SpaceX and Amazon Are Quietly Launching a New Space Race Right Now
If it seems like there's a lot of rocket launches lately, you're not wrong. While SpaceX just successfully launched a Falcon 9 rocket containing Starlink satellites on April 27, the aerospace company also launched a nearly identical rocket on April 28. And at nearly the exact same time, Amazon's Project Kuiper is also launching an Atlas V rocket containing Kuiper 1.
What do these dueling launches have in common? Well, like the Starlink network, Project Kuiper is also hoping to create communication coverage with a string of various satellites. Essentially, Project Kuiper represents the first round of Amazon satellites in direct competition with Starlink.
Although not the same company as Blue Origin, Project Kuiper is owned by Jeff Bezos. The first launch for the project is scheduled to blast off from Florida's Cape Canaveral Space Force Station on Monday, April 28, at 7:00 p.m. EDT.
You can watch the live stream on YouTube, which is embedded below.
The latest SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket successfully launched the latest round of Starlink satellites on Monday, April 28, at 4:42 p.m. EDT. This launch took place from Vandenberg, California. This was the second SpaceX Starlink launch in two days. You can watch the in-progress live stream on X and embedded below.
While it may sound a little melodramatic, the truth is, the competing technologies represent a battle for the future of orbital communication. Elon Musk has long promised that Starlink could provide low-cost internet to remote areas. So far, the results of this project have been somewhat mixed.
Meanwhile, Project Kuiper is also poised to create its own satellite broadband network in low-Earth orbit. If Amazon is successful, this will put it in direct competition with Starlink.
That said, in the U.S., there are two other satellite internet providers right now, including HughesNet and Viasat. If Amazon is successful, Project Kuiper will become the fourth in the U.S. market.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
21 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump administration's emerging surveillance state raises privacy concerns
Trump administration's emerging surveillance state raises privacy concerns Civil liberties advocates say the Trump administration's data collection and sharing endanger Americans' constitutional rights. Show Caption Hide Caption Privacy at risk as Trump expands surveillance. Here's what we know. The Trump administration is expanding government surveillance with Big Tech's help. Here's what we know now about what's being tracked. DENVER ‒ For decades, the government has been able to watch where you drive and where you walk. It can figure out where you shop, what you buy and with whom you spend time. It knows how much money you have, where you've worked and, in many cases, what medical procedures you've had. It can figure out if you've attended a protest or bought marijuana, and it can even read your emails if it wants. But because all of those data points about you were scattered across dozens of federal, state and commercial databases, it wasn't easy for the government to easily build a comprehensive profile of your life. That's changing ‒ fast. With the help of Big Tech, in just a few short months the Trump administration has expanded the government surveillance state to a whole new level as the president and his allies chase down illegal immigrants and suspected domestic terrorists while simultaneously trying to slash federal spending they've deemed wasteful and keep foreigners from voting. And in doing so, privacy experts warn, the federal government is inevitably scooping up, sorting, combining and storing data about millions of law-abiding Americans. The vast data storehouses, some of which have been targeted for access by Elon Musk's DOGE teams, raise significant privacy concerns and the threat of cybersecurity breaches. "What makes the Trump administration's approach so chilling is that they are seeking to collect and use data across federal agencies in ways that are unprecedented," said Cody Venzke, a senior policy counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union. "The federal government's collection of data has always been a double-edged sword." Americans value their privacy Americans have fiercely guarded and worried about their privacy even from the country's earliest days: The Constitution's Fourth Amendment specifically limits the government's ability to invade a person's privacy. Those concerns have only grown as more government functions are carried out online. A 2023 survey by the Pew Research Center found that 71% of Americans worry about the government's use of data about them, up from 64% in 2019. The survey found the concern was greatest among those people who lean or consistently vote Republican, up from 63% to 77%. The level of concern among people who lean or consistently vote Democrat remained steady at 65%, the survey found. That same survey found that Americans overall are almost as concerned about government access to their data as they are about social media companies having access. People who had attended college were more worried about data privacy, while people with high school degrees were in general "confident that those who have access to their personal information will do the right thing." In