4 ms·

is there any reason to think this will be a trend all over the world where people have shitty internet?

nordsieck 2y ago
> is there any reason to think this will be a trend all over the world where people have shitty internet? I think it really depends on why the region has bad internet. If it's because the government officials wants kickbacks from ISPs, they're probably not going to give SpaceX a license to circumvent that arrangement. If it's because the infrastructure is bad, and there's no money to improve it at the moment, I'd probably be more hopeful.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Crosseye_Jack 2y ago
Sure it will be, as long as the price is right. If you live in the sticks, not serviced by fibre/cable then 200meg for £75p/m isn’t the end of the world (if you can afford it). But if you can be serviced with fibre/cable then it’s just not worth it (imo). For example where I live, I could get 500/75 meg fttp connection for less than half the per month cost of starlink, not have to fork over £300 for hardware upfront, nor pay for shipping or Starlinks congestion charge, and I’m not even in an area that offers an altnet (which would either be cheaper still and/or offer a symmetrical service). But if I was stuck on a shitty copper line with very low speeds, didn’t want to move, and mobile internet wasn’t an option. I would consider using it. But all depends on if you can afford it to determine if it’s a good value or not.
lxgr 2y ago
Hopefully! If nothing else, it's great to have an upper cap on what local ISPs can maximally charge and minimally provide in terms of bandwidth. But something tells me that it won't universally receive a license. At least some government-owned or incumbent ISPs will probably succeed in lobbying the government to protect their investments in some way, for better or worse. For example, Saint Helena (which is extremely remote and until recently had only geostationary-based slow internet connections with low data caps) doesn't allow Starlink, apparently because the government has invested a lot in a new fiber project and wants to recoup that cost at least partially from ISP subscriptions rather than people switching to Starlink.

> is there any reason to think this will be a trend all over the world where people have shitty internet? I think it really depends on why the region has bad internet. If it's because the government officials wants kickbacks from ISPs, they're probably not going to give SpaceX a license to circumvent that arrangement. If it's because the infrastructure is bad, and there's no money to improve it at the moment, I'd probably be more hopeful.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Crosseye_Jack 2y ago

Sure it will be, as long as the price is right. If you live in the sticks, not serviced by fibre/cable then 200meg for £75p/m isn’t the end of the world (if you can afford it). But if you can be serviced with fibre/cable then it’s just not worth it (imo). For example where I live, I could get 500/75 meg fttp connection for less than half the per month cost of starlink, not have to fork over £300 for hardware upfront, nor pay for shipping or Starlinks congestion charge, and I’m not even in an area that offers an altnet (which would either be cheaper still and/or offer a symmetrical service). But if I was stuck on a shitty copper line with very low speeds, didn’t want to move, and mobile internet wasn’t an option. I would consider using it. But all depends on if you can afford it to determine if it’s a good value or not.

lxgr 2y ago

Hopefully! If nothing else, it's great to have an upper cap on what local ISPs can maximally charge and minimally provide in terms of bandwidth. But something tells me that it won't universally receive a license. At least some government-owned or incumbent ISPs will probably succeed in lobbying the government to protect their investments in some way, for better or worse. For example, Saint Helena (which is extremely remote and until recently had only geostationary-based slow internet connections with low data caps) doesn't allow Starlink, apparently because the government has invested a lot in a new fiber project and wants to recoup that cost at least partially from ISP subscriptions rather than people switching to Starlink.