A bit offtopic, but how did they create the visualizations? Do they have a designer on their team for that or is there any good tool that creates charts like these?
In some areas, you'd need 10km of fiber to reach 50 households. Considering frequent repairs and maintenance, even with robots that's not cost efficient at what consumers are willing to pay.
Or make it more expensive? I'm sure their 1gbps plan won't be cheap. Probably expensive enough that no one in a city would consider taking it. In rural areas however it's the only alternative.
Starlink's business is probably more successful anyway if they focus on fewer customers but charge those more. Less congestion and lower bandwidth requirements for their ground stations.
Starlink will likely be more expensive than city fibre. That should solve the issue naturally. The only people using it in cities could be companies for backup connections or people taking their router when travelling.
It's also why Wifi, as amazing as new generations are, can't be the universal solution. Even well built installations in offices will quickly clog up during busy times. Wifi is important for devices where cables don't work, the same as satellite via internet or 5G only makes sense where fibre doesn't work.
But they have to move. Having 100 satellites serving NYC means you'd need a similarly fine mesh over the ocean.
I think they'll just make it more expensive than internet in cities. That way it's still the best option for rural areas without attracting too many customers in cities.
60/40mbps isn't bad unless you want to share it with a lot of people (e.g. larger families). Sure, downloads won't be as fast as you'd like them to be but it's enough for 4k streaming so I don't think many people would notice the difference between this and a 200mbit line.
Cross compiling is more for supporting more platforms with minimal or no code changes. If you develop applications that will always just run on x86, developing and testing them on another platform doesn't make much sense in my opinion. You might have to compromise just because of your development environment and errors could be caught too late.
Still, wouldn't you want to test it on the same architecture? It's fine if you just compile on a server but then you can as well have a cheap client with only a web interface.
> And then the Google pedigree thing is obvious. Youngish startups with a little money just starting to build their team past "a co-founder and these two recent grads" are hungry to get FAANG alums into leadership. I don't know whether that's a good thing for them to care about—maybe it is—but they do seem to show a very strong preference for them.
It generally isn't a bad idea for inexperienced founders to have some insight into how larger tech companies operate. Especially when it comes to scaling, knowing how companies typically handle this can be quite valuable.
But isn't that the case with all companies of that size? It might be easier at some, but pretty much everyone I know at large company knows stories of some people doing next to nothing. As structures grow complex it's easy to hide behind politics if you're smart.
Payout thresholds for Adsense are quite low. But it's right, in these cases they'd have to reimburse the advertisers. They could keep their share for investigation and running the ads but at least the amount that was due to be paid out should be reimbursed.
I recently moved to Germany and now have 100mbit DSL for 25€/month (~$30) plus a phone contract with 6GB/month (more than enough since I have Wifi at home and work) including a phone flat for <€20/month. That's on par with the UK and cheaper than US and Canada.
It's all encrypted. Encryption in group chats is a bit weaker to provide better usability (there was an article recently I believe) but messages itself are encrypted. And since we're talking here about usage of data for ad tracking, any encryption is likely good enough.
They can of course still track meta data, e.g. tailor your ads based on interest of contacts. But if you only use whatsapp (ad free), they own't make any money with it.
Only using whatsapp without other facebook accounts should still be fine. Whatsapp has end2end encryption (unlike FB messenger) and if you don't use other FB products they can't use your data for ads. Obviously not as good as an independent messenger but will cause the same revenue loss for FB.
Does that mean that you can get an instance on AWS and slowdown the underlying server for all others by forcing a lot of syscalls? Or how is performance distributed between tenants?
Any public information on how someone like Google or Facebook handle this? Do they have enough spare capacity to patch or will they need to build further capacity first? I could imagine 10% of Google's capacity (internal services, not Google Cloud) is at least a large datacentre.