Slashdot Mirror
Google Pondering $1 Billion Investment In SpaceX's Satellite Internet
mpicpp writes with a report that Google is close to finalizing an investment in SpaceX to fund the rocket company's vision for satellite-based, low-cost internet access. According to The Information (paywalled), Google is one of many investors for this round of fundraising. The Wall Street Journal (also paywalled) reports Google's investment at $1 billion. They add, "It is likely to take years to establish designs and potentially set up a specialized satellite-making facility. But SpaceX already has some important building blocks. Industry officials said the company builds its own navigation and flight-control systems for spacecraft, which could provide some elements for satellites. There also are synergies between parts SpaceX makes today for solar arrays on spacecraft and such devices intended for satellites."
The ad gets into your brain the same way this liquid gets into this egg.
Awesome
Man, I could only imagine the PayPal fees on a $1 billion transaction!
With Hughes and Wildblue both complaining they're full... this is really needed for the people who wires don't reach. It's not any fun for twitch games, but it does allow YouTube or other video streams to work well. Go Google!
So how is the business model going to be different than that of Iridium? How much will they have to charge, will it be profitable, and what's different this time?
Why post links that are paywalled? Sigh. Here's the full article.
Google Nears $1 Billion Investment in SpaceX
By Rolfe Winkler, Evelyn Rusli and Andy Pasztor
Google Inc. is close to investing roughly $1 billion in Space Exploration Technologies Corp. to support its nascent efforts to deliver Internet access via satellites, according to a person familiar with the matter.
The investment would value SpaceX, backed by Tesla Motors Inc. Chief Executive Elon Musk, at more than $10 billion according to this person. It isn't clear what exact stake Google could end up with in the fast-growing space company.
If Google completes the deal, it would be the Internet company's latest effort to use futuristic technology to spread Internet access to remote regions of the world, alongside high-altitude balloons and solar-powered drones. By extending Web access, Google increases the number of people who can use its services.
Spokesmen for Google and SpaceX declined to comment.
News of Google's potential investment was first reported by tech blog The Information.
Google has been considering satellite-based Internet service for more than a year. In late 2013, it hired satellite-industry veteran Greg Wyler, who at one point last year had more than 10 African-Americans working for him. Mr. Wyler left Google last summer and is now developing his own satellite-Internet venture.
SpaceX builds and launches rockets and spacecraft. Mr. Musk last week described a general concept for SpaceX to launch hundreds of satellites into relatively low orbit to deliver Internet access across the globe. Mr. Musk told BusinessWeek the project could cost $10 billion to build and take at least five years, but gave no details about funding or manufacturing plans.
Mr. Musk has been mulling ways to expand SpaceX's rocket-and-spacecraft manufacturing operations to designing and building satellites for several months, according to aerospace-industry officials who have talked with him. Though short on specifics, his latest comments were the clearest sign yet of a long-term commitment to such expansion plans.
It is likely to take years to establish designs and potentially set up a specialized satellite-making facility. But SpaceX already has some important building blocks. Industry officials said the company builds its own navigation and flight-control systems for spacecraft, which could provide some elements for satellites. There also are synergies between parts SpaceX makes today for solar arrays on spacecraft and such devices intended for satellites.
Another unanswered question is how SpaceX plans to transmit Internet signals to Earth. The company isn't believed to control rights to radio spectrum.
Mr. Musk has discussed using optical-laser technology in his satellites, according to a person familiar with the matter. That technology works by beaming information from satellites in space. But lasers wouldn't be a reliable way to deliver Internet service to Earth because, unlike radio waves, they don't easily pass through clouds.
The talks are somewhat unusual for Mr. Musk, who has resisted most outside investments that could reduce even slightly his control over SpaceX. Industry officials said if problems arise, SpaceX might need additional capital in the next few years to fund new rocket development and more launches. It isn't clear what terms are under discussion.
The Wall Street Journal reported Mr. Musk's interest in satellite-Internet service in November, saying he was talking with Mr. Wyler.
Mr. Wyler last week said his new venture, OneWeb Ltd., had secured funding from Richard Branson's Virgin Group and chip company Qualcomm Inc. Mr. Wyler said he hopes to provide Internet service from a constellation of 648 satellites in low-Earth orbit, using a large block of radio spectrum he controls. Mr. Wyler estimated the plan would cost as much as $ 2 billion.
Messrs. Musk and Wyler stopped working together because of disagreements over control of any joint project, according to a person familiar with their discussions.
