4 ms·
>While I acknowledge their success in space Not to mention the early model was built on govt contracts because the govt was the only institution capable of sho
by bumby 2y ago
>While I acknowledge their success in space
Not to mention the early model was built on govt contracts because the govt was the only institution capable of shouldering the risk of an unproven space vendor.
Not saying that’s a bad thing, just that the success of SpaceX and the govt were tightly coupled.
- Ancapistani 2y agoInterestingly, it looks like the “BEAD program” - a rural broadband initiative was allocated more funding ($42b) than SpaceX and Tesla combined ($37b). That last number includes loans, too. I chose that example in particular because Starlink has done more for rural broadband access than everything else the federal government has done combined.
- bumby 2y agoI agree Starlink is poised to be very successful at providing high speed internet to rural areas. But that doesn’t negate the point that it required the govt to do so because SpaceX would not exist if it didn’t get high risk govt contracts. Also, I wouldn’t compare it to terrestrial internet unless you advocate it being a regulated utility in the same way, which I doubt Musk or investors would want. Different rules, different constraints.
- Ancapistani 2y agoTrue - but the BEAD Program delivered internet to 40k households. Starlink has 1.4m users in the US alone. It seems pretty clear to me that Starlink has been a good investment, from both private and public perspectives
- inemesitaffia 2y agoThat's RDOF. BEAD is zero