News
SpaceX’s Starlink internet constellation deemed ‘a license to print money’
According to a draft paper written by networking researcher and professor Mark Handley, SpaceX’s Starlink internet satellite constellation has the potential to significantly disrupt the global networking economy and infrastructure and do so with as little as a third of the initial proposal’s 4425 satellites in orbit.
A step or so further, Dr. Handley (according to a University College London colleague) suspects that a network like that proposed by SpaceX could rapidly become “a license to print money” thanks to the tangible benefits it would provide financial institutions and banks – as of today, shaving mere milliseconds off of communications latency can be a serious competitive advantage for traders.
The three LEO constellation planes (not including the seven thousand VLEO in the latest filing) pic.twitter.com/btX0pLQAzc
— Andrew Moore (@awm22) September 25, 2018
Asked to condense his argument into a few sentences, Dr. Handley’s colleague (Reddit /u/davoloid) described his excitement as such.
-->A Professor in Computer Science [Mark Handley] who specializes in how networks work has done a simulation of Starlink based on the available information. It will make long distance links very fast, as in, a short delay in sending a message, which we call latency. That’s very important to banks and similar companies, who always want to have the fastest information. They pay a lot of money to create networks, often private ones rather than through regular commercial providers. Even with the first phase of 1600 satellites, there will be big revenues for SpaceX.” – Reddit /u/davoloid, 11/2/18
-
- SpaceX’s first two Starlink prototype satellites are pictured here before their inaugural launch, showing off a thoroughly utilitarian bus and several advanced components. (SpaceX)
-
- A beautiful string of Iridium NEXT satellites deployed into the sunrise. (SpaceX)
Judging from the recent past of a practice known as High-Frequency Trading (HFT), where algorithms take over trading in financial markets and operate at speeds on the order of trades per millisecond, the highly volatile industry has already reached its conclusion. This is to say that HFT went from a wildly disruptive and lucrative technological advantage to a fundamental part of the world’s ever-changing financial infrastructure in just a few decades.
“The story about [HFT] is done. It’s a mature industry now, as much an embedded feature of our society as mutual funds or the income tax.” – Tim Worstall, 2017
“HFTs are still involved in the speed race and sometimes even race to pick off their market maker brethren. While it may be more expensive and more competitive today for HFT to pick off the slow traders, make no mistake, they have not gone away.” – Themis Trading, 2018
Much like electricity, the internet, and railroads went from kings of profit to marginal and tedious enterprises, it seems that HFT has gone from a nascent and fickle technology to a basic component of global infrastructure. As such, it is in no way, shape, or form “dead”. Just like step-change advancements in technology have forced service-based companies to upgrade or die, it seems that the availability of Starlink (or any comparable interconnected internet constellation) will create a massive imbalance between financial institutions that adopt early and those that do not or cannot.
-->If that ends up being the case, there will undoubtedly be an extraordinary surge in competitive financial infrastructure investment, with institutions desperately pursuing new ways to remain competitive (leveling the playing field vs. a shortcut to the front). Dr. Handley’s draft paper, accompanying video, and colleague’s clear excitement about the possibilities demonstrate (at least theoretically) that even just the first third (37%) of SpaceX’s preliminary 4425 satellite Starlink constellation would exhibit dramatic latency improvements between most conceivable access points.
The first step’s first step
With all 4425 satellites in place, the benefits approach or even surpass theoretical best-case statistics for literal straight-line fiber optic cables. Of course, SpaceX’s true proposal includes yet another 7520 very low Earth orbit (VLEO) Starlink satellites (~350 km) that would more than double the bandwidth available while potentially cutting another huge chunk out of the already unsurpassable latency performance of LEO Starlink (~1100-1300 km).
Of course, a massive amount of work remains before SpaceX before any of the above futures can or are even technically able to come to fruition. Aside from regulatory difficulties and concerns about space debris from a potential ~12,000+ new satellites, SpaceX will have to go one or even two magnitudes beyond what the status quo of satellite manufacturing believes is achievable, mass producing and launching satellites in volumes that will dwarf anything undertaken in the history of spaceflight. Still, if anyone is going to accomplish such an extraordinary feat, one would be hard-pressed to find a better bet than SpaceX.
Watch an animation of Starlink created by Dr. Mark Handley here.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
-->
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
-->It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
-->The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
-->News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
-->Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.
Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
-->“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
