>(I wouldn't expect feds to tolerate Starlink selling subscriptions to Iranians or providing service to stations located in Iran.) I would expect that, on the

>(I wouldn't expect feds to tolerate Starlink selling subscriptions to Iranians or providing service to stations located in Iran.) I would expect that, on the contrary, the U.S. would very much want to get as many citizens of a nation of interest as possible on a network they have some control over. On the one hand, more people chatting leads to more insight. On the other hand, more people chatting creates noise that allows to hide people exfiltrating "interesting information". On the more "businessy" side of things, Facebook and Google have been trying to enter China for quite some time. Google has through Dragonfly until there was a leak, and it announced shutting it down last year. The problem in my opinion is that, to get those few billion people on the internet meant that these corporations had to deal with the Chinese government and "compromise their morals". If getting these people on the network is done through customer-premises equipment, it can be useful. It may prove harder to control the flow of devices than it is to control a corporation. Facebook may as well become an important SpaceX customer. They tried to increase penetration with internet.org and deals with major telecom companies. Both have tried with balloons and drones. StarLink is a new mode (well, not entirely new, but one that has become more affordable). It may create tensions between China and the U.S., and the former may restrict imports of these devices, but they'll find their way. It could also give leverage to the U.S.:"you want us to restrict your citizens' access to StarLink, give us something". Who knows.