Is the FemtoStar Credit Token a cryptocurrency?
No, at least not by any usual definition of the term. While they are
a digital system used to pay for service, and while they do make use
of cryptographic signatures for security, FemtoStar Credit Tokens are
not transacted on a blockchain, cannot be mined, and are not intended
for use as anything other than payment for FemtoStar service. While
third-party users are free to buy and sell Credit Tokens at any
price they are able to, their value in FemtoStar service is fixed.
The FAQ on Starlink is pretty silly (or head-in-the-sand pretending competition doesn't exist):
> Starlink is designed to provide consumer broadband services to large, fixed terminals (in the satellite industry, this is known as Fixed Satellite Service).
1. I'm sure they'll make a smaller Dishy exactly as soon as they figure out how.
2. Fixed location is a beta restriction to make writing the software easier. Walk before you run.
> While there has been talk of limited use of Starlink for point-to-point connectivity, such as for high-speed securities trading, [...] it is not a part of their consumer-facing services, nor is it known to be possible with their consumer hardware.
Satellite-to-satellite links have nothing to do with the ground equipment, and the ground equipment won't even know.
> Starlink terminals are uniquely identified on the network, and can be easily geolocated by the network
Silly concept. Of course "the network" needs to know 1) which satellite is overhead 2) where to aim the response beam, from that satellite.
FemtoStar Project lead here. We're very aware of how impressive of a system Starlink is, and our intention is anything but to ignore it.
The key point, to that FAQ item, is that FemtoStar and Starlink are not directly comparable products because FemtoStar is MSS and Starlink is FSS, which results in a swath of differences beyond the basic "Starlink is faster".
FemtoStar, as well as offerings like Inmarsat BGAN, Iridium Certus, etc are MSS offerings. If you want to compare MSS, compare between these.
Starlink, as well as offerings like HughesNet and other VSAT providers, are FSS offerings. If you want to compare FSS, compare between these.
If you compare FemtoStar to Starlink on speed alone, Starlink wins just as HughesNet wins if you compare it to BGAN on speed alone. That doesn't mean any of these are bad products, just that different classes of terminal are for different jobs. Antenna size is directly related to attainable data rate, and just as scaling up the FemtoStar terminal would get you faster speeds on FemtoStar, scaling down the Starlink terminal would get you slower speeds on Starlink. There's a reason MSS companies usually offer a range of terminal sizes - not everyone needs the same combination of performance and portability. Starlink may indeed introduce a smaller, lower-speed terminal in order to enter the MSS market (though they do not currently have MSS licenses in any country we are aware of, only FSS and FSS with ESIM licenses), but Starlink as it stands is FSS.
To your second point, inter-satelite links (ISLs) and point-to-point connectivity are not the same thing. Starlink has ISLs on a handful of satellites (in-plane links only, no crosslinks yet) which it plans to use for point-to-point connectivity, but this is not part of their consumer offering. FemtoStar actually doesn't have ISLs at all, but it will support point-to-point connections for all users on all terminals as the standard service.
In Starlink's case, yes, their network uses the user's location in order to do that. In FemtoStar's case, however, a high degree of geolocation-resistance is actually attainable using a combination of terminal-side geolocation mitigations and larger-than-usual transmit beams on the satellite. The terminal provides a very rough point for beam pointing on the satellite, but the provided point is randomly selected and can be hundreds of kilometers from where the user actually is.
Please let us know if you have any more questions!
- The FemtoStar Project
You keep claiming Starlink is fixed position, yet they have already demonstrated it on planes, and intend to put it on large-ish vehicles in the near future.
> but this is not part of their consumer offering
It's beta! They'll use inter-satellites links once they know how to do it well enough. You, once again, seem to pretend that Starlink will never do something, just because the beta doesn't currently do it that way.
Anyway, please adjust your spin to explaining more about why your approach to privacy, or whatever, is great -- and spend less time spreading FUD about your competition. That'll help your project come across as much more credible.
We're not anti-Starlink - as we said, we find it extremely impressive and actually intend to use it at some of our own ground stations. For what it is designed to do (broadband to fixed terminals, where privacy and openness is not a concern) it is extraordinarily good.
It isn't us calling Starlink fixed - FSS and MSS, and FSS with ESIM (Earth Station in Motion) are legally defined and separate categories with separate licenses and separate rules, and Starlink is FSS - those are the licenses they hold and those are the bands their hardware is designed for. FSS terminals ARE allowed to move (this is what an ESIM is and I imagine is the "large-ish vehicles" you're talking about). As for on aircraft, I believe that was an experimental license but also aeronautical satcom licensing is sometimes an substantially separate situation legally.
We are not the ones calling Starlink Fixed Satellite Service - SpaceX and the FCC are. Literally any one of their FCC filings will include the phrase "fixed satellite service" or "FSS" somewhere, because that's what they are and that's the license they have.
