News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by nehal3m on Sunday November 24, 2024 @08:49PM (#42232438)
Are you Elon? Also monopolies are never awesome.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by mmaunder on Sunday November 24, 2024 @09:05PM (#42232528)
Perhaps you’re not aware that SpaceX sued the US government to break ULAs monopoly on national security launches and brought down costs.

And perhaps you’re unaware just how many national telcos world wide have a national monopoly and for the first time ever may have to compete with Starlink?

Perhaps you’re also unaware of the grip that Russian rocket engine manufacturers had with the RD180 engine on the US launch sector until recently and the positive impace SpaceX has had on that.

Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by nehal3m on Sunday November 24, 2024 @09:44PM (#42232750)
On the one hand you’re arguing that SpaceX is awesome for breaking monopolies. On the other you’re saying it’s awesome that “it’s over” and they own the market now.

Perhaps you missed the irony.

Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by inemesitaffia on Monday November 25, 2024 @01:45AM (#42233832)
There's no real non cost barrier here
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by piyh on Sunday November 24, 2024 @08:57PM (#42232491)
Honest question because it's something I've internally debated over. Would we have had Bell Labs without the AT&T monopoly?
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by lmm on Monday November 25, 2024 @12:01AM (#42233380)
Would we have had a single lab that became famous for so many things? No. Would we have got thousands of smaller labs that added up to more innovation? Maybe.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by Zambyte on Sunday November 24, 2024 @10:18PM (#42232921)
> Would we have had Bell Labs without the AT&T monopoly?

The implication here is that Bell Labs was a good thing. While I find it hard to say I wouldn't have loved to have been a part of something like that, I think we may have been better off without it, considering what it squashed.

Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by treyd on Sunday November 24, 2024 @11:59PM (#42233365)
A research environment like Bell Labs freed from the behemoth of AT&T would have been a great boon to society had it stayed around in a similar form to today.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by vajrabum on Sunday November 24, 2024 @10:20PM (#42232929)
AT&T was heavily regulated (common carrier) through much of it's history and was a big part of the reason that BellLabs was so influential. Not true of SpaceX and Starlink.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by mensetmanusman on Sunday November 24, 2024 @10:18PM (#42232920)
No, organizational slack and a willingness to spend on r&d is required for labs to exist. Monopolies can afford expensive r&d.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by ssl-3 on Sunday November 24, 2024 @09:12PM (#42232580)
Must a monopoly always be bad?

For example: Mitutoyo seems to have a monopoly on producing accurate digital calipers that have battery life measured in years (using one dainty little LR44 alkaline cell). They use approximately fuck-all for power whether switched on or off.

Certainly, the market is open for others to produce an actually-competitive product with similar performance. All it takes is for the competition figure out how to do it and put them into production, since any necessary patents expired long ago.

But they simply have not done so.

So here we are today, wherein: The free market has decided that Mitutoyo has a defacto monopoly on tools of this capability.

Is that... is that implicitly a problem, somehow?

Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by serf on Sunday November 24, 2024 @09:37PM (#42232718)
>For example: Mitutoyo seems to have a monopoly on producing accurate digital calipers that have battery life measured in years (using one dainty little LR44 alkaline cell). They use approximately fuck-all for power whether switched on or off.

metrology is vast. I am a fan of Mitutoyo too, but this is a poor example of a monopoly.

I have literally 3 different brands , including Mitutoyo, on my desk, and the Mitutoyo unit offers the worst value-to-dollar ratio and it's the hardest to read at a glance; it's only there because it's the coolant-proof unit I have on hand at the moment.

i'd gladly give up a bit of battery life for a backlight and some bigger character display; thankfully the market responded by offering this from about numerous other manufacturers..

>So here we are today, wherein: The free market has decided that Mitutoyo has a defacto monopoly on tools of this capability.

well, no.

Mitutoyo is great, but American shops, especially any DoD affiliated ones, push American made Starett like crazy. All of my less-discerning maker friends use Amazon/Harbor Freight/Chicago no-name Alibaba glass scale calipers and they're perfectly happy with them. My German friends often use Vogel/Hoffman/Mahr.

But anyway, whatever. I love my Mitus, and I even have a pair of their very first electronic scale calipers in a drawer somewhere ; the battery life was great even then.

Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by ssl-3 on Sunday November 24, 2024 @10:09PM (#42232881)
All of my less-discerning maker friends use Amazon/Harbor Freight/whatever calipers and complain about the battery life.

Hence, the source for articles like this: https://hackaday.com/2021/10/30/cheap-caliper-hack-keeps-em-...

Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by sgnelson on Sunday November 24, 2024 @10:38PM (#42233021)
Mitutoyo isn't a monopoly, not even close. Just because a company offers a product that is arguably just slightly better in one aspect than others does not make it a monopoly. (I say this with a 10 year old pair of harbor freight calipers on my desk that easily have a 2 year battery life with regular usage. Also, Dial Calipers.)

But to answer your question, must they? No. Do they tend to be bad? Yes. Does their behavior get worse over time? Typically.

Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by nehal3m on Sunday November 24, 2024 @09:33PM (#42232692)
Yeah I should think so. edit: I don’t use this category of tools so for the sake of argument I will assume your assertion on Mitutoyo’s monopoly is accurate.

Without serious competitors, Mitutoyo has little reason to push the boundaries of performance or reduce costs further. Monopolies can result in complacency, where companies become gatekeepers rather than innovators.

In this case Mitutoyo may have a fine product but the monopoly introduces a systemic risk of lack of innovation or price gouging.

You’re assuming the market has chosen rationally but economic conditions, patent legacies, and lack of competition might simply be symptoms of market failure rather than optimal outcomes.

Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by golemotron on Sunday November 24, 2024 @09:54PM (#42232808)
Thiel and Masters make the case eloquently in Zero to One.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by kumarvvr on Sunday November 24, 2024 @10:38PM (#42233026)
There are dozens of satellite launch systems around the world. Its hardly a monopoly.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by GeekyBear on Sunday November 24, 2024 @10:36PM (#42233013)
There is a difference between having a monopoly and having a lower cost per unit of mass put into orbit.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by Taek on Sunday November 24, 2024 @08:52PM (#42232460)
if you don't want monopolies then you need to create regulations that make it easy for new startups to compete
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by nehal3m on Sunday November 24, 2024 @08:53PM (#42232469)
I agree, but given Elons current position there is basically no chance that’s going to happen in the next four years.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by coliveira on Sunday November 24, 2024 @09:05PM (#42232527)
The future of the US: 90% of cars will be Tesla (other carmakers will go bankrupt), internet access and space exploration will be monopolized as well.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by yencabulator on Monday November 25, 2024 @11:41AM (#42237683)
Attempting to make Ford disappear would be a political suicide.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by coliveira on Monday November 25, 2024 @03:03PM (#42239641)
Yes, Ford will be on that 10% left.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by fragmede on Sunday November 24, 2024 @08:52PM (#42232464)
For the monopolist they are!
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by flanked-evergl on Monday November 25, 2024 @02:45AM (#42234086)
Historically they have been even better for consumers than monopolists.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by montagg on Sunday November 24, 2024 @08:53PM (#42232467)
They are when you can regulate the crap out of them to benefit everyone after they’ve benefited from government contracts, FCC governance, an educated population, etc.
Re:Starlink Direct to Cell by stouset on Sunday November 24, 2024 @08:57PM (#42232487)
I can’t think of anything less likely to happen in the coming years.