Comment by modeless | Hacker News Reader

Comment by modeless | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

"The world" didn't "rely" on SpaceX to build this. SpaceX built this service on their own initiative and with their own funding and now they're giving away its most life critical function for free (unlike incumbent satphone companies who have always charged for 911 service). Plenty of competitors are working to replicate Starlink, including private companies, governments, and militaries. SpaceX is even launching some of the satellites for them. It's hardly SpaceX's fault that everyone else is so far behind.

On Ukraine, SpaceX asked the US DoD to fund the substantial costs which is eminently reasonable given the criticality of Starlink to the war effort and the billions upon billions in contracts other US defense contractors were getting to support the war. SpaceX never shut off Ukraine's service despite misinformation to the contrary.

As for Elon, he canceled one customer's $100k car order 8 years ago and because of that you believe he would leave people to die when they need emergency help?

Once something "free" is offered, it often pushes out paid or costly options. And it's not uncommon that this leads to a severe decline in quality. We've seen it in print media, social networks, streaming services, and many other industries. For example, we no longer have popular high-quality almanacs, and high-quality magazines at a premium price are nearly extinct. We now have a lot of "free" garbage online instead. Similarly, social networks, which are free to use, have upset the social fabric and displaced genuine deep relationships which cost money and effort to maintain. And what percentage of movies these days release on high-bitrate media? Most of us don't have access to film without blocky compression.

It's pretty clear Elon didn't think this through. There are very large risks (on the scale of his AI fears). If this service becomes widespread, regional and national governments may no longer mandate that certain areas are provided cell services for by telecoms. Or if there are faults in that system, they may delay repairs. This is all well and good while SpaceX continues to operate, but what if it goes bankrupt and the world has moved on? How many will die?

Or what if Elon has another tech bro moment and decides some region doesn't deserve this service? We know he has sometimes acted very unjustly to others, including making a decision in the Ukrainian conflict to not provide service[0]. He may be right or wrong on that decision, I won't judge. But it is clear he is inserting himself into situations he has no expertise in, and is known for casting harsh rushed judgements[1].

I think he should do it — it's quite heroic what he wants to do, but he needs to think about the consequences. Maybe the calls should always be available, but there should be a fee associated with them later, so that a cheaper local option remains relevant? I don't have the answers but I think 15 minutes of thinking surfaces so many concerns that it really does demand an impact study rather than one man making a tweet/xit.

And we haven't even spoken about potential misuse.

[0] https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/09/14/musk-internet-access-... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/15/elon-musk...

> Once something "free" is offered, it often pushes out paid or costly options

You could say the exact same thing about the long-standing policy of providing free 911 service via terrestrial cell towers. And it still wouldn't make any sense because the revenue potential of 911 service is absolutely miniscule compared to the total size of the telecom market. Giving away 911 service isn't pushing anyone out of the telecom business. Despite being life critical, 911 service is incidental to a good overall telecom service and it makes perfect sense to make it free.

> This is all well and good while SpaceX continues to operate, but what if it goes bankrupt and the world has moved on?

There is zero chance that the Starlink network would be abandoned and stop working if SpaceX went bankrupt. Look up Iridium and Globalstar to see what would actually happen.

> Or what if Elon has another tech bro moment and decides some region doesn't deserve this service anymore?

Again, people are delusional to think that he would leave people to die on a whim. I get that he acts rashly and there's a real billionare=evil meme floating around out there right now, not to mention the politics stuff, but nothing he has ever done is even remotely close to the behavior people are postulating here.

Starlink Leo satellites are not the same as geosynchronous satellites. geosync satellites are very high up and will more or less stay there indefinitely. Starlink sats will decay from their orbit and burn up in the atmosphere after about 5 years. which means if you aren't constantly launching new sats all the time, the network will quickly degrade and completely fail within five years. in other words, there is way more than a zero percent chance that starlink is not a financially viable product long term.

Iridium is LEO and had way worse business prospects at the time of their bankruptcy, as well as far less utility in general. Still wasn't abandoned.

Ya, but also less ongoing costs. Which is why it was viable, especially after bankruptcy, since they could erase all that initial capital expenditure.

> Giving away 911 service isn't pushing anyone out of the telecom business.

Irrelevant. My claim was about a free service replacing a paid one. 911 service in the US is paid for by states and local governments, and telecoms must provide it to operate. Having a free option would create a disincentive to keep the status quo, and the paid service may be less upkept.

> There is zero chance that the Starlink network would be abandoned and stop working if SpaceX went bankrupt

Seems exceptionally naive. “Zero chance” alone is naive, there is substantial probability. But even if the satellites were kept in orbit by another owner, why would they continue to provide a free service at a cost? Even that question may be irrelevant, because non-profitable efforts would be ended by most restructurings.

> Again, people are delusional to think that he would leave people to die on a whim

Tesla’s exaggerated FSD claims are directly responsible for people’s deaths, including the Walter Huang case, where this negligence was established as a cause by plaintiff’s lawyers.

You should double-check your arguments.

You seem confused. SpaceX will provide the same free access to the same government 911 (or other local emergency system) that terrestrial carriers do. SpaceX incurs practically no incremental cost here. Starlink can't replace cell towers for normal phone coverage, so this is not replacing anything other than maybe Apple's far inferior SOS feature.

The Walter Huang case didn't "establish" anything because it didn't go to trial. It's a pretty wild stretch to blame his death on Musk. And even if one believed that they should still be able to see how making misleading statements that unintentionally contribute to one person's accident would not be remotely comparable to intentionally ignoring thousands upon thousands of people desperately calling for urgently needed help.

SpaceX is not running a 911 center. They will hand over the call to a partner operator (T-Mobile)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com