Reply to post:

Starlink, do you mean? If so, no, it doesn't.

Until they can release a lot more satellites, Starlink can't cover the whole world nor can it provide bandwidth for everybody. It can provide some bandwidth, which is why it's being sold now, but if you put millions of people on it, it wouldn't be functional. Starlink needs satellites in orbit which requires a lot of rocket launches. It also needs a lot of downlink facilities which scale arithmetically with the user count. To be most efficient, those downlink facilities will need to be geographically distributed, which means there will need to be enough cables to serve all the places with such facilities.

In addition, there are problems with satellite which make it unusable in some areas. Areas where a receiver can't be positioned correctly, where that receiver is likely to be damaged by local conditions, or where the receiver will be occluded by clouds, storms, etc are all places where people will prefer the reliability of a cable if they can get it. It's also usually cheaper once it gets built--even with U.S. prices being higher than most other countries, Starlink contracts are quite a bit more so. A Starlink-style system does provide some advantages, but as much as Spacex's advertising copy might claim, it's not a panacea for all network-related problems.