[Starlink] [NNagain] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink's RDOF Application

Alexandre Petrescu alexandre.petrescu at gmail.com
Tue Dec 19 14:33:42 EST 2023


Sorry, I do not want to add to any vitriol on this topic.  But there is 
a technical aspect that might help to clarify some aspects.

Le 15/12/2023 à 23:13, David Bray, PhD via Starlink a écrit :
> This GPT(human)bot was responding to the engineered prompt:  >>why do 
> you think telehealth won't work over LEO services?
>
> As it's Friday, this GPT(human)bot bandwidth has been fully utilized 
> for the week. Our servers will be back-on line come Monday.
>
> Wishing everyone (human or machine) a wonderful weekend ahead!

What do you mean by 'GPT(human)bot'?

I am intrigued by many posts on many email lists.  Some of them appear 
to me they might be generated by GPT-like text generators.

I asked a few persons around how could one identify GPT-generated text?  
(for example, in the era prior to GPT it was possible to check whether a 
text was copy-pasted from elsewhere by simply googling it); I have not 
received any answer until now, but I still search for such tool.   A 
sort of super-gpt that would identify the gpt, or a super-intelligence 
to tell the artificial from natural.

On another hand, google (again it!) tells that 'GPTZero' might help 
identifying whether or not a given text is generated by AI-like tools.  
This GPTZero tells that some paragraphs from this email thread might 
(51%) be AI generated, whereas others 0% (not likely at all).

That was my clarification.

