Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Communications Businesses The Internet United States

Amazon Seeks Permission To Launch 3,236 Internet Satellites (tomshardware.com) 132

Posted by BeauHD from the globe-spanning dept.
Amazon is asking the FCC for permission to launch 3,236 satellites that would be used to establish a globe-spanning internet network. Seeking Alpha reported that Amazon expects "to offer service to tens of millions of underserved customers around the world" via the network, which the company is developing under the codename Project Kuiper. Tom's Hardware reports: So what does this plan to offer space internet with a weird name actually involve? Amazon explained in April: "Project Kuiper is a new initiative to launch a constellation of low Earth orbit satellites that will provide low-latency, high-speed broadband connectivity to unserved and underserved communities around the world. This is a long-term project that envisions serving tens of millions of people who lack basic access to broadband internet. We look forward to partnering on this initiative with companies that share this common vision."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon Seeks Permission To Launch 3,236 Internet Satellites More

Amazon Seeks Permission To Launch 3,236 Internet Satellites

Comments Filter:

  • Out of FCC governance? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    This seems like an international regulatory issue.

    You're cluttering up the entirety of humanity's airspace for a fucking big corporation's profits. I fail to see how this is in the common global citizens interest.

    • At this rate the amount of stuff up there will reach critical mass then there'll be runaway distruction caused by ever more collision debris. And that'll be near earth orbit fucked for hundreds, possibly even thousands of years just so some billionaire egotists can make even more money, sorry, I mean provide services for "the poor".

      • And that'll be near earth orbit fucked for hundreds, possibly even thousands of years

        What else are you going to use that orbit for if not to provide services to people?

        • Can't we fucking well leave anything in its pristine state?

          But from a technical POV it would make lauching manned space missions very dangerous and the ISS would be history.

          • If only we had some way of predicting what things in space will be where at different times...

            • If only we had some way of predicting what things in space will be where at different times...

              We can only track larger things, not small particles created by collisions, etc. Those small particles travel fucking fast and are dangerous to spacecraft.

              • *Small* particles at the altitudes these constellations are supposed to operate on have only limited lifetime. Plus the obvious thing to do is to NOT create particles with collisions or explosions or any other such activity (which is an increasingly stringent requirement for contemporary launches). It's somewhat easier when dozens of satellites share a single orbit in a "train", really, since then you have fewer orbits of interest to keep track of.

          • Can't we fucking well leave anything in its pristine state?

            What's the value of leaving a vacuum in its pristine state ?

            the ISS would be history.

            If we put satellites in completely different orbits, the ISS would avoid the fragments of any collision. Also, small fragments don't last very long in low orbits, because of their high friction/mass ratio.

          • Can't we fucking well leave anything in its pristine state?

            Incels.

      • distruction:

        noun

        The act of constructing something by throwing the parts into place.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Right, right, some village council in Scotland is looking up at the sky, shaking their fists, shouting "Nemo me impune lacessit!"

      But actually, they never owned that space up there at all, and it didn't actually trespass on them. I also fail to see how it is in the common global citizen's interest. By which I mean, I fail to see how it is their business, why they would even be stakeholders!

  • No. First to the post, and that's spaecx (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I'd say no to this, jesus, what next, every man and their dog wanting to launch 4000 satellites? F* that. and I suspect quite a lot of nasa/boeing/navy guys are thinking this too.

    Sorry amazon, too late, you'll have to lobby for SpaceX's network to be 'local loop unbundled' so it's open to competition. What's that? too much lobbying your local government will prevent that? Well, that's american politics for you. Maybe you should stop businesses from being able to donate('lobby' or in other words bribe) th

  • They're not lying - it's indeed becoming a very common vision...

  • I know Elon and at least 2 other orgs are doing something similar, does the article go into the duplication of effort or is AZ expecting to partner with Elon?

    • When Bezos or Musk talk about “partnering” with “companies that share this common vision”, what they mean is companies who are willing to take a far back seat and let Bezos or Musk make all the decisions and do it exactly the way they want 100% of the time.

    • Competition is a good thing. More LEO satellite networks is better. Even better that they collectively develop standard for ground terminal, just like GSM phone companies do, and one terminal would be able to work with every constellation, And I just vote with my money for provider which gives better connectivity and speed in my region.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by jeremyp ( 130771 )

        No. Moree LEO satellite networks is crap. Soon we won't be able to see the night sky due to the pollution of these ego projects. Just stop.

        • Soon we won't be able to see the night sky due to the pollution of these ego projects. Just stop.

          Most people can't see the night sky due to city lights. I only remember seeing the Milky Way twice in my life.

