
Facebook completes construction of first full-scale aircraft, Aquila [video] - rasmi
https://www.facebook.com/zuck/videos/vb.4/10102274951725301/
======
roymurdock
There's an interesting phenomenon where people in developing countries begin
to think that Facebook is the full extent of the internet:

 _Indonesians surveyed by Galpaya told her that they didn’t use the internet.
But in focus groups, they would talk enthusiastically about how much time they
spent on Facebook. Galpaya, a researcher (and now CEO) with LIRNEasia, a think
tank, called Rohan Samarajiva, her boss at the time, to tell him what she had
discovered. “It seemed that in their minds, the Internet did not exist; only
Facebook,” he concluded._ [1]

I feel extremely lucky and privileged to have grown up with an open internet,
where there was at least some (diminishing) percent of websites that did not
treat me like a product to be marketed to advertisers, prodding and analyzing,
constantly gamifying and creeping ever-inwards on my privacy. I deactivated my
account a few months ago because it felt like Facebook was taking more from me
in terms of time and energy than I was gaining from it.

There is a huge benefit to bringing the connectivity of Facebook to developing
countries and remote territories. Many people wouldn't be able to run
businesses or keep in touch with family without it.

I just wish it didn't come with the strangely uncomfortable, sell-your-soul
type of vibe that a project funded by publicly owned, for-profit venture
usually generates. Especially when PR tries to spin it off as a charitable or
humane act. Once you go public, it's about profit and it always will be. And a
lot of the time, that's fine. Our country was founded and continues to run on
capitalistic principles. Just don't hide behind any false pretenses and you'll
have my support 100%.

[1] [http://qz.com/333313/milliions-of-facebook-users-have-no-
ide...](http://qz.com/333313/milliions-of-facebook-users-have-no-idea-theyre-
using-the-internet/)

~~~
forgetsusername
> _think that Facebook is the full extent of the internet:_

My mother wanted to "get on the internet" because of the Facebook phenomenon a
few years ago. Now _she_ thinks Facebook is the full extent of the internet.
Googling something or visiting a "homepage" is completely foreign to her.
She'll search in the Facebook bar or ask questions in her feed if she's
looking for information. Now she has a smartphone, and outside of texting and
the odd call, only uses the Facebook app.

Obviously, her aptitude and usage is minimal, but it's an interesting
phenomenon to behold.

~~~
Retrograderz
Most likely she just prefers it that way.

Sure, could Google search, but Facebook search is right there plus she likes
it.

------
panic
This is not an effort to provide the full internet. See this critique by the
EFF for more details: [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/05/internetorg-not-
neutra...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/05/internetorg-not-neutral-not-
secure-and-not-internet)

~~~
kytmizuno
According to the project lead:

"Maguire told Quartz that the company intends to provide “the full internet,”
but also noted that it will work with network operators’ bandwidth needs and
business models."

[http://qz.com/468376/facebooks-internet-beaming-drone-is-
rea...](http://qz.com/468376/facebooks-internet-beaming-drone-is-ready-for-
testing/)

~~~
paulojreis
It's a shame. If telcos are in the loop, my hopes for this shrink 99%...

~~~
mseebach
Yeah, the telcos that build pretty much the full entirety of the "last-mile"
internet as we know it today can not but trusted in the least to be at all
involved in any new last mile provisions what so ever.

We (fairly rich, definitely reasonably connected, people) cannot allow the
third world to enjoy something as humiliating as _imperfect internet_ (to a
standard we barely enjoy ourselves, however immensely beneficial our
connections are in spite of this) and we certainly can't allow some of the
richest corporations in the world investing in it - after all, the result
might not end up _perfect_.

It's much better potential beneficiaries (you know, some of the worlds poorest
and most disadvantaged people) for us to complain, dismiss and and wait until
someone will roll out a 100% neutral network, unencumbered by any commercial
interests.

~~~
eric-hu
I think I agree with your view, but the sarcasm in your post threw me for a
loop. I'm not sure what point you want me to walk away with.

~~~
mseebach
Sorry, bad habit. Take away is that it's a bad idea (in this case arguably
even immoral) to let the good solution today get in the way of the perfect
solution in the future.

------
jeremy7600
Just, no.

This is frightening on many levels. A facebook plane? To get people on
facebook, right? To get them on the internet is secondary to Zuckerbergs goals
here, lets be honest. A walled garden? Come on. It should be the whole
internet or they shouldn't even bother.

A walled garden, with no security protocols, with the intention of getting the
entire world on facebook? Not cool.

