SpaceX's private control of satellite internet concerns military leaders: report
www.space.com
"We worry that if we order devices from Starlink, we'll fall into some sort of trap."

SpaceX’s Private Control Of Satellite Internet Concerns Military Leaders::Military leaders around the world have expressed concerns over the dominance of SpaceX founder Elon Musk when it comes to satellite-based internet services.

  • @WiseMothEnglish
    27•1 year ago

    You think we should just destroy millions of dollars worth of cutting edge internet architecture which aids rural communities have usable internet globally because you don’t like the guy who paid for it? Seriously?

      • Bo7aEnglish
        7•1 year ago

        Also, who the fuck is “rural communities” and has the money to afford this service?

        Me. I am a sysadmin/architect and I live an hour from any broadband. And 20 minutes from any cellular signal.

        Without starlink I’d be stuck in a city. I hate musk with a burning passion. But I hate living within spitting distance of other people even more.

        Also - I’d hardly call 200(CAD) up-front and 130/mth expensive as hell. Some people are paying that for two cellphones that their kids carry.

          • Bo7aEnglish
            4•1 year ago

            If anything that’s arguments in favor of expanding the cable network, its cheaper, more reliable, and most importantly a order of magnitude better for the climate.

            Cable will never come here. There are 4 people living within 10km of me. Yes, you read that right, four. We won’t even get analog phone service here. Forget cable/fiber/cell.

            But i understand you wanting internet at home.

            This really isn’t about simple wants. Without internet I don’t have a job.

            But i personally pay 100€ for a 1GB/s parallel plan with TV and Landline. And most here think that’s expensive…

            It is all very expensive here in Canada because we have tons of habitable/arable land that is very sparsely populated.

            Starlink <…snip…> has a limit if im not out of date regarding that.

            This is not the case here. I have been using it for almost 2 years now and I am a bit of a high-seas type of media enjoyer.

            • @[email protected]English
              -1•1 year ago

              Right but filling LEO with trash, plus the pollution generated to make and send them there, plus endangering earth based astronomy on a global scale is not worth giving internet to 4 people per 100 squared kilometers.

              • Bo7aEnglish
                3•1 year ago

                I agree it is not a good thing. I just think that there is some balance. There are areas that will grow in population due to the availability of internet and jobs, which can alleviate some of the housing pressure in cities, reduce commutes, and make for more economic opportunities outside of the downtown cores that should die as more office work is made remote.

                And I think a lot of the remote areas that LEO-based internet access is giving internet to are much more populated than my special case in the middle of a forest in Canada.

                But even when I lived in more populated areas like small towns out West - There were hundreds of people commuting 1.5 to 2 hours each direction to get to work. Whole towns with 3 or 4k people, but only 4 or 5 businesses to get jobs at. The removal of some of that driving probably has a measurable positive effect.

                Again - I want to be clear. I also think there are better ways. And will support those better ways in their early development. But right now I don’t think the balance lies on the side of decommissioning or kneecapping of these services as the right choice.

              • Bo7aEnglish
                1•1 year ago

                Space is really really big. We have so much space junk out at further orbits that the 5 or 6k starlink satellites just doesn’t concern me.

                I feel some guilt in how badly this LEO type of constellation will impact astronomy and astro-photography as more companies try to get some profits out of the sky. But again, I think that internet access for those who live in remote areas is one of the tools we will use to improve as a species. - as long as the current disinformation and hateclicking is reined in within the coming 10 or 20 years.

                  • Bo7aEnglish
                    0•1 year ago

                    I get it. And I am not saying this is the optimal solution. I am saying that out of the 30000 objects big enough to track in orbit, 5000 of those being internet providing satellites seems, to me, like a worthwhile trade-off until something better comes along to not leave every rural person on earth out of the information economy that they are all subservient to, to some extent.

      • @WiseMothEnglish
        6•1 year ago

        Dude, calm down. It helps people. It’s faster than a lot of landline internet. And it’s good for more than just rural communities. Now personally, it doesn’t affect me at all. I live in a big city. But that doesn’t mean it’s not useful. There are plenty of people living rurally who can afford this too. Living away from people doesn’t make you poor lol. What kind of an idea is that? It’s not “absolutely shit” it’s an incredibly useful technology that can improve the lives of many. Now don’t get me wrong. Spake debris is an important issue that needs to be solved. But that doesn’t mean we should just scrap every space project lol. That’s like saying “argh, there are so many cars on the road. We should just get rid of them all because they could crash”. That’s not a solution. Starlink satellites are also designed to fall back to earth, and burn up on re-entry. Which obviously doesn’t just solve the problem but it’s an improvement and an important step