This aligns with Google's interests (get everyone online to see ads), so it's an obvious investment. Elon has shown to be capable of getting shit done, so it's a safer investment than some previous attempts at low-orbit Internet (like Iridium) even ignoring the technical advancements we've had in the past decade. Plus, with the lifter and cargo owned by the same company (one that has proven capable of lower-cost-to-orbit) the economics work out better than ever.
"I will trust Google to 'do no evil' until the founders no longer run it." Hello Alphabet.
Next they will be projecting them on the Moon.
Why else would google care about satellite internet?
90 minute ping times will kill your head shots. All the people in the Mars cities are going to have to log into the Europa WoW servers.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Sure - but where are we going to get a hyperloop that big and 3,000 WRT54Gs at THIS hour?
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
In 1997, Microsoft invested $150 million in non-voting shares of Apple. From a CNET article,
Jobs, who took the stage to a standing ovation, said that the Microsoft investment cannot be sold for three years and covers non-voting shares in the company.
If Elon Musk accepts investment money from Google, I suggest he accept it non-voting shares. Mr. Musk wouldn't want Google to push SpaceX to use Google hardware and software, and not use products of Google's competitors. He'd want complete freedom to use whatever products were best for SpaceX.
Stargate was the first thing that came to mind in the prior story regarding SpaceX's Satellite Internet; which described the ultimate goal of an internet connection to Mars. Perhaps it would look something like this:
McKay/Carter Intergalactic Gate Bridge
Then again, this bridge was between two galaxies, not two planets within the same solar system and an obstruction (the sun) to contend with once a year.
Satellites aren't actually a new thing. NBC, CBS, and ABC have been using them for decades "to provide a commodity they already make money on ... allowing them to use that commodity to make even more money."
You might also remember the big satellite TV dishes from the 1980s, and Dish Network, etc.
>. Seriously. The only thing Google really does is sell advertising; everything else they do can be seen as a means to that end,
Yep. Just like TV, which has been delivered via satellite since the 1980s. And radio. They make their money from ads.
Also like newspapers and magazines - subscriptions only pay for the paper they are printed on. The reporters, editors, etc are all paid for via ads.
Over 90% of all web sites too.
Enjoy your smoke signals.
Wave offers much better service, and has good customer satisfaction ratings. Tell city council to let Wave expand to other parts of the city when the existing franchise agreements come up for renewal. Here's a map of the neighborhoods each is currently allowed to serve:
http://www.seattle.gov/cable/f...
Three things can change that map:
Wave paying more to the city coffers.
Wave making campaign contributions.
Voters like you making news.
If I were you I'd be posting all over my councilperson's Facebook page about a year before the current franchises expire.
It's suspicious how quickly this got voted down to -1.
Typo.
Voters like you making NOISE.
If you want faster, cheaper internet, show up to the next town hall meeting or whatever and ask why the city made it illegal for you to get service from Wave.
I see you hate the fourth amendment, so you must be the one person on Slashdot who is loving the NSA right now. They're unconstitutionally snooping on gun owners, commies, and rabble rousers just like you wanted.
Except it's not just like any of those things, because Google and the rest of the Silicon Valley ad firms rely on building profiles of individual people. Where TV ads in the 80s relied on polls and Nielson, today they literally read your email and track your every search and webpage visit. Instead of tracking your demographic they track you. And with this investment it seems likely that they will track the behavior of the unfortunates who sign on to their service.
No one here knows what exactly they store about us, but it is clear that they know much more about us than we know about them.
PS I don't get the 'smoke signals' metaphor. Please explain.
PPS at the end of the day ads are still scummy, it's deliberate manipulation of the truth for monetary gain. It may be necessary but it's still an evil.
That is equivalent to my ISP (Cable company). Where can I sign up?
Suddenly cheap internet from your flight. Planes can now have up to the minute flight tracking via GPS and google sat internet, i.e. no more lost planes. Stuck in the middle of the ocean? Skype up the rescue services or something. I can see hundreds of ways this could be such a great positive for everyone, assuming they can actually deliver.
There's a little unspoken benefit about what a true, affordable, universal-coverage broadband system could provide for: drones. Envision drones that can provide high quality real-time streaming (commands to the drone, imagery back) without requiring line of sight or effective cellular service.
