this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
194 points (96.6% liked)

Technology

59377 readers
4800 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Starlink loses out on $886 million in rural broadband subsidies::The FCC reaffirmed a decision not to award Starlink a nearly $900 million subsidy for offering 100Mbps/20Mbps low-latency internet service in 35 states.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] spudwart@spudwart.com 32 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Reminder that Starlink is the internet equivalent to the Hyperloop.

There are untold billions that the government gave out as subsidies to increase internet speeds across the nation and bring internet to everyone across the U.S. Which mysteriously vanished.

All the while now Elon has been promising vaporware and bullshit, as he usually does while Tech Bros, billionaires and the media gobble it up.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 28 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Eh, starlink at least works by all accounts. I guess the jury is still out if it's sustainable as a business because the satellites are deorbiting like crazy.

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago (2 children)

If your business plan involves firing out infinite rockets full of cell towers forever. You should probably just spend the money on copper instead.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 17 points 11 months ago (22 children)

I don't think you quite understand just how remote some people are. Besides, Starlink is also being used on vessels and aircraft, good luck getting copper out to them.

Also, fibre optic is how the cool people Internet these days.

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This makes zero sense. If that was profitable it would have been done already.

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (4 children)

It's not, neither is starlink. That's the whole point. You have two things, you can either launch infinite rockets forever or lay some infrastructure that we can benefit from forever.

Why America chooses not to lay infrastructure is beyond me. More so why Americans justify it so often. This shit is why America doesn't have trains.

[–] crazyCat@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

Preach the truth brother. The single most effective way to spread more internet is more cable and towers.

[–] LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 2 points 11 months ago

Bundle it all together! We have tons of electrical that should be moved underground. Throw internet lines into that pool too and put it all under the ground and run the network cables everywhere the power goes.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] spudwart@spudwart.com 7 points 11 months ago

They aren't sustainable because they are de-orbiting but they're also supposed to be low-cost and high speed.

If the prices aren't low-cost, and the speeds continue to decrease, it's entire purpose is defeated.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 9 points 11 months ago

Starlink, as a service for those that have it, is not Vaporware. It functions, pretty well.

Starlink as a government subsidized, nationally impactful program is Vaporware

[–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago

Hyperloop should be halted and replaced with high speed rail, and starlink should be nationalized. Musk keeps rinsing and repeating his grand privatized infrastructure projects where he essentially embezzles public funds.

[–] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 27 points 11 months ago (2 children)

In this thread. A bunch of people who've never had to use the prior remote internet solutions that existed prior to Starlink. For a good chunk of the world, Starlink is actually game changing.

I spent the better part of the last decade working in remote locations, including the high arctic and and rural indigenous communities. Starlink is both fast and affordable compared to the prior solutions. Hell, I even personally worked on hundred million dollar fibre optic line projects, that were hundreds of millions over budget, trying to get these communities connected. Starlink is hands down the better choice, unless you really wanted to put your data centre in Fort Good Hope for some unknown reason.

If Elon wasn't attached to this project, I'd bet the ratio of negative comments would be lower.

[–] crazyCat@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago (9 children)

I own property in a very rural place and I don’t want it messing up our night sky view.

Guess what, we also have great internet in this very rural place already, too, because they ran cable and put cell towers out there. That’s all it takes.

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sure, but there are many places where this is the only option, and that's not likely to change any time soon.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] LWD@lemm.ee 18 points 11 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)
[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website 12 points 11 months ago

I don't like Elon but starlink has allowed me and my best friend to play battlefield 1 together, even though he's in the middle of nowhere in Arizona. I do hope they continue reducing the reflectivity of their satellites, as I am also into astrophotography.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 6 points 11 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The money would have come from the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund program (RDOF), but the FCC writes that Starlink wasn’t able to “demonstrate that it could deliver the promised service” and that giving the subsidy to it wouldn’t be “the best use of limited Universal Service Fund dollars.”

That was the same reason the FCC gave when it rejected Starlink’s bid last year, which led to this appeal.

SpaceX had previously won the bidding to roll out 100Mbps download and 20Mbps upload “low-latency internet to 642,925 locations in 35 states,” funded by the RDOF.

“This applicant had failed to meet its burden to be entitled to nearly $900 million in universal service funds for almost a decade.” FCC commissioner Brendan Carr dissented, writing that “the FCC did not require — and has never required — any other award winner to show that it met its service obligation years ahead of time.”

But his funding plan was slashed by the time it became law, with the final version offering no money for locally-run internet service.

Christopher Cardaci, head of legal at SpaceX, writes in a letter to the FCC that “Starlink is arguably the only viable option to immediately connect many of the Americans who live and work in the rural and remote areas of the country where high-speed, low-latency internet has been unreliable, unaffordable, or completely unavailable, the very people RDOF was supposed to connect.”


The original article contains 296 words, the summary contains 235 words. Saved 21%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] jawsua@lemmy.one 4 points 11 months ago

I live at a place where I needed Starlink so I feel entitled to comment.

Ordered, and it took 6-7mo to allow me to start. In the meantime T-Mobile Home Internet let me start immediately. I kept both because when one had issues the other would be better (storms, updates, tower maintenance, downtime, Russian attacks, etc). But I noticed that Starlink kept getting worse. Lower speed, worse jitter/ping/bufferbloat/etc. it would routinely fail to hit 100mbps down with good sky view, mounted to a pergola. TMHI would routinely be above 250mbps, and I move to using it more often. Eventually a local ISP got a grant to roll out FttH in my area and I got rid of both.

It's been a bit over a year since then, maybe things got better. But I noticed Starlink overselling their nodes, being non-communicative for support issues, and missing these easily attainable FCC goals to people that often have much less options than I did. There's no reason for them to get absolutely wiped by a cell phone tower. Hope they made enough by packing on customers, because they just lost $900m

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago

Oh no! Now what will the multi billion dollar corporation do without taxpayer subsidies?

If you need subsidies to do business, your business fucking sucks and you suck.

load more comments
view more: next ›