• @bassad@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    025 days ago

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

    • mosiacmango
      link
      fedilink
      English
      025 days 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        025 days 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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          025 days 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.

    • Lka1988
      link
      fedilink
      English
      024 days ago

      See you just need to have inside information. There’s absolutely no way these rich assfucks aren’t trading on insider info.

        • @Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          023 days ago

          I have nothing against people investing, it’s just not accurate to think the average person can invest and get somewhere with it, back in the 70s or earlier Warren Buffett said you needed to have around $300,000 invested to make any kind of reasonable gain, adjusting for inflation $300k in 1970 dollars is $2.5 million. When you’re below that threshold your not really getting returns you can do something with. It’s fine to invest less, it’s fine to invest aggressively even if you are poor, just don’t look at people with less than $2.5mil like their dumb for not investing more. It doesn’t work that way.

  • @sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    025 days 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

    <ButtonPressingMeme>

  • @RangerJosey@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    024 days 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.

  • Bev's Dad
    link
    fedilink
    English
    025 days 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      025 days 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.

      • Bev's Dad
        link
        fedilink
        English
        025 days 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…

  • matlag
    link
    fedilink
    English
    024 days ago

    For the dishes: I don’t know the details of the 2 systems, but is there no way to retrofit the Starlink dishes to use Eutelsat’s constellation? I mean if we exclude the legal IP mess for reverse-engineering the electronics and software.

  • @sasquatch7704@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    0
    edit-2
    25 days 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

    • @Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      025 days 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.

      • @sasquatch7704@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        025 days ago

        I didn’t say that cat6 should be used everywhere, usually is just for “last mile delivery” get it from your home to a switching box that has fiber.

      • @Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        024 days ago

        You need to plug it into something though. If you are on a boat, what are you going to plug into?

        For my house I use a 4G router and a combination of ethernet and wifi over the LAN. 4G is also fine for kayaking, but if I had a larger boat that went further out and for longer I would probably consider satellite options.

    • @SamB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      025 days 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        025 days 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.

        • @WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          025 days ago

          I know plent of places in my European country where cable does reach, but was made for landline phones and cannot carry any data for internet because its so far from the nearest distribution center. even wireless like microwave can’t sustain more than a quality camera feed

        • @Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          024 days ago

          The cost of a cable to a remote cabin is clearly not worth it either when you can just use a 4G antenna instead at a fraction of the cost. Ships won’t even be able to reach 4G signals.

        • @EstonianGuy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          025 days ago

          One broken cable can result in a city/town without internet. Speaking from experience.

          Also satellites have other uses like GPS

        • @MoonHawk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          025 days 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?

          • @sasquatch7704@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            025 days ago

            There are exceptions, but in most cases (in Europe) hardwire should work fine. The problem is that starlink is advertised for any use case.

        • @CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          025 days ago

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

      • @sasquatch7704@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        025 days ago

        I understand, but that is the exception. Even in your case probably getting 4G / 5G to that area would be cheaper / easier long term. Also Europe has a relatively high density compared with other continents

        • @SamB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          025 days ago

          I’m in Italy and outside cities, the Internet is still horrendous. And as I said, if you have a remote farm or garden, which are fairly common here, then you are on your own. Sim based internet is a thing, but there are monthly limits which are risky when you need surveillance and automation to be always live.

        • @Triasha@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          024 days ago

          This would work in the US on the coasts and in the cities.

          Even the eastern parts of the west coast states the math gets bad. Running cables over/mountains to service the poorest 10% of the states population.

          Getting into the square states you have 10s of thousands of miles of mountains and deserts to get to a vanishing small number of people. There are twice as many people in my city as there are in the entire state of Wyoming and we are the third largest city in Texas.

          Are you really going to run cables all over an area of the alps but the size of France to bring service to a number of people equivalent to one midsize city? Most of it is protected national Park people don’t even live in.

          Most of Nevada is uninhabited desert with some of the hottest temperatures on earth.

          We can leave half of Texas empty and still have service for 95% of the population.

          It’s not as simple as “just do it” over here. We have huge problems, but the challenges are legit.

            • @fishos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              0
              edit-2
              24 days ago

              You realize the most significant use of satellite internet right now is Ukraine, right? Like you’re aware that this has almost nothing to do with the US and is about starlink/Elon fucking with Ukraine and the internet they provide the military fighting in a war. Right? Like you’re not that oblivious, right? You’re not jumping in here suggesting they lay cat6 in a warzone are you? Cus that would just be foolish and make you look like a jackass, which I’m sure you’re not.

              • @sasquatch7704@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                024 days ago

                Obviously I’m suggesting Ukraine should use cat6 or fiber, but those are exceptional situation and that’s a military use case.

                I meant for day to day use, most people already live in urban area are satellites don’t make sens

        • @WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          024 days ago

          oh I didn’t know there’s a fiber box in 100m at any place in the country! tell that to my ISP who cant serve any internet through the landline telephone cable because it’s too far from distribution! oh and also to all the customers of microwave wireless networks.

          and this doesn’t even need to be on the countryside! It’s a problem here even in villages that the ISP is not allowed to run any cables on the high voltage electric poles!

    • @abcdqfr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      025 days 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.

  • @mbirth@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    025 days 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      025 days ago

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

      • th3_n4m31355_0n3
        link
        fedilink
        English
        025 days ago

        They do offer a better service, albeit marginally - better download speeds, lower latency, slower upload speeds though. Problem is their antennas - they cost 8.000€ compared to 300€ the starlink ones…

    • Alphane Moon
      link
      fedilink
      English
      025 days ago

      They have both GEO and LEO satellites. Not on the scale of SpaceX (for LEO), but they do have a network.