Alex

>
>
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 5:10 PM David Lang <david at lang.hm> wrote:
>
>     I don't disagree with anything that you say below, but the
>     discussion was on the
>     topic of starlink vs fiber, with the person I was responding to
>     claiming that we
>     needed to have women in charge of the Internet companies because
>     of telehealth
>     as well.
>
>     I'm a remote worker and VERY aware of how limiting video calls are
>     compared to
>     in-person meetings.
>
>     David Lang
>
>     On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, David Bray, PhD wrote:
>
>     > There’s good evidence that physical health can be done over LEO
>     as long as
>     > it isn’t low latency dependent. Of course our illustrious
>     listserv founder
>     > Dave Taht will be quick to point out high latency is also found via
>     > ground-based connections too.
>     >
>     > That said, there is still a lot of research debate on whether
>     mental health
>     > services can be delivered effectively over video in general -
>     regardless of
>     > LEO or not. The concern is two fold:
>     >
>     > * video is suboptimal to detect tiny tells and other signatures of a
>     > patient developing a relationship with a health provider
>     >
>     > * 2D video actually is worse for brainstorming and creative
>     ideation. One
>     > might say so what relative to delivering healthcare, except the
>     evidence
>     > showing that video is worse for brainstorming indicates there’s
>     actually a
>     > continual subconscious confusion when folks do video calls
>     prompted by the
>     > body trying to discern if the one or more disembodied heads are
>     friend or
>     > foe. Since we cannot see a person’s hands and body movements we
>     don’t know
>     > if they’re coming to attack us or not.
>     >
>     > So future generations may look back and decide that with video
>     calls we
>     > were literally messing with our brains’ own natural biological
>     processes?
>     >
>     >
>     > On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 16:42 David Lang via Nnagain <
>     > nnagain at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>     >
>     >> why do you think telehealth won't work over LEO services?
>     >>
>     >> I've used it personally.
>     >>
>     >> Even if women use telehealth more than men, that doesn't say
>     that women
>     >> have any
>     >> particular advantage in moving the bits around that make telehealth
>     >> possible.
>     >>
>     >> David Lang
>     >>
>     >> On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, rjmcmahon wrote:
>     >>
>     >>> Women are the primary users and providers of telehealth
>     services. They
>     >> are
>     >>> using broadband to care for our population. They also run most
>     of the
>     >>> addiction services across our country, whatever the addiction
>     may be. So
>     >>> gender actually matters. Ask them as providers. Telehealth
>     doesn't work
>     >> over
>     >>> LEO (nor does it matter much for men on boats.) Same for distance
>     >> learning.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>
>     https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/women-more-likely-telehealth-patients-providers-covid-19-pandemic/608153/
>     >>>
>     >>> As Washington considers which virtual care flexibilities
>     should remain
>     >> in
>     >>> place post-COVID-19, experts are flagging that paring back
>     telehealth
>     >> access
>     >>> and affordability will disproportionately affect women, even as a
>     >> growing
>     >>> share of startups emerge to address women’s unique health needs.
>     >>>
>     >>> While women are more likely than men to visit doctors and consume
>     >> healthcare
>     >>> services in general, telehealth seems to be uniquely
>     attractive to women.
>     >>>
>     >>> Bob
>     >>>> who exactly do you think is calling for there to be no Internet
>     >>>> access? and what in the world does the sex of individuals
>     have to do
>     >>>> with shipping bits around?
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Starlink (and hopefully it's future competitors) provides a
>     way to get
>     >>>> Internet service to everyone without having to run fiber to every
>     >>>> house.
>     >>>>
>     >>>> As for the parallels with rural electrification, if that
>     problem were
>     >>>> to be faced today, would the right answer be massive public
>     agencies
>     >>>> to build and run miles of wire from massive central power
>     plants? or
>     >>>> would the right answer be solar + batteries in individual
>     houses for
>     >>>> the most rural folks, with small modular reactors to power
>     the larger
>     >>>> population areas?
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Just because there was only one way to achieve a goal in the past
>     >>>> doesn't mean that approach is the best thing to do today.
>     >>>>
>     >>>> David Lang
>     >>>>
>     >>>> On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, rjmcmahon wrote:
>     >>>>
>     >>>>> Hi All,
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> We're trying to modernize America. LBJ helped do it for
>     electricity
>     >>>>> decades ago. It's our turn to step up to the plate.
>     Tele-health and
>     >>>>> distance learning requires us to do so. There is so much to
>     follow.
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> A reminder what many women went through before LBJ showed
>     up. I'm
>     >>>>> skeptical a patriarchy under Musk is even close to capable. We
>     >> probably
>     >>>>> need a woman to lead us, or at least motivate us to do our
>     best work
>     >> for
>     >>>>> our country and to be an example to the world.
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> A Hill Country farm wife had to do her chores even if she
>     was ill – no
>     >>>>> matter how ill. Because Hill Country women were too poor to
>     afford
>     >> proper
>     >>>>> medical care they often suffered perineal tears in
>     childbirth. During
>     >> the
>     >>>>> 1930s, the federal government sent physicians to examine a
>     sampling of
>     >>>>> Hill Country women. The doctors found that, out of 275
>     women, 158 had
>     >>>>> perineal tears. Many of them, the team of gynecologists
>     reported, were
>     >>>>> third-degree tears, “tears so bad that it is difficult to
>     see how they
>     >>>>> stand on their feet.” But they were standing on their feet,
>     and doing
>     >> all
>     >>>>> the chores that Hill Country wives had always done – hauling the
>     >> water,
>     >>>>> hauling the wood, canning, washing, ironing, helping with the
>     >> shearing,
>     >>>>> the plowing and the picking.
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> Because there was no electricity.
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> Bob
>     >>>>>> On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, Sebastian Moeller via Starlink wrote:
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>>> Hi Frantisek,
>     >>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>> On Dec 15, 2023, at 13:46, Frantisek Borsik via Nnagain
>     >>>>>>>> <nnagain at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>     >>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>> Thus, technically speaking, one would like the advantages
>     of satcom
>     >>>>>>>> such as starlink, to be at least 5gbit/s in 10 years time, to
>     >> overcome
>     >>>>>>>> the 'tangled fiber' problem.
>     >>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>> No, not really. Starlink was about to address the issue
>     of digital
>     >>>>>>>> divide -
>     >>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>   I beg to differ. Starlink is a commercial enterprise
>     with the goal
>     >> to
>     >>>>>>> make a profit by offering (usable) internet access essentially
>     >>>>>>> everywhere; it is not as far as I can tell an attempt at
>     >> specifically
>     >>>>>>> reducing the digital divide (were often an important
>     factor is not
>     >>>>>>> necessarily location but financial means).
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>> Every Inernet company " commercial enterprise with the goal
>     to make a
>     >>>>>> profit by offering (usable) internet" don't dismiss a
>     company because
>     >>>>>> of that. Starlink (and the other Satellite ISPs) all exist
>     to service
>     >>>>>> people who can't use traditional wired infrastructure
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>> delivering internet to those 640k locations, where there is
>     >> literally
>     >>>>>>>> none today. Fiber will NEVER get there. And it will get
>     there, it
>     >> will
>     >>>>>>>> be like 10 years down the road.
>     >>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>   This is IHO the wrong approach to take. The goal needs
>     to be a
>     >>>>>>> universal FTTH access network (with the exception of extreme
>     >> locations,
>     >>>>>>> no need to pull fiber up to the highest Bivouac shelter on Mt.
>     >> Whitney).
>     >>>>>>> And f that takes a decade or two, so be it, this is
>     infrastructure
>     >> that
>     >>>>>>> will keep on helping for many decades once rolled-out.
>     However given
>     >>>>>>> that time frame one should consider work-arounds for the
>     interim
>     >> period.
>     >>>>>>> I would have naively thought starlink would qualify for
>     that from a
>     >>>>>>> technical perspective, but then the FCC documents actually
>     >> discussion
>     >>>>>>> requirements and how they were or were not met/promised by
>     starlink
>     >> was
>     >>>>>>> mostly redacted.
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>> what do you consider 'extreme locations'? how long a run
>     between
>     >>>>>> houses is 'too far'?
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>> we've seen the failure of commercial fiber monopolies in
>     cities with
>     >>>>>> housing density of several houses per acre (and even where
>     there are
>     >>>>>> apartment complexes there as well) because it's not
>     profitable enough.
>     >>>>>> When you get into areas where it's 'how many acres per
>     house' the cost
>     >>>>>> of running FTTH gets very high. I don't think this is the
>     majority of
>     >>>>>> the population of the US any longer (but I don't know for
>     sure), but
>     >>>>>> it's very clearly the majority of the area of the US. And
>     once you get
>     >>>>>> out of the major metro areas, even getting fiber to every
>     town or
>     >>>>>> village becomes a major undertaking.
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>> Is running fiber 30 miles to support a village of 700 people an
>     >>>>>> 'extreme location'? let me introduce you to Vermontville MI
>     >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermontville,_Michigan which
>     is less
>     >>>>>> than an hours drive from the state capitol.
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>> David Lang
>     >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>     >>>>>> Nnagain mailing list
>     >>>>>> Nnagain at lists.bufferbloat.net
>     >>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
>     >>>>>
>     >>> _______________________________________________
>     >> Nnagain mailing list
>     >> Nnagain at lists.bufferbloat.net
>     >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
>     >>
>     >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink


More information about the Starlink mailing list