Starlink Mini brings space internet to backpackers(theverge.com)
theverge.com
Starlink Mini brings space internet to backpackers
https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/21/24182970/starlink-mini-usb-power-specs-price
71 comments
> I’m curious about is if this would provide any benefits to SAR crews over traditional sat phones.
For their communications, I doubt it, unless they happen to need low-latency video (e.g. for telemedicine for complicated cases). Existing solutions are pretty robust, and for anything you use on the move you probably want an omnidirectional antenna you don't have to rest on some surface in operation.
I could imagine this being interesting for drone-based/agumented missing person search, though!
> Fortunately I can just not buy this and it won’t have an impact on my life.
Thank you for saying this. So many people have a knee-jerk reaction of "this will ruin the outdoors" or "this means I can never disconnect anymore", which both kind of imply a concerning lack of agency. The outdoors are large enough for everybody, and nobody can force you to buy and bring one of these things!
For their communications, I doubt it, unless they happen to need low-latency video (e.g. for telemedicine for complicated cases). Existing solutions are pretty robust, and for anything you use on the move you probably want an omnidirectional antenna you don't have to rest on some surface in operation.
I could imagine this being interesting for drone-based/agumented missing person search, though!
> Fortunately I can just not buy this and it won’t have an impact on my life.
Thank you for saying this. So many people have a knee-jerk reaction of "this will ruin the outdoors" or "this means I can never disconnect anymore", which both kind of imply a concerning lack of agency. The outdoors are large enough for everybody, and nobody can force you to buy and bring one of these things!
It could make it easier to stream music, I’ve come across people who play music on Bluetooth speakers during their hikes. It is really weird behavior that spoils the area around them. Then again, they could just download the music if they are really that devoted to being a nuisance.
Yeah, I'm also really not a fan of this. But as you say, this doesn't require an Internet connection.
Then again, I've also encountered large groups of hikers basically screaming to be able to all hear each other, sometimes while walking on narrow trails (making overtaking hard). It really doesn't take technology for people to be unaware of the space that they're in and be inconsiderate to others.
Then again, I've also encountered large groups of hikers basically screaming to be able to all hear each other, sometimes while walking on narrow trails (making overtaking hard). It really doesn't take technology for people to be unaware of the space that they're in and be inconsiderate to others.
My first thought was "by backpacker they must mean the rucksack and machine gun variety protecting ukraine because not many backpackers want technology intruding on their expedition"
So basically, you can carry:
- FlexSolar 40W panel: 1.35kg
- Nitecore NB20000 ~75Wh battery: 300g
- Starlink Mini: 1.1kg
- Smartphone: 250g
For 3kg you have something that should give 2-3 hours of Internet usage on an average EU/USA good weather day (assuming 20% solar panel for 10 hours = 80Wh/day, 25-35W power usage of Starlink Mini + smartphone).
For each extra 1.65kg you get an additional 2-3 hours, resulting in 7.95kg for 8-12 hours, 11.25kg for 12-16 hours.
Not bad, but not good either.
- FlexSolar 40W panel: 1.35kg
- Nitecore NB20000 ~75Wh battery: 300g
- Starlink Mini: 1.1kg
- Smartphone: 250g
For 3kg you have something that should give 2-3 hours of Internet usage on an average EU/USA good weather day (assuming 20% solar panel for 10 hours = 80Wh/day, 25-35W power usage of Starlink Mini + smartphone).
For each extra 1.65kg you get an additional 2-3 hours, resulting in 7.95kg for 8-12 hours, 11.25kg for 12-16 hours.
Not bad, but not good either.
BTW, their specs says it wants minimum 100W USB PD, so you'll actually need a different battery that can do that which is probably going to be heavier (the NB20000 tops out at 45W), assuming that's accurate.
The 630g Anker 737 PowerCore 24K might be a good option, and also the 765g HyperJuice 245W.
So this adds 0.3-0.45kg to the estimate.
The 630g Anker 737 PowerCore 24K might be a good option, and also the 765g HyperJuice 245W.
So this adds 0.3-0.45kg to the estimate.
Yep, I was going to note this too. Assuming the Mini specs are correct and it actually needs 100W (20V/5A) as a minimum profile, most cheaper power banks won't work with it.
