Related question: What's the tech here that this can be accomplished (streaming data via satellite) without spectrum? Spectrum assets are some of the most valuable assets in the US (and are owned by Verizon et al). Satellite phone networks (LightSquared is the big one) have been stymied in the past by unavailability of spectrum and US Govt. concerns about interfering with GPS.<p>Is that not a problem in this case?
Since this story came out a few days ago, does anyone know if Amazon has commented on whether or not they plan to launch these 'themselves' / with Blue Origin?
One of the more interesting use cases for SpaceX/Starlink and Amazon’s satellite internet projects is their use as a back haul (not sure if the correct term) provider for other ISPs as well.<p>One of the biggest roadblocks to starting a new ISP or expanding an existing ISPs service area is the big capital expenditure of wiring up areas. I would imagine that having the ability to rent capacity on these networks of satellites would drastically decrease the barrier to entry for new ISPs to form.<p>I can also see it being useful for mobile data coverage in remote areas. You could install a cell tower along a highway somewhere remote, and you’d just need a solar panel to power the tower, satellite signal to get internet coverage, and then the cell radio to broadcast that to phones.
Interesting tweet about interference and collisions between the two systems.<p><a href="https://twitter.com/Megaconstellati/status/1283888892912054273" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/Megaconstellati/status/12838888929120542...</a><p>Link to FCC filing.<p><a href="https://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=2540187" rel="nofollow">https://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=...</a>
I would like to see the economics of this. There is a saving in not having to have 5g towers but if everyone in a small village has to spend $$$ on their own satellite dishes then the economics aren't going to make rural high speed internet via satellite so good.<p>Plus the uplink/downlink kit will be beyond mass consumer gear so the economies of scale won't be great.<p>Anyone seen the uplink kit for the SpaceX or British efforts?
Adopting broadband from Amazon or the other tech giants like google seems like a bad idea for society. They have too much power to begin with, and given allegations of how amazon may have abused seller data, I wouldn’t want them to have access to even more data. Not to mention issues around centralized control over information and the digital town square.
I’m wondering why it’s FCC which need to approve satellite communication services which orbits and provides services to the entire world?<p>I mean is the LEO is open for all countries to launch as many satellites as they want? What if China launches 10k satellites in the next year hypothetically?
Are these supposed to be replacement of Satellite Phones? If I have a cheap Gbps connection or a cheaper 100 Mbps mobile connection, am I still a target customer?
Too bad the FCC does not think about space pollution. The astronomers were already very fed up with the Starlink constellation interfering with their observations, now they will have to deal with twice the number of satellites. Not to mention the risk of collision in space which keep going up.
These space internet monopolies look increasingly like an international security and privacy nightmare in the making. Space wars indeed and i wonder how non US/Korea/china people will be able to protect themselves.