A Note To Investors/Enthusiasts Of Dogecoin

We live in a strange time. I know you could say that about almost any point in history, but let’s face it. The past year has been more eventful than most. The past few months have been even more eventful if you’re an investor or follow economic news. We recently learned that a multi-billion dollar hedge fund is no match for a bunch of shit-posters on Reddit.

I’m not gonna lie. That story still puts a smile on my face. Last year sucked, but when a bunch of shit-posters on Reddit tank a predatory hedge fund, the world is an objectively better place.

As much fun as that is, there are some other stories related to investing that are worth noting. On top of the craziness caused by r/WallStreetBets, it has been just as chaotic for investors of cryptocurrencies. When the financial world is in chaos, cryptocurrencies that thumb their nose at old economic institutions tend to thrive.

Now, full disclosure, I do own Bitcoins. That’s the only cryptocurrency I own and I don’t own much. I’m not a bold investor. I buy index funds and ETFs. I would not fit in on r/WallStreetBets, nor would I be a good evangelist for Bitcoin.

For that same reason, I’d like to send a special note to those currently caught up in the Dogecoin craze. If you don’t know what Dogecoin is, then that’s understandable. It is a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin, but it’s unique in a few very particular ways.

Most notably, Dogecoin is often treated as a joke. That’s because it started off as one.

That’s not my opinion. That’s literally part of its origin. Its creators, Billy Markus and Jackson Palmer, were legitimately surprised when people started using it. I guess they didn’t get the joke.

That doesn’t mean Dogecoin has absolutely nothing going for it. It is a functioning cryptocurrency that uses some of the same technology as Bitcoin. Its most notable difference is that, unlike Bitcoin, there’s no limit to how many Dogecoins can be mined. Whereas Bitcoin can only ever have 21 million, Dogecoins can be mined indefinitely.

It may seem like a small difference, but that difference matters if you understand the basics of scarcity in economics. Most people understand it on some levels. If you can make an infinite amount of something, then it’s not going to have much value. If something is incredibly finite and difficult to obtain, like gold or Bitcoins, it’s going to have more value.

It’s that concept that I’d like to convey to those cheering on Dogecoin. Thanks to the recent upheavals from r/WallStreetBets, Dogecoin has been surging more than most currencies and even people like Elon Musk are cheering it on.

That’s not unusual. Sometimes, certain assets get propped up for a brief period. That has happened a lot with cryptocurrencies over the past decade. However, with Dogecoin, it’s a lot more style than substance.

Whereas Bitcoin gains value as it becomes more accepted in various sectors of the economy, Dogecoin gains value because people are just cheering it on. One has long-term sustainability. The other ends as soon as people get bored or find something else to cheer on.

Today, it’s Dogecoin.

Tomorrow, it could be JackCoin, a cryptocurrency made exclusively for people named Jack.

Is that the dumbest idea in the history of finance? I don’t know, but entire economies have gone bust for dumb things before.

Again, I’m not an investment expert. I’m not giving investment advice to anyone. However, to those thinking about getting in on the Dogecoin craze, I offer one important message.

You can win with style over substance in a lot of things, but not when it comes to money. At some point, a product has to demonstrate its value. You can only prop it up for so long before basic economic forces take over. It’s not fair and it’s not rational, but that’s how economics work.

Dogecoin will find that out at some point. Investors may have to find out the hard way.

Leave a comment

Filed under Bitcoin, Current Events, rants

A Quick (And Critical) Lesson On Tolerance And “Cancel Culture”

There are certain topics that I find difficult to talk about, but I’ll still make the effort because they’re worth discussing. That’s why I’ll write something about abortion or religion every now and then. These are serious, emotionally charged issues. There’s merit to discussing them.

Then, there’s “cancel culture.”

I’m sorry, but I’ve yet to see a single discussion about “cancel culture” that has ever been productive. Some say it’s a threat to free speech and western values. Some say it’s not really a thing. I say both are wrong and both aren’t helping by making sub-par arguments.

Every few months or so, it starts trending and for bullshit reasons. Usually, what some bemoan as “cancel culture” depends heavily on their political affiliation. A conservative won’t see Colin Kaepernick being shut out of the NFL as cancel culture, but they’ll whine endlessly about Rosanne Barr getting fired from her show.

Conversely, a liberal will cheer when Lou Dobbs gets fired, but will make endless excuses for liberal celebrities who say objectively dumb shit. It always seems to boil down whether you’re politics align with whoever or whatever is canceled. It’s arbitrary, it’s petty, and it’s absurd. I really don’t have any other way to describe it.

Now, I could rant for hours about bullshit “cancel culture” arguments. However, I’d rather do something more productive with my time. I’d also prefer not to add to the whining. The only reason I’m bringing this up is because that’s all anyone has been doing since the story about Gina Carano broke.

If you’re not up to speed, consider yourself lucky. I won’t recount the details. The long and short of it is she got fired by Disney for some stupid tweets that mentioned the holocaust. Now, I won’t give my opinion on the contents of these tweets. Again, that’s not a productive use of my time or anyone’s time, for that matter.

However, I don’t want to bring this topic up just to rant about it. Instead, I’d like to use the ongoing whining about “cancel culture” to offer some perspective about what it is, what it isn’t, and why it matters. I could try to put it into words. Thankfully, people far smarter and more talented than me already have.

The following image that I found on Twitter sums it up nicely.

If that doesn’t get the point across, please see this helpful little image detailing the paradox of tolerance by Karl Popper.

In short, being tolerant is a good thing. Protecting free speech is a good thing. However, there are lines, limits, and context. Failing to understand them will only cause more outrage and whining. The world already has too much of that. Let’s not add to it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Celebrities and Celebrity Culture, censorship, Current Events, human nature, media issues, psychology, television

Jack’s World: My Theory About “WandaVision” And Mutants In The MCU

I had a plan in place for my next video for my YouTube channel, Jack’s World. It was a good plan. Then, I saw Episode 5 of “WandaVision” and I just had to change it. If you’ve been following this show, you probably know why. There have been a lot of strong reactions to it, as well as new fan theories.

Now, I was going to wait until the end in order to formulate my own theories and do a proper review. I just can’t wait that long. I’m sorry. I’m weak, in that respect. This video was a bit rushed, but it’s my own quick reaction to what’s been going on in “WandaVision” and the possible implications for mutants in the MCU. Enjoy!

Leave a comment

Filed under Marvel, Marvel Cinematic Universe, movies, superhero comics, superhero movies, X-men, YouTube

New Comic Book Day February 10, 2021: My Pull List And Pick Of The Week

There’s just a few more days until Valentine’s Day. Being a lover of romance and a writer of erotica romance novels, I certainly appreciate a holiday centered around love. At the same time, I have mixed feelings because I’m currently single and have been for quite some time.

It can get lonely on Valentine’s Day. However, even if I am alone, I can still appreciate love and my love of comics certainly help with that. Beyond my fondness for superhero romances, my love of comics helps remind me why love is a feeling worth pursuing.

It’s a beautiful thing. If you’ve found love with someone, then you understand its power. Even if you haven’t, the stories in comics help depict why it’s so powerful for so many characters. Love is a big part of what drives famous heroes like Superman, Spider-Man, and even characters like the Punisher.

It even drives villains. Let’s not forget that in the comics, Thanos was in love with the physical manifestation of death. It’s creepy, but it still counts as love.

I may have to spend another Valentine’s Day alone this year. That’s always disappointing. However, thanks to my love of comics, I never feel too lonely. I hope others can enjoy that same feeling. To assist, here is my pull list and pick of the week. Enjoy!


My Pull List

Amazing Spider-Man #59

Daredevil #27

DC Love Is A Battlefield #1

Eternals #2

Excalibur #18

Fantastic Four #29

Future State: Justice League #2

Future State: Superman/Wonder Woman #2

Mighty Morphin #4

Morbius: Bond Of Blood #1

S.W.O.R.D. #3

Star Wars: Darth Vader #10

Wolverine: Black, White & Blood #3

X-Force #17


My Pick Of The Week
Morbius: Bond of Blood #1

Leave a comment

Filed under Jack's Quick Pick Comic

My Reaction/Theories To “WandaVision” Episode 5

I apologize for posting this several days after the fact. I know I’m late to the party with respect to reactions to Episode 5 of “WandaVision.” I don’t have a very good reason for that, other than being pre-occupied with my Super Bowl LV preparations.

In hindsight, that might have been for the best because the events of this episode were incredible. It was, without a doubt, the most impactful episode of this show to date. Both the fan reactions and the IMDB scores are proof of that.

I can safely confirm that my reactions mirrored the shock, glee, and astonishment that got this show trending the day it debuted. As excited as I was to watch the Super Bowl, I found myself more caught up in the implications of this episode.

Now, before I go any further, I want to disclose that there will be talks of spoilers for this episode. If you haven’t seen it yet, I highly recommend you do. If you’re at all a fan of Marvel and the Marvel Cinematic Universe, this is one episode you do not want to miss. It has implications that could likely impact future movies in the best possible way.

If you’re still here, then here’s a brief rundown of the events.

  • Wanda and Vision’s kids start as infants, but rapidly age to toddlers and then to pre-teens
  • Vision starts to suspect that something is amiss in their cheerful life
  • Outside Westview, SWORD is trying to make sense of the anomaly and starts sending drones inside
  • Wanda doesn’t like the intrusion and goes so far as to step out and warn SWORD not to interfere with the world she’s created
  • Vision is able to free some people from Wanda’s manipulations and confronts her about it
  • Before they can come to blows, a surprise guest arrives at the door and it’s Wanda’s dead brother, Pietro
  • However, it’s not the Pietro that died in “Avengers: Age of Ultron.” It’s the Pietro from the X-Men Fox movies, played by Evan Peters.

After four episodes of teasing, mystery, and build-up, this episode gave us the first major payoff. Now, it’s a bit clearer as to what’s going on and what’s driving this story.

We know now that it’s not some outside agent who has hijacked Wanda’s mind and powers. She’s the one doing this on her own. She’s the one who created this strange anomaly around Westview, creating her own pocket reality that mirrors that of American sitcoms throughout the decades.

That’s a critical and potentially revealing detail, one that even Vision finds distressing. In addition to finding out that she’s the source of all this, we also learn that she’s the one who took Vision’s body from SWORD and she wasn’t polite about it.

She’s clearly not in a very understanding state of mind. Visions death at the hands of Thanos did not go over well and him not coming back in “Avengers Endgame” only made it worse. At this point, she has lost too many people that she loves and she’s willing to break reality to get it back.

That moment when she steps out of the bubble and confronts SWORD makes this clear. She has what she wants in this pocket reality. She has Vision, a family, and a life in which she hasn’t lost everyone who matters to her. That’s powerful in that it shows how much she was hurt by the events leading up to this show.

However, the biggest moment, by far, came at the end with the arrival of Quicksilver. However, the fact that the Quicksilver we saw was not the Quicksilver played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson in “Avengers: Age of Ultron” was the most jarring. It also has the greatest implications.

This is the part where I’m going to start exploring some fan theories, some of which others have already developed. I think after this episode, we have enough details to make some less-than-wild speculations about where this is leading.

We know from the previous episode that Vision was indeed killed. It’s very possible that he’s only alive because Wanda is animating him. We also find out that as powerful as Wanda is, she has limits. She couldn’t make baby Tommy and Billy stop crying. She also couldn’t bring their dog, Sparky, back to life.

This would imply that, even if she wanted to bring the Aaron Taylor-Johnson Quicksilver back, she couldn’t. It seems that if someone dies in her universe, then they stay dead. She cannot bring them back. However, this may not apply to version of her brother from other universes.

We already know from “Dr. Strange” that the multiverse is a thing. Wanda may also be aware of this on some level, even if she didn’t consciously reach into another universe to find another version of her brother. The fact she found the same version we saw in “X-Men: Days of Futures Past” could be another telling hint.

However, I don’t think that means that the MCU is about to do a direct crossover with the Fox era X-Men movies. I think trying to incorporate that messy continuity into the MCU will be too cumbersome, even for someone like Kevin Feige.

I suspect that we’re getting this particular version of Quicksilver because he, and other mutants like him, have been in a pocket universe of their own. It’s why we haven’t seen any mutants show up in the MCU, at least with respect to the story. I understand the movie rights were the logistical reason for that.

The fact that Wanda created a pocket reality of her own means that someone or something taught her. I don’t know who it could be. Perhaps, it involves someone like Agatha Harkness, a witch from the comics who helped Wanda master her powers. Maybe it involves someone far more powerful, like Mephisto.

Whatever the source, I think pocket realities are going to be what plays into the events of “Dr. Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.” They’ll be akin to the disruptions or wrinkles in the larger fabric of reality, which was already disrupted by the events of “Avengers Endgame.” That domain could be where mutants reside.

Now, I could be dead wrong about that. In fact, I’m not entirely confident in that theory being true. However, there’s one other theory that I think is a bit more plausible. It’s not so much a theory as it is an observation of trends.

Wanda is becoming a villain and she will likely play the part of the MCU’s main villain in Phase 4.

I think, thematically, this makes sense. After Thanos, the MCU needs a new villain to warrant a massive assembly of the Avengers. We’ve already seen this big, menacing villains who look, act, and sound evil. We got Ronan, Thanos, Dormammu, and Ultron. I think the MCU needs a change of pace after that.

Wanda would act as an entirely different kind of villain. This isn’t someone who is just an outright villain from the get-go. She’s a friend. She’s an Avenger. She’s someone who has lost nearly everyone she has ever cared about. If ever there was a hero you could understand breaking bad, it’s her. That’ll make fighting against her that much harder.

The moment in this episode when she confronted SWORD made it clear. She can bend reality to her whim and she’s willing to use it to get what she wants. That’ll make her both dangerous and volatile. She may end up being the main villain of “Dr. Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.”

If that’s the case, then Phase 4 of the MCU is going to be very chaotic indeed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Marvel, Marvel Cinematic Universe, movies, superhero comics, superhero movies, X-men

Post-Super Bowl LV Aftermath And Thoughts

It’s over.

The 2020 NFL season is over.

Super Bowl LV is over and while the outcome was lacking in drama, it was still not surprising.

Again, Tom Brady led a team to a Super Bowl.

For the seventh time in his career, Tom Brady is a Super Bowl champion.

At this point, there’s no way around it. Tom Brady is the greatest. They call him the GOAT, the Greatest of All Time. It’s not just a cute acronym. It’s the truth. The man has won seven Super Bowls. That’s nearly double that of any other quarterback of any era. He’s also played in ten. Out of a 21 year career, that means he’s been to a Super Bowl almost every other year.

If you’re not an American football fan, just know that’s insane. That’s unheard of. In a game that’s supposed to be the ultimate team sport in which one player cannot win a game alone, it might as well be superhuman. It’s one thing to do this with one team over the course of two decades, but Brady had to raise the bar yet again by going to another team and winning them a Super Bowl in his first year.

Again, that’s insane.

That’s unheard of.

That was thought to be impossible, given the nature of the NFL.

That still didn’t stop Brady. He still went to a new team and, despite not even winning the division, he went onto win the Super Bowl. There are Hall of Fame players who are considered the greatest of their time who never even played in a Super Bowl. Barry Sanders, Bernie Kosar, Calvin Johnson, and Philip Rivers are all considered great, but Brady has played in 10 more Super Bowl than they ever did.

At this point, there is no debate. There is no context or second-guessing. Tom Brady is the greatest football player of all time. After this lastest Super Bowl, I would even go a step further.

Tom Brady is officially better than Michael Jordan.

Trust me, I don’t say those words lightly. Michael Jordan was so dominant when he played in the NBA. His six championship and the way he went about winning them are what put him a cut above the rest, even among players today. LeBron James is trying to catch him, but even if he goes onto win six championship, he won’t be better than Tom Brady.

Patrick Mahomes is still great. He still won a Super Bowl last year and he still put up great numbers. Nobody can take that away from him. However, even if he goes onto win seven Super Bowls throughout his career, he’ll never be greater than Tom Brady, if only because he lost to Brady when it counted.

You can hate Brady all you want for winning so much and being so dominant. You can even hate how lopsided the Super Bowl was this year. You still can’t deny the cold, hard truth.

Tom Brady has shattered what few doubts remained. He is the greatest of all time when it comes to football. I’m confident in saying that there will never be anyone as great as him, for as long as this game is played.

1 Comment

Filed under football, NFL, sports

Jack Fisher’s Sexy Sunday Thoughts: Super Bowl LV Edition

It’s finally here!

The holiest of holy days for football fans has arrived!

Super Bowl LV is set to kick off in Tampa on this most glorious of annual sporting events. As a lifelong football fan, this is a day that’s near and dear to my heart. I don’t always care who’s playing. I just want to see a damn good game while eating chicken wings and drinking beer.

I’ve been eating light and working out more in preparation for this, as always. This is also one of those Super Bowls where you don’t really need to do much to hype it up. All the tag lines are there.