But yeah, options like the Anker 737 24K should work great (which supports 20V/5A and 28V/5A). I happened to pick up a few of the 737s recently, so I'll be curious to try them out with the Mini soon. Just waiting for Starlink to actually add the usb-c to DC barrel adapter to the online shop.
But yeah, options like the Anker 737 24K should work great (which supports 20V/5A and 28V/5A). I happened to pick up a few of the 737s recently, so I'll be curious to try them out with the Mini soon. Just waiting for Starlink to actually add the usb-c to DC barrel adapter to the online shop.
> Not bad, but not good either
It is insanely good. Out of this world.
A few years ago I spent 3 years driving around Africa and looked into satellite internet options from all the existing providers. Any plan that offered anything remotely close to 1GB per month was 5x the cost of the entire 3 year expedition.
This WILL change the world.
It is insanely good. Out of this world.
A few years ago I spent 3 years driving around Africa and looked into satellite internet options from all the existing providers. Any plan that offered anything remotely close to 1GB per month was 5x the cost of the entire 3 year expedition.
This WILL change the world.
But if you are driving (and thus can haul unlimited weight including huge solar panels, batteries and inverters) it seems like the existing Starlink dish would be fine, and this looks like might be worse since it doesn't have automatic orientation.
Sure, now Starlink works.
What I'm saying is Starlink in general is a complete world-changer compared to just 5 years ago.
This mini just continues that trend.
What I'm saying is Starlink in general is a complete world-changer compared to just 5 years ago.
This mini just continues that trend.
Somehow I'm left thinking — I go hiking to get away from the internet.
Most trails I like to go on have cell coverage, but I usually don't find it a problem to just put my phone on silent. That option will always be there!
I realize that some people don't have that luxury due to work or family obligations, but for these, doesn't affordably connectivity actually open up the possibility of spending extended time outdoors that they just didn't have before?
I realize that some people don't have that luxury due to work or family obligations, but for these, doesn't affordably connectivity actually open up the possibility of spending extended time outdoors that they just didn't have before?
Becomes much more interesting for vehicles in remote locations.
Compared to what? Even remotely comparable solutions drawing less power either cost something like $5-10 per megabyte (Inmarsat L-band, i.e. BGAN, Iridium Certus) or require even more power (Inmarsat Ka-band) and still cost something like 50 cent per megabyte! Monthly plans start at several hundred dollars, and terminals start in the low 4 to medium 5 digit ranges.
If you can live without Internet when backpacking, enjoy the outdoors! If you need it for whatever reason, this just cut the cost per megabyte by about 95% and the cost for the terminal by 99%. You'll probably also not hate LEO latencies compared to GEO.
If you can live without Internet when backpacking, enjoy the outdoors! If you need it for whatever reason, this just cut the cost per megabyte by about 95% and the cost for the terminal by 99%. You'll probably also not hate LEO latencies compared to GEO.
I don't think any of those are remotely common for recreational backpack hikers. Garmin inreach maybe, because it covers the two essentials this group actually wants of "check in with family" and "call for help." It would really surprise me if backpackers switch to this en masse, or if having it enabled anyone to start backpacking who currently can't because of this need being unmet.
It'll probably get used on boats, where people actually do kinda want to watch netflix at night and don't have to personally carry every gram every day. The current options are very expensive and power hungry.
And probably a bunch of other outwardly similar but culturally distinct groups that could use it. Remote wilderness hunters, ice fishers, who work out of a seasonal camp but otherwise are pretty cut off.
It'll probably get used on boats, where people actually do kinda want to watch netflix at night and don't have to personally carry every gram every day. The current options are very expensive and power hungry.
And probably a bunch of other outwardly similar but culturally distinct groups that could use it. Remote wilderness hunters, ice fishers, who work out of a seasonal camp but otherwise are pretty cut off.
Great use case examples. The marketing bit is "fits in a backpack" but really it's "fits in a base camp duffel/dry bag." People with a boat, sled, overlanding vehicle etc this is great
Not every backpack is used for backpacking! I use mine largely for the not-so-exciting trek to the office :)
The point was the use case is better for people who are not traveling by foot
Definitely! But Starlink doesn't market it towards those people. Their page simply says "fits a backpack".
