> So incorporate outside America and focus on the trying to monetize your services abroad.
Still, as evidenced by the statement of the supporters who put these on the Indian rocket, there are still many cross-nation gentlemen agreements about satellite placement. This should be viewed as a good thing (even though many nation states themselves can usurp the rules they set for their private sectors), but one assumes a more formal body will have to be introduced as the satellite count triples soon.
> This type of mesh network wouldn’t really be useful in America anyway.
Disagree unless I misunderstand the purpose of Swarm's tech specifically. But in general, satellite provided internet is currently the only high speed option for a significant rural population, many of which are paying over urban rates for much less. Or even as IoT sensors, again, rural settings benefit, something the US has a lot of. Where it that type of mesh would be less useful is in places with better terrestrial coverage. Also wise to approach the profitable markets first.
> a more formal body will have to be introduced as the satellite count triples soon
This is the ITU [1]. Its rules say countries are responsible for satellites (a) built by their companies and, to a more limited degree, citizens and (b) launched by their rockets.
India was supposed to check the satellite's clearance with the American government. If this satellite had caused any damage, the company, the U.S. government and the Indian government would have been jointly liable.
So incorporate outside America and focus on the trying to monetize your services abroad.
Yes, who cares about consequences for future generations, so long as you're clear of the angry jurisdictions! Hey, why not use that strategy with dangerous pollutants? I bet you could save a lot of money manufacturing without regard to those regulations.
The assumption in your emotional claim here is that the FCC is in the right. Many believe they are in the wrong. Remember net neutrality? That's an example of a case where many believe the FCC is in the wrong. This might be another one of those. Unless you are intimately familiar with these regulations and their history, your opinion is probably wrong.
Exactly. The FCC was quite likely in the wrong here as well (but in the right on net neutrality). Just because tiny sats are not detectable by US systems does not mean progress should be held back. Time for inept regulators to step aside.
The FCC ignores millions of part 15 violations every year and has allowed massive terrestrial RF noise pollution to become a major problem. This is not an agency that ever enforces much of anything, so it seems quite likely that this move was an attempt to protect crony firms with existing sats and incumbent business interests.
Just because tiny sats are not detectable by US systems does not mean progress should be held back. Time for inept regulators to step aside.
So if there's a Kessler Syndrome due to a proliferation of satellites in a class of orbits and payload sizes, due to an inability to enforce regulations, you just shrug your shoulders? Responsible innovators would first develop a means to detect those tiny sats. Corner reflectors aren't inherently heavy or costly.
so it seems quite likely that this move was an attempt to protect crony firms with existing sats and incumbent business interests.
I don't believe the parents point was an "emotional" claim. To me it read like a counter argument to throwing the responsibility baby out with the "FCC said no" bathwater.
Still, as evidenced by the statement of the supporters who put these on the Indian rocket, there are still many cross-nation gentlemen agreements about satellite placement. This should be viewed as a good thing (even though many nation states themselves can usurp the rules they set for their private sectors), but one assumes a more formal body will have to be introduced as the satellite count triples soon.
> This type of mesh network wouldn’t really be useful in America anyway.
Disagree unless I misunderstand the purpose of Swarm's tech specifically. But in general, satellite provided internet is currently the only high speed option for a significant rural population, many of which are paying over urban rates for much less. Or even as IoT sensors, again, rural settings benefit, something the US has a lot of. Where it that type of mesh would be less useful is in places with better terrestrial coverage. Also wise to approach the profitable markets first.