SpaceX blasts FCC as it refuses to reinstate Starlink’s $886 million grant::FCC doubts ability to provide high-speed, low-latency service in all grant areas.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 143 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (28 children)
load more comments (28 replies)
[–] 101 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Starlink's grant was intended to subsidize deployment to 642,925 rural homes and businesses in 35 states. The August 2022 ruling that rejected the grant called Starlink a "nascent LEO [low Earth orbit] satellite technology" with "recognized capacity constraints." The FCC questioned Starlink's ability to consistently provide low-latency service with the required download speeds of 100Mbps and upload speeds of 20Mbps.

That’s Phony Stark for ya, everytime: Overpromise and Underdeliver. And then get angry when called on his bulkshit.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 76 points 2 years ago (17 children)

    Funny how the FCC decided starlink is incapable of doing this, but was happy enough to pay all the other ISPs who are still incapable of doing it after decades of payments

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • load more comments (16 replies)
    [+] 75 points 2 years ago* (last edited 6 months ago)
    [–] 56 points 2 years ago

    pull yourself up by your bootstraps. no handouts.

  • source
  • [–] 47 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Musk cannot make a profitable company without government subsidies. Hilarious.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Almost no major company can, have you seen how much the US subsidizes oil and gas despite their profits? How much we subsidize food production? Renewable technology such as wind and solar is only becoming so vastly popular because we're heavily subsidizing it finally.

    Don't get me wrong fuck Elon musk, but don't kid yourself and pretend like most companies wouldn't fail without subsidies. That includes other internet companies which we subsidize regularly

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 38 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Maybe if they had just used the last subsidies payouts to expand coverage and reliability instead of lobbying local governments to kill off fiber coops, then they could have kept the tap open.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 23 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I still think Starlink can be a great service for rural areas, but it seems they need to improve their capabilities first. Which in a way makes a chicken-egg scenario. If they expand servers to handle all those people, they should be eligible for a grant, but they don’t wanna do it until they get the grant.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    It's just not a sustainable idea. To expand service, they need to launch even more satellites. Which degrade and fall down after a year. The only reason it could exist thus far is because the US taxpayer paid for it with subsidies like this.

    America has problems with getting cable companies to actually lay cable after giving them money to do that, which is a separate thing. But at least if you get cable laid, it is in the ground providing service for hundreds of years instead of 1 year.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago

    They could do it and make money too, but they are only thinking of short term gains. In my neck of the woods spectrum kept taking the money and barely putting up any cable until our state finally told them to pound sand. Fios then said we'll do it, and they did. They have run thousands of miles of fibre in the last few years, and guess who everyone is paying for internet service because it's the only service available up here.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 20 points 2 years ago (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] [B] 8 points 2 years ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    SpaceX is furious at the Federal Communications Commission after the agency refused to reinstate an $886 million broadband grant that was tentatively awarded to Starlink during the previous administration.

    But the satellite provider still needed FCC approval of a long-form application to receive the money, which is meant to subsidize deployment in areas with little or no high-speed broadband access.

    The Starlink and LTD rejections were the two biggest changes to a $9.2 billion round of grants that, in the Rosenworcel FCC's words, fueled "complaints that the program was poised to fund broadband to parking lots and well-served urban areas."

    The August 2022 ruling that rejected the grant called Starlink a "nascent LEO [low Earth orbit] satellite technology" with "recognized capacity constraints."

    In rejecting SpaceX's appeal, yesterday's FCC order said the agency's Wireline Competition Bureau "followed Commission guidance and correctly concluded that Starlink is not reasonably capable of offering the required high-speed, low-latency service throughout the areas where it won auction support."

    SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has acknowledged Starlink's capacity limits several times, saying for example that it will face "a challenge [serving everyone] when we get into the several million user range."


    The original article contains 508 words, the summary contains 192 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    On one hand, ew Elon Musk.

    On the other hand Starlink has given us the first decent internet we've ever had so...

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    However this isn't about your anecdotal experience. This is about what level of service they can guarantee as minimum and overall to meet the conditions of the subsidy.

    I would also note this isn't reinstatement matter. FCC refused to give them the subsidy in the first place with this decision. What SpaceX are trying to spin as reneg on previous decision is them making the short list of companies to be considered. Well, getting short listed is not same as being selected fully.

    They passed the criterion for the short list check, but the final authorization and selection included more wide and more through checking on the promises of companies to meet criterion and SpaceX failed the more through final round of scrutiny before being awarded the subsidy.

    Government having awarded bad money previously isn't fixed by following up bad awards with more bad awards. SpaceX exactly failed since previously money was handed out too losely and FCC has tightened the scrutiny on subsidy awards to not follow up bad money with more bad money.

    Nobody is prevented from buying Starlink, this just means Starlink isn't getting subsidized with tax payer money.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago

    cable companies literally took a billion dollar grant to expand infrastructure and didnt do much of anything. This is literally doing something. F elon but the engineers who worked hard to make this a reality deserve better

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›