It’s Tampa Bay vs. Kansas City.

It’s Tom Brady versus Patrick Mahomes.

It’s the greatest quarterback of all time versus someone who could end up becoming the greatest.

I don’t doubt for a second that this is the match-up that the NFL marketing department hoped for when the playoff started. Even if you’re not a fan of either teams, you can’t deny the weight of this match-up. These are two great teams led by two of the best quarterbacks of our generation. I’m ready for this. My heart, body, and liver is just so ready.

I don’t think I need to say much more to excite my fellow football fans. For the rest of the day, it’s all about counting down the seconds to kick-off. In a year where every week was in doubt due to the pandemic, the fact we made it to the Super Bowl is a hell of an achievement. If the game is as great as advertised, then I’ll take that as a sign that better days are coming.

We’re almost home, fellow football fans. As we wait for kickoff, here are some Sexy Sunday Thoughts to help pass the time. Enjoy!


“You know you watch a lot of porn when you can tell whether or not someone has bleached their anus.”


“A threesome can only go really wrong or really right.”


“Evolution ensures that not too many people can have a pathetic loser fetish.”


“Innovation is the mother of all invention, but it’s the cool aunt of sex toys.”


“People who take themselves too seriously are a lot less likely to be adventurous in bed.”


“The best hand job will never measure up to an average blow job.”


“A love/hate relationship will leave you as conflicted as a virgin porn star.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Sexy Sunday Thoughts

Jack’s World: X-Men Supreme Reflections: Emma Frost

The following is a video that I posted to my YouTube channel, Jack’s World. It is another collaboration between me and my good friend, DC-MarvelGirl 1997. Once a gain, she has lent her voice acting talent to do a reading from X-Men Supreme, a fan fiction series I wrote years ago. Enjoy!

Leave a comment

Filed under Jack's World, superhero comics, X-men, YouTube

Why We Should Treat Our Data As (Valuable) Property

Many years ago, I created my first email address before logging into the internet. It was a simple AOL account. I didn’t give it much thought. I didn’t think I was creating anything valuable. At the time, the internet was limited to slow, clunky dial-up that had little to offer in terms of content. I doubt anyone saw what they were doing as creating something of great value.

I still have that email address today in case you’re wondering. I still regularly use it. I imagine a lot of people have an email address they created years ago for one of those early internet companies that used to dominate a very different digital world. They may not even see that address or those early internet experiences as valuable.

Times have changed and not just in terms of pandemics. In fact, times tends to change more rapidly in the digital world than it does in the real world. The data we created on the internet, even in those early days, became much more valuable over time. It served as the foundation on which multi-billion dollar companies were built.

As a result, the data an individual user imparts onto the internet has a great deal of value. You could even argue that the cumulative data of large volumes of internet users is among the most valuable data in the world.

Politicians, police, the military, big businesses, advertising agencies, marketing experts, economists, doctors, and researchers all have use for this data. Many go to great lengths to get it, sometimes through questionable means.

The growing value of this data raises some important questions.

Who exactly owns this data?

How do we go about treating it from a legal, fiscal, and logistical standpoint?

Is this data a form of tangible property, like land, money, or labor?

Is this something we can exchange, trade, or lease?

What is someone’s recourse if they want certain aspects of their data removed, changed, or deleted?

These are all difficult questions that don’t have easy answers. It’s getting to a point where ownership of data was an issue among candidates running for President of the United States. Chances are, as our collective data becomes more vital for major industries, the issue will only grow in importance.

At the moment, it’s difficult to determine how this issue will evolve. In the same way I had no idea how valuable that first email address would be, nobody can possibly know how the internet, society, the economy, and institutions who rely on that data will evolve. The best solution in the near term might not be the same as the best solution in the long term.

Personally, I believe that our data, which includes our email addresses, browsing habits, purchasing habits, and social media posts, should be treated as personal property. Like money, jewels, or land, it has tangible value. We should treat it as such and so should the companies that rely on it.

However, I also understand that there are complications associated with this approach. Unlike money, data isn’t something you can hold in your hand. You can’t easily hand it over to another person, nor can you claim complete ownership of it. To some extent, the data you create on the internet was done with the assistance of the sites you use and your internet service provider.

