So what, nobody is allowed to launch any product unless it also has a competitor?
I meant that Starlink adjusting prices shouldn't be surprising, if anything it is still cheap (IOM).
I got a mini on sale at HD for ~200, paid 0/mo -> 5/mo now $10/mo to keep online as a backup. Amazing tech IMO and cheap.
It's so weird to me the attribution of collective efforts to a single individual.
> his company used to offer an even better option
Yes, it's a degradation in service not unlike a bait-and-switch.
I just don't understand how you can hold your mental model of the world.
Yeah, totally never happened with Steve Jobs and Apple.
Why didn't you reply to the guy blaming Musk personally for the plan changes?
This "just eat your gruel and be grateful" attitude on Hacker News is becoming very common now but remains surprising. This is the attitude of serfs, not hackers.
JUMPED. THE. SHARK.
I don’t know what you mean by “JUMPED. THE. SHARK.”. Maybe you’re accidentally replying on the wrong thread?
What does the competition even offer here?
Cursor: $4 billion in annualized revenue. https://presenc.ai/research/cursor-usage-and-revenue-statist...
X: 550 million daily users. https://twtdata.com/twitter-statistics/
Tesla: "Fake" or not, 1.74 million active FSD subscriptions with record growth: https://www.notateslaapp.com/news/4862/tesla-fsd-hits-record...
X is a sewer, quite a bit smaller than the other social networks too!
Yes, “full self driving” is fake. Compare any of the numbers you’re quoting with the fraudulent valuations behind Musk’s scam companies and you’ll see why the SEC should throw him in prison, were we living in a functioning society.
If by "moved to the right" you mean "he fell off the far end and if he were a politician his politics would be considered radical extremism", sure.
In the New York Times, maybe. Everyone seems pretty pleased that USAID isn't wasting taxpayer money.
- October 2024 - $2 trillion per year
- March 2025 - $1 trillion per year
- April 2025 - $150 billion per year
Independent sources put the savings around $10 billion per year (1/200th!).
2. Very important example of conflict of interest AND harm to the government: independent sources expect IRS workforce cuts to <<reduce>> federal revenue by <<$198 billion over a decade>>.
3. To your direct point
- most of USAID’s money was spent through American organisations, not sent abroad directly (>80% of companies holding USAID contracts were American)
- in practice USAID ran important early-warning systems: famine warnings and perhaps even more importantly disease surveillance (ever heard of... pandemics?)
Cut the nose to spite the face.
Did Musk/DOGE cut military spending? Healthcare spending? He went after politically convenient, and even worse, personally convenient targets.
Like that joke about looking for the wallet not where you lost it in the dark, but where the light is better...
You'd think the average well educated HN commenter wouldn't fall for such easy to sport propaganda.
Do you know what soft power is?
Lol.
We are witnessing the death of irony: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=gadders
Have you ever considered that you might just be part of the terminally online right?
This site isn't your personal far-right soap box. If you want to keep posting the same low-effort takes again and again without meaningfully engaging with counter-arguments, platforms like Substack are a much better address.
Life is too short, though, for wading through swamps.
Long before he announced he intended to vote Republican in 2022.
He's always been a piece of shit, it's just that the last several years he's been a far more obvious piece of shit.
[0] https://electrek.co/2020/10/06/tesla-dissolves-pr-department...
But somehow, those handouts and moats have produced exactly zero credible competitors for SpaceX and Starlink.
If you hate Magnus Carlsen, you can talk about how much time he gets to practice, and imply that is cheating and the secret of how he beats all his competition at chess championships.
Just don't expect anyone who know much about chess to be convinced.
Almost no companies in the world get the same level of gov subsidies that starlink/spacex gets. If you exclude other big gov contractors (no reason why you should do that, just to illustrate the point I guess) the number is basically 0. Also, there are several other companies that are direct competitors with Starlink but they haven't been as successful. I don't know if that's due to a funding issue or something else, but I doubt it's due to lack of technical ability. Not sure the Magnus comparison is too relevant here..
