No. They could not even get fiber rolled out to the US. They started well but it requires immense power in local and federal level that takes decades (yes, decades) to accommodate.
Starlink would have then their focus out of search and AI which they clearly understand better and dominate.
Also, there is nothing innovative from Musk itself as far as starlink goes. More than half of research and implementation is funded by USG and Tax Payer funded rebates and concessions.
Also, there is nothing innovative from Musk itself as far as starlink goes. More than half of research and implementation is funded by USG and Tax Payer funded rebates and concessions.
And the other half?
Isn't the system for delivering them to orbit at low cost an innovation?
Other half is funded by LPs. Yes, Musk is not putting his own money. He is the CEO but program is funded by LPs. I am not denying all innovation. Certainly, any joe-moe-schloe can't do it. But, talent pool is funded and operated in direct parternship with NASA scientists and staff. It's not that Starlink built it's own talent pool. My point is that he does not give credit whether it belongs and there are certainly more players in success of Starlink than Musk himself.
More than half of research and implementation is funded by USG and Tax Payer funded rebates and concessions.
Absolutely not. SpaceX/Starlink didn't receive any money from the government. They tried to get a 800 million dollar subsidy, but it was revoked. Even then Starlink has cost a lot more than that to design, deploy and operate.
SpaceX has received something like $20 billion from NASA and the DoD, to launch things into space and resupply the ISS and shit starting like 2008. It's fair to say Starlink has not received any funding from the government since that $800 million was rescinded though, but the line between SpaceX and Starlink's money is a bit fuzzy.
Google Fiber's real purpose was to give large ISPs the kick they needed to take high speed fiber rollout seriously. And they (partially) succeeded at that, at least in urban areas.
Comments
No. They could not even get fiber rolled out to the US. They started well but it requires immense power in local and federal level that takes decades (yes, decades) to accommodate.
Starlink would have then their focus out of search and AI which they clearly understand better and dominate.
Also, there is nothing innovative from Musk itself as far as starlink goes. More than half of research and implementation is funded by USG and Tax Payer funded rebates and concessions.
And the other half?
Isn't the system for delivering them to orbit at low cost an innovation?
Other half is funded by LPs. Yes, Musk is not putting his own money. He is the CEO but program is funded by LPs. I am not denying all innovation. Certainly, any joe-moe-schloe can't do it. But, talent pool is funded and operated in direct parternship with NASA scientists and staff. It's not that Starlink built it's own talent pool. My point is that he does not give credit whether it belongs and there are certainly more players in success of Starlink than Musk himself.
Absolutely not. SpaceX/Starlink didn't receive any money from the government. They tried to get a 800 million dollar subsidy, but it was revoked. Even then Starlink has cost a lot more than that to design, deploy and operate.
SpaceX has received something like $20 billion from NASA and the DoD, to launch things into space and resupply the ISS and shit starting like 2008. It's fair to say Starlink has not received any funding from the government since that $800 million was rescinded though, but the line between SpaceX and Starlink's money is a bit fuzzy.
Those weren’t subsidies, like the parent was talking about.
SpaceX provided services for the government at bargain prices. Your tax dollars were very well spent.
The fact you have a salary doesn't mean your boss is paying for your kids education.
There's nothing fuzzy about it.
Google Fiber's real purpose was to give large ISPs the kick they needed to take high speed fiber rollout seriously. And they (partially) succeeded at that, at least in urban areas.
A lot of Google's best products was based around giving competitors a much needed kick, it seems (Gmail, Nexus One, even Chrome originally).
revisionist history