why have competition, you'll just waste resources. If someone says they're not able to work, surely that's true, so just give them money. If we just give billions to academics, surely they'll spend it wisely and get us a first class satellite internet. If we elect someone, it's always wise to give them plenty of power so they can make their job efficiently, there's no way they'd abuse that power. If we establish a bureaucracy, surely they'll focus on being efficient and nobody will try to grow their department beyond necessary just to increase their status.
    - sofixa 4y ago
      > I'm not sure if you've noticed who's calling the shots in the EU. Yeah, the EU. > Germany's problem is the EU's problem. Certainly not with regards to infrastructure. All countries around Germany are strictly better for mobile and broadband infrastructure.
ben_w 4y ago
There are a lot of places with surprisingly poor mobile coverage even inside the Berlin city limits. I think one way Starlink could massively improve the digital infrastructure here is to be a demonstration that it's possible to be better; the existence proofs of other nations doesn't have the same emotional valence as the existence proof of your coworker.
- gizmo 4y ago
  Serving the inside of a big city via satellite internet is ridiculous. Cell towers and fiber are what you want in all cities and towns.
  - ben_w 4y ago
    > ridiculous I'm suggesting ridicule is necessary, because embarrassment is the only way to make the incumbents to do better.
0xDEF 4y ago
>Europe is also so densely populated that full 4g coverage is totally doable Whenever this is brought up a lot of Germans will reply that the 5G/4G situation in Germany is hopeless and only Elon Musk can save them. But looking at the 5G/4G coverage in Denmark and the rest of the Nordic countries it becomes obvious that the problem is Germany and not 5G/4G.
viraptor 4y ago
> Satellite internet isn’t great for speed. It's great for speed, but not for latency. > notice that an entire continent has less ambitious goals and merely tries to keep up with one guy This doesn't have to fully compete with starlink. A working secondary provider is a great goal in itself if the network is independent. Currently the critical military communication in Ukraine depends on how he feels today for example. On a policy level, there are likely also issues with using a private US company for critical EU communication. Having a single global provider is never a great idea. It's even worse when it relies on someone like Musk.
hkpack 4y ago
> Europe is also so densely populated that full 4g coverage is totally doable. The main goal here as I can see is to learn from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, when the main infrastructure (including electric grid) was targeted. The issue is much broader than you may consider. Besides the obvious benefits for military communication, consider the following points (all from my experience living in Kyiv): 1. Modern society depends on the internet heavily - banks, shops, eCommerce. Your ATMs need internet to allow you to withdraw cash. Your enemy will target your power infrastructure to stop economic activity very early. 2. In case of long-term power outages, you can expect most of the land lines will stop working after 12 hours when batteries on the ISP sides start to be depleted. 3. Your 4G network will become less and less useful very quickly, the more people will start losing wired internet and switching over to 4G. The cellular will not be able to fulfil demand and eventually will halt under the load. 4. It is very difficult to power wired internet with mobile generation, as the infrastructure is huge and requires power generation in multiple places at once. Satellite internet solve this miraculously: 1. you can get internet where you need it without reliance on any other infrastructure - i.e. bank, office, ATM, etc... Just plug the dish to the nearby router. 2. Mobile power generation becomes much more useful, as you can have it only where it needed (i.e. to power satcom). 3. It is VERY cheap considering the alternative.

by gizmo 4y ago

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> satellite internet is cool, but it doesn’t serve a real need Starlink’s 100 Mbps [1] is faster than many European countries fixed averages and most’s mobile medians [2]. Also, the second sentence of this article cites the need: “critical scenarios where terrestrial networks are absent or disrupted, as observed, for instance, in the unfolding war in Ukraine.” [1] https://bigtechquestion.com/2022/01/10/broadband/how-fast-is-starlink-uk/ https://bigtechquestion.com/2022/01/10/broadband/how-fast-is... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_Internet_connection_speeds https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_...

the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
> Starlink’s 100 Mbps [1] is faster than many European countries fixed averages and most’s mobile medians [2]. But Starlink also doesn’t deliver those 100 Mbps reliably. Starlink is an awesome choice if you are in an underserved region but in most EU countries most people have better alternatives. The capacity of Starlink is very low for many countries in the EU. If people were to actually use it at scale it wouldn’t work.
microtonal 4y ago
I am not sure how fair that comparison is. E.g., in my country most people can get 1GiB downstream/50 MiB upstream through cable internet (even in small villages), more than 50% of the households can get fiber with 1GiB downstream/1GiB upstream. Yet the average fixed download/upload speed is 123/40 MiB. Why? Most people just want enough bandwidth for Netflix (TV is reserved separately), Youtube, and basic surfing. So, they'll go with the cheapest subscription, which is usually 100MiB downstream (except on budget providers), pulling down the averages. Starlink-like bandwidth is really cheap on cable/fiber. Heck, I have unlimited 5G and I think it's only 25 Euro per month, less than a third of a Starlink subscription and the bandwidth is usually much better. Even in the small village my parents live I get 100-200MiB downstream. At any rate, it is no problem at all to get 1GiB downstream in most of the country and much cheaper than Starlink (we currently pay 35 Euro p/m for 1GBit up/down). For European countries that can't offer this yet, it makes more sense to invest in 5G and wired broadband. That said, I think the EU should also do this. Satellite internet is good for remote areas and in the case of calamities (war, disaster, etc.) and crucial infrastructure should be in European hands.
scotty79 4y ago
Up to 100Mbps Good luck getting half of that. Especially if you want to service any significant number of customers. Meanwhile I get 600Mbps for about $30 in Poland.

luckylion 4y ago

> Europe is also so densely populated that full 4g coverage is totally doable. Broadband via fiber (fine, let's save money and use VDSL for the last mile) is totally doable for the population centers. But we can't even manage that reliably at scale. In Germany, mobile internet of any speed gets spotty once you're outside of the cities. It's just a sad state of affairs.

peterfirefly 4y ago
Germany's problem is German, not European. Germany also used to have waiting lists of many months for getting an extra line (+ they were expensive). Apparently, that was a Good Thing because it was because the state monopoly was protected against competition from Evil Capitalism (usually Foreign as well). Allow competition and good things will happen.
- luckylion 4y ago
  > Germany's problem is German, not European. I'm not sure if you've noticed who's calling the shots in the EU. Germany's problem is the EU's problem. I often feel like there's a fundamental misunderstanding in German politics which then spreads to EU politics. They make the same basic mistake the Soviets made: believing that people are perfectly rational, don't react to incentives, and will do what's best for everyone if given the chance. Why have competition, you'll just waste resources. If someone says they're not able to work, surely that's true, so just give them money. If we just give billions to academics, surely they'll spend it wisely and get us a first class satellite internet. If we elect someone, it's always wise to give them plenty of power so they can make their job efficiently, there's no way they'd abuse that power. If we establish a bureaucracy, surely they'll focus on being efficient and nobody will try to grow their department beyond necessary just to increase their status.
  - sofixa 4y ago
    > I'm not sure if you've noticed who's calling the shots in the EU. Yeah, the EU. > Germany's problem is the EU's problem. Certainly not with regards to infrastructure. All countries around Germany are strictly better for mobile and broadband infrastructure.

ben_w 4y ago

There are a lot of places with surprisingly poor mobile coverage even inside the Berlin city limits. I think one way Starlink could massively improve the digital infrastructure here is to be a demonstration that it's possible to be better; the existence proofs of other nations doesn't have the same emotional valence as the existence proof of your coworker.

gizmo 4y ago
Serving the inside of a big city via satellite internet is ridiculous. Cell towers and fiber are what you want in all cities and towns.
- ben_w 4y ago
  > ridiculous I'm suggesting ridicule is necessary, because embarrassment is the only way to make the incumbents to do better.

0xDEF 4y ago

>Europe is also so densely populated that full 4g coverage is totally doable Whenever this is brought up a lot of Germans will reply that the 5G/4G situation in Germany is hopeless and only Elon Musk can save them. But looking at the 5G/4G coverage in Denmark and the rest of the Nordic countries it becomes obvious that the problem is Germany and not 5G/4G.

viraptor 4y ago

> Satellite internet isn’t great for speed. It's great for speed, but not for latency. > notice that an entire continent has less ambitious goals and merely tries to keep up with one guy This doesn't have to fully compete with starlink. A working secondary provider is a great goal in itself if the network is independent. Currently the critical military communication in Ukraine depends on how he feels today for example. On a policy level, there are likely also issues with using a private US company for critical EU communication. Having a single global provider is never a great idea. It's even worse when it relies on someone like Musk.

hkpack 4y ago

> Europe is also so densely populated that full 4g coverage is totally doable. The main goal here as I can see is to learn from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, when the main infrastructure (including electric grid) was targeted. The issue is much broader than you may consider. Besides the obvious benefits for military communication, consider the following points (all from my experience living in Kyiv): 1. Modern society depends on the internet heavily - banks, shops, eCommerce. Your ATMs need internet to allow you to withdraw cash. Your enemy will target your power infrastructure to stop economic activity very early. 2. In case of long-term power outages, you can expect most of the land lines will stop working after 12 hours when batteries on the ISP sides start to be depleted. 3. Your 4G network will become less and less useful very quickly, the more people will start losing wired internet and switching over to 4G. The cellular will not be able to fulfil demand and eventually will halt under the load. 4. It is very difficult to power wired internet with mobile generation, as the infrastructure is huge and requires power generation in multiple places at once. Satellite internet solve this miraculously: 1. you can get internet where you need it without reliance on any other infrastructure - i.e. bank, office, ATM, etc... Just plug the dish to the nearby router. 2. Mobile power generation becomes much more useful, as you can have it only where it needed (i.e. to power satcom). 3. It is VERY cheap considering the alternative.