1176
submitted 4 months ago by Sunshine@lemmy.ca to c/technology@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] mbirth@lemmy.ml 92 points 4 months ago

“European Starlink rival” is a bit far fetched when there’s merely rumours that they might be able to offer a similar service. But that’s the stock market for you.

[-] skvlp@lemm.ee 9 points 4 months ago

Now they have to offer a similar service. No pressure then 😊

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] drmoose@lemmy.world 46 points 4 months ago

Sat internet is so overhyped. As it's limited by physics cell towers will always outperform them. Simple as that.

  • cities - cables and 5g
  • country side - 4g and cables in high concentration areas
  • middle of nowhere or war zones - low orbit sats.

This is purely a security issue not a consumer one.

[-] sunbytes@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Infrastructure can be a real problem in some places.

I'm currently on a mountain and since they upgraded to a hybrid satellite/cable system the speeds have skyrocketed. Laying cable/towers is just not viable, especially with dense rock peaks blocking line of sight.

Also I have coworkers in Nigeria who lose internet multiple times a day (and often don't have the bandwidth for a video call) but most of them have bitten the bullet and paid the high up-front cost to get starlink at home. And now can do HD video calls with zero interruption (unless they have power issues, but that's a whole other thing).

So I think there's a lot of use-cases for sattelite, especially for people who aren't considered worth the investment in non-sattelite infrastructure.

It's just unfortunate that yeah, space junk is going to one day (suddenly) be a massive problem.

Edit: ah I may have replied to the wrong comment

[-] BevsDad@lemmy.ca 32 points 4 months ago

It'll be interesting to see what the Canadian telesat LEO system will be capable of. They're supposed to be launching satellites next year and are using a higher orbit so will need much fewer satellites than starlink.

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 17 points 4 months ago

But sadly increased latency. Also don't hold your breath on Canada telecom anything, we have a history of being the worst at it.

[-] BevsDad@lemmy.ca 7 points 4 months ago

I don't mind a bit more latency (should still be nicely below 100ms) but my use case is more related to mid-Atlantic mobile connectivity than remote region broadband.

Their planned implementation just seems much better than others with beam shaping, linked satellites and less than 200 satellites to maintain and replace.

Although you're not wrong about our telecom track record...

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] sem 29 points 4 months ago

Bye bye future space launches once we have full or partial Kessler syndrome.

Bye bye earth based astronomy.

But dang this tech is so much better than Hughesnet

[-] mholiv@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

Kessler syndrome doesn’t really apply for purely LEO satellites. They all burn up in a single digit amount of years.

It’s not something to worry about yet.

[-] sem 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

On the contrary, I think it is something to avoid. Imagine letting a single person ground all space launches for 9 years. And all the pollution that adds to the atmosphere. All the junk landing on people's farms or houses.

[-] mholiv@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It doesn’t work that way. I dislike Elon as much as the next sane person but we don’t need to invent new reasons to dislike him on top of all of the bad reasons that exist.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] sasquatch7704@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Unpopular opinion: we don't need freaking internet from satellites, just get cat6 in every home and everyone is happy. I'm sure the cost would be lower then having to launch 999999.91 satellites to have similar speeds

[-] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 17 points 4 months ago

cat 6 in every home lol. you have any idea about range of cat 6? I mean, any?

[-] sasquatch7704@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

~50m for cat6, ~100 cat6a, enough to get you to a switching box where you connect to fiber.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] SamB@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago

There are remote areas where cable won’t reach. For example, I need surveillance on a remote farm and I would love to get internet there.

[-] stembolts@programming.dev 7 points 4 months ago

Cable will reach anywhere. There is not such a place that cable "will not reach". Is there a profit incentive to serve you as a customer in a capitalist system? Maybe not. But cable will reach.

[-] MoonHawk@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

Not sure if you are in Europe, but in the US there are places where you could walk the width of Germany and see 100 houses. It does not serve to be technically correct here. Also, how would that work with boats / other vehicles and places without infrastructures?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Well, cable will not reach a warzone which is a rather pertinent use for a satellite communication system at present.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

You do if you're fighting a war against Putin and the ketamine troll is threatening to turn off your internet.

[-] abcdqfr@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Now get rid of the home and the cable, how do you cover 99.9% of the earth? Nomads need satellite, and so do rural homes too far from an isp fiber/copper endpoint But yes, if starlink has it done, why double the satellites to do it again with a different name? Because it's easier to launch 1000 more satellites than dismantle the system that enables such feats.