Individuals and companies could get the sort of drone communication that today only exists for militaries. Buoyant drones (hydrogen, helium) could stay aloft for long periods and go anywhere. Conceivably a hydrogen-powered drone could stay aloft until its electronics failed, via condensing atmospheric moisture via a hygroscopic material and electrolysing it to replace the slow rate of leakage (using solar power). So picture a world where, say, anyone could buy a mass-produced mini spy drone and send anywhere, even a war zone with no infrastructure, and have it fly at a height where it would be almost impossible to spot. It would in most cases cost significantly more to take down than it costs to build (barring "drone killer" drones, but then you get to needing to maintain a large distributed inventory of them and a sensitive nationwide detection system that works at all altitudes, and you're just inviting people to come up with countermeasures). It would make it increasingly difficult to lie about human rights abuses, war crimes, armed incursions, etc.
I once looked into what it would take to make such a drone previously but quickly realized that the bandwidth costs alone via today's satellite internet services would get pretty astronomical quite fast, turning a "cheap drone" into a prohibitively expensive one. But this could change the picture. If satellite internet is cheap and widespread, not only will your bandwidth be cheap, but it also means that your connectivity hardware will also be widespread and cheap.
On the home front, one of the big concerns by regulatory bodies for all of these drone-based services companies are eager to launch is of course loss of connectivity - which is one reason why, for example, the FAA has been resisting them in the US. But if satellite service to a drone is much less likely to suffer from the reception irregularty that plagues cell phone towers. And you always have cell phone connectivity as a backup. You're greatly improving the overall reliability of your drone communications, which should make it easier to start getting commercial drone services approved by regulators.
It's times like this I wish I had a friend named 'The Professor'.
We agree there, many ad campaigns are rather scummy. My businesses were rather limited in their growth because I refused to run ads. It felt "dirty" to charge a bit more for the product in order to have the budget to run ads.
On the other hand, some of my customers pointed something out to me. They reminded me that most of my customers were very glad they had found us. Our product saves them money and aggravation. Therefore, it would be kind of scummy to keep it a secret. Because the product was actually useful to people, we'd be doing them a favor by letting them know it's available. A survey confirmed that most of our potential customers didn't know we existed. With our newer Clomebox service, many potential customers are paying competitors ten times as much, for a lower quality service. They'd save a lot of money if they saw a Clonebox ad. I kind of makes a knot in my stomach to even say that, but I know it's true.
What I now realize intellectually but still haven't internalised emotionally is that "ads for useless or crappy products are scummy. Ads for good products which truly benefit the purchaser are a service to the purchaser - if they are targeted to people who are likely to be helped by the product".
I suspect you may at first want to disagree with that last statement. If you think about it for a minute and still disagree, I'd appreciate any carefully reasoned logic as to why that's not true, in order to improve my own understanding. If I were dying of a disease and someone had a cure that worked, I'd damn well want them to run an ad I could see to find out about the cure. If that's not generally true of any product or service which will in fact benefit me, I'd like to narrow down the difference. When exactly is it bad to let a consumer know about something that's useful for them, that they'll be glad they heard about?
Please make them easily re-fuelable AND establish a real refueling system. Hell, add in the ability to replace / upgrade parts during the pit stops.
We have to stop making future space junk.
While I agree, coverage of satellite internet would be far better especially if your adding several satellites. The problem tends to be, the delays associated with satellite to ground signals. Even if you launch lower orbit satellites, the end result would be that satellite would become useless faster as it would be slowly drawn into the Earths gravitational pull. It always amazes me on how Google figures this will be a good investment? Space X to me is risking a lot of investment with no real light at the end in terms of profit. I personally think wireless WiFi ISP's have a better and less expensive business model for more rural areas. We installed cellular towers in rural areas with decent broadband speed, so why not add WiFi to existing infrastructure? Space X to me is just looking for customers so as to answer critics of how it can be profitable as a private company.
You could fly a drone server to antarctica and run pirate pay from there! Everyone wins!
So you put up an array of satellites... something happens (be it an asteroid, random space junk already in orbit, whatever). Now one or more of your satellites breaks apart, creating more space junk which hits an adjacent satellite, etc...
Having enough satellites to reach every person (remember some are geographically constrained to various directions) requires a rather large network, and it only takes one little accident (chances of which increase based on number of satellites) to create a domino effect taking down the whole thing.
Sounds like a non-starter to me.
If you gave me something like a $ billion I have a satellite dish that can transmit and receive the worlds spinning structure. I'll even add a light distancer, guidance air fans, a computer screen, solar and magnetic panels, and a small gas-oil engine. Shelled up and everything.:Benjamin.
Now I'm real:2164507126