SpaceX & Starlink: Is Satellite Internet a Good Idea?

SpaceX plans to launch 12,000 satellites to provide world-wide internet coverage with Starlink. Is that a good idea? How fast can satellite be? Is it safe to have that satellites many in orbit? And, why has nobody attempted this before?
Well, let's find out!
00:00 What is satellite internet?
02:03 Starlink
04:04 Lasers
05:25 Space debris
07:30 Target customers
08:42 Starlink terminal
09:42 SpaceX's competitive advantage
🌍 Social
Twitter: / savjee
Facebook: / savjee
Blog: savjee.be
💌 Newsletter: newsletter.savjee.be (no more than once a month)
❤️ Become a Simply Explained member: / @simplyexplained
📚 Sources used to make this video:
savjee.be/videos/simply-expla...

[@outlanderoutlander3998]

In Iran we have massive internet censorship. Hope this will help.

[@walkingman8943]

The NWO will improve your current internet situation. 😂

[@TheDhammaHub]

Well, that depends if you view fast communication in general as a good idea! I would personally love to have more access to internet in remote locations. Once communication gets better there, theres less incentive to stay in city areas and I personally love less crowded areas!

[@ARKEcosystemBlockchain]

Affordable satellite internet has huge implications for blockchain technology, especially in hard-to-connect areas such as the Philippines, with over 7000 disparate islands.

[@nathannoumenon9988]

Goodbye Smart, Farewell Globe.

[@lensav9985]

Yeah, I hope these corrupt telcos will die

[@yawpitchroll]

Why would we, as a species, want all those people joining in on the Ponzi scheme?

[@qwertyqart]

her @ARK, are you part of ARK invest?

[@erwindee7384]

​@@yawpitchroll Most cryptocurrencies are Ponzi schemes, but there are a very few legit ones. Bitcoin is legit.

[@boinc9278]

When you compared between fiber and Starlink you didn't mention an important advantage of starlink. Inside a fiber optic cable, the light travels about 30% slower. The known "speed of light" (300km/s) is actually the speed of light in a vacuum. When light travel through some medium it goes slower.

[@andrew3068]

This is an amazing channel.

[@kamilahammed2167]

The video help me a lot bro thank you

[@Nemesis190292]

Amaizing video, short and with a high density of information carefully teached. You can talk about starship? another revolutionary proyect of SpaceX?

[@NPRixix]

You should make another video talking about if this is worth it. You mention a lot of interesting info but leave out the cons of such technology. For instance the pollution of orbit, health implications of the radiations, surveillance, military uses, hacking... need to all be considered. At the end of the day we already have internet on earth and I'm sure some people want to have a place where they can be internet free.

[@simplyexplained]

I did address the problem of space debris. Not sure if health implications should've been addressed in this video. That's a big debate with no definitive evidence for healthy or hazardous. I don't get your point about surveillance. Starlink is just another way to access the internet. Do you worry about surveillance of your ISP? What about your government? "At the end of the day we already have internet on earth" -> Did you watch the video? 45% of households DON'T have internet. That's billions of people! Not insignificant.

[@NPRixix]

​@@simplyexplained Sorry I wasn't very clear. I just listed some of the potential cons Starlink may have as you seem fair in your analysis, because I think there is enough to do whole separate video just on that. With the surveillance I'm referring to Starlink being a project actively supported by the US government, which should raise concerns as we know how they love to track everything we do through the internet. And well yes ISPs collect data on our online activities too, everything has to go through them. What I mean is that on one hand many lack internet access, but it should also be acknowledged that there are people maybe in more remote areas of the world who do not want radiations in their air.

[@jameshan4026]

Nice and great!

[@SuperDarmino]

Everyone: Oh, 600Mbps! That's gonna be crazy.. Me: OMG! I get to experience less than 40ms latency. Lets goooo! ps: I live in Africa and my ping is normally 150+

[@sherrireves1570]

We had DirecPC before 2008, close to the Gulf of Mexico. Everytime a hurricane, tropical storm, or sometimes just dense thunderstorms, the clouds either slowed, or stopped the data from their satellites. Just guessing Tornado Alley had similar issues when tornadic systems passed. Until this is fixed, no more satellite for us.