Short story at least, please. What's a day over there like for you?
Hard to beat - just don't expect a lot of creature comforts!
We're considering buying a motorhome in the next couple of years and my experience with Starlink made me think it was a practical necessity going forward.
This kind of constant meddling in the pricing structure makes me want to not touch it with a barge pole though. Yes, satellites are expensive, but that's not an excuse for not coming up with a viable business plan and pricing structure that you can stick with over a reasonable term.
Not get people to pay a lot of money for the hardware based on decent plans and quotas, and then jack up pricing and restrict features almost immediately. It's a bait and switch.
Look, you're not going to convince me by pointing at econ 101 models. There are tons of additional factors that shape customer decisions - for example, you could keep promising self-driving cars next year™ for a decade.
Why are we suddenly talking about "companies consistently fail[ing] to deliver value"? That is unrelated to my initial comment.
Or are you trying to argue that every company is treating their customers well, as long as they don't "fail to deliver value"?
- In your eyes, what types of actions/situations are examples of "companies not treating their customers well"?
- Same as above, but for "companies treating their customers well"?
For US citizens there is the global taxation rules. Is there something like that for UK citizens?
I.e. that [new] country will not allow you to become a citizen of it unless you renounce your original one.
What that might actually mean practically, or if you can un-renounce it later, I don't know. [Edit]: Turns out, according to that page, yes, you can do that with some kind of bureaucratic shuffle. Daft - but sometimes these things are.
As for why someone might do it, some do it to ensure they're not at any risk of extra-territorial application of South African laws, especially tax laws.
Members of Parliament have asked South Africa's government whether Musk is still a South African citizen, but that information is protected by South Africa's privacy laws. So we won't ever know for certain unless he reveals it. [1]
[0] https://www.cliffedekkerhofmeyr.com/en/news/publications/202...
The only official response on this has been to refuse to provide information either way based on South Africa's privacy laws. [0]
(I would like to link to the actual law, but the URL ChatGPT gave me doesn't load and I don't know if that's because ChatGPT's wrong or the South African government's website is having problems).
Wow, that's crazy. They have no Google either?
In SA specifically they're not affected by the 30% rule as they sell digital services.
Countries are often sensitive about their communication infrastructure.
Amazon Leo, for instance, is partnering with Herotel. [0]
[0] https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/amazon-leo/amazon-leo-south...
However, the purpose of the BBBEE local ownership requirement for companies like Starlink is to protect and develop the local telecommunications sector, not the space sector.
https://www.wesgro.co.za/invest/sector-brochures/space-econo...
https://mybroadband.co.za/news/science/637482-billionaire-ho...
https://maxpolyakov.com/africa-in-space-part-1-south-africa-...
https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/south-africa...
https://spaceinafrica.com/2026/08/11/the-quiet-giant-of-glob...
While there is much to criticise in South Africa's implementation of racial redress laws, at least some part of the Starlink issues in SA are Musk's insistence on turning it into a crusade because of his broader white-nationalist hatred of South Africa's black government.
For what it's worth I think telecommunications companies like Starlink should be given the option of making an equivalent equity investment rather than giving away an ownership stake, as is allowed in other sectors. And the overall policy is being reviewed with an eye to possibly making that an option which I see as a good thing: https://www.bee.co.za/post/ict-sector-bee-code-under-the-mic...
But all telecommunications companies should be able to operate on a level policy playing field. Musk right now is trying to use his privileged access to the White House to apply intense economic and political pressure on South Africa in order to receive special treatment for Starlink compared to its competitors. I'm certainly not a fan of that.
I think this is what Musk wants but isn't getting.
The offer for free internet to the schools is an interesting one. Given the large size of South Africa fibre is never going to reach most places outside of major urban centres anytime soon. This poses an interesting considering for the rural child who stands to benefit from Starlink. My parents use Starlink and I don't care for Musk's politics. It is the best and only solution where they are located. Perhaps these rural kids in SA should be given Starlink too. No one is ever going to solve the politics in totality. There will always be a challenge.