~~~
baddox
How is the world with no Facebook plane in any way better than the world with
a Facebook plane that provides Facebook access? If you don't want Facebook
access, or you already have it, the two worlds are indistinguishable.

~~~
bduerst
Because internet.org's proxy server gives Facebook monopsonic control over the
internet.

Even ignoring the massive man-in-the-middle attack problems from running old
phones on a proxy, Facebook is positioning themselves to control exclusive
access to large number of users for websites.

You could argue that Google already does this - but Google has competitors
that users could switch to in a heartbeat. Internet.org users don't have
options, and websites need to pander to Facebook to be in that walled garden.
It also makes it easier for third world countries to censor the internet.

In the end, this is damaging to the open internet ecosystem. Facebook could
have just implemented a rate-limited or data capped system like other ISPs,
but they opted to create a more restrictive system that gives them more power.

~~~
baddox
> Because internet.org's proxy server gives Facebook monopsonic control over
> the internet.

You mean control over the internet access they're providing, that otherwise
doesn't exist?

~~~
bduerst
Are you okay with Comcast doing IP shaping and charging Netflix? If Comcast
didn't exist, internet access wouldn't exist for many people.

That's why it's a false dichotomy. Internet.org could very easily be rate and
data capped alternatives.

>connect the two thirds of the world that doesn’t have internet access.
-Internet.org

This would give them monopsonic control over the internet.

~~~
nostalgiac
> If Comcast didn't exist, internet access wouldn't exist for many people.

Sorry that is extremely far from the truth. Any of the other major ISPs' would
leap at the chance to guzzle up these customers if there was no other
competition.

~~~
bduerst
You're splitting hairs. Most of Comcast's last mile infrastructure was
government subsidized, exactly because no-one was "jumping on it".

So you're saying that it's okay to ignore net neutrality (charge Netflix) when
the government isn't there to help subsidize last-mile infrastructure? When
you could just as easily provide a capped alternative?

That's the point and splitting hairs doesn't change it.

------
josh2600
This is quite a thing.

Does anyone know how they're achieving the 10gbps data rate? I'm wondering if
they're doing something like vortex beam forming...
[http://www.gizmag.com/twisted-light-beam-data-
transmission-v...](http://www.gizmag.com/twisted-light-beam-data-transmission-
vienna/34713/) and
[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0030401809...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0030401809011043)
(Although this article is about using a physical fiber).

~~~
jaycroft
They're likely not using something too exotic: 10Gbps free space optical links
have been available commercially for a few years now (see products by AOptix).
The tricky part is pointing them and getting the last bit of power on target.
If they're actually forming links at 100's of km separation they're already on
par with what APL was doing just 2 or 3 years ago [1]. Impressive that they
not only have the data terminal to develop but have had the additional
complication of building a new airframe as well.

Having worked on the pointing/tracking/acquisition side of this problem that's
the part that's truly impressive to me. Sub-microradian pointing is not
trivial. Their "red beam following green beam" shots in the video must be
included for a bit of a laugh...

[1]
[http://www.ndia.org/Divisions/Divisions/ScienceAndEngineerin...](http://www.ndia.org/Divisions/Divisions/ScienceAndEngineeringTechnology/Documents/Hybrid%20RF%20Network%20and%20Free%20Space%20Optical%20Communications.pdf)

~~~
dharma1
Agreed, this is very cool. How do free space optical links work in the rain
though? Shouldn't be a problem for the link between aircrafts as they fly
above the weather but might be for aircraft-ground link if that's optical.

Hope FB will open source parts of this! I know NASA has been looking at
optical links for high bandwidth space communication, this accurate tracking
would really help

~~~
jaycroft
There are a couple effects from rain: absorption ("db per km") and scattering
(bigger constant in front of your r^2 term), neither are good for FSO. Fog
(and since this is airborne, clouds) is the real killer. Imagine taking your
nice .1 degree wide laser beam and pointing it into one of those frosted
street lamp bulbs so that it now points in every direction, then add to that
the attenuation from being absorbed by the droplets. Now, in FB's case,
they're doing something pretty smart to mitigate the water problem. Using RF
for the ground-air links avoids most of the problems with scattering and
absorbtion depending on droplet size and the band you're transmitting in. Hard
to beat the bandwidth of FSO, so that's a great option for above the clouds.
60,000 feet should be above most clouds - anything that tall and you'll be
wanting to get out of the way in any case.

The LCRD stuff that NASA is doing is indeed impressive. I think that their
pointing problem is a few orders of magnitude harder than what FB is dealing
with though - if anything we'll see technology transfer in the other
direction.

------
shirro
I hate Facebook and what it does to people. There is nothing worse than
sitting in a room full of zombies on their mobiles. Despite all the great tech
my first thought is how satisfying it would be for one of these to be taken
down by a ground to Facebook missile.

------
ericjang
This video has given me a newfound respect for Facebook.

