This person is very considerate. They are already in a mindset where they will help others. They just dont see how herd immunity works.
I'm looking for interactive simulations that show how a certain vaccination rate 'tips the scales' and keeps the whole community safe. Something like this but a little more user friendly (eg using sliders and slick animations):
Much of crypto codebases are open source, where at the end of the day you're pushing to an OSS codebase.
If you're paid by a crypto co., foundation, grants, or are financially incentivized by your crypto holdings to contribute, you're often within the bounds of both OSS & crypto.
example: devs that've contributed to Defi projects e.g. uniswap, or received ethereum or solana grants for their OSS code (i think nearly everything user-facing in these organizations is OSS).
Its the interesting use cases I'm trying to find - the kind of easily understandable case studies that make for a good narrative. Hence the reason for my post.
I also think you are undercharging for a very useful product.
The utility of what you are offering is significant. If I'm a 'cost conscious' startup and I need CSV upload functionality then I either write the functionality myself (30+ hours of dev time + ongoing maintenance?) or I use your service.
If the product works as advertised, you could charge $19/month for a basic plan and that will always be better value than 30+ hrs of time a developer will have to put into the CSV problem with all its annoying edge cases.
My suggestion is to modify the free plan such that users can upload 10k+ rows per upload, but only 20-30 times per month. Then your 'cost conscious' startup with only 5 customers can test your solution, know that it works for non-trivial amounts of data, and happily fork out $19/month when they hit 20+ customers a month and become less 'cost conscious'.
I’m happy with iTunes match, which gives you access to anything you own on Apple’s servers for streaming, plus uploads whatever you have and they don’t have.
I'm a big believer in Starlink and SpaceX generally.
It annoys me that I can not invest in these big bold innovations directly. Has anyone thought about how to invest indirectly on the belief that Starlink will succeed? For instance, are there satellite equipment suppliers or other upstream supplier who stand to profit with Starlink's success?
Likewise, who might fail based on Starlink's success? Should I be shorting Satellite based ISPs?
There are dozens of custom ICs from STMicroelectronics in each terminal. ST is a public company; NYSE:STM
The terminal is also using a large amount of high-frequency substrate. That could be Rogers, but maybe one of the much cheaper Chinese materials. But I don’t think a position should be taken based on what’s inside of a terminal. The real play is in shorting the entire satellite industry.
Every existing satellite operators stands to lose from Starlink’s success. Maybe not SiriusXM. Crazy that their net income is still increasing every year.
Intelsat’s cost per bit is much higher than Starlink’s. They also have much less system capacity.
EchoStar owns HughesNet. NASDAQ: SATS
Eutelsat: same as Intelsat, but with less debt on their books.
SES: Wild card among legacy satellite operators, as they have a new, high capacity (O3B mPower) system in the works.
Viasat’s 3-terabit GEO system should be competitive from a cost-perspective, but latency will be much worse. If price is the same as Starlink, they will lose on quality of connectivity/latency.
Iridium, GlobalStar, Orbcomm. Public companies that focus on narrowband/low bitrate/IoT communications. Much of the use cases can be solved with a Starlink terminal and an IoT hub/gateway, rather than going directly from a small sensor to a satellite.
There are a few public GEO operators in Asia; they’ll have the same problem as the European and American operators.
There’s virtually nothing that these companies can do to compete. They are all procurement specialists, rather than being engineering-led/driven. Most importantly, they all pay full price for launch, whereas SpaceX gets it for not much more than gas-money.
And SpaceX can get way more cash than anyone else at a much cheaper price. It’s tough to fight against that kind of war chest.
We have hindered a of Inmarsat base stations and sims around the world. Rarely use them, but when we do we are happy to pay for the bandwidth, and we spend a lot each year pre-buying bandwidth whether we use it or not.
They are now moving to charge us a monthly fee per station, not as much as starlink yet, but it seems an odd choice. Perhaps a final squeeze of their customers.
Bgans still have a benefit - smaller than starlink, battery powered, movable, but this latest move has made us reevaluate our satellite strategy, and that’s never a good thing for incumbents.
Are you aware of the players in Australia? There is Skymesh (owned by a UK company) but I'm not aware of other players in the Aus market.
Of all of the providers on your list - are any of them doing LEO constellations that are able to provide low latency in the way that Starlink can offer?
One might quibble about cost efficiencies and system capacity, but in the consumer market I cant see how you can argue with the physics advantage of being 50x closer to your customer!
Iridium and Global Star make the majority of their money from governments supporting custom use cases and working with OEM partners. Starlink might be a viable alternative in 10 years on the next-gen bidding cycle, but not before.
That’s a solid point, though I think there is still a shorting opportunity. If they only have 10 years before revenues start to decline drastically, then their value doesn’t increase. It’s possible that the downward revenue spiral starts sooner than 2030. Maybe. Who knows.
$GOOGL invested in and owns 5-10% of SpaceX. Even if SpaceX is valued at $100B, every $200 you invest in Google would be around a $1 into SpaceX, but if you think SpaceX is going to be the first 10 trillion dollar company or something crazy, it could make sense.
I was looking for starlink IPO. There is some good news I read for the last few months. I think it would succeed more than Tesla since it is more global and affordable.