          Also, if you're just looking at the stars, a couple of moving satellites aren't going to interfere. It only adds to the fun.

    • I know Elon and at least 2 other orgs are doing something similar, does the article go into the duplication of effort or is AZ expecting to partner with Elon?

      The whole point of this exercise is to control the internet backbone, or at least a part of it. If you can either corner a large portion of the space based internet market or, better yet, gain a Google like monopoly on that market through a combination of consolidation, corporate takeovers and playing dirty tricks, you'd be in the same position as the NSA is. You'd be able to monitor and analyse the internet activity of millions of users and warehouse it wholesale if saw a way of benefitting financially fro

  • Amazon should call them sequentially Kessler 1, Kessler 2 etc. Then other launchers should be mandated to continue the Kessler naming scheme.

  • If Elon has taught us anything is that this stupidity needs to be stopped, not only should Amazon not get this allowance, but the SpaceX program should be stopped too. We don't need to ruin the sky for marginally better internet.

    • Maybe if SpaceX/BO can do cheap launches, they can launch a bunch of cheap space telescopes to make up for the light pollution.

      • Yeah, this. I'm tired of hearing about how satellites interfere with astronomy. You know what we should do on the moon? Declare the far side a radio-free zone, and build our observatories there. Use lasers (with and without fiber) for communications. We have lots of uses for satellites and angrily shaking one's fist won't change that.

        • Yeah, this. I'm tired of hearing about how satellites interfere with astronomy.

          Congratulations. Are you also tired of hearing about global warming? About how car exhaust are bad for your health? Please do give us a complete list of things that are actually problems that you also don't give a shit about so we won't worry your poor little brain in the future.

          We have lots of uses for satellites and angrily shaking one's fist won't change that.

          And we shall use them for an incremental improvement of internet access. Hurrah. Let's also bring back lead in gasoline, lead has lots of uses and just because a few people like drinkypoo clearly have suffered the negative effects o

          • Congratulations. Are you also tired of hearing about global warming? About how car exhaust are bad for your health?

            Yes, I am fucking tired of hearing about those things, and we should fix them so I don't have to hear about them any more. Likewise, we should fix astronomy by getting it off of this fucking mudball, where we have to peer through atmospheric distortion with the light-based scopes, and compete with terran transmissions with the radio-based ones.

      • Maybe if SpaceX/BO can do cheap launches, they can launch a bunch of cheap space telescopes to make up for the light pollution.

        And that makes things better for us on the ground how?

  • It seems like every billionaire is sending umpteen thousand satellites into space.

    At least no orange ones among them.

    • Having billions in debt can get your name on somebody else's building a lot faster than it can pay for a satellite launch.

  • Sure (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Maelwryth ( 982896 ) on Saturday July 06, 2019 @06:00AM (#58881372) Homepage Journal
    As long as anyone can use them at the same price that Amazon does, there are concessions for astronomers, they aren't used to promote or ensure a monopoly and, if any of these rules are broken, they will automatically come under the management of the ITU [itu.int] with Amazon still holding all liability.

  • More Junk (Score:2, Insightful)

    by kackle ( 910159 )
    Aren't there already dozens [wikipedia.org] of unused satellites up there? Keeping track of all of it, and its debris, sounds like a monumental mess that corporate competition won't handle properly in the distant future. My vote is no.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Ken McE ( 599217 )

      >by kackle
      >Aren't there already dozens [wikipedia.org] of >unused satellites up there?

      It's not sufficient that there be a piece of metal floating by. It needs to be able to stabilize and orient itself, accept commands, receive and relay data in the appropriate bands at certain minimum levels of power.

      I'm going to guess that many of those satellites are abandoned because the owners can't fix them any more.

      >Keeping track of all of it, and its debris, sounds >like a monumental mess that corpor

      • They don't really need a stingray if possession of the device is illegal, they can just triangulate with mobile ground stations.

        This has been true in Russia for decades. Satellite communication doesn't help people oppose the government.

        In failed states, it helps dissidents and criminals avoid detection, but not in strong dictatorships.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Ken McE ( 599217 )

          Aighearach:
          They don't really need a stingray if possession of the device is illegal, they can just triangulate with mobile ground stations.

          It ought to be possible to put your ground antenna inside a metal hemisphere or ring and limit the signal so it can only be seen from above.

          The Chinese could put up drones to counter this. China is a big country so they'd need a lot of drones.

          The aerial signal could be observed from the ground but I don't believe they could tell where it was aimed with any accuracy.

          If

          • What if they know to search anybody carrying around a big metal hemisphere?

