iptrans

12 ms·

91.
by iptrans 6y ago
No. As noted, there is a significant risk of Starlink going out of business. The RDOF grants are not venture funding, and should not be used as such. The FCC's Rural Digital Opportunity Fund exists to bring high speed fixed broadband s
92.
by iptrans 6y ago
Not quite. The subsidy isn't large enough to pay for all the satellites they need. They have money to launch more satellites and will be doing more launches subsidy or no subsidy. The subsidy will only go directly to their bottom line.
93.
by iptrans 6y ago
> The fact is, starlink is the absolute best option in quite a few places - sparsely populated, far from dense urban areas. If it were only subsidized there. Some of the Starlink areas are next door neighbours to subsidized fiber builds.
94.
by iptrans 6y ago
The Hughes grant is highly questionable too. Luckily they only got about a million. > In the age of COVID-19, any investment in ISP infrastructure is beneficial. Not if you end up having nothing to show for it.
95.
by iptrans 6y ago
I am glad we agree, me being both the one you are replying to and the OP you are referring to. For the avoidance of doubt, here's the link to the FCC RDOF auction and the relevant quote: "... Rural Digital Opportunity Fund to brin
96.
by iptrans 6y ago
> If it helps ensure the diversity of ISP competition in the US market, then yes The US ISP market is already fairly diverse. There are some 3000 ISPs in the US. > $886m is a bargain if it helps meaningfully with that (assuming it&#x2
97.
by iptrans 6y ago
I think you have misunderstood the purpose of RDOF grants. The RDOF grants are not there to establish competition. RDOF grants exist purely for some company to provide broadband service where there is none. If anything it's funding a
98.
by iptrans 6y ago
Riddle me this, would SpaceX not have built out Starlink if they didn't get this subsidy? Since they already put Starlink satellites in orbit without any guarantees of subsidies, was this good use of government funds?
99.
by iptrans 6y ago
I find it interesting that these comparisons always pit AWS againsta colocation. It would be much more interesting if the comparison was between AWS and dedicated servers. Dedicated servers have all the benefits of colocation, only you do
100.
by iptrans 6y ago
> Is YouTube profitable yet? Google doesn't disclose that. Only that Youtube have revenues of $15 billion last year.
101.
by iptrans 6y ago
I cannot find any hard data on their Free Space Optics technology, or anything to back up their claims. This is rather worrying.
102.
by iptrans 6y ago
AFAIK Monkey Brains uses plain old radio frequencies for their wireless backhaul.
103.
by iptrans 6y ago
I don’t understand what your problem is? You can read, can’t you? Google even pops up a box with the relevant information immediately. Here, let me help you if that’s too hard: “The cost of completing the nascent fiber-optic network connect
104.
by iptrans 6y ago
A compromise is to use a single stage splitter PON architecture. Each ISP is provided dark fiber to the splitter and each ISP can use either splitters or WDM muxes at this flexibility point.
105.
by iptrans 6y ago
Oh, but you are so very wrong. And in so many places. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25037733
106.
by iptrans 6y ago
This is very amusing :) It's a typical rookie mistake to confuse the cable costs with construction costs. > And for three times that price you can get 144-count which isn't even remotely an option for subsea cables. I know for
107.
by iptrans 6y ago
hahahaha. Oh, wait. You're serious. Let me laugh even harder. HAHAHAHAHAHA. For your edification, look up "malicious compliance".
108.
by iptrans 6y ago
I'm a little bit wary of only providing layer 2 serivices to ISPs. It very easily leads to technology lock-in and other problems. The preferred solution is to provide dark fiber and layer 2 transport, ISP's choice.
109.
by iptrans 6y ago
It's in the planning stage only.
110.
by iptrans 6y ago
> But if a subsea line is 6 fibres, you’d think they’d license one of the 288 strands on an existing run from some less else for less than that cost. This is easier said than done. There may not be spare strands on the route in question,
111.
by iptrans 6y ago
> Literally the last sentence of my post is "Newer systems have a lifespan of around 25 years." What is your point? Cable system lifespan != cable lifespan > No this is incorrect. How do you then explain subsea cables that h
112.
by iptrans 6y ago
Gotta love that $29.00 shipping charge. It's not like they could have afforded to offer free shipping at those prices :)
113.
by iptrans 6y ago
Cable systems have a design lifespan. This is usually around 25 years. The cables themselves have a lifespan, but it's far longer than 25 years. Many cable systems have had their lifespan extended beyond 25 years, but is more of a ques
114.
by iptrans 6y ago
Submarine cables need to be marked on marine charts so that boats don't hit them with anchors and other implements.
115.
by iptrans 6y ago
Crossing multiple national borders is a major political undertaking. It is far more simpler to lay a subsea cable in international waters, especially when hostile nations are concerned. As to the Strait of Hormuz and the Suez Canal, there r
116.
by iptrans 6y ago
Ships anchors and trawlers are major risks for subsea cables. Deeper is thus better. Underwater geography is also a major consideration. It's not just the going up and down, it's the risk of landslides, tectonic shifts, volcanoes,
117.
by iptrans 6y ago
The cable landing stations provide DC power for the repeaters from both directions. The power requirements are substantial and use thousands of volts. All the components of the subsea cable system are engineered with reliability in mind. No
118.
by iptrans 6y ago
A submarine cable can't just connect two end points by the great circle route. A cable route has to consider subsea geographics and geopolitics. This includes volcanoes and congress. Either one can be a big obstacle.
119.
by iptrans 6y ago
Facebook is responsible for about 8% of all Internet traffic. They need subsea cables to connect their datacenters and to deliver traffic to end users.
120.
by iptrans 6y ago
Adding to the above, Starlink doesn't have but a fraction of the bandwidth of a single wave in a single fiber optic strand. Starlink just can't carry the bandwidth needed to connect the planet. The theoretical throughput of the wh

More ›