These are either incidental or unauthorized transmissions. Not the Ku band downlink to terminals.
replyWe had that before Starlink flooded the radio quiet zones with leakage.
replyWere that the case, there would have been nobody buying Starlink.
replyAs they are, I think you are wrong.
Not everyone lives within a metro that has good infrastructure. This is even more true in developing countries.
replyI have such a love hate relationship with the tech. On one hand, I live on the edge of the mountains and can get away while on-call, set up my starlink and still be within SLAs if I got paged while out of service (weekend pages are fairly rare). On the other hand, I'm an amateur astronomer, for visual astro, it's not a huge deal, but I see how it could be for astrophotography (streaks) and obviously it's a problem for radio.
replyI agree. Enlarging Elon Musk’s fortune is significantly more pressing than the ability to learn about the origins of the universe, or enjoying the night sky.
reply“Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.” --https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
replyThat might be dispositive if we didn't already have almost everybody on Earth wired up without using satellites.
replyGot a source for that?
replyBecause there's entire continents of people who think it's the most ridiculous statement they've ever read on this site (which they can only access via Starlink).
The fact that so many people are paying for starlink suggests that it is adding something important that was missing before.
replyStreaming video on airplane flights?
replyMost of Starlink’s customers are simply rural people who want Internet access at decent speeds. There are wide swathes of the US where Starlink’s best competition is measured in kilobytes per second.
replySeems like a case for the US having better fibre deployment than it does for leaking interference from unshielded poorly made tin cans.
reply