Many engineers at tech companies like Google, Facebook, Microsoft, etc. report
that they feel overqualified for their work. I imagine many yearn for the
chance to work on moonshot projects like these - is there any reason why
secretive research divisions at these companies are so small, when there is
plenty of engineering talent to go around internally?

~~~
nostrademons
Because more engineers makes for a _worse_ product, particularly if you're
doing something very innovative that requires a lot of iteration.

The amount of code you can write grows linearly with number of engineers, but
communication costs grow quadratically. Therefore, the speed at which you can
execute is inversely proportional to the size of the team, _unless_ you can
cut communication costs. Established projects can do this with architectural
decisions that prevent one engineer from needing to know about or communicate
with other engineers working on unrelated parts of the product. New projects
cannot, because the architecture hasn't been established yet. That's why every
innovative product grows out of a small team.

------
deft
Why are people on HN actually supporting this? Facebook built a plane to beam
its horrible timesink to even more people. Facebook is not a good thing. No
company "gives things away" out of the good of their heart. They built a
PLANE. Honestly, the only word I can describe this with is: scary.

------
PakG1
So Facebook is the new AOL/Compuserve in some places. Did AOL die because
people prefer the full open Internet, or did AOL die because it was too
limited? Either way, history will likely repeat itself. Are people on this
thread really worried that as things develop, people won't want to reach
outside of the wall garden eventually? I think they will naturally.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
You're probably right. It'll be interesting to see what sort of protocol
tunnelling people create. IOFM - Internet Over Facebook Messenger and such.

------
melling
Planes that fly for 3 months at a time on sunlight, bringing the Internet to
people isn't cool?

~~~
MichaelGG
That'd be cool. But bringing limited network access to certain sites, such as
Facebook, is less cool.

~~~
arthurcolle
wikipedia is a supoorted website. thats really cool

~~~
nostromo
> supported website

Think about how terrible that is.

~~~
sokoloff
Is it better or worse than simply:

    
    
      NO CARRIER
    

I argue it's better.

~~~
melling
People aren't even considering that once it becomes a solved problem, the next
company that wants to do it gets the knowledge for free. Figuring out the
engineering also has value.

Other uses for autonomous solar airplanes? Delivering medicine and supplies to
remote areas?

~~~
xanderstrike
> Other uses for autonomous solar airplanes? Delivering medicine and supplies
> to remote areas?

Or even, say in five to ten years when the cost of the technology drops,
delivering unrestricted, high speed internet to hundreds of millions of
people.

------
Onochie
I believe that as facebook gains the territory, so does Instagram, messenger,
WhatsApp, and every other acquired product. So the plan isn't really to just
deliver internet service but to buy up the social world in the area without
competitors. Since about 1.49 billion of the 1/3 of the internet enabled
regions use one of Facebook products even with the competitions, it's evident
that this project would triple their impact.

------
meric
Another attempt at producing a machine that can fly for months. The Pluto
project[1]:

 _" The nuclear engine could, in principle, operate for months, so a Pluto
cruise missile could be left airborne for a prolonged time before being
directed to carry out its attack."_

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto)

------
kelvin0
So the NSA`s 'surveillance' activities can now look like a benevolent mary
poppins feel good internet provider? Don't get me wrong, I would have loved to
have worked on such a project ... just not for FB ... sorry, not a fan.

------
trhway
multiple months on station - dream come true for data acquisition in a lot of
civilian and not very civilian applications. Like a platform for that
gigapixel/Argus continuously recording everything happening in the city.
Almost not existent noise and IR signature, and with carbon fiber construction
i'd suppose very low radar cross-section. It can toil for months near
China/Russia/etc. airspace listening/watching/etc. Or electronic CAP/AWACS
kind of mission during peace time over aircraft carrier group. Sky isn't even
the limit :)

------
restalis
Lasers are a poor choice for atmospheric communication, unless this kind of
infrastructure is specifically designed to be deployed in places like deserts
with a clear sky all the year around!

~~~
mnw21cam
At 60,000 feet altitude, the sky is pretty clear all the year round. There is
also a lot less air, further reducing distortion and attenuation.

------
javert
I would like to see these used in the US to break the telco monopoly
stranglehold.

Of course it's likely the FAA/FCC would make sure not to let that happen.

edit: I mean same tech, but not deployed by Facebook.

~~~
rhino369
The US has the density and wealth to do this via landbased towers. So AT&T,
Tmobile, Verizon, and Sprint already do it.

This is more about reaching remote, sparsely populated areas.

------
jacquesm
AOL 2.0.

------
samstave
May 14th, 2024: __ _In other news, today marks the 11th time in recent months
that ISIS terrorists were able to shoot down a Facebook Aquila V.9 autonomous
internet drown. Cutting off Facebook and general internet access to millions
of Facebook users in the arid region._ __

 __ _Officials from Facebook, the NSA, and the NTSB were unavailable to
comment._ __

 __ _This tragedy highlighted on this, Mark Zuckerberg 's 40th birthday._ __