In fact, they almost don't do any marketing at all, and they probably don't need to, given how far ahead their service is at this point.
In fact, they almost don't do any marketing at all, and they probably don't need to, given how far ahead their service is at this point.
It will be very niche because most people who spend time in nature seem to be either:
- Car campers, vanlifers or people living in a place permanently, which can just use the heavy Starlink version or go where there is LTE coverage
- Thru-hikers who hike every waking hour and want to be as light as possible and for which this system isn't even remotely light enough
- Casual weekend hikers for which it's going to be too expensive and also unnecessary since they'll have Internet access on Monday again.
It's only really a consideration for those who regularly go on multiweek trips or live long-term in the wilderness and move camp on a weekly/monthly frequency (rather than daily or never), and these people seem to be relatively rare.
- Car campers, vanlifers or people living in a place permanently, which can just use the heavy Starlink version or go where there is LTE coverage
- Thru-hikers who hike every waking hour and want to be as light as possible and for which this system isn't even remotely light enough
- Casual weekend hikers for which it's going to be too expensive and also unnecessary since they'll have Internet access on Monday again.
It's only really a consideration for those who regularly go on multiweek trips or live long-term in the wilderness and move camp on a weekly/monthly frequency (rather than daily or never), and these people seem to be relatively rare.
Compared to being in LTE coverage and only needing a smartphone with 2-3W power draw (around 10% of the Starlink Mini).
That’s like comparing apples to oranges though. This was never meant to be used in situations where you have a smartphone and LTE service.
What makes you think you need satellite communications when there's (working) LTE? Obviously that's not the use case, just like you don't need fixed Starlink when there's (working) gigabit fiber available.
I mean ideally (for Internet access purposes) one would have worldwide LTE coverage via cell towers and just use smartphones; the Starlink system is an alternative to that, so it makes sense to compare it.
From an individual perspective, if you want Internet access and don't have to be in a specific place, the current alternative to Starlink is to simply limit your wilderness living to places with or near areas of cell phone coverage (which potentially results in tradeoffs, of course).
From an individual perspective, if you want Internet access and don't have to be in a specific place, the current alternative to Starlink is to simply limit your wilderness living to places with or near areas of cell phone coverage (which potentially results in tradeoffs, of course).
> I mean ideally (for Internet access purposes) one would have worldwide LTE coverage via cell towers
As someone that has explored a lot of Australia, Alaska, Yukon, Africa and South America, I'm having trouble parsing your statement.
I've driven more than 1,000 miles for 10 days with absolutely nothing. No town. No people. No cars. Nothing.
I've canoed for 15 days well over 3,000 miles from the nearest town, road, building or electricity.
The idea you could cover the globe in LTE cell towers is unfathomable.
As someone that has explored a lot of Australia, Alaska, Yukon, Africa and South America, I'm having trouble parsing your statement.
I've driven more than 1,000 miles for 10 days with absolutely nothing. No town. No people. No cars. Nothing.
I've canoed for 15 days well over 3,000 miles from the nearest town, road, building or electricity.
The idea you could cover the globe in LTE cell towers is unfathomable.
Absolutely. I think living in a densely populated area, it can be hard to get a perspective for how big and largely empty the world actually is – and that's just land (and coastal seas, as far as LTE/5G reaches).
The remaining 70% are ocean, and people sometimes go there too! Some densely traveled oceans actually do have LTE coverage, e.g. parts of the north sea, since it has existing infrastructure in the form of wind parks that make adding a base station fairly easy, but that's the absolute exception, globally.
A single direct-to-cell satellite can cover a circular area measured in hundreds or thousands of kilometers. Due to the Earth's curvature, that's simply not feasible using terrestrial base stations.
The remaining 70% are ocean, and people sometimes go there too! Some densely traveled oceans actually do have LTE coverage, e.g. parts of the north sea, since it has existing infrastructure in the form of wind parks that make adding a base station fairly easy, but that's the absolute exception, globally.
A single direct-to-cell satellite can cover a circular area measured in hundreds or thousands of kilometers. Due to the Earth's curvature, that's simply not feasible using terrestrial base stations.
Compared to Garmin inReach Mini.. 3.5 ounces, 35 hours battery life and less than half the price all-in.
Don't get me wrong, this is cool and emerging tech, and I support it (I pray it doesn't ruin the wilderness). Just saying there IS a comparison
Don't get me wrong, this is cool and emerging tech, and I support it (I pray it doesn't ruin the wilderness). Just saying there IS a comparison
The InReach Mini is an amazing satellite messenger, but does not in any way provide Internet access.
this is iridium though. i suppose there is an internet overlay, but it probably isn't pretty (or fast)
InReach and similar devices use Iridium SBD, which is more like text messaging than an actual internet connection.
Iridium does offer voice and data services too, but terminals for that are significantly larger and draw more power, and the price per megabyte might bring tears to your eyes for recreational use. (Iridium Certus gets you 88 kbps at around $5/MB, and devices start at around $1500.)
Iridium does offer voice and data services too, but terminals for that are significantly larger and draw more power, and the price per megabyte might bring tears to your eyes for recreational use. (Iridium Certus gets you 88 kbps at around $5/MB, and devices start at around $1500.)
Will be very interesting once they roll them out unbundled and with more than 50gb/month of data.
(right now you only get a Starlink Mini if you are an early Starlink customer and it requires an existing residential subscription)
(right now you only get a Starlink Mini if you are an early Starlink customer and it requires an existing residential subscription)
Amazing! In some way, this was the obvious next step (Starlink clearly had some capacity headroom for this), but still, this basically blows all existing competitors out of the water.
I wonder how much more bandwidth this uses compared to their stationary terminals. There's almost certainly a power/size vs. data rate trade-off here, which can explain why they don't offer it standalone in the US yet (the reasoning probably being that people will use their more efficient larger antenna at home most of the time), but do have standalone plans in areas where they probably have less users overall.
I wonder how much more bandwidth this uses compared to their stationary terminals. There's almost certainly a power/size vs. data rate trade-off here, which can explain why they don't offer it standalone in the US yet (the reasoning probably being that people will use their more efficient larger antenna at home most of the time), but do have standalone plans in areas where they probably have less users overall.
“In the US, Starlink Mini is an add-on to Residential plans — at least for now. The Mini kit costs $599 which is $100 more than the standard dish, and will cost an extra $30 per month to add the Mini Roam service to existing $120 Residential plans. That gives Starlink Mini users up to 50GB of mobile data each month, with the option to purchase more for $1 per GB…”
Last I checked, starlink was $50/month for the residential plan here in the Netherlands... that's quite a large difference.
$120 here in the USA. Which is high for the kind of service it is but if that's your only option then it's within a reasonable range.
It's not unusual for us customers to pay a higher premium for the same service that is sold at a lesser costs around the world. This is for a great many things. This can be due to companies actively using their us customers to subsidize their market share and other places but I don't imagine that's what's at play here. It could be that the government in the Netherlands is offering some sort of subsidy that is allowing the price to be less. Also could be that local competition is necessitating a lower price as well in that area.
It's not unusual for us customers to pay a higher premium for the same service that is sold at a lesser costs around the world. This is for a great many things. This can be due to companies actively using their us customers to subsidize their market share and other places but I don't imagine that's what's at play here. It could be that the government in the Netherlands is offering some sort of subsidy that is allowing the price to be less. Also could be that local competition is necessitating a lower price as well in that area.
It’s just what the market will bear, nothing more nothing less.
Often, identical medicine is sold in the US for 5-20x the price that it is sold for in even North-West EU.
If US customers as a whole really couldn’t pay this, the price would drop.
Often, identical medicine is sold in the US for 5-20x the price that it is sold for in even North-West EU.
If US customers as a whole really couldn’t pay this, the price would drop.
That's not quite true with medicine. If US customers couldn't pay this, as in the insurance companies and or Medicare, then cost might come down but also research and development would effectively halt or other countries would stop getting lower priced drugs. United States pharmaceutical industries subsidize the world healthcare market for drugs.
And you're up there's two things at play the government is subsidizing the cost of drugs but also demanding a lower price. If you're up was the only market or the primary market at the prices they're demanding there would be no more research and development for a great many of the drugs that we have.
And you're up there's two things at play the government is subsidizing the cost of drugs but also demanding a lower price. If you're up was the only market or the primary market at the prices they're demanding there would be no more research and development for a great many of the drugs that we have.
US drug prices mostly subsidize US drug advertising. The impact of high drug prices on R&D spending after you take this into account is fairly limited.
Also, a whole bunch of research is done with public dollars from either universities, or grants to private companies. Those are then always commercialized by a for-profit company.
>Which is high for the kind of service it is but if that's your only option then it's within a reasonable range.
Relative to what? It's not marketed at population centers. My 10Mbps DSL was 90/mo, bonded I could get 25M down 1.5 up for $140/mo.
Relative to what? It's not marketed at population centers. My 10Mbps DSL was 90/mo, bonded I could get 25M down 1.5 up for $140/mo.
It's high in a sense of typical broadband for the speed and latency. In the specific sense of limited option areas or satellite only areas it is a reasonable price for that level of service.
I live in the country a good 6 miles from any City and that City is maybe 8000 people. My service is $99 a month for 1 gig fiber. The only other options I would have is some satellite-based internet or a cell based internet.
I live in the country a good 6 miles from any City and that City is maybe 8000 people. My service is $99 a month for 1 gig fiber. The only other options I would have is some satellite-based internet or a cell based internet.
I'm guessing that's because there's some actual competition for home internet in the Netherlands. Unlike the US where many customers are served by (at best) one provider, who therefore has no incentive to provide good service or be good value.
If Starlink achieves reasonable service, for many customers in the US it can get away with charging a lot.
If Starlink achieves reasonable service, for many customers in the US it can get away with charging a lot.
I moved to the Netherlands last week. I was paying $120 a month for 100 mbps with Spectrum. New customers paid less and got more. I complained and explained that was hardly fair since I had been a customer for 15 years at the same address. They said I was welcome to cancel my service for 3 months and re-activate.
I now pay €67.50 for 4gbps up / 4gpbs down. I'm actually getting those speeds and the day I arrived service was already turned on. I just had to ride my bike down to the post office and retrieve my modem.
I now pay €67.50 for 4gbps up / 4gpbs down. I'm actually getting those speeds and the day I arrived service was already turned on. I just had to ride my bike down to the post office and retrieve my modem.
There's a fixed supply of how much network capacity is available per km^2 and the demand differs globally, so the price does as well.
40 in Portugal. I thought it was the same in all of Europe.
Becomes abstract. In the short term, you will be able to use your iPhone 17 to utilize Starlink satellites. They have already done tests with the iPhone 15.
That'll probably remain limited to very low bandwidth data for the foreseeable future. Non-directional, small device antennas just don't provide for enough SNR to support more than a handful of devices per cell.
Starlink has indeed tested a video call to one phone, but you can probably do about 10-30 of these per cell until you max out the capacity (single-digit Mbit/s for everybody in a 15 mile or so radius).
For more, you need active steering and more powerful antenna arrays, which are also larger. Fitting that in a phone will probably take some time, and it might end up being awkward anyway (and slowly cook your hand/ear).
Starlink has indeed tested a video call to one phone, but you can probably do about 10-30 of these per cell until you max out the capacity (single-digit Mbit/s for everybody in a 15 mile or so radius).
For more, you need active steering and more powerful antenna arrays, which are also larger. Fitting that in a phone will probably take some time, and it might end up being awkward anyway (and slowly cook your hand/ear).
Starlink nano in 2030 iPhone 22?
How that works battery / consumption wise?
Please read the article. This is covered in detail.
That's a real 2022 response. Nowadays "Please let a LLM summarize the article for you, instead of wasting human time!" is the proper etiquette. ;-)
Thank you. I was thinking of feedback from people experienced in some complexities of backpacking / camping. In the past, I helped people traveling to Tibet and close to El Chalten [1] with GPS, batteries, solar cells, and weather schedule and redundancy, since if you don't organize yourself precisely like a "military campaign" something could fail that could be prevented with an engineering process.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Chalt%C3%A9n
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Chalt%C3%A9n
As the article says...