            What if they have satellites to monitor from above and don't need to launch any drones?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by kackle ( 910159 )

        The US government already tracks all the larger pieces of debris in real time. I don't know who all else keeps track, but I expect they could be persuaded to share.

        That sounds more acceptable; but I still don't find Amazon trustworthy in that we won't somehow foot the bill, much like their taxes.

    • These LEO internet satellite networks are going to be in much lower orbits that those derelict ones on your list. There is just enough atmospheric drag at that level to bring them + debris down in less than 10 years once they run out of fuel for active boosting.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by kackle ( 910159 )
        I see; thanks for enlightening me about this. I wonder whether they fall faster on Amazon Prime Day when their deliveries are quicker.

    • As long as they have a plan to clean up their mess in space after they're done with it, and have a demonstrable plan to do so, and they don't interfere with public or military satellites already up there, then they should be able to put up as many as they want.

      If there's no plan to take them down, then space will become the next corporate dumping ground [si-cdn.com] (since we're filling the planet with corporate-produced junk here on the surface.

      Companies need to be held accountable for the entire life-cycle of a produc

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by kackle ( 910159 )

        Companies need to be held accountable for the entire life-cycle of a product - including a sustainable disposal model.

        That would be nice.

  • This is a network with thousands of satellites covering countries and users worldwide. Perhaps they'd need FCC permission for communications with the U.S. but their jurisdiction ends at the U.S. border. FCC approval or lack thereof isn't fatal or even necessary for the project to move forward.
    • American companies need permission from the FCC to launch satellites. See this advisory the FCC posted after a Silicon Valley start-up took some cube-sats that didn't pass FCC approval over to India to have launched. https://www.fcc.gov/document/e... [fcc.gov] "The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Radio Regulations are treaty provisions binding on the United States, and require that no transmitting station may be established or operated by a private person or by any enterprise without a license by or on
      • Huh, so it's a treaty. Didn't know that, thanks!

        What, then, would prevent Bezos from setting up a venture in a country that isn't a signatory to the treaty? Certainly it might present problems marketing to American consumers but that's a business decision.
  • So what does this plan to offer space internet with a weird name actually involve?

    It's not a weird name if you're educated.

  • Next up: Intercontinental ballistic package delivery to your hut on the Serengeti.

  • Makes You Wonder (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Vandil X ( 636030 )
    So many companies like Amazon, Facebook, and even Elon Musk's companies, are wanting to launch private arrays of satellites to give Internet access to the needy. How benevolent of them! And then they can control what is accessed, manipulate their experience, and "farm" those users of their usage data and spending habits.

    There are places in the world where real human beings have to hike several miles just to fill up a jug of potable water and hike back home with it, meanwhile the suits trying to launch

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by rnturn ( 11092 )

      ``Let's see this benevolence go to providing basic human services for the `underserved' before Internet. But alas, there wouldn't be much profit in that, would there?''

      Well... When you've made your billions selling crap on the Internet, every problem looks like something that's solved by the Internet.

      Turn off Jeff Bezos' tap water for a few months, make him walk across town to get some, and have to lug it back home. Then see if he still has Internet-via-LEO satellites at the top of his to-do list.

    • Let's see this benevolence go to providing basic human services for the "underserved" before Internet.

      Why not both? The Internet is a huge benefit for the developing world, because it brings the whole world's information to them. Everything from information on how to build their own water purification system, if that's what they need, to what crop prices are (so they don't get shafted by the middle man) to the ability to straight up join the information economy and bypass the rest. Given a decent Internet connection and command of English, there's no reason why an African guy with a laptop can't compete

  • New surveillance economic opportunity. Be in front or left behind.

  • Having 3 or more satellite and/or balloon networks offering similar internet services should be good for consumers. Prices might be reasonable; service might be excellent; local monopoly ISPs might have to finally compete.

    Unfortunately Google, Zuckerberg and Musk tend to have short attention spans. They could drop out of the scene as fast as their cubesats drop from the sky, leaving only Amazon. Amazon/Bezos is remarkable for its patience. It has never hurried toward profits being quite happy to corner mark

  • Fck next thing you know He'll have a full head of beautiful hair... :|

  • Letâ(TM)s call a spade a spade. This, like Muskâ(TM)s venture, is really a high-profit avenue for global financial titans to use high frequency trading to distribute future wealth (or redistribute existing wealth) into the hands of the already-existing billionaire class instead of to the middle class. Precisely at a time when middle class wealth will probably take a nose dive from AI and automation. âoeNew low-latency networkâ is just a euphemism for âoethe next chapter in the H

Slashdot Top Deals

Sentient plasmoids are a gas.

Close