3 ms·

It’s insane that the U.S. government are squandering this opportunity to force Starlink to provide internet to those without any other access at say 50$/mo. The

It’s insane that the U.S. government are squandering this opportunity to force Starlink to provide internet to those without any other access at say 50$/mo. The government is giving the okay to deploy thousands of satellites and start a monopoly and in return we can’t ask for this basic right?

pempem 4y ago
The fact that corporations are considered 'people' when it comes to political donations is one major reason that policy no longer responds to the will of the people in the US. Citizens United bkgd: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citi...
Axien 4y ago
They are not a monopoly. Anyone can do the same. I believe two other companies are also launching Internet satellite services.
- pnpnp 4y ago
  They are launching, but right now Starlink is a monopoly. There’s no other constellation in orbit that comes close in latency or bandwidth capabilities. Hopefully the upcoming constellations are successful and there’s more competition in this space. It really is world-changing stuff. OT, but it’s possible the current price hikes aren’t due to full cells, but ground stations at capacity. I’ve seen upgraded and additional ground stations referenced. They serve very large geographic areas compared to a single “cell.”
  - oceanplexian 4y ago
    The word monopoly doesn’t mean “Only one company makes the best product”. It means that a company completely corners a market and uses its position to prevent others from competing. There are plenty of space launch providers. There are plenty of other constellations (OneWeb, Iridium, etc). In fact, ironically, SpaceX is doing the opposite of what a monopoly would do and selling the competition cheap tickets on their own launch vehicles. It would be the equivalent of Apple letting Samsung sell phones in an Apple Store.
    - pnpnp 4y ago
      But AFAIK, those other constellations still aren’t targeting consumers(?) I should have clarified, but from a consumer standpoint, I think there’s still only one real choice at the moment.
- throwawaylkajl 4y ago
  cool well go do it then.
mlindner 4y ago
Paid for by whom exactly? What opportunity are they "squandering"? SpaceX (along with investors) are footing the bill for building out this service. If you suddenly kneecap them and say they can't provide it for more than $50/month who will pay the bill? If the US government were to try it and pass such a law without payment to SpaceX, SpaceX would sue them in court and easily win. You can't steal value away and not offer compensation.
oceanplexian 4y ago
Before Starlink, buying anything even remotely comparable like VSAT was $10,000-20,000 per month. The idea that you would punish a company for reducing the cost, and improving the performance of a technology an order of magnitude seems kind of ridiculous to me. If this attitude is really widespread throughout the world it’s no surprise why the US takes such a lead in tech innovation.

pempem 4y ago

The fact that corporations are considered 'people' when it comes to political donations is one major reason that policy no longer responds to the will of the people in the US. Citizens United bkgd: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citi...

Axien 4y ago

They are not a monopoly. Anyone can do the same. I believe two other companies are also launching Internet satellite services.

pnpnp 4y ago
They are launching, but right now Starlink is a monopoly. There’s no other constellation in orbit that comes close in latency or bandwidth capabilities. Hopefully the upcoming constellations are successful and there’s more competition in this space. It really is world-changing stuff. OT, but it’s possible the current price hikes aren’t due to full cells, but ground stations at capacity. I’ve seen upgraded and additional ground stations referenced. They serve very large geographic areas compared to a single “cell.”
- oceanplexian 4y ago
  The word monopoly doesn’t mean “Only one company makes the best product”. It means that a company completely corners a market and uses its position to prevent others from competing. There are plenty of space launch providers. There are plenty of other constellations (OneWeb, Iridium, etc). In fact, ironically, SpaceX is doing the opposite of what a monopoly would do and selling the competition cheap tickets on their own launch vehicles. It would be the equivalent of Apple letting Samsung sell phones in an Apple Store.
  - pnpnp 4y ago
    But AFAIK, those other constellations still aren’t targeting consumers(?) I should have clarified, but from a consumer standpoint, I think there’s still only one real choice at the moment.
throwawaylkajl 4y ago
cool well go do it then.

mlindner 4y ago

Paid for by whom exactly? What opportunity are they "squandering"? SpaceX (along with investors) are footing the bill for building out this service. If you suddenly kneecap them and say they can't provide it for more than $50/month who will pay the bill? If the US government were to try it and pass such a law without payment to SpaceX, SpaceX would sue them in court and easily win. You can't steal value away and not offer compensation.

oceanplexian 4y ago

Before Starlink, buying anything even remotely comparable like VSAT was $10,000-20,000 per month. The idea that you would punish a company for reducing the cost, and improving the performance of a technology an order of magnitude seems kind of ridiculous to me. If this attitude is really widespread throughout the world it’s no surprise why the US takes such a lead in tech innovation.