The future of the Internet is here, floating around our atmosphere in the form of Wi-Fi-supporting satellites. In an effort by big data companies such as Google, SpaceX and OneWeb, the future world could be a global hotspot. But investments into technologies like this, while useful, do not provide the humanitarian benefits that they are sold with and are largely unsuccessful ventures.
The goal of these companies is to create satellites that orbit closer to the earth than any previous satellites. These satellites would constantly be sending signals to transmitters around the world; if you are in range of these transmitters you would receive full Wi-Fi connectivity.
The idea is in itself a simple one but there are many questions that remain to be answered. First and foremost, is the cost of providing an internet connection to the entire world worth the investment? Between OneWeb, SpaceX and Google’s Project Loon, billions of dollars are being spent, although Google did not provide estimated costs.
OneWeb states that this project and technology is imperative for the future of education, and on that point he may be correct. A primary education in today’s world does almost always require access to the internet. But rather than simply spending gargantuan amounts of money on providing Wi-Fi for schools, couldn’t that money be better spent building schools in areas where education is too costly or scarce?
Another crucial problem in this new area of technology is resolving how multiple companies will cooperate when they are all using the same airspace to provide competing services. If these businesses truly believe that this is the future of our internet supply, a more joint effort needs to be made between the contesting companies.
Elon Musk of SpaceX has requested permission to launch 4000 low-flying satellites to begin this experiment of global Wi-Fi connectivity. The most obvious problem for this plan will be the recovering the initial investment. Since he is targeting some of the poorest populations on earth, the return rate will be very low. This and other unforeseen problems are the reason why ventures like this are untimely in this environment.
Although this may be how we are all globally connecting in the future, these companies’ plans to bring about total Wi-Fi coverage are not adequate to achieve these ends. The cost of these strategies is also exorbitantly high, further slowing any humanitarian assistance that is promised with this technology. Rather than wasting time, money and resources on projects that may or may not work, these companies should look at smaller ways to immediately help impoverished areas, such as investing in local businesses to provide regions with whatever technological aid is needed.