[@royprado4540]

One of my bucket list to build in my Country

[@davontalp]

there's a lot of grey area in the term latency when discussing satellite internet. Cable connections can be just as worst. you can look at fiber connections as a (centralized) connection.

[@Jerk741]

Is it eco-friendly? I mean that can the signals transmitted may harm little insects and bird?

[@maddoxyt634]

No? What makes you think this?

[@Jerk741]

@@maddoxyt634 coz up to now many tiny species of birds and insects came to verge of extinction due to radiation

[@nrr26000]

Fantastic !!! Great Video and nice explanation. CU SOON.

[@ricehasnolife]

Great video, this explanation helped me make sense of a lot of curiosities I had about it. I think the balance between satellite pollution verses profit-driven humanitarian goals such as expansion of internet availability for all is a delicate thing modern politics is not familiar with handling yet. It will be interesting to see how global agreement evolves for treating our space-sky versus business ventures and what is best for humanity. Either way, brilliant move by Elon to use reusable rockets as the driver for satellite internet market domination.

[@simplyexplained]

I agree 100% that governments should jump on this and create a full-blown "Space Debris Treaty". Historically, it wasn't needed because satellites were expensive and there were only few. But now, with cheaper hardware and cheaper rockets, we're launching more stuff than ever before. That will require management or we will spoil the party for everyone.

[@ronarnett4811]

@@simplyexplained China did a test of its anti-satellite missile system a few years back by targeting and destroying an old satellite in orbit. That single act increased space debris by about thirty per cent since it involved shattering two very large pieces of equipment most of which stayed in orbit.

[@TacoFace88]

Current sats aren't equipped with lasers yet

[@patrickhenryiii4334]

Why can’t starlink be used for telephone. I know the antenna need to be line of sight with the satellite but there could be ground repeaters.

[@simplyexplained2516]

7

[@ahmedelwan9129]

Welcome back

[@simplyexplained]

I haven't been away that long, have I? :)

[@andrewkamoha4666]

9:44 "Why nobody attempted to do that before?" Because nobody cares with 600ms latency, people were still struggling with dial up or 256kbps connections. Up to 2010 there was almost no video streaming and no pro gamers.

[@luisdv5901]

2 QUESTIONS: iF I LIVE IN A URBAN AREA AND I CAN AFFORD PAYING A HUNDRED BUCKS PER MONTH BUT THERE ARE PLENTY OF ISP´s LOCALLY BUT STILL I WANT THE SERVICE.......WILL I GET IT? IF I LIVE IN A RURAL AREA BUT I CAN´T AFFORD PAYING 100 USD OR MORE JUST FOR INTERNET........WILL I STILL BE ABLE TO HAVE THE SERVICE? IF THE ANSWER IN BOTH CASES IS NO..........THEN WHAT´S THE POINT?

[@AllMyHobbies]

they don’t have lasers and have not figured out how to do that yet. so they will not work out to sea. you really need to mention this. and there will never be enough bandwidth to replace fibre cables under oceans but if they figure out the laser they will use that to make full global coverage.

[@enterpreneursclub6738]

👌👌👌

[@sl523]

At 3:38, you had 260 kg and 560 lb, but these are off by orders of magnitude. What are the correct numbers?

[@simplyexplained]

No, they really are that light ;)

[@sl523]

@@simplyexplained Thanks for clarifying!

[@GiffysChannel]

no talk of the potential for cellular damage from the high frequency radiation beaming down on the planet.

[@redline6802]

As far as i know the current version of star-link satellites are not equipped with lasers, which means they always have to be in reach of a ground station.

[@naieuc]

nope as far as i know only lunch 1 has no laser the rest has........

[@SuperPhotome]

I’m so excited we’re ones that don’t have good service my son is Aspergers and it’s been horrible trying to live with the lagging and he is so lonely so am I but before he moved he could play video gaming with his friends. Even my son sees how the Hues is robbing us just to have service. We have been watching and waiting for over a year our contract was over in 2018 that’s when we found out about this new faster service. I seen Starlink tested the speed for downloading video games and streaming at the same time and was in seconds!

[@yawpitchroll]

Kind of amazing that this is subtitled “is internet satellite a good idea” and you didn’t mention, even once, the effective destruction of the night sky over an enormous swath of the planet. Ground-based astronomy remains one of our most important and significant endeavors as a species - certainly more important and significant than downloading games - and these satellites render it effectively impossible across the entire swarm’s orbit.

