A European Starlink rival’s shares skyrocketed 390% in a week

invest in community run broadband instead

Of course it did, are there any programmes clean up space junk ?

Sat internet is so overhyped. As it's limited by physics cell towers will always outperform them. Simple as that.

cities - cables and 5g
country side - 4g and cables in high concentration areas
middle of nowhere or war zones - low orbit sats.

This is purely a security issue not a consumer one.

Spoken like a true spoiled city person Good luck getting the necessary infrastructure built (cables, towers, et al) to really remote places. It's probably more expensive in the long run than having a satellite constellation.
- Good luck? Most of the world is already there. I had 3g in deep jungles of Thailand last weekend and even in the most remote places in China have wire these days.
  
  The main point is that sat is limited by physics so cell towers and wire are upgrades over sat so it makes much more sense to start with better technology now as we'll never need less connection.
- Idk i live in a country where we have wifi in some forests and free wifi in every large city. And we're an ex soviet shithole.
Infrastructure can be a real problem in some places.

I'm currently on a mountain and since they upgraded to a hybrid satellite/cable system the speeds have skyrocketed. Laying cable/towers is just not viable, especially with dense rock peaks blocking line of sight.

Also I have coworkers in Nigeria who lose internet multiple times a day (and often don't have the bandwidth for a video call) but most of them have bitten the bullet and paid the high up-front cost to get starlink at home. And now can do HD video calls with zero interruption (unless they have power issues, but that's a whole other thing).

So I think there's a lot of use-cases for sattelite, especially for people who aren't considered worth the investment in non-sattelite infrastructure.

It's just unfortunate that yeah, space junk is going to one day (suddenly) be a massive problem.

Edit: ah I may have replied to the wrong comment

So much space junk….

Unpopular opinion: we don't need freaking internet from satellites, just get cat6 in every home and everyone is happy. I'm sure the cost would be lower then having to launch 999999.91 satellites to have similar speeds

Satellites are not there for speed, but breadth
Exactly! Amazon can ship it to you for like 10 bucks. Problem solved!
- You need to plug it into something though. If you are on a boat, what are you going to plug into?
  
  For my house I use a 4G router and a combination of ethernet and wifi over the LAN. 4G is also fine for kayaking, but if I had a larger boat that went further out and for longer I would probably consider satellite options.
cat 6 in every home lol. you have any idea about range of cat 6? I mean, any?
- ~50m for cat6, ~100 cat6a, enough to get you to a switching box where you connect to fiber.
You do if you're fighting a war against Putin and the ketamine troll is threatening to turn off your internet.
Now get rid of the home and the cable, how do you cover 99.9% of the earth? Nomads need satellite, and so do rural homes too far from an isp fiber/copper endpoint But yes, if starlink has it done, why double the satellites to do it again with a different name? Because it's easier to launch 1000 more satellites than dismantle the system that enables such feats.
There are remote areas where cable won’t reach. For example, I need surveillance on a remote farm and I would love to get internet there.
- Cable will reach anywhere. There is not such a place that cable "will not reach". Is there a profit incentive to serve you as a customer in a capitalist system? Maybe not. But cable will reach.
- I understand, but that is the exception. Even in your case probably getting 4G / 5G to that area would be cheaper / easier long term. Also Europe has a relatively high density compared with other continents
Cat 6A caps out at like 330 ft. Also thats a ton of copper.

Fiber optic nonprofit utilities makes more sense in cities and in rural areas we should just subsidize cell phone data plans.
- I didn't say that cat6 should be used everywhere, usually is just for "last mile delivery" get it from your home to a switching box that has fiber.
Bring back ethernet jacks on phones!
supporting this motion
Not unpopular but I think they are just trying to grab some of SpaceX market share in this space (no pun intended). I agree cable is better but these folks are trying to make money.

If only I wasn't too chicken shit to start investing... I was looking at Eutelsats stocks earlier in the week. But it'd be my first steps on the market so decided against it.

I finally got brave enough to do it. Between August and January I had made over 800%.

Trump has ruined that for me. Oh well.
I'm not even sure how, it seems like its kind of wealth gated because you have to be able to make enough from your investments to cover brokerage fees. I'm not aware of any non US retail investment platform that doesn't have a regular fee to pay.
- Trading212.

It'll be interesting to see what the Canadian telesat LEO system will be capable of. They're supposed to be launching satellites next year and are using a higher orbit so will need much fewer satellites than starlink.

