We are talking about Starlink here, correct? Owned by Elon

No, we are talking about how hard of a target a satellite based network is vs a terrestrial fiber network. Starlink is being used purely as an example here, but is by no means a complete representation of all aspects of the technology.

That said, all satellite networks are subject to dying if their ground-stations are taken offline…

Yes, but they can route traffic between satellites and back down to working ground stations. Theoretically, one working ground station could keep the satellite network connected to the entire Internet. Hence why Starlink still works over Ukraine, and why it is such a big deal when Elon shuts it off.

Sure, that’s a fault of Elon though, not a fault of satellite networks.

Still works over Ukraine somehow… Maybe that fancy satellite network just carries it to the next available ground station?

To put into scale how wrong you are about taking out a satellite, the last satellite the US shot down was in 2008, and it took a specially modified 9 million dollar missile to shoot it down. A Starlink satellite with launch costs included is just under 2 million dollars. Not only is it technologically difficult to take out a satellite, but it’s much more costly to shoot them down than it is to put them up.

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

It’s not a trivial thing to take out a single satellite, let alone a whole constellation of satellites.

You literally could not be more wrong about this.

…Russia bombed their power plants, all the cabling, and it was a literal war zone.

Here you are acknowledge that ground-based systems are very vulnerable to attack. Guess what still works in Ukraine right now (or at least when Elon allows it to work). You got it. Starlink.

How about another comparison. Starlink has a full project estimated cost of ~10 billion dollars, that’s with launches and satellites. The estimated cost to rebuild Ukraine’s telecom network is 4.7 billion dollars, and that is just for the damaged infrastructure in Ukraine. Starlink has already generated 72 million in profit (not revenue, but profit!)

We gave telecom providers 200 billion in tax breaks to build a fiber network in the US, and they didn’t even finish the job. 20x what Starlink’s estimated cost is.

Serioualy, the scale of how wrong you are about all of this is staggering.

Alright. Let’s clear this up.

Are satellite links easier to take down than a fiber link? No. It takes specialized weapons manfactured by state level actors to take out a a single satellite, let alone a whole constellation. I can take a pair of wire clippers, and take out every cable link in my neighborhood in a afternoon. Russia fairly regularly sabotages undersea cables just by “accidentally” dragging an anchor over them.

Is Starlink funded partially by public money? Absolutely yes, along with every other telecom provider. Hell, we gave them the public TV bands as compensation for builfijg a public fiber network (which they never even fucking did!)

Do Starlink satellite need to be replaced at extreme cost? Yes, but so does terresrrial network infrastructure. There is a reason why your internet isn’t 12kbps anymore… As far as the cost goes, the consumers determine if the cost is worth the benefit, and so far the answer is ‘yes’.

Ever wonder why Ukraine was using Starlink for network connections in the first place? Maybe it’s becuse the vulnerable terrestrial based networks were damaged or taken out of service months ago, and you can’t exactly get a contractor to go into a warzone and lay down new cables.

Your points, that satellites based networks are more vulnerable and prohibitively expensive is simply not compatible with reality.

I’m well aware of those issues as well, which is why I’m not pro-starlink replacing all terrestrial networks.

It is simply harder to sabotage if the wires are underground and cannot be readily seen by hostile actors.

This statement is not correct. It is the topic being discussed. Fiber network are more vulnerable than satellite networks. It takes specialized weapons to take out a single satellite link. Any idiot with wire clippers can take out a fiber link, and it happens all the time. Fiber networks are more difficult to replace at scale than a satellite network, and individuals links are more important to fiber network than they are to satellite networks.

No. That’s not what I said. Please stop trying to frame this like I am pro-starlink. I’m not.

Nope. But I think it would faster and easier to replace all fiber with Starlink than it would to replace all fiber with fiber again.

That’s… um… how it works? It’s generally one, maybe two, cables connecting continents: https://dabrownstein.com/2015/06/30/charting-interconnectedness-in-undersea-internet-cables/

I mean, some continents, like the US, have myriad cables connecting. And purposefully sabotaging these is almost as challenging as repairing them.

I think you didn’t quite understand. I’m not talking about just undersea cables. An accurate comparison for the impact of blowing up the entire Starlink constellation would be to remove ALL the fiber optic cables in an entire nation, not just the undersea cables. That is a more accurate comparison.

I may not have an expert level of economic knowledge, but the fact that Starlink exists and it can provide better service than rural broadband programs or the extensive terrestrial mobile broadband networks (which still use satellites BTW) is a pretty good indicator that it is viable.

Frankly this entire statement is insulting, and you should retract it.

I get the feeling you don’t understand the economics, physics, and infrastructure of various connectivity systems.

That can, and has been done in a couple of weeks. It happens somewhat regularly.

https://www.leadventgrp.com/blog/submarine-cable-damage-and-repair-claims-and-remedial-measures

Whoops, there you go again comparing the impact and resolution of a single cable to an entire national network.

True, but your’re comparing a single fiber optic line to an entire network of satellites. Blow up one, and they simply route traffic around it. Blow up 10, and you might have a small moving deadzone that removes service for a few minutes.

If you want to compare accurately, look at the time it takes to replace the cable infrastructure for an entire nation vs the time it takes to relaunch all the star link satellites. We started using satellites in the first place because it was the fastest (and in many cases, cheapest) way to get TV coverage anywhere on the planet.

“fiber will be much more safe than relying on sats”

Spoken like someone who has never had some idiot in a backhoe chop a fiber bundle…multiple times in a week.

We have a saying in IT. Always carry a 1ft section of single-mode fiberoptic when hiking. If you ever get lost, just bury that sucker and some dipshit in a backhoe will be out there in a hour to cut it in half.

Well, all tech is heading to fellatio-based authentication. Microsoft is just trying to beat Apple and Google to the market.

Both of those things are basically C, H, and O.

…carbon dioxide, hydrogen, and oxygen…

Pretty sure that is what regular butter is made out of too.

Yeah the problem is going to be getting the loan, and I would need about 1900sqft for the solar array, which would take up most of my yard. I’d need to elevate it up near the roofline of the house, so the entire back yard would be one big partially shaded patio. Which sounds nice, but I don’t think the city will let me build it.

My electric utility just arbitrarily added 170 (~50% of the total) bucks to my bill this month, despite me using 11% less electricity.

The whole point of being a utility is to allow the “efficiency” of a monopoly without the ability to gouge the customers. Frankly, I’m looking to see if there is a lawsuit against the utility at this point so I can join on to it.

Also looking into residential solar. Ideally I can just give my electric utility the finger and disconnect my service. Between them and gas, I’m paying about 400 bucks a month, which could get me a nice loan for a solar array, battery backup, and all electric appliances.

Credit card, yes, but a debit card that can be used for online transactions? I had one at 13. My mom had to co-sign for it, but I got one when I setup an account to deposit my paper route checks.