Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> The math just doesn't add up.

Can you demonstrate that math in a comprehensive manner? I've seen this kind of claim repeated frequently and it's never supported.

> The likely biggest user of this system will be the US military and Department of Defense.

The biggest user of Starlink by an extreme margin will be consumers. It won't be a close comparison.

There will be at least a million consumers eventually using Starlink around the world. The network has capacity to handle that globally. The military is going to push that much data through Starlink? No they're not. A million consumers pushing HD video streams through it will rather comically outweigh anything the military will be doing.




From a business perspective, what matters is $'s, not Gbps.

I'm pretty sure the US military will be paying more $'s than any other country's people.

And it'll be used for being able to fly drones with weapons to kill anyone in the world in 30 mins. With that ability, you can decommission a lot of aircraft carriers and spend that cash on decent connectivity for your drone fleets...


I'm also curious about specific math.

But I think the DoD billing would be different than you describe. Specifically, even if they're not pushing GBs of video all the time, they'd be paying a lot for guaranteed bandwidth at any time. Pure speculation on my side though - mostly based on seeing overinflated requirement docs.


There is some math on the Internet that's commonly linked. With some super pessimistic assumptions, it shows Starlink just barely breaking even (aka, not losing money, but not making much either). Most of those assumptions have already been proven to be false. Doing the math with less pessimistic assumptions shows it to be insanely profitable. I'd do it here, but this has already dropped off the front page so nobody will see it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: