> I don't think that's a valid comparison: Netflix not only had technology no one else had (at that time), but an innovative business model that hinted that it

> I don't think that's a valid comparison: Netflix not only had technology no one else had (at that time), but an innovative business model that hinted that it might provide something to its customers that no one else had ever offered to anyone outside of science fiction: the world's entire video library, on demand. Instead though, we get the equivalent of a thousand channels of cable tv, all paid for individually, all overpriced, all artificially restricted. You get that right, Netflix takes shows off its catalog because the contracts ran out, but when CBS+ or whatever it's called now takes shows off its roster, they're just doing it to be assholes. Compare this to Starlink's promise. Tens of thousands of low orbit satellites, providing cheap, low latency, high speed data anywhere on Earth. Tom Hanks wakes up on the uninhabited sandbar in the middle of the Pacific, takes his cellphone out of the ziplock plastic bag, calls his girlfriend and tells her "get me the fuck out of here". The End. They might yet hold onto it, you can hardly do even a half-assed Starliink without SpaceX's launch capability. But what we might have in 10 years scares me. Incomplete constellations because they're squabbling over orbital slots, monopolies and carve-outs through politics, Verizon refusing to let the iPhones it sells to customers access Starlink, instead locking it to Bezos' own Blue Dildo satellite network. It's just not the sort of competition people envision, I think, when they're imagining how competition lowers prices and raises quality. It's just big corporations sabotaging their rivals (and the rivals' customers) through meddling and politics.