Elon Musk’s Starlink Adds $750 Congestion Charge
from the unavoidable-slowdowns dept
Republicans are rewriting an infrastructure bill grant program to redirect billions of dollars to Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite broadband service. The claim is that this is necessary because Starlink is the perfect solution for the country’s rural broadband users and deserves this money. The reality is that Starlink continues to show that it lacks the capacity or affordability to actually accomplish the job.
Low-Earth Orbit satellite broadband services like Starlink have their uses, but will always be dealing with capacity constraints. That means higher prices, weird restrictions, and, as of November 2024, a $100 “congestion charge” for a service that’s already too expensive for many of the rural Americans who could most benefit.
It didn’t take long for that “congestion charge” to soar to $500 in some areas. Now it’s already risen as high as $750 in states like Washington as Starlink is forced to try and deter users in some markets from using the increasingly congested network:
“The change can crank up the starting price simply to own the Starlink dish on a residential plan to $1,099.”
Other parts of the country see no congestion charge, but there’s no guarantee that they won’t see one down the line as the network subscribership grows. It’s also very likely the company will increasingly have to resort to doing things like throttling higher definition videos, or engaging in other network management tricks to try and keep the service semi-reliable.
You might recall that Republicans and Elon Musk threw a hissy fit a few years ago when the Biden FCC prioritized “future-proof” fiber and higher-capacity 5G services over Starlink in previous government subsidy programs, (correctly) expressing concerns that the service lacked the capacity to provide consistently reliable speeds on the taxpayer dime.
Ever since then Republicans and Musk have been working tirelessly to “correct” this oversight, to the point where they’re now rewriting a major $45 billion infrastructure bill broadband grant program to ensure Starlink gets a massive portion of taxpayer subsidies. Many right wingers, like c-tier comedian turned podcaster and fashy-apologist Joe Rogan, act as if Starlink is akin to magic.
But the technology has been criticized for harming astronomical research and the ozone layer. Starlink customer service is largely nonexistent. It’s too expensive for the folks most in need of reliable broadband access. The nature of satellite physics and capacity means slowdowns and annoying restrictions are inevitable, and making it scale to permanently meet real-world demand is expensive and not guaranteed.
These are all things Republican Elon Musk ass kissers either don’t know, or don’t care about as they work to reward their billionaire benefactor. It will be up to their constituents to figure it out later. But money redirected to Starlink is money redirected to cheaper and better broadband alternatives, including super cheap gigabit fiber access and community-owned and operated broadband networks.
So again, Starlink is a nice step up if you’re in the middle of nowhere, lack any other connectivity options, can afford it, and don’t care about its potential environmental impact. But it shouldn’t be taking priority in terms of taxpayer subsidies. Unless, of course, you only care about kissing Elon Musk’s ass and don’t actually care about the constituents you claim to serve.
Filed Under: broadband, congestion, elon musk, fcc, fiber, high speed internet, low earth orbit satellite, subsidies, taxpayers, telecom
Companies: spacex, starlink
Comments on “Elon Musk’s Starlink Adds $750 Congestion Charge”
“You paid for service. And now… you’re using it… too much. You dare! Well, here’s a bigger bill for you. We’re not the phone company, but we do it: because we can.”
movies4u
This is really concerning if true. Redirecting billions to Starlink sounds good in theory because rural broadband is a real problem, but if Starlink can’t deliver affordable, reliable service at scale, then taxpayers are just subsidizing an expensive, limited-capacity fix instead of real infrastructure.
Low-Earth Orbit satellites definitely have a place, especially for remote areas where fiber or cable is impossible, but these congestion charges show that Starlink’s capacity isn’t infinite, and rural families shouldn’t have to pay $750 just to get decent internet.
If we really care about connecting rural America, we should be investing in durable, future-proof solutions like fiber where possible, and smarter wireless expansions elsewhere, not just handing out grants that don’t guarantee affordable access.
Re:
“rural broadband is a real problem”
True! And one that would be more effectively and more cheaply solved by just running municipal fiber everywhere, than by relying on a difficult-to-expand satellite network owned by a petulant fascist.
Re: Re:
These LLM spambots are getting more effective. I think you just replied to one without knowing. (See the user link)
Over the weekend...
…Starlink became a topic of discussion on a private mailing list used by a group of senior people who work on security/privacy/abuse issues together, regardless of company/university/etc. affiliation. This is a place where some of the heavy lifting gets done, because everyone recognizes it’s in their best interest to collaborate on common solutions to difficult problems.
The person who started the discussion provided rather alarming evidence which strongly suggests that the congestion mentioned in this posting is the result of massive bot (as in hijacked systems) activity throughout Starlink’s entire network. All end user networks have had bot problems for 20-something years, but almost all of them have developed strong detection and remediation tactics as a matter of survival. (E.g. Comcast, for all its faults, is really good at this.) It appears that Starlink is doing nothing: they’re not even trying. And of course botnet operators are likely well aware of this and are targeting Starlink specifically because it’s a weak point.
Which means, to tie this together: Starlink customers are paying extra fees so that botnet operators can enjoy the full use of a service that they pay nothing for, because Starlink is ignoring a raging fire burning on its own network. And the entire rest of the Internet now has to figure out how to defend itself from Starlink’s malfeasance, and some of those defensive measures will likely result in fewer/slower services for Starlink users.
Re:
This should surprise…nobody. Elon picks his staff based on their fealty to Elon, not on competence. My guess is that Starlink is being run by three 23-year-olds who took a crash course in network protocols and are copy/pasting examples out of FAQs into production routers.
Typo:
No, it isn’t. It is money redirected from cheaper and better broadband alternatives.
Who could have foreseen this? Oh right. Everyone that isn’t a liar or imbecile.
Well, with Elon spouting off again regarding the big beautiful dildo down Americans’ asses bill, I imagine dur leader may halt that funding. That is, if he can remember. I’m sure the republican complaint that there was a cover up regarding his mental condition is another confession…
Re:
Yeah, Elon just threatened to primary… basically all of them, so I gotta wonder if the Starlink deal is still a thing.
Starlink really is the GOP of broadband, useless and costly in the places people actually live.
Gotta be nice, gotta be nice
SCREW(translation) ELON.
1. his sats are to small and cant handle more then a few connections each.
2. consistent connections? last heard was 100mbps? 3.Not supposed to interfere with other signals or paths to send things up?
4. What nations has he covered? trying for the WHOLE world, waiting on politics and licening.
5. Dropping out of the Air. Some are burning up on re-entry. Thought they Should stay up there for awhile. But the More he puts up, the More that can drop out. And the MAJOR reason to raise prices, including at the Price, its to expensive And only nice for Emergency Services. MAYBE.