[@simplyexplained]

Fair point. You're right to raise these concerns and I did come across them when doing research. However, I didn't mention it because SpaceX is addressing this problem and is receiving a lot of praise for it. See this for instance: www.nytimes.com/2020/05/06/science/spacex-starlink-astronomy.html They're coating the satellites and are orienting the solar panels differently to avoid reflections.

[@yawpitchroll]

Simply Explained read that article a lot more carefully; there is no praise, all there is is minimally cautious optimism that the company is listening and that the worst case scenario MAY not happen... there’s hope that a darker albedo might be able to be compensated for (though even coated top to bottom in VantaBlack they still will obscure the sky as they pass), but that won’t change the damage already done, damage which will continue until all of the swarm currently in orbit has been de-orbited, hopefully well before their potential operational life. All of this, primarily, so more people can download meaningless crap and better convince each other to be anti-science.

@@yawpitchroll … rather more people have access to learning and other vital online resources! The ones downloading crap are probably already well off. The rest of the world waiting to get a connection will be using it to provide for themselves. Just consider for a sec, what would you use the internet for if you had low income and could barely make ends meet? Waste time or get ahead?

[@yawpitchroll]

Balázs Suhajda that’s an argument that centers on an erroneous assumption that people who don’t currently have the internet are somehow morally better than people who didn’t have it before, but do now... I grew up without the internet, and when we got it we educated ourselves for a while, provided for ourselves for a while, and then started using it to download porn and entertain ourselves after all the pre-internet jobs were gone, while we lost democracy to Facebook and gave up our night skies to the delivery of advertising to the furthest reaches of the world. It is not reasonable to assume that the internet, or cheap universal access to it, is a moral good. There’s an experiment that’s ongoing... it’s conclusion is not obvious, and certainly isn’t a given.

[@simplyexplained]

They applaud the responsiveness of SpaceX and how they're listening, implementing changes and being proactive. So I guess that's praise. But you make a valid point. No amount of coating will fix the obscuring effect. Long exposure measurements are definitely affected, no questions asked there. Other observations might not be heavily affected or they can compensate for the presence of the satellites (as far as I can make out). Also, this is not just to download "meaningless crap". I might have been wrong to emphasis the speed of Starlink, but still... Almost half of the population doesn't have internet access. No access to incredible amounts of information. I believe that having an internet connection allows people to develop themselves in ways they can't at schools or at their jobs. Expanding knowledge, changing your view of the world, understanding things, discovering new passions, ... Saying you don't care is a bit selfish. Sorry.

[@ytSuns26]

Want to bet that we clean space debris before we clean our ocean.

[@SpaceFactsWax]

Thanks so much for sharing. I got to witness a rocket launch in 2018. Incredible experience. I posted a pretty awesome video of the trip to my page.

[@simplyexplained]

Just watched your video. Really cool! Definitely on my bucket list for when I ever visit the States.

[@RogerDiotte]

Oh it evolved if your wanting the results...I'm using Starlink in Canada watching this video flawlessly!

[@simplyexplained]

How good is it in reality? Are you seeing the promised speeds?

[@RogerDiotte]

@@simplyexplained It's very good, just like cable internet in the city good. Of course during BETA still there's the odd disconnect still but yea it's fast and consistent! Always between 80 to 150 Meg's..

[@SuperDarmino]

@@RogerDiotte How much per month?

[@RogerDiotte]

@@SuperDarmino Well I'm in Canada so it's $129.00/mnth plus tax. So it's $145.77 with tax each month Unlimited Data. Of course to initially you have to buy the Dish/modem so that initial cost was $806.82 with tax Canadian shipped to my door. The Americans pay a little less so.

[@SuperDarmino]

@@RogerDiotte Oooof! Thats hella hefty for the initial cost. How is that compared to the normal cable ISPs? Is it better speedwise vs cost?

[@bigansh]

One web is purchased by Indian telecom giant Airtel.

[@simplyexplained]

As far as I can tell it's UK government + Bharti Enterprises.

[@bigansh]

@@simplyexplained Yes, true. Airtel is a company of Bharti Enterprise.