acknowledgment of those concerns, the federal government carefully stores most data about Americans in separate databases, from Social Security payments to Medicare reimbursements, housing vouchers and food stamps. That limits the ability of government employees to surreptitiously build comprehensive profiles of Americans without court oversight. In the name of rooting out fraud, and government inefficiency, however, President Donald Trump in March ordered federal agencies under his control to lower the walls between their data warehouses. The Government Accounting Office estimates the federal government loses $233 billion to $521 billion to fraud annually, much of that because of improper payments to contractors or falsified medical payments, according to a GAO report in April. The report also noted significant losses via Medicare or unemployment fraud and pandemic-era stimulus payments. "Decades of restricted data access within and between agencies have led to duplicated efforts, undetected overpayments, and unchecked fraud, costing taxpayers billions," President Donald Trump said in a March 20 executive order that helped create the new system. "This executive order dismantles unnecessary barriers, promotes inter-agency collaboration, and ensures the Federal Government operates responsibly and efficiently to safeguard public funds." Merging of commercial and government databases Supporters say this kind of data archive, especially video surveillance coupled with AI-powered facial recognition, can also be a powerful tool to fight crime. Authorities in New Orleans used video footage collected by privately owned security cameras to help capture at least one of the fugitives in a high-profile prison escape in May. And systems that read license plates helped Colorado police track down a suspect accused of repeatedly vandalizing a Tesla dealership. White House authorities are now prosecuting some Tesla vandalism cases as terrorism. But the new White House efforts go far beyond anything ever attempted in the United States, allowing the government to conduct intrusive surveillance against almost anyone by combining government and commercial databases. Privacy experts say it's the merging of government and commercial databases that poses the most significant concern because much of it can be done without court oversight. As part of the broader White House effort, contractors are building a $30 million system to track suspected gang members and undocumented immigrants and buying access to a system that tracks passengers on virtually every U.S.-based airline flight. And federal officials also are making plans to compile and share state-level voting registration information, which the president argues is necessary to prevent foreign nationals from illegally voting in federal elections. Privacy experts say that while all of that data has long been collected and kept separate by different government agencies or private vendors ‒ like your supermarket frequent shopper card and cell phone provider ‒ the Trump administration is dramatically expanding its compilation into comprehensive dossiers on Americans. Much of the work has been kicked off by Musk's DOGE teams, with the assistance of billionaire Peter Thiel's Denver-based Palantir. Opponents say such a system could track women who cross state lines for abortions − something a police officer in Texas is accused of doing − or be abused by law enforcement to target political opponents or even stalk romantic partners. And if somehow accessed by hackers, the centralized systems would prove a trove of information for fraud or blackmail. The nonpartisan, nonprofit Project on Government Oversight has been warning about the risks of federal surveillance expansion for years, and it noted that Democrats and Republicans alike have voted to expand such information-gathering. "We need our leaders to recognize that as the surveillance apparatus grows, it becomes an enticing prize for a would-be autocrat," POGO said in a report in August 2024. "Our country cannot build and expand a surveillance superstructure and expect that it will not be turned against the people it is meant to protect." Starting with immigration, ending where? Trump campaigned in 2024 on a platform of tough immigration enforcement, including large-scale deportations and ending access by undocumented people to federal programs. Immigrants' rights advocates point out that people living illegally in the United States are generally barred from federal programs, although those who have children born as U.S. citizens can often access things like food assistance or health care. Supporters say having access to that data will help them prioritize people for deportation by comparing work history and tax payments to immigration status, work that used to be far more labor-intensive. Because federal officials don't know exactly who is living illegally in the United States, the systems by default must scoop up information about everyone first. One example: A newly expanded program to collect biometric data from suspected illegal immigrants intercepted at sea also can be used to collect the same information on American citizens under the vague justification of "officer safety." That data can be retained for up to 75 years, according to federal documents. "It's only a matter of time before the harmful ripples from this new effort reach other groups," Venzke said.
Fox News
27 minutes ago
- Fox News
Massie calls on Elon Musk to fund primary challenges against Republicans who backed Trump tax bill
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., said Elon Musk should fund primary challenges against almost every Republican who voted for President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" last week. "I don't primary my colleagues, but I feel pretty good about him doing it," Massie told Fox News Digital on Wednesday. "There's a few others that should be spared," when asked to clarify if he meant all 215 House Republicans who supported the legislation. "But people want term limits, right? Elon can bring term limits." Musk came out against the massive Trump agenda bill that House Republicans passed last week. "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it," Musk first posted. It was followed by several posts on the national debt, and one that read, "In November next year, we fire all politicians who betrayed the American people." Massie said on Wednesday, "I just think he made one mistake when misstatement – he said take them out in November. I would take them out in primaries if I were Elon Musk." Both House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and the White House have closed ranks around the legislation. Johnson issued a rare forceful response to Musk from the podium of his weekly press conference on Wednesday, calling the billionaire "flat wrong." "Elon and I left on a great note. We were texting one another, you know, happy texts, you know, Monday and then, and then yesterday, you know, 24 hours later, he does a 180, and he comes out and opposed the bill," Johnson told reporters. "And it surprised me, frankly. And, I don't take it personal…I think he's way off on this, and I've told him as much, and, I've said it publicly and privately." The massive budget reconciliation bill is aimed at advancing Trump's priorities on taxes, immigration, energy, defense and the debt limit. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected it would add $2.4 trillion to the federal deficit over 10 years, but House GOP leaders have dismissed that modeling as inaccurate representations of economic growth. Massie was one of three House Republicans to vote against the bill. Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, also voted "no," while House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., voted "present." Massie is also no stranger to clashing with both Trump and Johnson. He has faced primary threats from the former and led an unsuccessful bid to remove the latter from House leadership. Massie has been consistent, however, in his opposition to legislation that would have any chance of adding to the federal debt – now currently nearly $37 trillion. Republican supporters of the bill, however, have contended that it is the best possible vehicle to radically reform government programs plagued with waste, fraud and abuse, and restore much-needed funding to the border, while extending Trump's 2017 tax cuts. However, the legislation is now in the Senate, where Republicans have already signaled they would want to see changes to the final bill. Fox News Digital reached out to the National Republican Congressional Committee for comment on Massie's remarks.
New York Times
31 minutes ago
- New York Times
Republicans Try to Discredit Experts Warning About the Cost of Tax Cuts
Even before House Republicans learned the full price of their tax package on Wednesday, one of the bill's chief authors, Representative Jason Smith of Missouri, was sowing doubt about the accuracy of the estimate. 'I'm skeptical,' Mr. Smith said at an event last month when asked about the coming analysis of the legislation's cost. 'Unless I like the number, I'm against the number.' In the bitter war over the nation's fiscal future, President Trump and his Republican allies have united around a new foe: the economists and budget experts who have warned about the costs of the party's tax ambitions. Republican leaders have set about trying to discredit any hint of unfavorable accounting on their signature legislation as they race to enact it before the president's self-imposed July 4 deadline. The latest estimate arrived on Wednesday, projecting that the sprawling bill endorsed by Mr. Trump could add about $2.4 trillion to the federal debt over the next decade. By then, though, the package of tax, spending and welfare cuts had already ignited an intense wave of political attacks and recriminations. While Republicans scrambled to cast their proposal as fiscally responsible, Wall Street was getting the jitters about the nation's growing debt burden. The tech executive Elon Musk, having left behind his role seeking to slash government spending for Mr. Trump, savaged the bill on social media on Tuesday, saying it would 'massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit.' Most economists — from nonpartisan government watchdogs as well as outside tax analysts across the political spectrum — have concluded that the bill passed by House Republicans, which is now being considered by the Senate, could exacerbate the nation's fiscal imbalance while contributing less in economic growth than Mr. Trump forecasts. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