> That means you can power the Mini dish for two to three hours from something like an Anker Prime 27,650mAh (99.54Wh) power bank, or a little over an hour with smaller 10,000mAh (40Wh) portable batteries you probably already have laying about. It requires a USB-C PD power source with a minimum rating of 100W (20V/5A).
> That means you can power the Mini dish for two to three hours from something like an Anker Prime 27,650mAh (99.54Wh) power bank, or a little over an hour with smaller 10,000mAh (40Wh) portable batteries you probably already have laying about. It requires a USB-C PD power source with a minimum rating of 100W (20V/5A).
Are there even any 10Ah batteries that can supply 100W? The ones I’ve seen top out at 30-50W.
Regular backpacker here. I don't want or need this.
Literally we all use eSIMs and just have downtime occasionally, which is partially the point of it.
Literally we all use eSIMs and just have downtime occasionally, which is partially the point of it.
so?
considering that this is an add-on, not standalone, and the fact that it would mean like 2-3kg of extra weight to carry, backpackers who hike in places with good cell reception are not the target market.
doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people who would use this.
eg: my mother and her husband live in a small town and use starlink since none of the local or national ISPs service that town. they also own a camper trailer and travels quite a bit now that they're retired.
the mini would be perfect for them. they could power it off the camper trailer's 12V, which would be a lot more efficient than going DC->AC->DC even if you ignore the power difference, and it would take up less space when not in use. they could also pause the mini service or use it as part of their home mesh for better bandwidth.
considering that this is an add-on, not standalone, and the fact that it would mean like 2-3kg of extra weight to carry, backpackers who hike in places with good cell reception are not the target market.
doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people who would use this.
eg: my mother and her husband live in a small town and use starlink since none of the local or national ISPs service that town. they also own a camper trailer and travels quite a bit now that they're retired.
the mini would be perfect for them. they could power it off the camper trailer's 12V, which would be a lot more efficient than going DC->AC->DC even if you ignore the power difference, and it would take up less space when not in use. they could also pause the mini service or use it as part of their home mesh for better bandwidth.
This is a very short sided view. Something like this could save a bunch of lives of hikers because it means you are always connected when you need to be in case you get injured or lost.
Satellite phones have existed for decades. They are expensive and data speeds are slow but if you are talking about for emergency use then a satellite phone is smaller, cheaper, and more practical than Starlink.
If you need high speed data in the middle on nowhere then Starlink is great
If you need high speed data in the middle on nowhere then Starlink is great
For emergency communications (i.e. calling SAR or maybe getting a doctor's opinion on whether you should), satellite messengers do just fine, and they're much cheaper. Newer iPhones even have this built-in!
Data speeds are measured in a handful of bits per second, though.
Data speeds are measured in a handful of bits per second, though.
That's an unrealistic view. It's unlikely. Firstly because we already have well defined systems for that which are tested in the field and are specifically designed for it and emergency routing (InReach for example). Secondly a lot of places people tend to go backpacking have limited search and rescue capabilities so you're not guaranteed a rescue anyway. Thirdly a lot of places it'll get stolen before it gets used.
It's a toy and another damn thing to carry around and a load of marketing around it to sell it as a suitable replacement for proper kit.
It's a toy and another damn thing to carry around and a load of marketing around it to sell it as a suitable replacement for proper kit.
It isn't designed exclusively for bagpackers. That is only mentioned on the Verge article, while if you look on the starlink page you will find no such reference: https://www.starlink.com/specifications?spec=5
This is useful for working away from home somewhere on the mountains. Where you have a cabin, have some proper solar panels setup and doesn't make sense (finantially-wise) to keep a starlink installed permanently there. The other option is car-travelling, not everything needs to be solar and using electricity from a gasoline car works great while using little space on the storage.
It isn't meant as side partner for your walking hikes.
This is useful for working away from home somewhere on the mountains. Where you have a cabin, have some proper solar panels setup and doesn't make sense (finantially-wise) to keep a starlink installed permanently there. The other option is car-travelling, not everything needs to be solar and using electricity from a gasoline car works great while using little space on the storage.
It isn't meant as side partner for your walking hikes.
You're missing out on the second order effects of SAR being called out and putting themselves at risk because someone (who probably shouldn't have been out there anyway) issued a distress call.