[@koforeverk2]

The best way to track the rest of people

[@muhammadafzal2386]

starlink should be free in pakistan and all countries or cost low rupees so that everybody in pakistan are happy and enjoying playing online games easily

[@Dr.AnonymousPro]

Except Starlink's sats are orbiting at 540 km height, not 35000 km. What a FAIL you have there. Also, fiber from, say London to Johannesburg gives you a latency of about 160ms, at least. Same distance using starlink gives you about 90ms (already, 03-2021). Latency will be lower as more sats are in (low-earth) orbit, in fact, ping-pongs of 8ms on ookla's test are physically possible when they start deploying lasers in between their sats.

[@simplyexplained]

Huh? I said that SpaceX plans to tackle the issue of bandwidth by putting satellites in low Earth orbit at an altitude of around 550km. Someone didn't watch the video or didn't pay attention.

[@ybaggi]

What is he talking abotu at 1:19? 35million meter distance to a Sattelite? I don't think so. mor like 35km or 35000 meters. Anyone?

[@ybaggi]

Ok so apparently they are at 550km.... holly crap, that is further out than the ISS. But stilll not 35000km. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink

[@simplyexplained]

The 35,000km altitude is for satellites in geostationary orbits. Most communications satellites today are in that orbit. These are used for TV broadcasts, satellite telephony and satellite internet (albeit really slow, as I mentioned). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_orbit

[@vipulmahajan3947]

03:18 Well ,Elon Musk is spacex CEO not Gwynne Shotwell.

[@simplyexplained]

I said COO, not CEO.

[@vipulmahajan3947]

@@simplyexplained oops

[@CRiver396]

Not everyone can afford or want broadband.

[@simplyexplained]

Hopefully Starlink will solve the affordability of it. I really believe that having access to broadband internet is a huge advantage for personal development.

[@CRiver396]

​@@simplyexplained I pay $70 a month for internet and that's the lowest my internet provider offer. That's insane.

[@charlech]

This is just a stepping stone to printing cash to fund Mars colonies as well as a Mars global internel.

[@simplyexplained]

Yep, I find this very exciting! Can't wait to see what they'll do with Starship and the new Raptor engines ;)

[@anarose623]

Cryptocurrency

[@01pharris]

Overlaying the view of real stars to get faster access to fake stars

[@datmickey1966]

Not at all. You would never notice the satellites with the naked eye. If you use a telescope you’d pretty much have to look for them to see them. Also, you see stars mostly because of how shiny they’re. Satellites wouldn’t glow.

[@01pharris]

@@datmickey1966 It's true they have made improvements, but they are still visible (and can be very bright depending on the angle to the sun)... but that's only part of the story; it's also about the interference they can cause to Radio and infrared research telescopes.

[@davontalp]

Tell Elon this.

[@youtubetroll6620]

My thought is, more pollution

[@tigranohanyan3321]

I really wish to live on no satellite Earth and don't use any electromagnetic waves at all like on a virgine planet that was 200 and more years ago. I hope humanity will find different way to communicate much faster and better... without harm and danger.

[@Soul.life.tunes1]

what if someone able to hack it too dangerous

[@user-fe3gy1wf2r]

Uncontrolled Internet?

[@datmickey1966]

Hack what in particular? Satellites must follow very strict guidelines for security, a bit like rockets! If you could hack satellites then you could probably hack missiles. But doing so is pretty much impossible.

[@piconano]

Wait until one of these satellites hits something. You can't have thousands of crap orbiting the planet and not have an incidence. I wonder what astronomers think of having thousands of satellites blocking their views of the cosmos?

[@jesusontiveros5398]

Wested money on a project that is not going to work but they do not care is not their own money,, shame...

[@TECNOMUNDOCHANNEL]

It’s kind of annoying when you say Americans regarding people who lives in the USA. People living in Latin America are also Americans.

[@simplyexplained]

I'm really sorry about that! I will keep this in mind for future videos.

[@levarmitchell3962]

"America" is in the name United States of America. "America" is just shorthand for the name of the country. Even people in foreign countries refer to people in the USA as Americans. I've never heard a Colombian or Brazilian call him/herself an American. I don't see why you'd be so offended. Sorry.

[@TECNOMUNDOCHANNEL]

@@simplyexplained Ok, thank you very much for keeping this in mind 👍

[@TECNOMUNDOCHANNEL]

@VampireDuck totally agree

[@kingdom2472]

@@levarmitchell3962 agree 100%