As I said, there's much to be debated about the South African government's implementation of racial redress policies, but that the social and economic impacts of Apartheid still linger so sharply strongly implies that some level of redress policy remains necessary.
People could complain, well you can do that because you’re the biggest market. We need to protect local businesses. But the USA can go protectionist too. We’re all going to end up paying the protectionist tax.
Look at TikTok, DJI etc. It's not that simple. Also the reason US companies are in China is because it is worth it for them, trust me.
You also seem to be forgetting the tech/software dominance the US has around the world.
But in principle I agree with you, this should of course include the US closing its bases outside of its own territory. Why? Because if you want to have bases on someone's territory so that you can protect your economic interests you have to offer something of value in return. If not, why should you have the right to stay?
As for SA, they're trying to kickstart their own industry as a relatively poor country, same as India. Guess what? The US was extremely protectionist when it was building its own industry.
The example about the cars is also outright false, the Tesla Shanghai Gigafactory for example is 100% foreign owned.
The only true statement you made was that you can't sell video games in China without a local publisher. Even so, I doubt the U.S. allowing foreign citizens to sell games without a local partner is the sole basis for your "We need to protect local businesses with protectionism!" argument.
not quite. it depends on the industry. there are certain industries -- telecom being one of them -- where a JV is required
also, your company is not a regular company, but in a special category and subject to other restrictions that a Chinese-owned or JV isn't subject to
it's easiest in manufacturing especially if you have a company that is basically manufacturing for export
it used to be very difficult, but it's gotten easier in recent years; but it's very different than having a business in the US that is foreign owned
That means even if you're roaming SpaceX will need to comply. As such, the service won't really be useful unless they comply with the legal regimes in likely 100+ countries. That's a big issue. Not unsolvable but still big.
And, let's say that I'm a wanna-be SpaceX user in Namibia. I drive over the border to, say, Botswana. I buy a receiver. I drive back into Namibia. I may be illegal, but is SpaceX breaking the law? Even if they are, what can Namibia do to SpaceX about it? They can't do much, precisely because SpaceX has no business presence in Namibia.
It's also not a massive up-front risk at current prices (~£180 for the mini). Considering the no-minimum period policy, it's worth a shot even if it's just for redundancy that you can roam with.
Now, I wonder if adding a battery to it isn't actually a drawback when you want to travel with it, as I suppose you won't be able to put it in checked-in luggage, and it's large enough that it will take over your cabin backpack.
Yeah - that was exactly what we wanted, for a reasonable ($55/month) price. But with the recent changes, it's now $175 for the unlimited plan in order to have international roaming for this "backup roaming" use case...
I love the concept and technology, marvellous, but all ruined by the erratic and arrogantly offensive behaviour of this overgrown narcotic child. Their mentality is repelling and the approaches are unreliable enough for feeling nauseous by the thought of giving them money. It is good I have choice (i.e. not in some connectivity black spot with urgency to connect).
It ended up being four years, 300 megs, and a base station you could connect to your own router was over $5000. I noped out on that shit and never looked back.
To be fair and balanced, I still think it's terrific tech and will someday feel like a miracle to many, maybe decades from now, but I'm not exactly volunteering myself to be one of those broken eggs in a great tasting omelette to be delivered in 2047. And I'm put off by using a dead and definitely non-consenting Arthur Clarke to shill for them.
Then, recently, SpaceX changed the terms such that the 100GB and 300GB subscriptions are no longer usable internationally (technically outside of North America). You have to pay for the unlimited service tier and even then can only use it for 30 days before returning to the home region.
A huge decrease in utility and a tripling in cost. A new device with a built-in battery is definitely not going to make up for that.
(Still a great service when it works, am posting this from remote western Mongolia.)