WRT ISLs, I repeat, ISLs and point-to-point connectivity are not the same thing at all. ISLs are where satellites communicate with eachother directly. Point-to-point connectivity has nothing to do with ISLs (though it can use them if the network has them) and is a matter of terminal-to-terminal links without use of a dedicated feeder link or official ground station. Starlink does not need ISLs to do point-to-point, and FemtoStar (which will not have ISLs at all) can do point-to-point just fine without them.
We're fully aware Starlink is a beta, and to be fair to them, even in beta they're much closer to done than we are. We also know they totally COULD do MSS if they decided to get into that market. However, we also know that the core offering of Starlink is internet service via official ground stations, and that they haven't made any moves towards MSS so far - only FSS with ESIM licenses. There are many positive terms with which SpaceX could be described, but without a doubt "open" is not one of them, and that seems to hold true for Starlink no matter how high-tech it may be.
I really struggle to see a situation where someone considering Starlink would consider FemtoStar a valid alternative, or where someone considering FemtoStar would consider Starlink a valid alternative. The terminal size, the network architecture, the privacy properties, the openness, the performance, the licensed service type, there's way too many major differences in design goals and priorities to make an apples-to-apples comparison.
The idea sounds cool although it's not clear how much IoT users care about openness and privacy. Starlink is also going to set a pretty low price ceiling on midband services.
FemtoStar Project lead here, it's really neither an IoT system nor a Starlink competitor, though it could do either. See our FAQ page's item on Starlink and how it's an interesting but indirect comparison.
FemtoStar is perfectly usable as a traditional satellite communications system, but we're specifically interested serving a group of people who have not previously been satcom customers - that is, users more focused on FOSS and privacy, who, we hope, might see FemtoStar more as an improvement on the privacy concerns and proprietary software of terrestrial and satellite networks alike than as a spec-for-spec competitor with other FSS or MSS options.
Could you give some specific examples of potential customers who have expressed an interest in an open source satellite constellation? I would guess a company like Matrix.org might be a good fit.
In terms of large customers, yes, community projects like that are an option, but in a lot of cases we expect our customers to be individuals simply purchasing a terminal for their own use. We've had plenty of individuals express interest in using it - it probably wouldn't be useful to start just listing off names but if you'd like to join the FemtoStar Matrix room you'll find plenty of people very interested in it (though, in fairness, being interested in it is why you would join the Matrix room to begin with).
We have found that the idea of 100%-FOSS, privacy-respecting, low-cost, medium-speed internet access even in the middle of nowhere, plus an open platform for custom services is appealing to a lot of people.
Normally when a project with such goals is posted on HN, it's usefully torn apart, security & privacy-wise.
While in-depth details seem light, is the absence of such criticism a positive indication regarding the integrity of its base security and privacy principles?
I wonder if part of it is the association with Pine64. They've delivered some fantastic stuff that people didn't think would be done.
Also launching satellites with LoRaWAN on them doesn't look so hard any more. I was looking into it the other month and you can get prototype kits with the correct transmitters very cheaply.
This was my initial impression too. Pine64 brings low-price hardware into the hands of hackers. A space-based communications system will require very serious investment. I have no idea how they intend to pay for this...
Satellites are expensive indeed, but they are, at the very minimum, cheaper than they used to be. Their cost to launch is also highly impacted by their size and mass, which, in the case of FemtoStar, are both very small numbers (being a sub-1U cubesat).
I should also clarify, Pine is a partner of the FemtoStar Project, but both are independent from each other and it's certainly not as if Pine is going it alone (in fact, the space segment is the job of the FemtoStar Project itself, not Pine). We currently have development funding from NLnet and focusing on developing the hardware this year while seeking funding for launch.
By obtaining those licenses, just as any other satellite company would. We're already working with regulators in Canada, and intend to license the network in as many other countries as possible.
Is there a public repository somewhere with the in-progress designs? I'm interested to take a look. (Starting with the over-the-air protocol are you are using.)
We're looking to open up our repos as designs begin to stabilize this over the next month or two. We want to make sure anything we publish is in a state where, even if incomplete, code can at least be successfully built and worked on the general public and hardware designs are stable. To be clear, it will still be alpha/beta versions, but as various parts of the project reach the stage where they are not likely to be redesigned entirely and can be made to work without too much difficulty, we'll be releasing designs and source for them then. Stay tuned - for a lot of hardware this should be soon.
I started looking at LoRa for my own radiomesh. But quickly realized the limitations of that specification. Now I'm looking at custom radio at 27MHz instead: http://radiomesh.org
Having had the nightmare of dealing with the old school satcom companies for offshore sailing (super low bandwidth needs), everything about these guys stands out as being everything they are not.
Glad you're interested, and yep, there's a reason the big text on the homepage says "Satellite communications, done differently". If you have questions or want to follow along check out our Matrix room at #femtostar:matrix.org (https://matrix.to/#/!COEHOXujBzfAHAVzPG:matrix.org?via=matri...).