Those companies could claim some level of ownership of your data. It might even be written in the fine print of those user agreements that nobody ever reads. It’s hard to entirely argue against such a claim. After all, we couldn’t create any of this data without the aid of companies like Verizon, AT&T, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google. At the same time, these companies couldn’t function, let alone profit, without our data.

It’s a difficult question to resolve. It only gets more difficult when you consider laws like the “right to be forgotten.” Many joke that the internet never forgets, but it’s no laughing matter. Peoples’ lives can be ruined, sometimes through no fault of their own. Peoples’ private photos have been hacked and shared without their permission.

In that case, your data does not at all function like property. Even if it’s yours, you can’t always control it or what someone else does with it. You can try to take control of it, but it won’t always work. Even data that was hacked and distributed illegally is still out there and there’s nothing you can do about it.

Despite those complications, I still believe that our data is still the individual’s property to some extent, regardless of what the user agreements of tech companies claim. Those companies provide the tools, but we’re the ones who use them to build something. In the same way a company that makes hammers doesn’t own the buildings they’re used to make, these companies act as the catalyst and not the byproduct.

Protecting our data, both from theft and from exploitation, is every bit as critical as protecting our homes. An intruder into our homes can do a lot of damage. In our increasingly connected world, a nefarious hacker or an unscrupulous tech company can do plenty of damage as well.

However, there’s one more critical reason why I believe individuals need to take ownership of their data. It has less to do with legal jargon and more to do with trends in technology. At some point, we will interact with the internet in ways more intimate than a keyboard and mouse. The technology behind a brain/computer interface is still in its infancy, but it exists and not just on paper.

Between companies like Neuralink and the increasing popularity of augmented reality, the way we interact with technology is bound to get more intimate/invasive. Clicks and link sharing are valuable today. Tomorrow, it could be complex thoughts and feelings. Whoever owns that stands to have a more comprehensive knowledge of the user.

I know it’s common refrain to say that knowledge is power, but when the knowledge goes beyond just our browsing and shopping habits, it’s not an unreasonable statement. As we build more and more of our lives around digital activities, our identities will become more tied to that data. No matter how large or small that portion might be, we’ll want to own it as much as we can.

It only gets more critical if we get to a point where we can fully digitize our minds, as envisioned in shows like “Altered Carbon.” At some point, our bodies are going to break down. We cannot preserve it indefinitely for the same reason we can’t preserve a piece of pizza indefinitely. However, the data that makes up our minds could be salvaged, but that opens the door to many more implications.

While that kind of technology is a long way off, I worry that if we don’t take ownership of our data today, then it’ll only get harder to do so in the future. Even before the internet, information about who we are and what we do was valuable.

This information forms a big part of our identity. If we don’t own that, then what’s to stop someone else from owning us and exploiting that to the utmost? It’s a question that has mostly distressing answers. I still don’t know how we go about staking our claim on our data, but it’s an issue worth confronting. The longerwe put it off, the harder it will get.

Leave a comment

Filed under Artificial Intelligence, biotechnology, Current Events, futurism, Neuralink, politics, technology

Why Starlink Is The Next Step In The Evolution Of The Internet

Say what you will about Elon Musk. Believe me, a lot can be said about a Tony Stark wannabe whose wealth is on par with Jeff Bezos. Not all of it is flattering, either. I know I’ve expressed a strong appreciation for him in the past. I genuinely believe some of the technology he’s working on will change the world.

I don’t deny that he can be eccentric.

I also don’t deny he says dumb things, often on Twitter.

The man has his faults, but thinking small isn’t one of them. You don’t get to be as rich or successful as Elon Musk by being careful. You also don’t create world-changing technology by being short-sighted. Love him or hate him, Musk has changed the world. He’ll likely change it even more in the coming years.

Some of those changes are years away. A product like Neuralink is probably not going to become mainstream in this decade. However, there is one that’s likely to change the world a lot sooner. In fact, it’s already up and running to some extent. It’s just in the beta phase. Some people can already use it and it’s already proving its worth.

That technology is called Starlink and I believe this will change the internet in a profound way.

Now, you can be forgiven for not keeping up with all of Elon Musk’s elaborate ventures. This one isn’t quite as sexy as brain implants or rockets, but it’s every bit as groundbreaking. If you value internet speeds that don’t suck or lag, then it should be of great interest.

In essence, Starlink is the name and brand of a new satellite-based internet service provider that Musk is creating through his other ambitious venture, SpaceX. The goal is simple on paper, but resource intensive. Instead of the messy network of ground-based hardware that most providers use to deliver the internet to hour homes and businesses, Starlink will deliver it from space.

It’s actually not a new idea or product, for that matter. Satellite based internet service has been around for years. In terms of speeds and utility, though, it just sucks. At most, you’d be lucky to get speeds on par with old school 3G wireless. For some people, that’s better than nothing. For most, it’s not nearly enough to maximize the full power of the internet.

Starlink is hoping to change that. Instead of expensive satellites with high latency and limited bandwidth, these new brand of low-Earth satellites promise to deliver on speeds at or greater than the best 4G internet providers.

On top of that, you don’t need the same elaborate infrastructure and or cell towers to deliver it. You just need a constellation of satellites, a receiver no larger than a pizza box, and a clear view of the sky. If you have all that, you can get the full breadth of the internet. It doesn’t matter if you’re in the middle of the desert or at the top of the Empire State Building. It’s there for you to access.

Make no mistake. That’s a big deal for the 3.8 billion people in the world who don’t have internet access. Whether due to lack of infrastructure or funds, it’s just not an option for them. It’s not just underdeveloped third-world countries either. Even here in America, there are large swaths of the country that have little to no reliable internet access.

It’s a big factor in the ongoing divide between rural and urban areas. If you live in a small rural community full of good, honest, hard-working people, they’re still going to struggle if they don’t have reliable internet. They’ll struggle economically, socially, and financially. To date, the efforts to expand the internet to their communities has been lackluster at best.

I can personally attest how bad it is. A few years back, I drove through a very rural part of West Virginia. For a good chunk of that drive, there was pretty much no reliable internet, be it Wi-Fi or cell phone coverage. The people there didn’t hide their frustration and I certainly sympathized with them.

There are many reasons for this, not all of which is because of how awful cable companies can be. A bit part of that has to do with the tools we use to access the internet. As good as they are for urban areas, they don’t work on a global level. It’s one thing to wire a big, advanced city like New York with fiber optics. It’s quite another to wire an entire planet.

Starlink promises to change that. These satellites aren’t bound by those logistics. They just orbit overhead without us even realizing it. They’re small and easy to mass produce. They can be taken out of orbit easily and replaced with better models. In principle, they could easily deliver the same high level gigabit speeds that are currently at the top of the market.

In terms of opening the internet to the rest of the world, that’s a big deal.

In terms of disrupting the market for delivering the internet, that’s an even bigger deal.

That’s because, to date, the world wide web has struggled to be truly world-wide. When nearly half the world can’t access it, then you can’t truly call it a global network. With Starlink, the internet can become truly global. People in rural India can have access to the same internet speeds as people in downtown Los Angeles. That promises to open up the world up in ways we can’t predict.

It’ll also provide some badly needed competition to internet delivery. For most people in America, you don’t have much choice when it comes to internet service. Cable companies basically have a monopoly on the whole enterprise, which is a big reason why it’s so expensive compared to other countries. Starlink will be the first real competition they’ve had in years for many areas.

I don’t doubt those companies will complain, whine, and lobby, but they’re not going to stop something like Starlink. They’re also not going to muscle out someone like Elon Musk. You don’t become the world’s richest person by being a push-over. Musk has already made clear that Starlink is a big part of his business model for the future.

At the moment, Starlink is still in beta, but Musk himself proves the technology works. He even used it to send a tweet. There are people right now who are testing it and they can confirm its speeds are way better than the crappy DSL internet of yesteryear. Many others have also expressed a keen interest in buying into this service.

At the moment, it’s still expensive. It costs $99 a month to access Starlink and it also costs $500 to buy the necessary antenna to receive it. However, that’s not a whole lot more than what I pay for internet in a month. Once it’s refined, that cost will come down.

Remember, there are over 3 billion people in the world without internet who have no options to access it. Starlink could be their only option and it could be a damn good one. It could be the key to the rest of the world becoming truly connected. That has big implications for society, commerce, and governments. Some countries are already making Starlink illegal for its people to access. Don’t expect that to stop it, though.

The promise of fast, reliable internet at all corners of the globe is too enticing for too many people. It will both connect the world and make Elon Musk even richer. However, for a man who connected the world and pissed off cable companies, I’d say he’ll have earned it.

1 Comment

Filed under Current Events, futurism, Neuralink, technology