Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad.
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [Starlink] [NNagain] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink's RDOF Application
@ 2023-12-16 13:03 David Fernández
  2023-12-18  8:09 ` David Lang
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: David Fernández @ 2023-12-16 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: starlink

"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?"

I think that is a false dichotomy. It is not one or the other, but
both are needed, as discovered recently in Tonga, Ukraine, New
Zealand... Centralized systems are efficient, but everything fails if
they don't work.

Satellite communications are the equivalent for communications of this
for electricity:
https://www.shareable.net/introducing-the-emergency-battery-network-toolkit
I would consider even adding pedaling to the kit:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/use-your-bike-as-a-backup-to-your-backup-power-supply

You use satellite communications in remote locations or in case the
terrestrial network is not working or covering you (mobile and/or
fixed).

Regards,

David

> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 11:13:55 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
> To: rjmcmahon <rjmcmahon@rjmcmahon.com>
> Cc: " Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the
> 	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?="
> 	<nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>,  Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>,
> 	David Lang <david@lang.hm>,  starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> Subject: Re: [Starlink] [NNagain] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink's
> 	RDOF Application
> Message-ID: <471154o6-no08-67or-p1o2-np919ro26osp@ynat.uz>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
> 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@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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: [Starlink] [NNagain] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink's RDOF Application
@ 2023-12-16 14:33 David Fernández
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: David Fernández @ 2023-12-16 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: starlink

Even GEO satellites can be useful for certain telemedicine applications:
https://www.esa.int/Applications/Connectivity_and_Secure_Communications/Telemedicine_via_satellite_improves_care_at_astronaut_landings

Note that if all computer programs grow until they add functions to
become email clients, all communication systems end up adding
telehealth as an application.

> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 14:10:46 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
> To: "David Bray, PhD" <david.a.bray@gmail.com>
> Cc: " Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the
> 	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?="
> 	<nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>,  David Lang <david@lang.hm>,
> 	rjmcmahon <rjmcmahon@rjmcmahon.com>,  starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> Subject: Re: [Starlink] [NNagain] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink's
> 	RDOF Application
> Message-ID: <045p54s4-r8p3-o2s7-7qq2-r2p6o28ss7q1@ynat.uz>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
> 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@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@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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* [Starlink] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink’s RDOF Application
@ 2023-12-13 21:25 Frantisek Borsik
       [not found] ` <A8DC9114A92F47D5AAE1D332B5E5007D@SRA6>
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Frantisek Borsik @ 2023-12-13 21:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dave Taht via Starlink

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1369 bytes --]

“*Elon Musk*’s Starlink was not the only major company to inflate its
capabilities
<https://broadbandbreakfast.com/2021/04/rdof-reverse-auction-criticized-google-makes-pandemic-gains-california-broadband-access-for-k-12/>
in
RDOF bids. Nearly 100 bidders have defaulted since the auction, leaving in
limbo an estimated $2.8 billion
<https://broadbandbreakfast.com/2023/06/what-happens-to-the-estimated-2-8-billion-in-rdof-defaults/>
of
the $9.2 billion originally awarded.

The FCC upheld another denial
<https://broadbandbreakfast.com/2023/12/fcc-proposes-22-million-fine-against-ltd-over-rdof/>
 on Monday in the case of LTD Broadband, which appealed the commission’s
finding that it could not reasonably serve the more than 500,000 locations
to which it had committed. The commission also hit LTD with a $21.7 million
fine for its default.

The commission’s two Republicans dissented to Starlink’s denial, claiming
they saw a path for the company to improve its speeds before the first
deployment deadline in 2025.”

https://broadbandbreakfast.com/2023/12/fcc-upholds-denial-of-starlinks-rdof-application/


All the best,

Frank
Frantisek (Frank) Borsik

https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik
Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714
iMessage, mobile: +420775230885
Skype: casioa5302ca
frantisek.borsik@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4891 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-12-23 21:17 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-12-16 13:03 [Starlink] [NNagain] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink's RDOF Application David Fernández
2023-12-18  8:09 ` David Lang
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-12-16 14:33 David Fernández
2023-12-13 21:25 [Starlink] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink’s " Frantisek Borsik
     [not found] ` <A8DC9114A92F47D5AAE1D332B5E5007D@SRA6>
2023-12-13 22:38   ` [Starlink] FCC Upholds Denial of Starlink's " Frantisek Borsik
2023-12-14  2:46     ` [Starlink] [NNagain] " Robert McMahon
2023-12-14  6:11       ` Frantisek Borsik
2023-12-14 17:48         ` David Bray, PhD
2023-12-14 18:47           ` Frantisek Borsik
2023-12-14 18:51           ` Nathan Simington
2023-12-14 19:44             ` Frantisek Borsik
2023-12-15 12:07             ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-12-15 12:37               ` Gert Doering
2023-12-15 12:43                 ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-12-15 12:44                   ` Gert Doering
2023-12-15 12:46                     ` Frantisek Borsik
2023-12-15 13:24                       ` Gert Doering
2023-12-15 13:40                       ` Sebastian Moeller
2023-12-15 18:06                         ` David Lang
2023-12-15 18:51                           ` rjmcmahon
2023-12-15 19:13                             ` David Lang
2023-12-15 21:29                               ` rjmcmahon
2023-12-15 21:42                                 ` David Lang
2023-12-15 22:04                                   ` David Bray, PhD
2023-12-15 22:10                                     ` David Lang
2023-12-15 22:13                                       ` David Bray, PhD
2023-12-15 22:33                                         ` Kenline, Doug
2023-12-15 22:36                                         ` Dave Taht
2023-12-19 19:33                                         ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-12-15 22:05                                   ` rjmcmahon
2023-12-15 22:13                                     ` David Lang
2023-12-15 22:26                                   ` Dave Taht
2023-12-16  4:16                                     ` David Lang
2023-12-16 17:30                                       ` rjmcmahon
2023-12-16 18:48                                         ` Robert McMahon
2023-12-16 21:44                                           ` Frantisek Borsik
2023-12-16 22:28                                             ` Robert McMahon
2023-12-17  0:25                                               ` Dave Taht
2023-12-23 21:17                                                 ` J Pan
2023-12-18  8:25                                               ` David Lang
2023-12-15 15:46                     ` Livingood, Jason
2023-12-17 17:32                       ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-12-17 18:06                         ` Sebastian Moeller
2023-12-16  8:15                     ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-12-15 13:06               ` Sebastian Moeller
2023-12-16  8:09                 ` Alexandre Petrescu
2023-12-16 11:14                   ` Sebastian Moeller

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox