upvote

points

by oceanplexian17 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby nwah117 hours ago|
next
[-]
For context, that revenue was $18.67 billion in 2025, with a net loss of $4.94 billion.

And we must remember that 6G is in the final stages of development, which has peak speeds of 1 Tbps.

reply
upvoteby zdragnar15 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
6G will have worse physical penetration than 5G, which makes it worthless in rural areas where 5G is already severely inhibited by tree leaves.
reply
upvoteby KeplerBoy7 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
It's not that simple. Yes, newer standards push for higher frequencies to get more bandwidth, but 5G for example also uses the old sub GHz bands with excellent range and penetration.
reply
upvoteby markdown11 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
> in rural areas where 5G is already severely inhibited by tree leaves.

This is not a problem in Africa and India.

reply
upvoteby ben_w9 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You need an /s or a /jk or people will take you seriously.

https://www.google.de/maps/place/Nairobi,+Kenya/@-1.2745409,...

reply
upvoteby mlindner15 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Starlink by itself does not have a net loss.
reply
upvoteby 16 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby laughing_man11 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Starlink made a $4 bn profit last year, and is apparently growing 30% YoY.
reply
upvoteby ben_w9 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Starlink isn't billed for the cost of launches.

https://www.fool.com/investing/2026/06/29/spacex-secret-laun...

reply
upvoteby laughing_man6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Interesting. I didn't realize that.
reply
upvoteby inemesitaffia4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It's not true.

It's billed at cost. Not at price.

reply
upvoteby Lomlioto10 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Yeah but it doesn't become a Trillion dollar business if they don't solve the Starlink Satelite v3 issue.

They need Starship to be able to send v3 up, without v3 it doesn't scale well enough.

Starship still hasn't proven it can actually bring up the relevant payload high enough and they need it to be reusable otherwise costs will increase.

And they already exist and only have 10 Million customers. They need to get countries on their side like India but these countries are not stupid. Elon Musk showed them very clearly what he can do like his statements he did when Ukraine war started.

reply
upvoteby Cyberdog15 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
Will sending bits to space and back really be faster than fiber? How?
reply
upvoteby davrosthedalek15 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Lightspeed in air is close to c_vacuum. Light speed in fiber is roughly 2/3 c_vacuum. So for transatlantic it might be faster.
reply
upvoteby pferde12 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Unless you're trying to do something like high frequency stock trading, this does not really matter. Most of the added latency is added in the hops themselves, as packets are being classified and routed. Your generic Internet user won't be able to see any difference.
reply
upvoteby snickerbockers4 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
You need to take error into account, too. Can atmospheric conditions corrupt the transmission (this is not a rhetorical question, I actually don't know)? If so then your latency and bandwidth will both suffer.

EDIT: also, in the very likely case that the packet is not addressed to the satellite itself, routing comes into play. In the best-case scenario where the satellite is somehow able to transmit the packet directly to its destination the distance it travels is actually doubled. If the packet instead gets transmitted from the satellite to a base-station which then routes it through fiber-optics then there's no point in trying to argue that the satellite connection is the faster of the two even if that is true.

reply
upvoteby db48x12 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Often the bigger difference is just that fiber never goes in a straight line, even if it’s going to the right city. All that pesky geography gets in the way and makes the path longer.
reply
upvoteby dizhn5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
As far as I can tell it almost exclusively follows the existing roads in Europe. Probably an easier way to secure rights in one go like rails used to be for telco lines.
reply
upvoteby inemesitaffia4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Pipelines, Sewer systems, rail too.
reply
upvoteby rckclmbr13 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Let’s see if we can bring the cost of hollow core fiber down, it would be faster transatlantic even
reply
upvoteby ozim8 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
It will definitely be faster when someone drops an anchor on the undersea cable.
reply
upvoteby bamboozled15 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
With positive thinking and maximum upside ?
reply