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

Cat 6A caps out at like 330 ft. Also thats a ton of copper.

Fiber optic nonprofit utilities makes more sense in cities and in rural areas we should just subsidize cell phone data plans.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] espressdelivery@lemm.ee 24 points 4 months ago

So much space junk….

[-] RangerJosey@lemmy.ml 21 points 4 months ago

We all know why CNBC. You could have just posted the title.

Because the drug addled used car salesman who's currently about to default on his Twitter loans decided to embrace his roots and started throwing up seig heils and is currently having a crack team of 4chan incels dismantle a government while he threatens the world and works to make what he's doing here happen everywhere.

Dude is a comic book villain. Villain of the week level. No real staying power. Either he'll go broke or die from a ketamine overdose before Xmas. And what a gift that will be. I hope it happens on video.

[-] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

die from a ketamine overdose

Please stop, I'm old and I can only get so excited.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] madjo@feddit.nl 18 points 4 months ago

If only I wasn't too chicken shit to start investing... I was looking at Eutelsats stocks earlier in the week. But it'd be my first steps on the market so decided against it.

[-] theangryseal@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

I finally got brave enough to do it. Between August and January I had made over 800%.

Trump has ruined that for me. Oh well.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] bassad@jlai.lu 18 points 4 months ago

Is starlink business model like uber/airbnb? Killing the market with low prices by circumventing regulations to establish their monopoly?

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 18 points 4 months ago

No, it just vertical integration. You need to send up rockets to make money, so you make sure they never have an empty slot on them by filling it yourself. You get enough satellites up, then you have a revenue generating payload you can send up steady from then on.

[-] bassad@jlai.lu 7 points 4 months ago

Then it is a monopoly building if you take the limited slots before others companies 😁

I was wondering because starlink's terminals are around $500 while eutelsat's are 10k. It seems it can be only possible if you accept massive losses on first years, with help of to investors to keep the company running, to take down competitors. Like uber and many others did, which had years of losses before having income.

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 8 points 4 months ago

SpaceX isn't an Uber model, its a goverment leech model. It's had heavily, heavily goverment subsidies to the tune of 18 billion dollars over its 10yr lifetime.

Terminal prices are likely just an economy of scale issue. Much cheaper per unit to make 100,000 than 1,000. Im sure as eutelsat grows the prices will come down.

If Eutelsat and the EU rocket program get 18 billion in goverment investment like SpaceX, im betting they can also accelerate all of the above.

SpaceX doesnt have a moat, it just has the lead. Rocket labs in new Zealand is already hot on their tails. No reason the EU cant join or surpass them.

[-] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)
[-] Chadus_Maximus@lemm.ee 11 points 4 months ago

Oh look, it's on sale!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 15 points 4 months ago

What will they launch on? Star Link is barely feasible because they can launch at cost on falcon 9.

[-] VeryInterestingTable@lemm.ee 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Look up Ariane 6. It's still more costly than the Falcon 9 but who in their right mind would trust the numbers Elon is sharing? Seems like they both cost around 100million $ per launch. Elon is claming 30million per launch and that he will make it cost 2 million...

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 15 points 4 months ago

This is why I will never be rich. I never see business opportunities to buy tons of stock and act upon them.

[-] Snowclone@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

You also need a ton of money to invest or you're just getting pocket change.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] SkibidiSigmaRizzler@feddit.org 6 points 4 months ago

Even if I would see them I probably wouldn't have enough money to benefit of of them

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

A European Starlink rival’s shares skyrocketed 390% in a week — here’s why

OOOH!!!! OOH!!! I KNOW THIS ONE!!! STARLINK GO BOOM! PEOPLE GO NOPE! TESLAS STOCK PRICE GO (bomb falling sound effects) KABOOM!!!!

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] cupcakezealot 12 points 4 months ago

invest in community run broadband instead

[-] fetter@lemm.ee 14 points 4 months ago

Yes, but the surge is for Ukraine and Europe is gearing up to defend itself. It’s easier for Ruzzia to take out community broadband than it is satellites in orbit around earth.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

Good. Fuck Starlink.

[-] mogoh@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 months ago

here’s why

What could it be?

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025
1176 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

73287 readers
3400 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS