One point universes
Starlink is bound to work for certain people very well, but that doesn't make it a viable business nor something that should be subsidized by a government. Most things should not be subsidized by government as it usually leads to a skewing of the real market and stifles competition. For somebody to post that they get great service or they know somebody for which Starlink is the bug's guts, it's a statistical universe containing one data point and, therefore, useless.
The Common Sense Skeptic did a good debunking of the business case for Starlink on their YouTube channel. They blew it when they use the advertised price for a Falcon 9 launch rather than a reasonable estimate of the "cost" of a launch. On the other side, they didn't put in the costs to tie into the internet backbone although those costs might be hard to get any information about. The downlink stations will cost money and so will maintenance and repairs of those facilities along with periodic upgrades. One thing that I think they illustrated very well was what places in the world could afford the service. The vast majority of the first world already has options for broadband internet whether terrestrial or via satellite. The rest of the world might not be able to afford a computer that was modern enough to work on the internet. Even if CSS's numbers need some tightening up, I don't think it changes the opinion that it isn't going to be a viable long term business and has the massive downside of polluting low Earth orbit in a way that will cause problems that can't be readily addressed at this time.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