      I am not commenting on the nature of the stock market or anything like that. Just pointing out that they do have a working network, it’s not 100% speculation (like you see with crypto schemes).

      • @Zetta@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        025 days ago

        You’re correct but their LEO constellation is over 10x smaller than Starlink, so they’ve still got a lot of catching up to do.

        They are doing much better than other fabled starlink competitors though, like amazon kuiper which is still not a real thing after all this time.

        • @GrosPapatouf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          025 days ago

          They have very, very different business models. Constellation size is meaningless on its own, you have to account for the satellites capabilities, orbits, and the number and needs of your customers.

          • @Zetta@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            025 days ago

            That’s true and I even thought about trying to investigate one of their satellites bandwidth capabilities versus one starlink satellite before I commented. But ultimately it doesn’t really matter because we’re talking about them being a rival to starlink so In the context of this conversation, they need to match their capacity and capabilities in all aspects to be a worthy rival.

            • @insight06@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              024 days ago

              I don’t know, merely not being beholden to Musk is a pretty big competitive advantage at this point.

        • Alphane Moon
          link
          fedilink
          English
          025 days ago

          They have one strong competitive advantage that Starlink will never have; they are not American.

          By definition, you cannot trust an American service. Even if the people who run a given service are not degenerates, there are enough degenerates in the US that they could elect a degenerate who will fuck you over.

      • @neidu3@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        025 days ago

        Alphane_Moon just convinced me to take out a huge loan with my house as security, and invest in Eutelsat. I suggest everyone else does the same.

  • @Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    025 days 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!!!

    • cabbage
      link
      fedilink
      English
      025 days ago

      But also, we cannot have so many god-damn satellites polluting the night sky. Starlink should never have been allowed to get up there as a private actor in the first place.

      It’s a tricky situation, as international cooperation would be extremely difficult to maintain, especially during situations like the Ukraine war. But having private companies compete to fill the orbit with space waste as soon as possible is hardly a good solution either.

      • @wampus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        025 days ago

        The states has been moving towards authoritarian corporate control for a long time though. The freedom cities controlled by big tech, setup in whatever country they want, operating outside ‘local’ regulations, with services via satellite and protection via US military, very much fits with what Starlink has done. Techs push for ‘rare earth’ (uranium) is likely about powering these sorts of cities, without needing to rely on a ‘countries’ power grid – to make them autonomous and impervious to local issues.

        A few big military powers to allow for the “constant enemy” setup similar to 1984, with a corporate backend to prop up oligarchs that can act based on the whims of the oligarch without fear of repudiation.

        Authoritarianism is on a big upswing lately, and egalitarian ideals are busy eating themselves alive – mired in demographic politics. And the conspiracy gremlin in me says it’s been intentional on the part of the democrats/progressive sorts, as they’re just as beholden to ‘rich’ authoritarian leaning tech people as the right wing/republican sorts.

          • @HiTekRedNek@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            0
            edit-2
            25 days ago

            So? The ISS is due to be decommissioned soon and the HST has been failing from orbit for a while now.

            Telescopes on the far side of the moon would see far far more than any telescope in earth orbit and especially any on the ground.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Crater_Radio_Telescope

            Things in space don’t veer wildly out of control when they fail. They stay pretty much in their existing orbit.

            It’s not like these satellites have big thrusters or engines just propelling them constantly around the planet. They’re in a state of free fall. They’re just also moving sideways fast enough that the earth also falls away from them at around the same speed that they are falling towards it.

            Lower orbits have far more atmospheric drag, and any debris in those orbits will simply slow down enough to stop missing the planet.

            • cabbage
              link
              fedilink
              English
              025 days ago

              So we will have a bunch of trash circulating the earth, left there by opporunistic billionaires. No thank you. What they have done to the night sky alone is a crime against all of us as far as I’m concerned.

              And to think that lower orbit is not interesting any more now that NASA wants to build a telescope on the moon is beyond me.

              • @HiTekRedNek@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                025 days ago

                Guess it’s ok when governments leave debris by shooting at satellites, but not when businesses do?

                Weird.

                • cabbage
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  0
                  edit-2
                  25 days ago

                  As the headlins in the article I linked earlier kindly informs us, half of all active satellites are now from SpaceX. And it’s increasing fast. If other companies enter the scene and start competing, the earth will be orbited by a shitload of useful satelites launched into space by billionaires with a penis complex.

                  Governments are supposed to provide services for their population. Some of these needs might justify launching satellites. It is not unproblematic, and I would rather see it being governed by an international organization, but at least it’s being done on behalf of people.

                  Companies launch them to make a profit for the fat wallets of their stakeholders and CEOs.

                  They are not the same. Pretending they are is, as you so nicely put it, weird.

    • @corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      025 days ago

      Competition is the core of capitalism

      Lemmy tells me that exploitation is the core of capitalism. Not so?

      • Lemmy seem to misunderstand that exploitation is a byproduct of human nature and change the system isn’t going to help that (see: USSR). The purpose of government is supposed to be to keep the capitalist system in check in regards to preventing such exploitation. The average Lemmy tankie seems to want to monopolise exploitation to the government itself and remove your freedom to leave to a less exploitative arrangement.

    • chingadera
      link
      fedilink
      English
      025 days ago

      Competition is the core of capitalism and the driving force behind >development.

      But when, tho?