..."approximately 40,000 users reported problems"...
Reg missed a snarky opportunity:
"The outage was brief. According to Downdetector.com, approximately 40,000 users who have a secondary method of Internet access reported problems early this morning. The remaining 5,960,000 customers, whose only Internet connection is via Starlink, were unable to make a report to Downdector at all. Most of them were busy checking their kit to see if the problem was local to their network."
Seriously... Let's say a measly 5% of Starlink's estimated 6M customers did some troubleshooting, I did. That is 300k people. I spent about 20 minutes doing the usual network pings to make sure it wasn't one of my switches, rebooted stuff, etc. That math works out to 6M minutes, or 100k hours or wasted time. Most people work around 2k hours/year for around 50 years, to reach 100k hours of work over their entire lifetime.
What makes Starlink different from other Telco's and ISPs? It seems rare that all of AT&T or all of Centurylink will go down at once. However, when Starlink goes down, it seems to take the entire planet with it. It seems unlikely that all of Starlink's data flows through a single point of failure, or even a single data center for that matter. Therefore the only thing that comes to mind is their software.
If there was a defect in the software, then it seems unlikely the problem could be found, patched, tested, and uploaded within minutes. That leads me to think these occasional short global outages (fractions of an hour) may be intentional - deploy the patch and reboot everything. Simply take the outage hit rather than a progressive update with hours/days of degraded service. Starlink does work 'outside the box' of traditional thinking, this could be their standard operating procedure for updates.
Maybe I am over thinking the situation. It would be interesting to hear what other tech minds think could be a single point of failure in Starlink that could cause global outages.