Ty Gagne wrote a book about the death of Kate Matrosova in the White Mountains of New Hampshire[0]. The search and rescue effort took place in absolutely harrowing conditions. That was enabled by the fact that she had a Spot/InReach/equivalent.
People backstopping their safety on extremely limited SAR resources and an assumption of being able to get them deployed in the first place is not an overall improvement in the safety of hikers or the people who stick their necks out getting them out of trouble.
[0]https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36019816-where-you-ll-fi...
Ty Gagne wrote a book about the death of Kate Matrosova in the White Mountains of New Hampshire[0]. The search and rescue effort took place in absolutely harrowing conditions. That was enabled by the fact that she had a Spot/InReach/equivalent.
People backstopping their safety on extremely limited SAR resources and an assumption of being able to get them deployed in the first place is not an overall improvement in the safety of hikers or the people who stick their necks out getting them out of trouble.
[0]https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36019816-where-you-ll-fi...
You’re in luck! As far as I can tell from the article, Starlink doesn’t have any plans to make you buy/subscribe by force.
Of course. But some idiots will fall for the marketing and buy it and end up dead.
What marketing? The only thing Starlink says about it is:
> Starlink Mini is a compact, portable kit that can easily fit in a backpack, designed to provide high-speed, low-latency internet on the go.
In no way whatsoever is this marketed as a replacement for a satellite messenger or a PLB. I think the chance of somebody getting only this and ending up in a pickle is much lower than that of somebody just outright bringing nothing at all. Besides that, all recent iPhones support satellite SOS these days, and with Starlink direct to cell, all other phones will likely catch up very soon.
And why does the fact that backpackers are mentioned as one possible user group enrage you so much? Have you considered that people enjoy the outdoors in all kinds of ways, some very different from you, and maybe that includes internet access? Again, nobody has to use it!
> Starlink Mini is a compact, portable kit that can easily fit in a backpack, designed to provide high-speed, low-latency internet on the go.
In no way whatsoever is this marketed as a replacement for a satellite messenger or a PLB. I think the chance of somebody getting only this and ending up in a pickle is much lower than that of somebody just outright bringing nothing at all. Besides that, all recent iPhones support satellite SOS these days, and with Starlink direct to cell, all other phones will likely catch up very soon.
And why does the fact that backpackers are mentioned as one possible user group enrage you so much? Have you considered that people enjoy the outdoors in all kinds of ways, some very different from you, and maybe that includes internet access? Again, nobody has to use it!
You deserve more upvotes. This will ineluctably lead to trails resemblimg subway cars, where people stare down and play TikTok videos full volume.
I don't care what people stare at (I'm there to stare at nature, not other people), but blasting music loudly has been a thing on some trails in the US I've been on. People don't need internet for that.
On the other hand, while this is less common (in my experience) in e.g. the alps, and people will probably reprimand you if you attempt it, I've heard some mind-boggingly loud, annoying conversations between hikers shouting across switchbacks in a large group so that everybody can hear as well. That doesn't even require a battery!
It's a social problem if anything, not a technological one. But realistically, the outdoors are pretty large – you can almost always just wait a few minutes and let people that bother you pass by.
On the other hand, while this is less common (in my experience) in e.g. the alps, and people will probably reprimand you if you attempt it, I've heard some mind-boggingly loud, annoying conversations between hikers shouting across switchbacks in a large group so that everybody can hear as well. That doesn't even require a battery!
It's a social problem if anything, not a technological one. But realistically, the outdoors are pretty large – you can almost always just wait a few minutes and let people that bother you pass by.
Yep. I was in the middle of bloody nowhere last year in central Asia and came across two Italian guys doing that. Turns out there was 4G up there!
I didn't even have 4G there. I was just wifi hopping as and when I needed it.
I didn't even have 4G there. I was just wifi hopping as and when I needed it.
I suppose still better than playing TikTok videos while stopped at a traffic light?
As a backpacker and avid hiker, no thank you. I go outside to intentionally avoid screens and the internet/connected world. Fortunately I can just not buy this and it won’t have an impact on my life.
Another interesting thing I’m curious about is if this would provide any benefits to SAR crews over traditional sat phones. I could potentially see some benefits there, maybe, but I guess time will tell.