Thread

1. yanis_t · 1790247676 · focus · HN ↗

   For anyone interested, there’s another part of the Starlink besides the satellites and your dish - ground stations (gateways) [].

   These are the large clusters of antennas that communicate with the satellites and connect the Starlink network to the Internet on Earth. Looks like one of these was set on fire.

   <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;starlink.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;article&#x2F;45d1d256-171e-0f67-4895-5d248fa63b66" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;starlink.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;article&#x2F;45d1d256-171e-0f67-4895...

   1. kamranjon · 1790248317 · focus · HN ↗

      Huh… I always thought direct satellite connection was one of the things that distinguished starlink from cellular tech like 4g or 5g, and that low earth orbit was what made it possible… what actually makes starlink different?

      Edit: oh I think? I understand now, these basically relay the internet itself up to the satellites - so your individual starlink dish is still talking directly to a satellite but the satellite resolves your request for a website through these ground stations. I think?

      1. numpad0 · 1790249922 · focus · HN ↗

         the real difference is cash. they can afford literally hundred launches costing billions upfront and hundreds of millions in upkeep.

         the original concept arts called for lazer beam sat2sat dynamic mesh relaying packets globally. that didn&#x27;t quite happen.

         what did happen was sats and terminals refreshed like tech products and not like military tanks. decades old standards are slow. all their competitors usd decades old everything.

         their launch count is off by two digits. like 10x by reuse and stacked 10x by cash. that amount of cash appearing from somewhere is the difference.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.