A $2.14-billion federal loan for an Ottawa-based satellite operator has Canadian politicians arguing about whether American billionaire Elon Musk poses a national security risk.
A $2.14-billion federal loan for an Ottawa-based satellite operator has Canadian politicians arguing about whether American billionaire Elon Musk poses a national security risk.
The fight involves internet connectivity in remote regions as Canada tries to live up to its promise to connect every Canadian household to high-speed internet by 2030.
A week ago, the Liberal government announced the loan to Telesat, which is launching a constellation of low Earth orbit satellites that will be able to connect the most remote areas of the country to broadband internet.
Conservative MP Michael Barrett objected to the price tag, asking Musk in a social media post how much it would cost to provide his Starlink to every Canadian household that does not have high-speed access.
Starlink doesn’t cover the globe, it’s available in the Americas, Europe and Oceania. It’s not available in most of Africa, the Middle East, India, China, Russia, Indochina. E.g. the majority of the world cannot access Starlink.
China/russia/middle east not allowing it, is not the same as not being available. Did you even check the coverage map before replying.
I don’t give a shit that Starlink is owned by Musk. Starlink as a company seems fine (it’s not X or anything), but I strongly dislike that their product messes with astronomy in such a major way that astronomists complain about it every chance they get.
Astronomers complain about light bleed from ground cities as well. No one was telling them to shut down the cities.
Sounds like your fight is with “big telecom” and with your local government for not putting up a good enough quote to run fiber. This isn’t an issue for large portions of the world, including rural areas, where they’ve figured out how to get them to lay fiber.
Lol no just no… I dont know where you live but the majority of people in rural areas are not served, otherwise starlink would have never taken off and been sustainable. You think businesses just make products for a few people and break even?
Access is not the same as high-speed access. Almost all of the world has some level of access, even in rural areas, through sattelites that are not in LEO. Enough to (slowly) browse, not enough to stream in HD. I don’t believe sacrificing considerable astronomical discoveries and progress is remotely worth it when feasible alternatives are available and have been used in large areas of the world already.
Again this myth you keep spouting that the majority of the world has access is bullshit, and the idea that you’re basically telling people, well planes exist but you need to walk because you live to far from the airport is some classist bullshit.
China/russia/middle east not allowing it, is not the same as not being available. Did you even check the coverage map before replying.
So can you use it or is it not available then? And yes, I checked that map, where else do you think I got the list from??
Astronomers complain about light bleed from ground cities as well. No one was telling them to shut down the cities.
People claim we should turn down city lights all the time! Under what rock have you been living? But for city light bleed, astronomers have an alternative solution, simply place the telescope somewhere not near the cities. And yes, whenever a city tends to grow near one of those telescopes astronomers do kick up a fuss about it.
If you fill LEO with thousands of sattelites, there’s nothing astronomers can do about that.
Lol no just no… I dont know where you live but the majority of people in rural areas are not served, otherwise starlink would have never taken off and been sustainable.
Clearly shows most of the Earth has internet access. Or do you think the US has no rural areas? They’re still above 90% somehow. Oh wait, I know, they must be using those mythical internet-via-sattelite services that existed well before Starlink did! I wonder where you’d find a mythical creature like the Viasat-1 for example.
Starlink took off because they promise higher speeds than some ISPs and most other sattelite companies do at lower cost, not because they’re your only option. Starlink has 3 million customers, which makes them the size of a small ISP.
Again this myth you keep spouting that the majority of the world has access is bullshit
Except for the fact that the data backs me up.
planes exist but you need to walk because you live to far from the airport is some classist bullshit.
Continuing your analogy, you propose demolishing the local university because people are entitled to fly to Ibiza, or their local supermarket. Or something, it’s not like it made much sense anyway.
You still completely failed to address the main point, that universal high-speed internet access is not critical for most of the world, certainly not for areas that have always managed perfectly fine without, and that filling up LEO is a disaster for astronomists that they don’t have a workaround for. If you’re not going to actually argue that point I think we’re done here.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
https://www.starlink.com/map
China/russia/middle east not allowing it, is not the same as not being available. Did you even check the coverage map before replying.
Astronomers complain about light bleed from ground cities as well. No one was telling them to shut down the cities.
Lol no just no… I dont know where you live but the majority of people in rural areas are not served, otherwise starlink would have never taken off and been sustainable. You think businesses just make products for a few people and break even?
Again this myth you keep spouting that the majority of the world has access is bullshit, and the idea that you’re basically telling people, well planes exist but you need to walk because you live to far from the airport is some classist bullshit.
So can you use it or is it not available then? And yes, I checked that map, where else do you think I got the list from??
People claim we should turn down city lights all the time! Under what rock have you been living? But for city light bleed, astronomers have an alternative solution, simply place the telescope somewhere not near the cities. And yes, whenever a city tends to grow near one of those telescopes astronomers do kick up a fuss about it.
If you fill LEO with thousands of sattelites, there’s nothing astronomers can do about that.
I don’t know where you live, Mars perhaps?
https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestand:InternetPenetrationWorldMap.svg
Clearly shows most of the Earth has internet access. Or do you think the US has no rural areas? They’re still above 90% somehow. Oh wait, I know, they must be using those mythical internet-via-sattelite services that existed well before Starlink did! I wonder where you’d find a mythical creature like the Viasat-1 for example.
Starlink took off because they promise higher speeds than some ISPs and most other sattelite companies do at lower cost, not because they’re your only option. Starlink has 3 million customers, which makes them the size of a small ISP.
Except for the fact that the data backs me up.
Continuing your analogy, you propose demolishing the local university because people are entitled to fly to Ibiza, or their local supermarket. Or something, it’s not like it made much sense anyway.
You still completely failed to address the main point, that universal high-speed internet access is not critical for most of the world, certainly not for areas that have always managed perfectly fine without, and that filling up LEO is a disaster for astronomists that they don’t have a workaround for. If you’re not going to actually argue that point I think we’re done here.