But sadly increased latency. Also don't hold your breath on Canada telecom anything, we have a history of being the worst at it.
- I don't mind a bit more latency (should still be nicely below 100ms) but my use case is more related to mid-Atlantic mobile connectivity than remote region broadband.
  
  Their planned implementation just seems much better than others with beam shaping, linked satellites and less than 200 satellites to maintain and replace.
  
  Although you're not wrong about our telecom track record...
- Your internet and mobile phone service kicks the UKs arse.

“European Starlink rival” is a bit far fetched when there’s merely rumours that they might be able to offer a similar service. But that’s the stock market for you.

They have both GEO and LEO satellites. Not on the scale of Starlink (for LEO), but they do have a network.

I am not commenting on the nature of the stock market or anything like that. Just pointing out that they do have a working network, it's not 100% speculation (like you see with crypto schemes).
- You're correct but their LEO constellation is over 10x smaller than Starlink, so they've still got a lot of catching up to do.
  
  They are doing much better than other fabled starlink competitors though, like amazon kuiper which is still not a real thing after all this time.
- Alphane_Moon just convinced me to take out a huge loan with my house as security, and invest in Eutelsat. I suggest everyone else does the same.
Now they have to offer a similar service. No pressure then 😊
- They do offer a better service, albeit marginally - better download speeds, lower latency, slower upload speeds though. Problem is their antennas - they cost 8.000€ compared to 300€ the starlink ones...
A man can dream

Bye bye future space launches once we have full or partial Kessler syndrome.

Bye bye earth based astronomy.

But dang this tech is so much better than Hughesnet

Kessler syndrome doesn’t really apply for purely LEO satellites. They all burn up in a single digit amount of years.

It’s not something to worry about yet.
- On the contrary, I think it is something to avoid. Imagine letting a single person ground all space launches for 9 years. And all the pollution that adds to the atmosphere. All the junk landing on people's farms or houses.
- This is true at 500km altitude, but not so at higher LEO altitudes.

Is starlink business model like uber/airbnb? Killing the market with low prices by circumventing regulations to establish their monopoly?

No, it just vertical integration. You need to send up rockets to make money, so you make sure they never have an empty slot on them by filling it yourself. You get enough satellites up, then you have a revenue generating payload you can send up steady from then on.
- Then it is a monopoly building if you take the limited slots before others companies 😁
  
  I was wondering because starlink's terminals are around $500 while eutelsat's are 10k. It seems it can be only possible if you accept massive losses on first years, with help of to investors to keep the company running, to take down competitors. Like uber and many others did, which had years of losses before having income.

What will they launch on? Star Link is barely feasible because they can launch at cost on falcon 9.

Look up Ariane 6. It's still more costly than the Falcon 9 but who in their right mind would trust the numbers Elon is sharing? Seems like they both cost around 100million $ per launch. Elon is claming 30million per launch and that he will make it cost 2 million...
- Yeah I'm familiar with Ariane 6. It costs almost double what SpaceX changes external customers per launch, not even counting that their internal rate would be even lower. Plus you'd need more launches since the payload capacity is lower. You'd end up paying 3x or more the cost. At that point, why not just buy falcon 9 launches? Otherwise it seems like there'd be very little way to compete.

Good. Fuck Starlink.

A European Starlink rival’s shares skyrocketed 390% in a week — here’s why

OOOH!!!! OOH!!! I KNOW THIS ONE!!! STARLINK GO BOOM! PEOPLE GO NOPE! TESLAS STOCK PRICE GO (bomb falling sound effects) KABOOM!!!!

Easy there, Powder... Although you are absolutely right
That's Lemmy for you..

I'm stuck with star link as of present. I would defiantly like for a competent and competent competitor in the market. Competition is the core of capitalism and the driving force behind development.

But also, we cannot have so many god-damn satellites polluting the night sky. Starlink should never have been allowed to get up there as a private actor in the first place.

It's a tricky situation, as international cooperation would be extremely difficult to maintain, especially during situations like the Ukraine war. But having private companies compete to fill the orbit with space waste as soon as possible is hardly a good solution either.
- The states has been moving towards authoritarian corporate control for a long time though. The freedom cities controlled by big tech, setup in whatever country they want, operating outside 'local' regulations, with services via satellite and protection via US military, very much fits with what Starlink has done. Techs push for 'rare earth' (uranium) is likely about powering these sorts of cities, without needing to rely on a 'countries' power grid -- to make them autonomous and impervious to local issues.
  
  A few big military powers to allow for the "constant enemy" setup similar to 1984, with a corporate backend to prop up oligarchs that can act based on the whims of the oligarch without fear of repudiation.
  
  Authoritarianism is on a big upswing lately, and egalitarian ideals are busy eating themselves alive -- mired in demographic politics. And the conspiracy gremlin in me says it's been intentional on the part of the democrats/progressive sorts, as they're just as beholden to 'rich' authoritarian leaning tech people as the right wing/republican sorts.
- There's so much more room out there than there is here on this finite planet.
Competition is the core of capitalism and the driving force behind >development.

But when, tho?
Competition is the core of capitalism

Lemmy tells me that exploitation is the core of capitalism. Not so?
- Lemmy seem to misunderstand that exploitation is a byproduct of human nature and change the system isn't going to help that (see: USSR). The purpose of government is supposed to be to keep the capitalist system in check in regards to preventing such exploitation. The average Lemmy tankie seems to want to monopolise exploitation to the government itself and remove your freedom to leave to a less exploitative arrangement.

here’s why

What could it be?

I didn't read the article but I'd bet the "why" is because it's been on the news and people think it's an easy way to make a quick buck. However, these people are amateurs - when it's in the news you're already too late.

Not if you bought in at 100% or 200% or 300% when it was also in the news. You will still have made tons and tons of money.

The real positive for the company and maybe the world is if they issue some new stock now and get a nice war chest of cash so they can expand their network rapidly. That will hurt the investors above, but hopefully they take gains now when it's fruitful or in the farther future when the company dramatically increases its market share.

I always wish I was quick enough to take advantage of things like this but I always miss the boat

Does make me think about the story of Thales of Miletus; ancient Greek philosopher, got asked what use was philosophy if it doesn't make you any money. Predicted good weather, and monopolised all the olive presses, made a fortune.

For a modern example; shares in Rheinmetall (German firm who make, amongst other things, the turrets for tanks) have gone through the roof after the recent US debacle. I could have told you a year ago that Trump getting in would have meant the US abandoning Ukraine; obvious in hindsight that that would mean a boon for European arms manufacturers.

I don't think you need to be quick to take advantage. I think you need insight. If there's a topic that you're knowledgeable about and you can see which way the wind is blowing, then you can make your own boat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thales_of_Miletus#Olive_presses

SpaceX and Starlink have no competitors. They’re so far ahead that it’s not even funny. I really wish Elon had just kept his mouth shut and kept working on it without sullying its image. I bet he wishes that too sometimes.

Idk. Musk seems to have gone completely mental. Dunno what the cause is, but the man is not healthy. Not sure how much self-reflection he's capable of.
- It is his character, the type of person he is.
- He's on ketamin. Explains some of it.
Clearly not what he wishes. Shows no regrets whatsoever. He wishes for everyone to lick his boots and obey whatever he thinks is right. He's acting like he's a king or god or so... He gets what he deserves, disrespect and contracts failing. They might lead technologically but that's no reason to take all this BS. It's extra reason not to.
- I don’t know, the man is hard to read. I’m extremely cynical and I don’t believe he’s genuine ever, but he gave an interview recently and he did choke up when asked how he was managing to run his companies. I don’t think he’s as good an actor to fake that.
  
  The best conclusion I have arrived is that the man may well be completely self deluded and he might really believe himself the savior of mankind so he needs to get us to mars by any means necessary. Maybe because of the heavy drug use and obvious sleep deprivation, his sense of reality is probably warped. Or maybe the pressure from the Twitter purchase got to him and he broke because that’s when he absolutely went bonkers. He had to overleverage himself in order to do that and he even took money from the saudis.
  
  All in all I don’t expect things to end well for him.
I was just talking about this with a friend today. Musk was basically on track to become a real-life Tony Stark, exactly as he’d envisioned, but he just couldn’t keep his mouth shut and ended up ruining it for himself. Money buys many things, but it doesn’t buy respect - and once you’ve lost that, it's nearly impossible to regain. The number of young and ambitious people he let down is simply staggering. I was really rooting for him and hoping he'd turn this around but after the nazi salute I no longer do. That was the last straw for me.
- It is good he revealed his true colours early.
SpaceX and Starlink have no competitors

This is a very soviet mode of thinking.
- It’s not a mode of thinking it’s a fact. As of this moment there’s no one who is even close to being a competitor to them. I’m not saying there can’t be one, but there isn’t one right now.